Kazuo Ishiguro: Never Let Me Go

[Shade]

I agree steffee and pink shadow that the whole point was that the characters didn't want to escape as they were conditioned to accept their lot - I remember hearing critics comment last year when the book came out that "they should have run away"! Sadly that way lies Michael Bay's The Island.

By extension I think Ishiguro wants us to think about our own lives and how we meekly accept our limited lifespans and experiences and rarely rage against the dying of the light.

 

[pink shadow]

By extension I think Ishiguro wants us to think about our own lives and how we meekly accept our limited lifespans and experiences and rarely rage against the dying of the light.

Most certainly.

BTW, and this is not very important, but it's just bugging me: I never managed to figure out what the four donations would be, before someone "completed" (and btw, I thought that expression was perhaps the most horrible thing in the whole story, that clinical "completion" ,instead if death), I mean, number 1: a kidney, number 2: a lung, number 3: ? what can you take after that without actually killing someone? Eyes or part of the skin? Or was that Ishiguro's way of saying these kids were biologically altered?

 

[steffee]

Most certainly.

BTW, and this is not very important, but it's just bugging me: I never managed to figure out what the four donations would be, before someone "completed" (and btw, I thought that expression was perhaps the most horrible thing in the whole story, that clinical "completion" ,instead if death), I mean, number 1: a kidney, number 2: a lung, number 3: ? what can you take after that without actually killing someone? Eyes or part of the skin? Or was that Ishiguro's way of saying these kids were biologically altered?

Didn't some of the donors "complete" before the 4th donation though? I think it was respectable to get to your fourth because you'd survived that far and you were unlikely to make it through, but some did IIRC?? Didn't Ruth complete on her 3rd though? I didn't think there was a specific first organ to be donated by each donor, but that whatever was required was taken.

They were biologically altered in that they couldn't have children, but I'm not sure there was any more. Wasn't the whole "drawings" idea to show that they weren't altered at all, at least in the "mind" sense?

It's funny you should mention that Shade, because I am currently reading the Alchemist, whish says (on a book)...

"It's a book that says the same thing almost all the other books in the world say," continued the old man. "It describes people's inability to choose their own destinies. And it ends up saying that everyone believes the world's greatest lie?"

"What's the world's greatest lie?" ....

"It's this: that at a certain point in our lives, we lose control of what's happening to us, and our lives become controlled by fate."

I think some books more than others urge you to challenge the degree of agency you have in your own life, and NLMG is certainly one of them.

 

[Balmy Westwind]

I think the book could not have ended any other way. I think that Ishiguro wanted the reader to think about the ethics of cloning humans. Did we think that the youngsters were actually human? Or not human as had been suggested when Madam called them poor creatures? Are we all really just sheep that follow the leader or can we exercise freewill and not just be controlled by fate? Could these youngsters have done anything other than go like sheep to the slaughter?

 

[steffee]

I think the book could not have ended any other way. I think that Ishiguro wanted the reader to think about the ethics of cloning humans. Did we think that the youngsters were actually human? Or not human as had been suggested when Madam called them poor creatures? Are we all really just sheep that follow the leader or can we exercise freewill and not just be controlled by fate? Could these youngsters have done anything other than go like sheep to the slaughter?

Well, since nobody else is responding...

I agree Ishiguro wanted us to consider the ethics of cloning. By writing the story from the POV of Kathy, and the others but also including some thoughts and feelings of the non-donors characters, e.g. Miss Lucy, and Madame, he stressed just how "human" those Hailsham students were. I considered them to be real people, rather than "creatures" or anything Madame might have referred to them as.

We are just sheep. It's sad but true. We're all the same, we all live in a house, watch tv, use gas and electricity and even dress alike. Granted there are a few minority people who do not do all of that, but by and large, we're the same. I don't think that's controlled by fate, but by society.

They students couldn't have done anything, because there wasn't any other option for them. It didn't occur to them to alter their "destinies", so to speak.

 

[steffee]

Wow, amazing discussion everyone...

Still, you've read this...
Pontalba?
Shade?

 

[pontalba]

Steffee I didn't finish it. Didn't like it. Depressing is the least of it. IMO I knew right away what was going on, and didn't appreciate the authors approach to the subject. Although I have to say the understated way he presented it was creepy. Even creepier than all the movies that came out in the 70's or so on that very same subject. I suppose I had enough of the subject matter with those films.

But in the end the author did not engage me, didn't make me care about the people populating his story. There is such a thing as too much understatement. Its not too often I don't bother to finish a book. But this is the second of his I have not finished.

 

[Balmy Westwind]

I guess this is a book you either love or hate. I loved it.

Steffee I think you are right and there was no other option open to them. They had no role models and only rumours of awful things having happened to children who had tried to escape. I too felt that the youngsters seemed to be real people. Indeed the very fact that a few children had tried to escape from Hailsham in the early part of the book shows that some did exercise freewill. Their failed attempts would reinforce to the others the pointlessness of trying to alter their destiny.

The fact that Kathy and Tommy did think that they might be able to put off their duty for a few years is evidence that they were real people. It was only after they were told this option had never been open to them that they accepted their fate.

 

[steffee]

Steffee I didn't finish it. Didn't like it. Depressing is the least of it. IMO I knew right away what was going on, and didn't appreciate the authors approach to the subject. Although I have to say the understated way he presented it was creepy. Even creepier than all the movies that came out in the 70's or so on that very same subject. I suppose I had enough of the subject matter with those films.

But in the end the author did not engage me, didn't make me care about the people populating his story. There is such a thing as too much understatement. Its not too often I don't bother to finish a book. But this is the second of his I have not finished.

Thanks for replying

I didn't care for it much either while reading. I thought it was badl written... there I said it, lol. I did finish it though, and appreciated the story once I finished it, but throughout, like you Pontalba, I didn't care much for any of the characters, aside from Ruth, who I disliked, and I felt it could have been written in a more heartrendering (is that a word?) way. It made me feel so heartless throughout!

Still, I have read Remains of the Day which was much better, IMO, and something has made me just purchase A Pale View of Hills too.

I guess this is a book you either love or hate. I loved it.

Steffee I think you are right and there was no other option open to them. They had no role models and only rumours of awful things having happened to children who had tried to escape. I too felt that the youngsters seemed to be real people. Indeed the very fact that a few children had tried to escape from Hailsham in the early part of the book shows that some did exercise freewill. Their failed attempts would reinforce to the others the pointlessness of trying to alter their destiny.

The fact that Kathy and Tommy did think that they might be able to put off their duty for a few years is evidence that they were real people. It was only after they were told this option had never been open to them that they accepted their fate.

Oh, I must have missed the part where any of them tried to escape

I thought that too, after they'd spoken to Madame and Miss Emily, they seemed to become even more apathetic, if that was possible. That bit wasn't sad to me though; the only bit that was sad was when Kathy dropped Tommy off that day and he rushed off to play with his donor-friends, and she realised how different they were.

 

[Shade]

I dunno steffee, if there was a part about other Hailsham students trying to escape then I missed it too! Maybe it was too understated for me to notice...

When I first read Never Let Me Go last year I gave it four-and-a-half stars in my notional internal five-star scale. Rereading it this time I gave it four. I'd go so far as to say that it's the Ishiguro novel I enjoyed least, in the process of reading it - though the discussions above show that it's a book that perhaps grows in the estimation after it's finished. I think his other books do that too but they are also enjoyable while reading - even the chaotic Unconsoled or the confusing When We Were Orphans - whereas Never Let Me Go seems too willing to hide its light under a bushel. I know Ishiguro consciously wanted to make the landscape of all of England as flat as Norfolk, presumably to reflect the flatness and relentless consistency of their lives (and all our lives, by extension), but I think he also decided to make the language flat enough to reflect this also, which was a mistake. As a result too much of it seeps by unnoticed. I found myself passing whole scenes based at Hailsham and thinking, What was the point of that?

It's instructive I think to compare it with The Remains of the Day (perhaps still Ishiguro's best work). It too - like all his books - is told in a calm, unruffled tone, but the emotions seep through much more vividly, and the book seems much richer though essentially also about time and loss and the limitations of life. For example, near the end of The Remains of the Day when Stevens lets Miss Kenton leave for the last time and says, almost parenthetically, "indeed, at that moment - why should I not admit it? - my heart was breaking," it comes as a hammer blow to the reader, and I can feel the tears pricking the back of my eyes just retyping it now. Compare with Kathy at the end of Never Let Me Go, and her admission that the tears were rolling down her face just didn't seem to have the same effect.

So for me Never Let Me Go is a great idea and ripe for all sorts of interesting discussion, such as that above, which I've thoroughly enjoyed - but is less satisfying as an actual read than his other books.

 

[steffee]

Yes, Shade I agree it's a great BOTM book, there's plenty to discuss, aside from the "should they have tried to escape?" theme.

What about the idea of the students looking for the person they were molded from? What about the them being sterile, why was that so? And the whole teenage relationship experience, both with friends and bofriend/girlfriend? What was the significance of the drawings, especially Tommy's animals?

 

[actonbell]

What about the idea of the students looking for the person they were molded from? What about them being sterile, why was that so? And the whole teenage relationship experience, both with friends and boyfriend/girlfriend? What was the significance of the drawings, especially Tommy's animals?

Interesting questions--I think these children had an innate, emotional need for parents, and that was behind the "possibles." I think that's also why Ruth pretended to be getting extra attention from one of the guardians, and exhibited jealous, competitive behavior, too: they were as human as anyone, and needed attention.

The art? Later on, Madame and Miss Emily explain that this is to prove to the world how human these clones were, deserving to be brought up in humane conditions.

Since someone mentioned Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake, I'll add that it's a possiblility that these clones were designed with more than the usual amount of organs. This novel isn't very specific about a lot of things, and this is just a thought I had.

And I agree that Kathy's narration does seem very passive and almost detached for the most part, but I think this was intentional--Ishiguro does not manipulate us, here--the end is very sad, and it takes the reader's full involvement to understand and react to it.

I'm glad I read this--it was my first Ishiguro novel--thank you for the recommendation!

 

[StillILearn]

I haven't had a chance to reread this one, steffee, but I did manage to slip in The Remains of the Day (book and video) recently, and I am definitely an Ishiguro fan. (I do remember thoroughly enjoying NLMG at the time, though.)

We should all be eternally grateful that I didn't try to incorporate NLMG and/or TRotD into my "currently reading" space.

 

[pink shadow]

About children trying to escape from Hailsham: It didn't happen while Kathy & co were there, I think it was just a rumour going around: I think some girl had tried to go through the woods and ended up being killed by some wild animal.Very possibly a rumour started to prevent the students from trying to do something like that themselves.

The fact that some of them completeted after two or three donations I saw as an accident - they just weren't strong enough to survive the donations, but if you did there were four donations to be done before completing. Hence my question about the number of organs.

What about the idea of the students looking for the person they were molded from? What about them being sterile, why was that so? And the whole teenage relationship experience, both with friends and boyfriend/girlfriend? What was the significance of the drawings, especially Tommy's animals?

Well, I think actonbell answered these questions well. To me it seemed that they tried, in so many ways, to mimic the ways of "real" humans (for lack of a better phrase). They acted like kids wanting to be like their idols, dressing like them, talking like them, while a lot of the time it didn't quite seem like they knew what they were doing or why, e.g. Kathy's sexlife. She says herself that she was being rather promiscuous, but at the same time, she's really naive about the whole thing. I think that although they have been schooled, they lack an understanding of basic human functions and reactions, and maybe that is also why they behave the way they do about the donations - they just don't know that this is a strange way to react. They have all these feelings obviously, but they don't now what to do with them. I think that they felt a bit adrift in the world, and that if they could somehow learn the "code", and find a touchstone somewhere, a partner, a parent, a real job, they could survive - hence the thought that they could get a postponment if they could prove they were really in love. This longing for something firm is maybe also shown in Kathy's love of the song "Never let me go"?
OK, I'm basically just rambling now - any thoughts?

 

[actonbell]

I think that although they have been schooled, they lack an understanding of basic human functions and reactions, and maybe that is also why they behave the way they do about the donations - they just don't know that this is a strange way to react. They have all these feelings obviously, but they don't now what to do with them.

...well-stated, I agree. It's as if they're in a zoo, like animals in captivity. They are detached from their natural environment, and their reactions and different from the outside population's.

 

[steffee]

How are their reactions different to everyone elses? I thought Ishiguro got across the point that their reactions weren't different to "normal" people's, which is why they accepted it, because "normal" people tend to accept their own situations, never questionning exactly why they do certain acts or behave in certain ways, etc.

 

[MonkeyCatcher]

How are their reactions different to everyone elses? I thought Ishiguro got across the point that their reactions weren't different to "normal" people's, which is why they accepted it, because "normal" people tend to accept their own situations, never questionning exactly why they do certain acts or behave in certain ways, etc.

I agree. Their reactions and responses were only different to certain things, such as donations, at least that's how I interpreted it. And as steffee said, even this wasn't overly strange, as any normal person would accept this if it had been a part of their whole lives as well. They still felt sadness, happiness, love, embarrassment and anger, and so I think that they were very much human.

 

[pink shadow]

They still felt sadness, happiness, love, embarrassment and anger, and so I think that they were very much human.

Absolutely, I didn't mean to say that they weren't human or that they didn't have the same emotions as other humans, but it's more a discussion of genetics versus upbringing. They have the same emotions as other humans, but because of their upbringing they don't always know how to think, feel or react in different circumstances. They have what appears to be a very limited world view and are very naiv in many ways. I mentioned Kathy's sexlife, and I think it shows there that she doesn't know how to react to her own sexuality at all. She doesn't know from books or movies or adults what to expect really, she can only take Ruth's word for it that her dersires are unnatural. That would probably not be the case with most teenagers in Britain today.

 

[steffee]

I understand what you're saying, but I think most teenagers feel that way, and most only have their peers to talk to about those sorts of matters. Kathy's sex life, seemed to me, to be very typical of a teenagers. Indeed, all of the students romantic pursuits, seemed typical of adolescent behaviour to me. Tommy and Ruth becoming a couple just because they'd grown up together, Kathy choosing a suitable first-time partner, the anxiety caused by wondering if your interest (or lack of) in sexual activity makes you abnormal; these all seemed typical of teenagers, to me.

The Hailsham students, did however, have an added burden, the knowledge that they were different to "normal" teenagers, and were destined for different lives. So, that knowledge will have altered their emotions, in itself.

I think many teenagers feel emotions such as you've described, but are unable to control them appropriately, so in that respect, they weren't that different either.

 

[jaynebosco]

I am about three chapters from completing the book and I am confused as I was when I first started the novel, not to say that some of the explanations that I have read here have helped in understanding what the novel is about.

What I have found interesting about the book is Kathy's detachment emotionally and how she is unable to express what she is truly feeling; like she almost knows that if she does, she won't be the person that she has been and thrust into something that she is unable to handle. She almost seems as though she is confused about what her exact purpose is, other than being a carer (still have no clue as to what that is; guess they are supposed to help the donors get through the donation process , right?).

Anyways, I felt that, and still feel, as though Ishiguro wants to realize how we have sort have become like clones, not really feeling anything, unless we are allowed to or express any sort of emotions; almost as though we are supposed to keep them under wraps, like when Kathy found the tape with the song "Never let me go" in that second hand shop with Tommy after they had left Halisham.