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.