Fate And Free Will In Cat's Crad

The belief in fate or free will shapes the way a person lives their life. In Kurt Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle and Chloe Benjamin’s The Immortalists, many incidents cause the characters to question their destinies. Through the psychoanalytical lens, the characters in both novels challenge their fate and free will in response to negative events that impact their lives. The characters reevaluate their belief systems as they experience loss, death, and change. The types of loss endured by the characters in Cat’s Cradle are insignificant to the impact that the loss creates. Based on Freudian theory, Newton’s relationship with Zinka is reflective of the Oedipus complex, indicating that it is fate for him to fall in love with her. “These stages [of

“Asa’s boy [is] all set to be a heap-big re-search scientist” until he sees the drastic and negative change that science creates (Vonnegut 56). After “they [drop] the bomb on Hiroshima[, he] quit” despite the fact that his fate is to follow his father’s footsteps (Vonnegut 56). Asa’s son does not want his psychic energy to be “ busily being used to [...] repress memories and deal with anxieties”, so he allows his id to control his unconscious mind (Wilderdom). Due to the negative change that the bombs bring, Asa’s son uses his free will to pursue another career. His id pushes him to “[get] drunk … [and] go to work cutting stone”, as a way to avoid causing more negative change in the world (Vonnegut 56). Unlike Asa’s opinion on change, the people of San Lorenzo believe that change will bring them prosperity. The people of San Lorenzo seek this change through “governmental or economic reform” so that they will be “much less miserable” (Vonnegut 115). Bokonon’s creation “[provides] the people with better and better lies” and allows them to avoid their true fate as “truth [is] the enemy of the people” (Vonnegut 115). The people of San Lorenzo are aware of their free will but are too afraid to use it which causes “the religion [to become] the real one instrument of hope” for them (Vonnegut 115). Due to their fear of the consequences that free

Varya “[fears] that [she is] fixed” to her fate as she watches her newly-introduced son abandon her (Benjamin 325). It is a drastic change for her to have a son after her siblings dying and her choice of not having a family of her own. Her ego uses displacement as a defense mechanism to avoid another loss. She figures that loss is fixed to her fate. She “[hopes] that it [is] not too late for life to surprise her” and for her fate to be redirected (Benjamin 325). However, she also “[hopes that] it [is] not too late for her to surprise herself” which shows her belief in free will (Benjamin 325). While Varya attempts to change her fate as she nears her death, Klara and Simon try to run from their fate in hopes that their choices will change it. They try to run away without “even [having] a plan” which causes the other siblings’ lives to change as they must return home to care for their mother (Benjamin 33). Varya and Daniel try to convince them to not leave and follow their fate of remainining at home with their mother. However, Klara assures them that she does not need a plan as “[she is] waiting… for it to be revealed to [her]” which contradicts her original ideology of controlling her destiny (Benjamin 33). All of the siblings must face the changes that the absence of Simon and Klara cause, eventually leading them to be divided in their belief of fate or free