Levy spends the first half of his essay discussing how Never Let Me Go is a Bildungsroman. After proving this, he goes on to say that “Human rights law and Bildungsroman narrate a process that blunts the dangerous spontaneity of the individual, compelling them to integrate peacefully into the fabric of the social order” which is what Kathy does (Levy, 4). To rebel would hurt society, and since Kathy and her friends have been raised by society, it does not make sense that they would want to destroy it. The clones believe that this is not only their one way to contribute to society but that it is important for them to do so. Jerng takes this a step farther by arguing that by “learn[ing] to make sense of their lives as clones,” Ishiguro is challenging
…show more content…
While there is an argument against their humanity, the evidence of their humanness is more prominent. Hailsham was created with this in mind. Most every person in the novel knows that the clones are human, but they try to pretend otherwise because the reality is far more detremintal to their society. While Hailsham’s goal to say “’How dare you claim these children are anything less than fully human’” is proven by their art, and their presences, it has to be swept under the rug (202 ebook). People, both in Never Let Me Go and in real life, generally do not want to give up their ability to save the ones they loved and so they look at the art that proves Kathy’s humanity and ignore it. Levy brings up the “bystander effect” and uses it to describe the human population in Never Let Me Go (Levy, 13). The issue is that “empathetic response occurs not only because normal citizens can’t stomach knowledge of atrocity but also because they recognize how the entitlement they enjoy have a direct connection to the suffering of others” and so they have no choice but to see Kathy, Tommy, and Ruth as subhuman (Levy, 14). As Guo points out, it is shocking when the people realize that the clones could be human. In regards to the chapter where Madame sees Kathy cradling a pillow, she says “From the perspective of Madame, she knows that the person in front of her is an …show more content…
Is Never Let Me Go a glimpse at a potential future or perhaps a reprimand of how humans treated people in the past? Jerng’s closing remark that “instead of foregrounding the epistemological desire to find out what the clone is, it foregrounds and ethical project to discover how cloning might change how we relate to each other,” paints a clear argument that this novel is about what the future may hold (Jerng, 24). However, dismissing the idea of what a clone is, and by extension what humanity is, takes away from the depth that this novel has. Never Let Me Go provides both a glimpse into the past as well as a harsh reality that the potentials of cloning can bring to our future. This novel asks what it means to be human and gives an example of a human, Kathy, while simultaneously repeating that Kathy must oppose the answer because she is a clone. Ishiguro does not offer a solution to the dangers of cloning, but instead gives a clear picture of the problems that comes with it. It forces the readers to ask themselves if it is right to give up someone else’s life to save their loved one if that someone else was different than them. There is not a clear definition of humanity either, as Kathy passes most tests of humanity but is still seen as the
While there is an argument against their humanity, the evidence of their humanness is more prominent. Hailsham was created with this in mind. Most every person in the novel knows that the clones are human, but they try to pretend otherwise because the reality is far more detremintal to their society. While Hailsham’s goal to say “’How dare you claim these children are anything less than fully human’” is proven by their art, and their presences, it has to be swept under the rug (202 ebook). People, both in Never Let Me Go and in real life, generally do not want to give up their ability to save the ones they loved and so they look at the art that proves Kathy’s humanity and ignore it. Levy brings up the “bystander effect” and uses it to describe the human population in Never Let Me Go (Levy, 13). The issue is that “empathetic response occurs not only because normal citizens can’t stomach knowledge of atrocity but also because they recognize how the entitlement they enjoy have a direct connection to the suffering of others” and so they have no choice but to see Kathy, Tommy, and Ruth as subhuman (Levy, 14). As Guo points out, it is shocking when the people realize that the clones could be human. In regards to the chapter where Madame sees Kathy cradling a pillow, she says “From the perspective of Madame, she knows that the person in front of her is an …show more content…
Is Never Let Me Go a glimpse at a potential future or perhaps a reprimand of how humans treated people in the past? Jerng’s closing remark that “instead of foregrounding the epistemological desire to find out what the clone is, it foregrounds and ethical project to discover how cloning might change how we relate to each other,” paints a clear argument that this novel is about what the future may hold (Jerng, 24). However, dismissing the idea of what a clone is, and by extension what humanity is, takes away from the depth that this novel has. Never Let Me Go provides both a glimpse into the past as well as a harsh reality that the potentials of cloning can bring to our future. This novel asks what it means to be human and gives an example of a human, Kathy, while simultaneously repeating that Kathy must oppose the answer because she is a clone. Ishiguro does not offer a solution to the dangers of cloning, but instead gives a clear picture of the problems that comes with it. It forces the readers to ask themselves if it is right to give up someone else’s life to save their loved one if that someone else was different than them. There is not a clear definition of humanity either, as Kathy passes most tests of humanity but is still seen as the