6 ms·
It's not clear to me if the story is supposed to be a second degree satire of left-leaning doctrine or a third degree satire of right-leaning fantasies. No mat
by Bakary 4y ago
It's not clear to me if the story is supposed to be a second degree satire of left-leaning doctrine or a third degree satire of right-leaning fantasies.
No matter its goal, the story hits a raw nerve. The mix of emotions over inequality, natural superiority, and its implications one way or the other is one of the strongest cocktails, I feel.
- WFHRenaissance 4y agoWhat's a first degree satire look like then?
- qsort 4y agoJust like a third, fifth, seventh... degree one, I imagine.
- Bakary 4y agoIt can't exist by definition. Or if it can I'm not equipped to visualize it.
- WFHRenaissance 4y ago>the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues. This is first degree satire. Your third degree satire is actually satire in the second degree.
- Bakary 4y agoAfter checking it looks like the expression second degree doesn't map to English from my own language and I was translating too literally (in the first degree? lol)
- swayvil 4y agoPlaying it totally straight.
- wnoise 4y agoWouldn't that be zeroth degree satire?
- WFHRenaissance 4y agoYes, at least in English.
- slowmovintarget 4y agoWhy can't it be both at the same time? Vonnegut was both a great thinker and a great writer (the former is typically a precondition for the latter).
- Pxtl 4y agoVonnegut was brilliant, but I never found his writing subtle. He generally was pretty straightforward about things. imho, Harrison Bergeron should be taken at face value as his indictment against holding back the gifted among us. Remember that his exemplars aren't great Randian industrialists, but like... dancers. Artists. Quietly intelligent men like himself. Vonnegut isn't saying "the strong should triumph and stand on the backs of their lessers and dominate the world" but rather just "let great and beautiful things be great and beautiful". And there's the subtle misogyny that our hero is smart and his wife is a bit dense and happily accepts their dystopia. I love Vonnegut, but that fits with his writing through and through. Vonnegut's women generally... aren't great. Yes, letting greatness be victorious has kind of a conservative bent because it also implies letting the losers lose, which runs runs against progressive ideals that Vonnegut seems to hold of making sure everyone is taken care of. I think Vonnegut was the kind of man who could hold both those thoughts in his head at the same time. We contain multitudes. In general, it's a cute story within Vonnegut's body of work, but anybody who fixates on this one piece... it's kind of a red flag of "I would do great and awesome things if only the bleeding heart liberals stopped holding me back!"
- virissimo 4y agoYou contrast Rand's heroes with those of Vonnegut as if they are all CEO-types, but they also include sculptors, architects, engineers, composers, and philosophy professors. IMO, Rand and Vonnegut are much more similar than their fans would like to admit.
- indrora 4y agoAttempting to compare Vonnegut and Rand without acknowledging that Rand fundamentally believed poor people should suffer for their poorness is comparing a scathing comedian and a clown: you have to accept one has a point, and the other is a clown.
- aasasd 4y agoIt's always fun seeing USians trying to shoehorn every variation of human behavior into the one-dimensional classification. (Seeing other Westerners confusedly borrow the same dichotomy is also entertaining, as it often fits poorly to them and they surely should know better.)
- criddell 4y agoIs this a criticism of Vonnegut?
- aasasd 4y agoThe only problem I might have with Vonnegut is that I could use more of his novels. Some of his books easily derail into author's explicit commentary on things—which is fun too in its own way, but leaves less space for more subtle jabs in the course of an actual plot.
- bfors 4y agoAs a USian, it is not fun
- sixo 4y agoThe words "left" and "right" are flimsy and one-dimensional for this purpose, but the basic dichotomy they're referring to in this context has deep roots in historical thinking: whether it's right for people to have whatever they can get vs what they need— with the choice of moral framework indicating who "deserves" status and advantages; the former being the meritocratic/libertarian/objectivist sense, or the latter the communist/liberal/christian sense. In either case "right" and "left" are poorly matched, but come on, you know what they're talking about.
- Bakary 4y agoI don't think this condescension is warranted for two reasons. Vonnegut operated this satire clearly within American cultural parameters and the dichotomy, though one-dimensional, is linked to many different foundational ideas in various cultures all across the world.