Despite really enjoying this novel, I have often found myself questioning whether or not this story is of literary merit, or AP worthy. The rest of the books that I have read in this class have been rather challenging with several references, and deeper meanings that I would not have been able to understand without help. To me, a story of literary merit is something that has an important meaning that is not totally obvious to the reader and requires deep analysis and thinking. I have also found that there is usually some big event that somewhat ambiguously ties the whole story together and I have yet to encounter that in Never Let Me Go, nor am I anticipating one.
It is clear that my definition of a book that is of literary merit is rather narrow and specific. It can most definitely be argued that books that fit this type of category more often than not do fit this mold. That does not mean that they all must. There are plenty of books out there that use strong and confusing language with mysterious and odd content that aren't AP worthy. As was discussed in the previous post, the style and language of Ishiguro is not that of Margaret Atwood or Toni Morrison, but it does convey a deeper, darker message in a simpler, more reader-friendly way.
Obviously I am rather conflicted as to whether or not this is AP worthy based on the other works we have read for the class. I think I also may be conflicted because this is a more contemporary novel as it was published in 2005, which is obviously much more recent than the other books we have read in AP Lit. All of this being said, even though a lot of the books that are considered to be "AP worthy" are older and more "difficult" to read, that does not necessarily mean that they have to fit this criteria. So, perhaps, my view is just flawed? I truly think that I could see it go either way.
If we were to consider Never Let Me Go to be AP worthy I think it would be because of it's commentary on innocence and knowledge. The students of Hailsham are sheltered from their inevitable futures by their teachers. They know that they're different, but they don't know exactly why and they have questions that they know they can't ask. They know they can never reproduce and that they were put on Earth for a specific reason and that they have to maintain good health and be isolated from the "real world" in order to fulfill their duties. By the end of the book we find out that certain teachers really wanted to tell them and found it to be extremely unethical to not tell these children that they were going to become organ donors whether they liked it or not. Since it was their futures they had a right to know and sheltering them from the truth would only cause harm. Perhaps if they had had this knowledge earlier they would have lived their lives differently. While they may have been trying to keep them innocent, they were denying them their right to know their future. In this case innocence was ignorance, and it is clear that knowledge is very powerful and can be upsetting but it is better to be knowledgeable than to be ignorant.
Thursday, April 5, 2018
Author's Style
Welcome back! I have hardly been able to put this book down and have enjoyed it very much, despite the slight confusion I am feeling in terms of the meaning of the work as a whole, (which I will talk about in a later post), that I think could mainly be attributed to one key characteristic: style. The style of this novel is so incredibly different from that of the other novels I have read so far in AP Lit, like Brave New World, Handmaid's Tale, and Song of Solomon, and quite frankly it's refreshing. To be able to read a book and not have to stop every few minutes and try to figure out what the heck just happened, whether or not something is actually a motif or constantly looking up vocab, is nice for a change. Ishiguro's lax, laid-back, and easy to comprehend writing style allows for more time to contemplate what is really going on and to draw connections between different parts of the novel. I have also found that this style makes the story weirdly relatable. Despite the fact that there are few things I can genuinely relate to in this book, (I don't go to boarding school, I don't live in England, and I'm not destined to donate all of my organs as an adult), as I read I feel strangely connected to Kath and her friends. There is the obvious connection that I am an adolescent and am in the midst of my own coming-of-age experience, but it's more than that. You can read so much of this book in one sitting because it reads in your head so smoothly as though you were experiencing it yourself.
This casual, easy-to-read style almost tricks the reader into thinking that this is all normal. You find out that Ruth, Kathy, Tommy, and all of the other students at Hailsham are clones of people who are leading real, normal lives, that will not go on to donate all of their organs. The novel makes this situation almost fun when at one point the three of them accompany a few other students from The Cottages (a sort of transition period between Hailsham and donating), to investigate a "possible" of Ruth's. "Possibles" are the people that they may have been cloned from. While this adventure starts as fun, they later come to the realization that it can't be Ruth's possible and the people they are cloned from are likely to be less respectable. Ruth says, "We are modeled from trash. Junkies, prostitutes, winos and tramps," (166). The casual language used when discussing their unfortunate fates such as "completing" (dying, which usually occurs around the 4th donation) adds to the normalization of the content.
The order in which the story is being told also makes the book easier to read. Instead of staying chronological, which can get rather boring, it incorporates flashbacks and stories from when Kath attended Hailsham. These flashbacks connect the past with the present and allow for the reader to make these connections on their own, which makes things interesting. It has kept me intrigued and eager to read more to finally have everything come together. This also permits Kath to have insight and commentary on things that occurred in the past, which is fun to read, especially when it comes to her relationships with Ruth and Tommy.
Another style element that makes this book great is the perspective. This story is told in first person from Kath's point of view. Though there are times when I would like to be immersed into Ruth or Tommy's minds, I feel as though Kath is a good judge of character and gives us the next best insight. Though first person narrators can only provided a limited and unavoidably biased view, it also gives an in-depth, and detailed perspective that would not be possible with multiple narrators, which I enjoy. Kath's character also seems the most relatable, because she is rather average in most senses and does not like to cause any trouble but is also attentive.
As you can tell, I really like Ishiguro's style of writing and would love to read more work by them. Reading a novel that is written in such a simplistic and flowy style makes it so much easier and more enjoyable to analyze and to think about more deeply, which makes the reading experience all the more pleasurable.
This casual, easy-to-read style almost tricks the reader into thinking that this is all normal. You find out that Ruth, Kathy, Tommy, and all of the other students at Hailsham are clones of people who are leading real, normal lives, that will not go on to donate all of their organs. The novel makes this situation almost fun when at one point the three of them accompany a few other students from The Cottages (a sort of transition period between Hailsham and donating), to investigate a "possible" of Ruth's. "Possibles" are the people that they may have been cloned from. While this adventure starts as fun, they later come to the realization that it can't be Ruth's possible and the people they are cloned from are likely to be less respectable. Ruth says, "We are modeled from trash. Junkies, prostitutes, winos and tramps," (166). The casual language used when discussing their unfortunate fates such as "completing" (dying, which usually occurs around the 4th donation) adds to the normalization of the content.
The order in which the story is being told also makes the book easier to read. Instead of staying chronological, which can get rather boring, it incorporates flashbacks and stories from when Kath attended Hailsham. These flashbacks connect the past with the present and allow for the reader to make these connections on their own, which makes things interesting. It has kept me intrigued and eager to read more to finally have everything come together. This also permits Kath to have insight and commentary on things that occurred in the past, which is fun to read, especially when it comes to her relationships with Ruth and Tommy.
Another style element that makes this book great is the perspective. This story is told in first person from Kath's point of view. Though there are times when I would like to be immersed into Ruth or Tommy's minds, I feel as though Kath is a good judge of character and gives us the next best insight. Though first person narrators can only provided a limited and unavoidably biased view, it also gives an in-depth, and detailed perspective that would not be possible with multiple narrators, which I enjoy. Kath's character also seems the most relatable, because she is rather average in most senses and does not like to cause any trouble but is also attentive.
As you can tell, I really like Ishiguro's style of writing and would love to read more work by them. Reading a novel that is written in such a simplistic and flowy style makes it so much easier and more enjoyable to analyze and to think about more deeply, which makes the reading experience all the more pleasurable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)