Slaughterhouse-five

Throughout Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-five, Billy Pilgrim experiences the reality of fate, although the people around him do not realize the extent of external things controlling their lives.  Billy keeps a framed prayer on his office wall that says, “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom always to tell the difference.”  Most people believe that only certain things are inevitable, while the rest are under their control.  For example, the narrator describes how Americans believe it is their fault when they cannot find a job or something bad happens to them.  Billy explains how they waste so much time feeling guilty for no reason when the narrator says, “Among the things Billy Pilgrim could not change were the past, present, and future.”  Constantly Billy travels through time with no rhyme or reason.  This may be symbolic of how his life is out of his control and the memories of war keep coming back to overwhelm him.  Billy repeatedly travels back to his time in World War II where he knows the fates of his friends and himself.  He constantly references how people are going to die and that he feels bad that these characters have no idea.   Also, when Billy knows the plane to the optometrist meeting will crash, he decides not to warn the other passengers because he wants them to have peace of mind.  In this situation Billy is only a little uncomfortable, if not indifferent, to the events that will occur, but in contrast, the passengers are completely oblivious.  Billy’s realization that his fate is inevitable allows him to see from a more objective point of view.  Billy decides to marry his wife because it is in his fate, not because he completely loves his wife.  He sees that he will become an optometrist and follows that path without questioning it. Like the Tralfamadorians, he sees that chasing after success is a waste of time.

                As people on Earth do not realize that they are lacking all control and dwell on the negative situations, the Tralfamadorians embrace it and look only at the positive things in life.  The Tralfamadorians don’t see time as we do; they see time all at once because it is not linear.   Billy sees time similarly to them rather than people because he has witnessed his entire life.  This view of the world helps Billy maybe cope with the traumatic events of war because he sees people as dead for only an instant, while they are alive at some other point in time.  This way of thinking has probably helped him deal with the many deaths he witnessed during war.  Maybe this idea of fate and lack of control is comforting to Billy because he knows what events will occur in his life, but it also makes him a more passive character.   His passivity caused by the knowledge that he cannot control his own life makes me indifferent toward him, and I view him as an almost weak character, which proves his characterization as an anti-hero.

Beloved

The role fate and free will play in Beloved is not a completely clear one.  Is free will more apparent than fate?  Which of the two seems to be dominant throughout Morrison's novel?  First I'll examine the free will aspect of the story.  One of the most important events in Beloved is when Sethe murders Beloved, illustrating the occurrence of free will.  Sethe had the choice to murder her daughter and protect her from the harsh reality of slavery that she had once experienced.  On the other hand, she acted upon instinct; her "thick love" guided her to protect her children and do what she could to save them from the trials of slavery.  Based on Paul D's claim, Sethe was not thinking for herself, and her decision was not completely her choice; she made the decision within the confines of her extreme love.  Maybe it was not absolutely fate, but a higher power (love) forced her to commit this crime of passion.  

So following this theory that some higher power had control of Sethe's decision, how much of the story relates to fate if the characters do not solely act on free will?  Much of the characters' fate depends on their connection to slavery.  It seems to be fate that after being a slave for so long, the past comes back to almost haunt the characters.  One significant example of this is when the four horsemen from Sweet Home attempt to bring the escaped slave, Sethe, and her children back to slavery.  These four horsemen are allusions to the Book of Revelation in the Bible that relate to the apocalypse, the fate of the world.  This shows how slavery seems to be the fate of Sethe's family, although she escapes it for the second time, and contributes to the outcome of her family's stability.  Sethe and Denver remain isolated from their community due to the grief of the murder of Beloved, which was directly related to going back to slavery and eventually overwhelms Sethe to an almost death-like state.  Paul D, also a former slave at Sweet Home, and Beloved remind Sethe of her past as a slave by constantly asking questions and telling stories.  Beloved seems to represent not only the grief that Sethe feels, but she also represents every slave, especially with her constant allusions to being on a slave ship.  The memories and constant references to the harshness of slavery occur throughout the story, illuminating that slavery, or the memory of slavery, guides how Sethe's family should live, isolated and cautious.  To say that Sethe's family was destined to fall apart is a stretch, but it is safe to say that the re-occurrence of events relating to slavery are unavoidable.

The Stranger

                In The Stranger by Albert Camus, fate plays a limited role.  The only fate that Meursault believes is guaranteed is death.  He is disinterested in any idea of a god guiding his life and choosing a fate for him.  Meursault even questions why other people believe that a god chooses their fate, when they are all “elected by the same fate.”  Camus characterizes this “fate” of only death as a “dark wind that had been rising toward [him] from somewhere deep in [his] future.”  That fate “leveled whatever was offered” in his life, which means that the choices in his life were taken away by the single fate of death. 

                Throughout, Meursault seems to exercise free will, rather than be bound by a destiny that a higher being chose throughout his life.  He compares the “gentle indifference” of the world to his own indifference.  Meursault concludes that life has no meaning, and therefore nothing matters, so he does as he pleases.  As other people are bound by some type of morality, Meursault is not; he uses his freedom to kill the Arab at the beach.  At that moment, he loses control of himself, although no higher being is controlling him.  He chooses to not grieve over his mother’s death, which feels unnatural to other people who are bound to some type of morality.  Although Meursault may not be considered an immoral person, he does not have the feelings or emotions that would stop him from committing the crime that he has committed; therefore, he uses only his free will. 

                Although it was Meursault’s free will that led him to not particularly care about his mother’s death and kill a man, other people did have control over the circumstances of his fate.  According to Meursault, again, the only fate is death.  Because he killed a man, he is sentenced to death.  The court chose to bring his fate sooner, because they rejected his request to appeal.  According to Meursault, they did not decide his fate; his death was inevitable and would have happened sooner or later.

Free Will in Invisible Man

Throughout Invisible Man free will is more significant than fate.  There are not very many instances in this novel that involve fate; however, the novel is based around the narrator’s free will and the restrictions surrounding it.  Although the narrator has free will, he tends to follow the path set out for him by other people, limiting his identity to the stereotypes of black men and to what other people tell him to be. 

Tod Clifton’s Sambo doll represents a certain stereotype of black men, but it also symbolizes how the prejudice that whites have against blacks control the actions and ability to carry out free will of black men.  Also, the narrator’s surgery after the Liberty Paints accident represents how whites have manipulated him.  During the surgery the white doctors experiment on him and attempt to change his personality.  When they use electricity he begins to dance, which is part of the Sambo stereotype.  The white men force him to dance and abide by that stereotype while he has no control.  Similarly, the narrator blindly follows the orders of Jack and the leaders of the brotherhood because he believes it will benefit his race and cause change.  Although he uses free will in his first speech after the battle royal and in his speech at the eviction, the brotherhood takes that free will away.  During his third speech, the narrator talks about the hardships his race has encountered, but the leaders of the brotherhood warn him of going too far.  Although the topic is of his liking, he is restricted by the brotherhood.  They want him to make more “scientific” speeches, so that they reach their ultimate goal of destroying the black community.  The brotherhood uses the narrator to achieve their own goal without the narrator knowing, but he soon discovers that something suspicious is going on. 

When Jack loses his false eye, it becomes clear to the narrator that he should use his own free will to build his identity.  Before, his identity was built by his college, Bledsoe, the stereotypes of whites, and his membership in the brotherhood.  Later, the narrator tries to manipulate women to gain knowledge of the brotherhood, and he tries to escape both the brotherhood and Ras, demonstrating his new use of free will.  He falls into a hole and realizes that he has been stuck in a hole his whole life, unable to build his own identity.  He comes to terms with the world and how people try to make a pattern out of the chaos of life.  He learns from his past and does not come out of the cellar until he understands that he can use his own free will to determine his life.

King Lear and the Role of Fate

Throughout King Lear, fate plays various roles.  Some characters believe in a predetermined life and blame fate for their misfortune, while others laugh at the idea of fate.  Also, while some elements of the plot seem destined, others seem to be caused by the characters’ free will. 

                When Edmund plots to take his father’s inheritance, he turns his father against his younger brother, Edgar, in order to gain Gloucester’s favor.  Edmund makes it seem like Edgar is plotting to kill his father, so that he can have the inheritance to himself, which he would not have had originally because he is an illegitimate son.  Gloucester blames the nearing eclipse and alignment of the stars for his bad fortune of his youngest son “betraying” him.  He believes that some higher power, or the bodies of the solar system, has control over his life.  Edmund, on the other hand, laughs at the idea of fate.  He believes it is foolish to think that a higher power, especially the alignment of the stars, controls one’s life.  Nevertheless, it was he who manipulated the fate of his family, not a higher power as Gloucester suspects.

                Many characters use the term “fortune” to describe coincidence, luck, or fate.   King Lear describes the bad fortune of his family splitting apart and considers for a time if it is an act of fate or merely a coincidence.  It seems to be fate that the British win the war at the end, which decides Cordelia and King Lear’s fate of being captured and then dying.  Edmund promises to capture Cordelia and Lear if the British won the war, so it is plausible that a higher power decided that the British would win.  On the other hand, it appears that Goneril and Regan used their free will to destroy their family to gain power and the love of Edmund.  Usually blatantly immoral actions, such as destroying family ties for one’s own gain, poisoning a sister, and committing suicide, are acts of free will.  Goneril and Regan both turned against Lear after falsifying their love for him in order to have their own power, which they decided by their free will.  They were not destined to destroy their family and contribute to the king’s insanity.  It was also not fate or a higher being that decided their deaths. 

                Interestingly, fate and free will work hand in hand to decide the outcome of King Lear.  Although there seems to be more instances of free will than fate, fate does play a significant role in the end.  Most characters, like Gloucester, believe that a higher power controls their lives.  This belief in fate plays an important role in the characters’ lives, which, in turn, makes the reader question if fate really does play as important of a role as the characters believe, or if it is only each character’s free will that decides the outcome.

Oedipus and Fate

To what degree is Oedipus' life controlled by fate?

Oedipus learns that he is going to kill his father and marry his mother, so he flees from Corinth and Polybus and Merope because he believes they are his real parents, and he does not want to do what the prophecy said he would do.  Oedipus tries to disprove the prophecy, so he travels far from any possibility of fulfilling that fate, only to encounter his real parents in Thebes. On the way there Oedipus kills his father, and when he arrives he marries his mother. 

Although that part of his life was controlled by fate, was the rest, too? 
The only predetermined parts of Oedipus' life were killing his father and marrying his mother.  Although those were the only parts of his life determined by fate, they were fairly significant parts. Oedipus was able to survive his parents' death sentence because the shepherd and messenger allowed him to live in Corinth with adopted parents.  Oedipus was supposed to find out his fate because it led him to leave his adopted parents, whom he thought were his real parents.  He was predetermined to leave Corinth and return to Thebes so that he could encounter his real parents.  Oedipus needed to kill his father at the crossroads, and later solve the sphinx's riddle so he could marry his mother.  Fate controlled a huge part of Oedipus' life, but after his fate was fulfilled, he was able to use his free will.  Oedipus used free will to decide whether or not he should flee or die after he discovered the truth about his birth father and mother.  He also decided to blind himself; that was not fated.  Ultimately, fate controlled the big parts of Oedipus' life until the fate of killing his father and marrying his mother was fulfilled.

Are we governed by fate, free will, or a greater power? Or do we fall somewhere on the spectrum between?

The idea of fate has always taken my interest.  Are we predetermined to be who we are?  Do we have control over what we decide to do with our lives?  We all can decide what we want to do, but did some higher power have that decision in the plan of the world?  Christians hold a belief that God gave us free will to do as we please, but do we have complete control over our lives?  Do things happen for a reason, or is it just coincidence?  Was I fated to move here, to meet all these new people, to give up my old life, to adjust myself to the new environment?  Or was it just coincidence that my family made a last minute decision to move?  Moving here allowed me to clear my mind about my future.  In Illinois I was not concerned about my future very much.  I didn't care about what college I go to and I had not yet decided what I want to do.  I was somewhat indifferent about my interests and many other things.  When I moved here, I met a few key people that helped me grow up and take life more seriously.  Those people showed me my strengths and helped me decide that I want to be an engineer.  Was I predetermined to meet them so that they could guide me on the path through life, or was it just coincidence?

Beowulf relates to the question about fate because the epic hero's life seems to be predetermined.  Beowulf owes Hrothgar a favor, so he travels to his land to try to save his people from Grendel.  Beowulf happens to be the only man strong enough to defeat him.  He was fated to keep his promise and help Hrothgar.  The hero later has to defeat the mother of Grendel, and he finds the only sword that can destroy her.  Beowulf needed that to carry on his heroic journey.  Later he becomes king of the Geats, which definitely does not sound like coincidence because all of the old king's sons had to die first.  It seems to be Beowulf's destiny that he is king when someone wakes the dragon guarding treasure.  He proves his heroism by defeating the dragon, but not without a fatal injury.  It was Beowulf's destiny to die there because his name can live on forever, and he freed the treasure for his people.

Fate can also relate to more important things, like the economy.  I read an article about how Germany holds the fate of the euro zone.  Germany has to help some countries within the euro zone to save them from a down-spiraling economy.  There are 17 nations that use the euro as their currency and many are having economic difficulties.  Germany can help, but they would have to be willing to give up a lot.  Germany controls those nations fates: If the nation helps, they could start to stabilize the euro a little, or if they decide not to help, there could be major changes in the value of the euro, and they could send the other countries into deeper debt.