Toward Ecological Humanism

As an important post-WWII American writer, Kurt Vonnegut (1922-2007) has caused much controversy among literary critics. To start with, his preference to write in the science fiction mode made mainstream critics dismiss him as another popular pulp literature writer. When Slaughterhouse-Five came out in1969, critics began to recognize the unique postmodernist narrative power he demonstrated, but the note of pessimism and the dark laughter of gallows humor in his works confused many scholars and they believed him to be mainly a black humorist and absurdist who saw the world in a dark, nihilistic vision. With more works published and his popularity with the American youth rocketing, serious critical attention to Vonnegut grew and scholars came to realize the seriousness and the moralizing urge behind the bizarre plots and the hilarity and chaos that marked his world. By the1990s and until now, scholars have generally agreed that Kurt Vonnegut is an adamant humanist who, despite his relentless satire and criticism of humanity’s faults and follies, persists in seeing goodness and beauty in humanity and maintains hope against a world that is basically absurd and despairing.However, even in this consensus there is disagreement. Whereas many scholars have noticed that Vonnegut’s humanism differs from the classic humanism, they find it hard to nail it down with an appropriate name. Attempts such as "postmodern humanism"(David2006),"postmodernist humanist"(Chen2010), and "misanthropic humanism"(Tally2009) are inadequate to capture the complex love-hate sentiments Vonnegut holds for humanity. Years after his death, Vonnegut stays alive in the critical world as the "Clown of Armageddon"(Freese2009) who pokes fun at those who intend to label him with a dead name and instead encourages open and diversified interpretations.This dissertation is not an ambitious effort to finalize the controversy, but to add to the existing Vonnegut scholarship another possible perspective. Animals have long been ignored in the studies of Vonnegut, although they abound in his fictional world. An investigation into their roles, decoding their enigmatic messages in relation to Vonnegut’s predominant humanistic concerns, reveals that the animal images, be they real or imaginary, realistic or metaphorical, are more than linguistic devices used to increase forcefulness and richness of expression. They are, in effect, integral parts of Vonnegut’s humanitarianism and significantly contribute to his themes of humanity. Indeed, the exploration of the significance of animal roles opens new grounds for the understanding of Vonnegut’s treatment of humanism, namely, it reveals a tendency in Vonnegut’s thinking toward ecological humanism.Animal studies offers useful perspectives and concepts for the interpretation of animal images and is helpful for the understanding of ecological humanism. It is an emerging and increasingly influential field that reexamines the human-animal relationship and investigates the ethical, cultural, and political implications in the human treatment of animals, both in daily life and in the cultural representation. Central on its agenda is the critique of the Western philosophical traditions, particularly the legacy from the Enlightenment, that have been anthropocentrically prejudiced against animals and denied them ethical standing. The term speciesism is used to describe this discrimination based on the difference of species, primarily the human prejudice against the nonhuman species. It is generally believed that the oppression of species is always interlocked with oppressions of race, sex, and class, and any other discrimination based on difference. In its interrogation of speciesism inherent in classic humanism, animal studies converges with the anti-humanist tradition in the Western philosophy and the "animal turn" manifest in the contemporary development of humanism. Sharing a common goal to remedy the wrongs human beings have done to nature and other species and to realize the reconciliation between humans and nature, these intellectual trends all point to the advent of a new era of humanism-ecological humanism, a constructive concept that denounces the overweening assumption of human supremacy in classic humanism, its cult of reason and scientism in particular, but at the same time advocates the extension of the aspirations in classic humanism such as liberty, justice, and equality to the nonhuman world so as to realize the full emancipation of all living beings and proposes a redefinition of the human identity in the universe and the ecological community, so as to display the transformation from mastery to kinship.Much of Vonnegut’s thinking is consensual with the concepts of ecological humanism. First of all, he is strongly aware of the ecological destruction caused by human beings and condemns it at every opportunity. An investigation into his earlier experiences and the influences on him shows us a Vonnegut whose worldview was deeply affected by his experiences in nature and who had strong affection for animals, believing that animals offer more trustworthy and unconditional friendship than humans. All this lays foundation for our understanding of his ecological sensibility and the fondness of animal images in his writing.Critique of humanity is one of the most well-known themes of Vonnegut, but little importance is attached to the roles of animals in bearing out this theme. In Chapter Two, the issue of meat-eating is explored as a case of humanity’s inhumanity. In Breakfast of Champions, Hocus Pocus, and Galapagos, killing animals for food is a common recurrent motif. The deliberation with which Vonnegut describes the killing scenes indicates his deep concern over the moral implications in this common practice. From the callousness in the hamburger business, the avarice and cruelty in raising the veal calf and boiling the lobster alive, to the shameless carnage of trusting island creatures, Vonnegut presents us a series of pictures where the ferocity in humanity is exposed with growing intensity. In view of such ferocity that used to be ascribed only to animal predators, the fundamental definition of humanity becomes seriously challenged.Loneliness is another constant concern for Vonnegut. In the post-industrial society, humans become pathetic creatures that are alienated and lonely; their sense of ontological security is highly at stake. To combat loneliness and maintain sanity, animal companions become indispensable. Chapter Three deals with the theme of human loneliness as reflected in the animal companionship. In The Sirens of Titan, Breakfast of Champions, and Slapstick, even people of the closest relation, such as wife and husband, father and son, brother and sister, can be estranged and hostile to each other. Pets have to be relied on for the replacement of interpersonal intimacy. Trivial as this perspective may seem, it represents the widespread apathy and the human predicament of loneliness in the post-industrial society.Slaughterhouse-Five is undoubtedly the summit of Vonnegut’s literary career. In terms of animal treatment, it is also one of the most daring. In the novel, the boundary of species is radically blurred by the transposition of the human with the animal. Billy Pilgrim becomes twice "animalized":first as a survivor in the slaughterhouse from the senseless slaughtering that the Dresden firebombing essentially is, then as a sample of the Earthlings exhibited in the Tralfamadore zoo. In both experiences, critique of speciesism is obvious and sympathy for the condition of the real animals that are normally in the slaughterhouse and the zoo is evoked. Meanwhile, the human hubris as the "paragon of animals" is deflated and the fragility and porosity of the "insuperable line" between humans and animals is made apparent. In addition, the introduction of an extraterrestrial planet creates an effective interplanetary perspective and renders humans a humbled species identity as the "Earthlings". This is very close to the eco-humanist proposition of biotic citizenship.In spite of all his bitter criticism of humanity, however, Vonnegut is not a pessimist, nor is he a misanthrope. He fosters profound love for humanity and wishes to find solutions for the human predicament. Animals come to his rescue again. In The Sirens of Titan and Galapagos, human characters undergo a literalized process of "becoming animal". Boaz and Chrono respectively choose to live with the harmonium and bluebirds in The Sirens of Titan, while in Galapagos, after a million years’ evolution, humans eventually do away with the manipulating big brain and become joyous amphibians. In the choice of animalizing and return to the animal kingdom, literally or metaphorically, human beings finally achieve the ecological and spiritual integrity that consists in peace, contentment, and harmony with themselves and with their environment.To conclude, animals play important roles in Vonnegut’s treatment of the humanistic themes and help define the special quality of Vonnegut’s humanism. Ecological humanism, in return, helps further our understanding of Vonnegut’s simultaneous attack and advocacy of humanity. It also offers a conjuncture where his humanistic concerns conjoin his strong sensibility for animals and for the ecological destruction. Still, Vonnegut is primarily a "humanist", which, according to his explanation, means one who is especially interested in humans. His sympathy for the animals, sincere and constant as it is, mainly expresses itself in the reflection of humanity’s weaknesses and follies. Unfortunately, he did not live to the full bloom of the ecological humanism that is burgeoning so refreshingly in his thought.