The Treatment of Ethics in Precarious Life in “Never Let me Go”

Before I delve into the role of ethics as portrayed in the precarious lives depicted in “Never Let Me Go,” here is some food for thought: how would an individual living a perilous life influence you? Could it be a call for help or is it stirring up feelings of sympathy? In Judith Butler’s “Precarious Life,” she carefully unfolds various elements of ethics. Using “Precarious Life” as a theoretical framework for “Never Let Me Go,” I will explore the treatment of ethics and how they are profoundly undermined through dehumanization.

“Never Let Me Go” overtly supports dehumanization by alienating the clones at Hailsham and the people they are trying to assist.

The concept of dehumanization came to me after studying Judith Butler’s “Precarious Life,” in which she makes it a significant part of her discourse. Butler branches into various facets of precariousness in her work, with one being our tendency to alienate those leading precarious lives. In this essay, “alienation” will be synonymous with dehumanization as I delve deeper into Butler’s ideas and how they are demonstrated in “Never Let Me Go.” Dehumanization will be my primary focus since upon revisiting Ishiguro’s “Never Let Me Go,” the theme of dehumanization becomes glaringly conspicuous owing to Ishiguro’s deliberate act of dehumanizing characters in his book by alienating them.

In her book, “Precarious Life,” Butler asserts: “When we think about the ordinary ways that we approach humanization and dehumanization, we find the assumption that those who acquire representation…have a higher chance of being humanized, and those who get no chance to represent themselves run a higher risk of being treated as less than human, perceived as subhuman, or indeed, not regarded at all” (Butler 141).

Essentially, Butler argues that society’s perception of humanization or dehumanization is linked with the notion that individuals with a polished image tend to be treated favourably while those with no opportunity to craft a superior image are risk being ignored or worse still, disregarded.

A clear demonstration of the lacking self-representation Butler underlines might be the very fact that the clones – the Hailsham students – have a limited understanding of their purpose or why certain events affect them. They remained unaware of their purpose in life until their guardian, Miss Lucy, enlightened them. She introduced their reality thus: “You’ve been told about it. You’re students. You’re…special. So keeping yourselves well, maintaining yourselves very healthy inside, is more crucial for each of you than it is for me” (Ishiguro 69). The weighted pause wherein Miss Lucy labels the clones as “special” hints at her cognizance of the harsh truth. It’s a somber, albeit sarcastic accolade, aimed at dismissing exactly how they are being exploited. Lacking the self-representation Butler speaks of, the students at Hailsham forego any chance of being humanized.

To further elaborate on the idea of dehumanization, Butler applies Levinas’ theory of the face, exploring how we relate to the distinction between the humanizing, yet harsh face, and the dehumanization that can also occur through the face (Butler 141). Butler seeks the ethical demand presented by precariousness. The fundamental question is whether humanization or dehumanization is the answer to this ethical demand. Based on Levinas’ theory, we respond to a face; not a literal face, but the aura a person exudes when we encounter them. One response is choosing to help because we want to, and the other is opting to assist out of pity for the “other”.

The students at Hailsham live a precarious life, one characterized by pity. Utilizing Levinas’ concept of the face, the precarious life of the Hailsham students is linked to the ethical demand made by that face. The inability of their caregivers to empathize with them, viewing them instead as expendable, symbolizes dehumanization, as exemplified by “… but Madame hadn’t nearly come up to the barrier …she just went on standing there … staring at me … with that look in her eyes … like she was seeing something that gave her the creeps” (Ishiguro 72). This quote comes from a moment when Madame watches Kathy hug a pillow as if it were her baby. Kathy’s description of Madame’s gaze signifies the dehumanizing element. The ethical demand occurs when Kathy embraces the pillow while listening to the song Never Let Me Go. Her actions are the “face” pleading for aid, notably poignant because readers are aware that they are clones and may not be understood in human terms. Madame later responds to this subtle, subconscious precariousness by crying. Through dramatic irony, we realize that they are the merciless characters, and the world around them is perpetuating their dehumanization out of pity.

In her article “Ishiguro’s Inhuman Aesthetics,” Black argues that the reader will not relate to Ishiguro’s characters through the sudden realization of their likeness to us, but through rejecting the traditional notion of what it means to be human. Black contests the occurrence of dehumanization and suggests that empathy is the true route to understanding the precarious existence of Ishiguro’s characters. She asserts: “The act of relating to someone else’s experience is deeply bound up with our everyday understanding of what it means to be human” (Black 785).

Continuing with this concept, Butler responds to Levinas’ concept by claiming, “It appears to be that the ‘face’ of what he calls the ‘Various other’ makes a moral demand upon me, and yet we do not know which requirement it makes” (Butler 131). What Butler is stating is that the extremely precarious individuals create a perception that makes an honest demand upon those who are not precarious. Butler makes complex matters clearer when she quotes Levinas to elaborate on his notion of the face: “My moral relationship of love for the various other comes from the fact that the self cannot survive by itself alone, cannot find meaning within its very own being-in-the-world … In ethics, the other’s right to exist has primacy over my own, a primacy illustrated in the moral act: you will not kill, you shall not threaten the life of the various other” (Butler 132). Butler gives the impression that society chooses to help others because they are moved by their difficulties and desire nothing more than to see them (the others) being as safe as they are. My view, however, in contrast to what Butler has quoted, is that the honest relation a person may have towards a person who cannot survive is dehumanizing. Regardless of how much one might want to help another, that person automatically dehumanizes the ‘other.’ What society sees as humanity is simply a mask of dehumanization.

Although not all readers think alike, some will probably dispute the claim that Never Let Me Go dehumanizes the characters in the novel by ‘othering’ them. One thing that is certain in Ishiguro’s book is that the Hailsham students were created and given a purpose so they could donate their vital organs to those in need. While it’s true that scientists and the guardians at Hailsham instigated and carried out the development of cloning in order to provide organs for someone in need, it doesn’t necessarily follow that they are committing an act of humanity. By choosing to help those in need through making the Hailsham students donate their vital organs, the scientists and guardians behind this are also dehumanizing those they intend to help. Society in Never Let Me Go is responding to their own ethical relationship and by doing so, are ‘othering’ those in need because they are precarious; they are living life on the edge, not knowing what’s going to happen next. If they don’t receive the organs they need, they may die.

Finally, to advance the idea of how ‘othering’ ties into ethics, Butler claims, “If the Other, the Other’s face, which nevertheless carries the significance of this precariousness … then the face functions to create a struggle for me, and establishes this struggle at the heart of ethics” (Butler 135). Here, Butler is commenting about the trigger of ethics. If for some reason, an individual’s face carries the hint of some kind of precariousness, or at least if the non-precarious individual notices, it creates a struggle for the non-precarious being. The precariousness of a person is the face inviting another to assume the responsibility of helping. It is the very act of helping that dehumanizes the precarious individual because it is perceived as a struggle.

The previous instance is the embodiment of how Never Let Me Go deals with the idea of humanization and dehumanization. Life for the Hailsham students continuously fluctuates. In their society, the students present a challenge, and the obligation rests on everyone else to alleviate the precariousness of their lives. In response to the ethical demand the clones inadvertently make, society brands them as monstrous and dehumanizes them as a mechanism to cope with the discomfort their existence causes. Butler was right when she referenced Levinas’ moral relation of love for the “other”; however, the ethical dynamic unfolding in Never Let Me Go serves as a sobering reminder of the dehumanizing potential of the “other.” This “otherness” ignites a societal friction that forces people to react or adapt.

Consequently, while Never Let Me Go highlights the dehumanization of the clones as a means to cater to those in need, we must also bear in mind that this assistance, while beneficial, connotes an inherent dehumanization of the clones. In essence, there exists no unequivocal definition of humanity; it is fundamentally an individual’s moral relation and the rationale behind their reaction to their relationships and the ethical demands imposed by precariousness. Drawing from Butler’s Precarious Life, it becomes clear that the face serves as the catalyst for the exercise of morality, yet distressingly, it can also lead to dehumanization.

Did you like this example?

264

14