Of his bones are coral made;
Those are pearls that were his eyes:
Nothing of him that doth fade
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange."
- William Shakespeare, The Tempest
The Grand and the Absurd in Human
Evolution
In his first
edition of On the Origin of Species,
Charles Darwin rightly anticipated the disgruntlement and discomfort of his
readers with the concept of natural selection. He knew that for many it would
dislodge deep-seated quasi-scientific dogmas and unsettle more than a few
religious beliefs. In advance of this potential opposition he defended his
theories of evolution, declaring, “There is grandeur in this view of life…from
so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have
been, and are being, evolved.” Since his writing of that book in 1859 many have
indeed found “grandeur in this view of life,” even against the superstitious
opposition it still faces. Kurt Vonnegut, in his novel Galápagos, locates the absurd in this view of life, and rewrites
the story of evolution not as one of the “preservation of favoured
races in the struggle for life,” as Darwin called it, but instead as the
history of recklessness and foolishness amongst dangerous animals chief of
which are the big-brained humans, who invent atomic bombs and slavery among
other contemptible hobbies. Vonnegut even writes in a new chapter of human
evolution in which the vast majority of the human race is wiped out by an
apocalyptic bacteria and the remaining human population evolves into a
human-seal hybrid who give up their attempts at technological enslavement of
the world and live lives as gentle fisher folk that prefer playing and swimming
to annihilating one another.
In typical
Vonnegut fashion this unconventional narrative is narrated unconventionally. It
is told by an omniscient ghost following the exploits of passengers on a cruise
ship called the Bahía de Darwin on
a voyage ironically called “the Nature Cruise of the Century.” The ghostly
narrator is none other than Leon Trout, the runaway son of Kilgore Trout, the
pulp sci-fi writer and Vonnegut alter-ego that appears
in many of Vonnegut’s novels. Leon, a Vietnam veteran who sought asylum in
Sweden after participating in unspeakable atrocities of war, was accidentally
decapitated while part of the construction crew for the Bahía de Darwin. After this untimely death Trout finds
himself an immaterial and invisible ghost who can inhabit the minds of anyone
he chooses. Throughout the novel his father, Kilgore, appears to Leon
attempting to entice him to give up his status as a ghost and join him in the
afterlife. The path to the afterlife presents itself to Leon as a blue tunnel
with a magnetic power he must resist to stay as a ghost on earth. The yonic implications of the tunnel to the afterlife are not
to be ignored. Vonnegut describes the tunnel’s beckoning quality, as it seeks
to draw Leon on with a “restless state of peristalsis.” Tellingly, Leon peers
within, searching for his mother, but is disappointed to find only his
typically unkempt alcoholic father. The afterlife symbolizes a utopian paradise
and an Oedipal return. The return of the mother is a return to Eden before the
fall of man and carries with it the potential of redemption. Prelapsarian Eden and the Oedipal state both symbolize
innocence and an ur-history for humanity and its collective psyche, both of
which must thus be returned to and then worked through in order to successfully
avoid the trauma of the fall from grace and the abandonment of the maternal
figure. Leon, however, finds only his father at the end of this yonic temptation, and Kilgore continually insults Leon as
he attempts to coerce him into abandoning the earth. Without his mother,
though, Leon refuses the false promise of eternal paradise and decides to stick
it out on earth with the beleaguered cruise to see what comes of humanity and
find out if they can find their own heaven on earth and Oedipal reunion.”
Leon narrates these events in retrospect, as his present is actually a
million years in the future, when humanity has evolved into a seal-like being
and he expects the blue tunnel to the afterlife to reappear and he will finally
give up the earth and find his own absolution, whatever it may be. Human
evolution takes a strange twist in 20th century, Trout explains,
because an incurable bacterial infection gnaws its way into the ovaries of
every human female on earth – excepting the few females aboard the
auspicious Bahía de Darwin – and renders human reproduction
impossible. The Bahía de Darwin is fated to make a one-way trip to the
Galápagos islands where it will run aground, thereby stranding its nine
passengers on the fictional island of Santa Rosalia
and destine them to restart the human race away from civilization as well as
the nasty ovary-consuming superbug.
Dialectic of
Beethoven and Barbarism
Vonnegut writes
of the near-extinction of the human race with an element of cheerfulness not
found in most apocalyptic fiction. This is because his vision for a new
humanity rising from the ashes – from the Galápagos islands to be precise
– is one of a post-human optimism. Throughout the novel the ghostly
narrator Leon Trout insists that humans from the 20th century (a
million years ago from his perspective) are fatally flawed from an evolutionary
perspective - the main flaw being the human brain, of course. Human brains,
Trout explains, have been sending humanity on a destructive course that points
to collective suicide one way or another. Whether it comes from bombs or
disease or environmental collapse, the human race is doomed and the only
possible escape is an escape from humanity itself.
In Breakfast of Champions Vonnegut wrote,
“I tend to think of human beings as huge, rubbery test tubes, too, with
chemical reactions seething inside.” Humans, as a collection of chemical
reactions, have so many opportunities to malfunction because of an imbalance in
their fragile chemical state. “So it is a big temptation to me,” he continues,
“when I create a character for a novel, to say that he is what he is because of
faulty wiring, or because of microscopic amounts of chemicals which he ate or
failed to eat on that particular day.”
Brains in
particular go haywire, and in Galápagos this
mental short-circuiting leads to some nasty conclusions, chief among them being
pointless wars and financial crises, which are both manufactured catastrophes
invented in their muddled recesses of the human brain. The financial crisis
Vonnegut writes about is a slight fictionalization of the Latin American debt
crisis that was the result of excess borrowing by Latin American countries in
the 1980s, when Vonnegut was writing this novel. The debt crisis is largely
symbolic of the many human failings and manufactured crises throughout history.
It was, as Vonnegut writes, “the latest in a series of murderous twentieth
century catastrophe which had originated entirely in human brains.” Brains are
forever thwarted any human peace and happiness in Galápagos, leading many characters to decisions that range from the
suicidal to the homicidal to the plainly humiliating. “To the credit of
humanity,” Vonnegut admits, “more and more people were saying that their brains
were irresponsible, unreliable, hideously dangerous, wholly unrealistic –
were simply no damn good.”
Vonnegut’s take
on the contradictions of the human brain is thoroughly dialectical, expressed
through two complementary thoughts on, of all things, Ludwig van Beethoven. When
writing about the financial crisis that had ruined much of Latin American and
ensured that the popular “Nature Cruise of the Century” would be derailed and
serve as an inadvertent genetic life raft for humanity, Vonnegut laments the
artificial manufacturing of crises, something audiences in the post-recession
era can particularly appreciate. In the wake of the debt crisis, a number of
countries, including Ecuador, where this novel is set, experienced hyper-inflation in their local currency making it
essentially worthless. Virtually overnight great sums of wealth had become no
longer useful in any practical capacity. Vonnegut takes exception to the fact
that people ever place value in paper money at all. “Wake up, you idiots!” he writes,
“Whatever made you think paper was so valuable?” The abstract notion of value
in worthless bits of paper is a phenomenon that plagues a number of Vonnegut
novels, and its absurdity comes to a head in Galápagos when an entire country can no longer afford to buy food
for itself because “people had simply changed their
opinions of paper wealth.” Vonnegut remarks, “the
people were beginning to starve to death” because “business was business,” and
that’s the way the world works.
The truth was
(and still is) that the massive famines around the world due to depreciations
of currency have nothing to do with material reality. The world, Vonnegut
points out, is still a lush and fertile place, at least for now, and could easily
support the planet’s population if resources were sensibly distributed around
the globe. Nevertheless, millions and millions of people starve to death due to
poor distribution and irresponsible waste. The famine “was all in people’s
heads” though, and it was “as purely a product of oversize brains as
Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony.”
By drawing a
parallel with one of the great works of art in history, Vonnegut admits the
dialectic of civilization, in which that which allows for great art also, by necessity,
causes great suffering. He is in agreement with philosopher Walter Benjamin,
who once commented, “There is no document of civilization which is not at the
same time a document of barbarism.” Vonnegut’s dialectic of civilization is the
very same that Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer famously wrote about in their
classic work of political philosophy Dialectic
of Enlightenment. In that text they wrote that their principle concern was
“nothing less than to explain why humanity, instead of entering a truly human
state, is sinking into a new kind of barbarism.” This pithy aim is that of
Vonnegut’s, not only in Galápagos, but
also throughout his corpus. His skepticism of enlightenment as a
self-cannibalizing historical process is in accord with Horkheimer and Adorno,
who in that same text wrote perhaps the most stunning indictment of that period
of history and culture: "Enlightenment, understood in the widest sense as
the advance of thought, has always been aimed at liberating human beings from fear
and installing them as masters. Yet the wholly enlightened earth radiates
disaster triumphant."
Vonnegut’s
writing is nothing but a catalog of he triumphant disaster that the earth has
radiated under periods known as “enlighten” or “civilization” or “modernization”
or “progress.” Nuclear apocalypse, technological dependency, biological
superbugs, mass exploitation, warfare, and artificially manufacture famines are
but the tip of the iceberg of atrocities committed in the name of civilization
and enlightenment. At the nexus of this historical dialectic – this
contradiction of progress and destruction – is the human brain, which
Vonnegut blames for sending history down a careening and doomed path. It is for
this reason that he formulates his second thought on Beethoven. Leon Trout has
a habit of saying a particular quote he picked up whenever anybody dies. It
goes: “Oh well – he wasn’t going to write Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony
anyway.” This superficially heartless quip is actually emblematic of Vonnegut’s
deeply sympathetic and humane outlook on life. It is, paradoxically, a way of
saying that at least the deceased also won’t cause any harm anymore either, and
perhaps the world is a more peaceful place now. Toward the end of the novel,
after he has explained that humans have evolved into seal-like creatures with
smaller brains, Trout makes this same quip about the human race, which has,
since it evolved, effectively died out. This time, however, Trout’s sentiment
is laced with a more explicit redemptive hope: “Nobody, surely, is going to
write Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony – or tell a lie, or start a Third World
War.” The dialectic of enlightenment is finally at rest. There are no more
documents of civilization and thus no more documents of barbarism either.
Lest he leave
us entirely without hope, in a deeply absurdist move, Vonnegut delights in this
hopeless situation of humanity by proclaiming, “Even in the darkest times,
there really was still hope for humankind.” Vonnegut’s absurdism
is dialectic to the core though. For as he paints a gloomy picture of the
corner humanity is in, where every bit of progress is regression and every
document of civilization is barbarism, there is always a resolution awaiting
humanity. It is not that despite humanity’s failings there is still an
opportunity to overcome them and restart history and fulfill the goals of
enlightenment. It is that it is precisely because
of humanity’s paradoxical relationship to civilization and barbarism that
we have the capacity to dialectically overcome ourselves. “Man is something
that shall be overcome,” Nietzsche writes in Thus Spoke Zarathustra. “What have you done to overcome him?” Vonnegut’s
overcoming is found on the Galápagos islands, where a new Eden awaits and humanity
finds a new opportunity to rebuild from the ashes and forge a civilization
devoid of violence, enmity, exploitation, and the other crimes committed by
brains the world over. Only then will there be a Beethoven without barbarism.
'Tis a consummation / devoutly to be wished
In
his endeavor to illustrate the sick and twisted realm of the human psyche,
Vonnegut does not just stop at the material manifestations of the collective
insanity (i.e. the myriad manufactured crises) but also seeks to uncover the underlying
psychological conditions that foment them. As is common for Vonnegut, he delves
into psychoanalytic theory to make accusations of the mental sickness of the
modernized and technologized world. Midway through the novel, when Latin
America’s financial crisis is at its peak, he writes of a fictional war that
breaks out between Peru and Ecuador for little reason other than to distract
the populace from noticing how hungry they truly are. Vonnegut writes of a
Peruvian pilot by the name of Guillermo Reyes who finds that in firing rockets
from his jet he has “at last found something which was more fun than sexual
intercourse.” The “tremendous self-propelled weapon slung underneath” the
airplane was “madly in love” with a radar dish atop an Ecuadorian airport. When
Reyes releases the rocket his “feelings at the moment of release had to be
transcendental” and felt completely “drained.”
This
orgasm/explosion connection and the symbol connection between the rocket and
the phallus relates to Freud’s potent theory of the death drive, which argues
that, as Freud writes in Beyond the
Pleasure Principle, "the aim
of life is death." Freud postulates that because the civilized
world is deeply repressed, sexually and emotionally, it must seek an outlet for
its pent-up libido elsewhere. The expression of the libido in alternative means
than sex, a process known as sublimation, so often finds its manifestation in
violence, which symbolically recreates the act of sex, as Vonnegut so deftly
writes in the scene with Colonel Reyes. It is for this reason that most people
“think of explosions as show business, as highly theatrical forms of self-expression,
and little more.” According to Vonnegut, “the launching of the missile, in
fact, was virtually identical with the role of male animals in the reproductive
process,” which of course is the most alluring form of entertainment and
theatrics. Reyes in fact is quite typical in feelings that “what he had done
was analogous to the performance of a male during sexual intercourse.”
In
this analogy of violence and sex, Vonnegut essentially sexes civilization and the violence it sows. The
technological-military complex that drives so-called civilization is
unambiguously sexed male, as it recreates the male sex-act in increasingly
violent measures with sexual imagery and gratification. The progressive march
of history, the endless mastery over nature through technology, and the
exploitation of working classes matches the typical psyche of the alpha male.
Vonnegut uses the words of Shakespeare to make his case for the link between
sex and violence: “‘tis a consummation / devoutly to be wished.” The statement
applies to the destructive forces and the lust of humanity, which, according to
Freud, are ultimately one and the same. Even in the original Shakespeare the
dual connotation is not to be missed. This destructive behavior is detrimental
to those who might face its consequences, which are often not the perpetrators
of the violence. In an extended passage on psychological conditions in modern
society, Vonnegut diagnoses history with a severe case of “pathological
personality,” which he says “merely cause pain to those around them, and almost
never to themselves.” This pathology is the distinctly male and masculine
personality of atomic bombs and capitalist exploitation.
If
all that is ignorant and violent in humanity is sexed (and gendered) as male in
Vonnegut’s writing, then the reverse is also true. All that is redeeming is
characterized as female. Of the characters in the novel, the women are largely
intelligent, hard working, and compassionate while the men are exploitative,
deceptive, and futile. It is for this reason that the human apocalypse is
manifested as a an ovary-destroying superbug – it is the destruction of
the female and feminine that spells the destruction of humanity – or all
that is worthwhile about humanity. Thus when the Bahía de Darwin
finally sets sail, as an emergency escape for
only nine passengers, all but one of them are men – and the lone man is a
hopeless, ignorant, racist whose only contribution is his semen which helps
restart the human race. Vonnegut jokingly calls the story of the stranded
passengers of the Bahía de Darwin “A Second Noah’s Ark.” This is a
deeply subversive narrative strategy though, as in Vonnegut’s retelling of the
destruction and rebuilding of life as we know it, the
male and female do not counterbalance each other for the future success of the
human race, but the female is prioritized. Not only is there only one male
aboard the cruise ship, but the other sexed elements of society – namely,
technology – are portrayed as foolish. This ship itself, the Bahía de
Darwin is a sheepish floating scrap heap, having been reduced to almost
nothing by looters in the famine-ravaged Ecuadorian port of Guayaquil. Also
along for the ride is a neat little techno-gadget called Mandarax,
invented by an ill-fated would-be passenger, a Japanese inventor who is shot
before even making it onto the cruise ship. Mandarax
serves as a comic foil representing the futility of technology in seriously
improving the human condition from a psychological or existential position. Its
main function is to serve as either a translator or as a generous provider of
quotes from literature. Thus throughout the novel Vonnegut includes dozens of
quotes from literature to shed light on the condition of the castaways as they
are stranded on the fictional Galápagos island of Santa Rosalia. When the passengers are lost at sea and hope that perhaps Mandarax
has an emergency locating beacon or broadcasting device with which they can
radio for help they cry mayday into its speaker. Mandarax’s unhelpful response contains the following “utterly mystifying words”:
In depraved May, dogwood and chestnut, flowering JudasUnsurprisingly, the hapless passengers throw Mandarax into the ocean in a fit of impotent rage not long after they arrive in the Galápagos wherein it is promptly eaten by a great white shark. Through the inanity of Mandarax, that supposed technological marvel that found itself in the belly of a shark, Vonnegut mocks the technological-progressivist ideology of capitalism in which all new technologies are by necessity good so long as they make money, no matter how they are used. On the island of Santa Rosalia, Mandarax isn’t helpful in the slightest, only serving to raise the anxieties of those who attempt to use it. When asked for advice it only provided pointless quotations, most of which were “clunkers,” leading to users “feeling mocked by its useless advice or inane wisdom or ponderous efforts to be humorous.”
To be eaten, to be divided, to be drunk
Among whispers. . .
- T.S. Eliot (1888-1965)
Through the absurdity of Mandarax, Vonnegut implodes the myth that we will soon be a superhuman, semi-robotic race of geniuses. Vonnegut supports a trans-humanism along the lines of Donna Haraway in her seminal theoretical text A Cyborg Manifesto. However, his is not a cyborg trans-humanism but instead an animalistic one. We do not need to unite with machines to overcome human flaws, for the flaws are ultimately derived from our fetishization of deadly machinery in the first place. It is, after all, a short step from Mandarax to the explosive missile. His desire is that instead of being hyper-technologized, we take a step back and reacquaint humanity with the profundity of its organic and animalist side. Instead of moral virtue, which is rife with hypocrisy, Vonnegut aims for something simpler: eradication of apocalyptic desire. Humanity has spent enough time lusting after ultimate destructive power that sooner or later we will, accidentally or not, get it and the results will be depressingly predictable. Whether through atomic warfare, ecological disaster, or diseases that resist medical intervention, humanity’s quest for mechanical superiority and monopolistic power will deliver the destruction it promises. Vonnegut’s trans-humanism is thus an attempt to find some scrap of goodness inherent in humanity, rather than seeking salvation elsewhere, such as through technology. Only in this return to the existing animal within humanity will humanity depart from its current destructive path, also known as “history.” Vonnegut animalizes the human, because even the most vicious animals and bloodthirsty creatures don’t enact such madcap adventures as conquering continents, building death camps, enslaving races, or blowing up entire cities. The flaw is thus in the human brain, something no other animal is either blessed or cursed with. As he writes in his novel Jailbird, “It was thinkers, after all, who had set up the death camps. Setting up a death camp, with its railroad sidings and its around-the-clock crematoria, was not something a moron could do. Neither could a moron explain why a death camp was ultimately humane.” In Galápagos, Vonnegut asks, “Can it be doubted that three-kilogram brains were once nearly fatal defects in the evolution of the human race?” It cannot be doubted, so Vonnegut writes a new future, a new Noah’s Ark, in which humans dispense with big brains, becomes seal-like, and regain their innocence in the hopes of doing humanity right this time around.
The Era of Hopeful Monsters
Vonnegut’s
view is that technology is not just exacerbating the problems of society, but
in many ways contributing to it. That is, technology made by and for human
brains is the root of the problem. He writes derisively of scientists “using
their big brains and cunning instruments” for the purpose of annihilation or
triviality. Leon Trout calls the era of a million years ago (i.e. the 1980s)
the “era of big brains and fancy thinking.” This is not unlike when Vonnegut
wrote in The Sirens of Titan that the
present can be called the “Nightmare Ages” in which
everyone is still foolishly looking around for the purpose of life rather than
within themselves, where it is located. Leon Trout explains that he was a
Vietnam War veteran and was made to commit unspeakable atrocities. Vonnegut too
was a war veteran, and his well-documented experiences in Dresden during its firebombing
led him to abhor misuse of technology, particularly for military applications,
but also for the machinery of capitalism. In Galápagos he writes that in the future, after humans evolve to be
seal-like, even if anyone ''found a grenade or a machine gun or a knife or
whatever left over from olden times, how could they ever make use of it with
just their flippers and their mouths?'' Later he adds that people are by
necessity kinder and gentler to each other: ''It is
hard to imagine anybody's torturing anybody nowadays. How could you even
capture somebody you wanted to torture with just your flippers and your mouth?”
These
sentiments echo those he made at Bennington College in 1970, when he delivered
a profound speech summarizing his thoughts on technology, ideology, and
aesthetics. He said:
“The arts put man at the center of the universe, whether he belongs there or not. Military science, on the other hand, treats man as garbage—and his children, and his cities, too. Military science is probably right about the contemptibility of man in the vastness of the universe. Still—I deny that contemptibility, and I beg you to deny it, through the creation of appreciation of art.”
Vonnegut’s
aesthetics are not limited to just the arts though, but to the whole range of
human experience that provides beauty and joy rather than cruelty and
destruction. In this sense then, the seal-human hybrids of the future are the
most aesthetic creatures he has yet surmised, being totally dedicated as they
are to playfulness and enjoying the grandeur of their world. They cannot write
Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, but their simple life is as good a start as any in
the simple aesthetic appreciation of existence itself. Furthermore, this
lifestyle cannot possible lead to the disastrous outcomes such as atomic bombs
or foolish wars in Vietnam. They spend their life eating, sleeping, and
playing. They are not far off from another animal Vonnegut writes about, which
is the blue-footed booby, supposedly named as such because they were deemed
unintelligent when they did not resist the violence inflicted upon them by
explorers and colonists who killed them for food. Such naïve innocence, such a
booby-like nature, is to be praised in Vonnegut’s view, seeing as the boobies
are dedicated to lives of aesthetic bliss rather than intellectual and
technological domination through instrumental-rationality and military science.
Vonnegut speaks to the beauty of the booby mating ritual and even postulates
that they have a belief in the divine and transcendence from the sheer
sublimity of their unusual dancing. This also applies to the marine iguana, who
Vonnegut describes as needing nothing and wanting nothing except a belly full
of food, which it has no problem attaining. “It has no enemies,” he states
admiringly, as if the marine iguana had achieved a state of near-nirvana in its
apathy and dedication to peaceful existence.
It
is clear, then, that Vonnegut, drawing upon the greatest trends of romanticism,
finds transcendence in nature and the aesthetic, which are often bound together,
as in the Blue-footed booby or the marine iguana, or even the Galápagos islands in general. This remote archipelago
thus serves as a paradise, a utopian escape from the ravages of history, and a
location where humanity can regain its lost sense of beauty and peace. The
Galápagos islands symbolize a place apart from the continents of despair,
suffering, and ugliness. Vonnegut describes Mary Hepburn, the matriarch of the
new Galápagos community as “Mother Nature Personified,” giving her the ultimate
title he could bestow. To be aligned with nature is to be aligned with beauty
and goodness, and even humanity, at least that element of humanity that has not
been crushed by the machine of so-called civilization. Before being stranded on
the Galápagos, Mary was a biology teacher who was well acquainted with the
blue-footed booby. When explaining the mating ritual of this divine creature to
her students, a ritual many found more beautiful than even the human
institutionalized ritual or marriage, she asked her students to ponder if they
would “dare call it ‘religion’? Or, if we lack that sort of courage, might we
at least call it ‘art’?”
We
could call our era the “era of big brains and fancy thinking,” as Vonnegut does
in Galápagos, or perhaps the
“Nightmare Ages,” as he does in The
Sirens of Titan. Perhaps we ought to take another title though, one stolen
from a Kilgore Trout novel, which the narrator, Leon Trout, describes in Galápagos. Kilgore, Leon explains, wrote a novel titled The
Era of Hopeful Monsters, about “a planet where the humanoids ignored their
most serious survival problems until the last possible moment.” Leon determines
that most people from a million years ago, our present day, were monsters at
least in terms of personality and decides he will call this era the Era of
Hopeful Monsters. Vonnegut’s aesthetic redemption has the potential to rescue
us from our monstrous selves, so long as we locate the aesthetic within
ourselves. To quote Emerson, “Ne te quaesiveris extra.” Humans cannot evolve by sheer will into
creatures that are more peaceful and less destructive, but we can start by
locating the aesthetic in the contemporary human, even if the human is
monstrous. When Leon recounts his childhood, which was deeply troubled, he
reminisces that he flunked every course but one: art. “Nobody flunked art “ he
contends, “That was simply impossible.” This is because art is a fundamentally
human endeavor which everyone has equal access too. The aesthetic and the human
are one and the same, and art is the endeavor to achieve a certain harmony or
unity with the aesthetic in a quest for existential authenticity. The human is
beauty itself, a rough and difficult sort of beauty, but beauty nonetheless. We
are hopeful monsters, so often treated as “garbage,” as Vonnegut said to that
audience at Bennington College. It is the aesthetic – whether in human
art or the natural world – that can “put man at the center of the
universe” and redeem a monstrous, yet hopeful, humanity.
Vonnegut, via the impotent Mandarax, quotes Thoreau near the end of the novel: “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.” He does so to make the point that the few characters, stranded aboard the Bahía de Darwin and then the Galápagos, are not the only ones plagued by self-doubt and existential despair. It is, unfortunately, an all too common state of being. In Galápagos the humane Vonnegut seeks to reassure his desperate readers that in the open sea of human despair, an Ararat awaits this second Noah’s Ark. And in the depths of that deep despair, a sea change awaits, and a new humanity just might transform into something rich and strange. There may, as Vonnegut writes, have to be “certain modifications in the design of human beings.” The changes that the ghost of Leon Trout saw are just a start. “I’ve only been here for a million years,” he says, just before it is his time to enter the afterlife once and for all, “no time at all, really.”
Read Matthew Gannon's opening essay, "Kurt Vonnegut Has Come Unstuck In Time"
Read Matthew Gannon's previous reviews:
Player Piano, the One-Dimensional Society, and the Emergency Brake of History
Vonnegut in Jerusalem: A Report on the Absurdity of Language and Media
The Tragedy of Eliot Rosewater, Prince of Indiana
Vonnegut on Truth and Aesthetics in a Nonmoral Sense
Vonnegut's Sermon on the Mount
Read Matthew Gannon's previous reviews:
Player Piano, the One-Dimensional Society, and the Emergency Brake of History
Vonnegut in Jerusalem: A Report on the Absurdity of Language and Media
The Tragedy of Eliot Rosewater, Prince of Indiana
Vonnegut on Truth and Aesthetics in a Nonmoral Sense
Vonnegut's Sermon on the Mount