Ever wondered what it would be like to have a clone? Or how they would live their lives? Would they have the same emotions everyone else obtains and expresses? In the novel Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro, clones are schooled and sheltered until they are ready to be carers progressing into organ donors. On that note, many questions have surfaced targeting whether or not cloning is considered ethical treatment or just an inhumane act from the human race. Kazuo Ishiguro stresses human rights and the ethical treatment of clone persons throughout his novel Never Let Me Go through his uses of narrative and literary devices in order to give the audience a feel for this subject. Cloning is the major subject of the novel itself. The narrator of …show more content…
Cloning can be interpreted from numerous perspectives. Some may argue that it is beneficial, while others may state that “it only fulfills the selfish interest of a creation” (Pearson 3). Cloning shows the harshness some are able to put into action due to the end results. Most clones do not live quite that long, yet they are scrutinized as if they are some freak of nature since some do not consider them human. Society tends to judge people and things on appearances instead of how things truly are. However, clones inherit the same genes as the individuals in which they are cloned from resulting in originality regardless of artificiality (Aurelia 2). In Never Let Me Go, the students’ originality and creativity are shown mainly through their art classes because their work is collected by Madame and Miss Emily at Hailsham. The reasoning behind having Hailsham is to provide more comfort to the clones as they are prepared to be picked apart little by little (Ishiguro 261). However, cloning still does not seem reasonable regardless of what the effort is to make them comfortable. As the subject of cloning becomes more disputable, everyone seems to have their own input on
In “Jennifer and Rachel,” Lee M. Silver argues that reproductive cloning deems permissible to those who encourage it, as opposed to those who reject it and don’t want to run the risk of how they’ll look in the eyes of society. Jennifer, an independent career driven woman, believes that the best way to have a baby of her own at her age is by cloning. Silver’s description of the cloning procedure is done by retrieving cells from the willing adult; prepare the cells for merging to unfertilized eggs, and then the embryos that develop successfully will be introduced to the uterus of the willing adult. Jennifer partakes in the cloning procedure and it was successful. Nine months later on March 15, 2050, Rachel was born.
Living in a world where they have successfully created human clones for organ donations, is not a great achievement to mankind in any way, shape, or form. It makes you wonder, where exactly do you draw the line between the advancement of technology and the dehumanization that occurs because of it?" Never Let Me Go is a Novel based in the main character Kathy’s memories of her experience in Hailsham and after she left. Hailsham is a boarding school for children who have been cloned from people considered as low life’s or unsuccessful, the only purpose given too these children are for them to develop into adults and donate as many of their mature organs as they can till they die, or as the students and guardians refer to it “complete”. The author focuses on the sick ways of our current society and warns us about the possible future that may be introduced and excepted, Kazuo Ishiguro writes with the intent of teaching and affecting the reader on an emotional level at the same time.
If a random individual were asked twenty years ago if he/she believed that science could clone an animal, most would have given a weird look and responded, “Are you kidding me?” However, that once crazy idea has now become a reality, and with this reality, has come debate after debate about the ethics and morality of cloning. Yet technology has not stopped with just the cloning of animals, but now many scientists are contemplating and are trying to find successful ways to clone human individuals. This idea of human cloning has fueled debate not just in the United States, but also with countries all over the world. I believe that it is not morally and ethically right to clone humans. Even though technology is constantly advancing, it is not reasonable to believe that human cloning is morally and ethically correct, due to the killing of human embryos, the unsafe process of cloning, and the resulting consequences of having deformed clones.
successful clones often have problems with their body and are subject to a short lifespan ridden with health problems. This hurts the person or animal cloned rather than to help them, making cloning an immoral
In “Never Let Me Go” by Kazuo Ishiguro we see cloned human beings that are raised in a boarding school so that they can grow up and become organ donors. The main purpose of these kids was growing up and donating their organs one by one till they finally die at an early age. These kids were not treated as human beings. They were created in a test tube just to be a donor. The main character who was also a donor is the narrator of this story. Life should be controlled by the person that owns it and that person should make decisions how to live and where to live, clones are still human beings with soul and flesh there for they deserve human right. If they cannot get the right they deserve then cloning should be illegal unless there is understandable reason. These kids are raised in a place called hailsham, where they are taken care of so that they can stay healthy but they were not allowed to leave the school and socialize with the world till they turn eighteen and graduate.
In conclusion, it is clear to see that cloning is not the taboo it has been made out to be. It is a new boundary that humanity has never encountered before and so it is understandable that people have qualms about ‘playing God’ by shaping a life. Although some might argue that it is immoral to clone human beings, the truth is that it is unethical not to. Given that such technology has the potential to save millions upon millions of lives, not tapping into that industry would have dire consequences on the future. In this case, the ends more certainly justify the means.
In this case, this will be the beginning of human degradation because clones will be treated as commodities or purchased products. Although couples commonly have babies for purposes such as improving a marriage or continuing a family name, human clones can possibly serve as savior siblings or replacements. Savior siblings will only function as spare parts, while a replacement child stands in a shadow of their deceased clone. They represent means to an end by being forced into existence for a sole purpose to alleviate pain and misery from the preexisting. In my opinion, reproductive cloning will turn into a game for the countless number of egotistical people that our society obtains. As irrational as this may be, human cells will eventually be sold, so other people can produce babies that resemble past legends, or current superstars, and even dead geniuses. From the article by Philip Kitcher in the Science, Ethics, and Public Policy of Human Cloning book, the author recognized how prevalent cloning will become when commenters ventured how legitimate it would be to clone Einstein. He indicated, “Polls showed that Mother Teresa was the most popular choice for person-to-be-cloned, although a film star (Michelle Pfeiffer) was not far behind, and Bill and Hilary Clinton obtained some support〖."〗^7The quote signifies how cloning will eventually convert into a luxury to please peoples’ irrational means, increasing the chances for people to be equated to their genetic determinism. Kant identifies humans as authors to the moral law because of our possession of human dignity. According to Devolder’s article, “UNESCO's Universal
Brannigan, C. Michael. Ethical Issues in Human Cloning. New York: Seven Bridges Press, Chatham House Publishers, 2001.
In the essay, Cloning Reality: Brave New World by Wesley J. Smith, a skewed view of the effects of cloning is presented. Wesley feels that cloning will end the perception of human life as sacred and ruin the great diversity that exists today. He feels that cloning may in fact, end human society as we know it, and create a horrible place where humans are simply a resource. I disagree with Wesley because I think that the positive effects of controlled human cloning can greatly improve the quality of life for humans today, and that these benefits far outweigh the potential drawbacks that could occur if cloning was misused.
Human cloning destroys individuality and uniqueness. “What makes people unique is the fact that we have different genes and cloning would lose these important parts of our bodies makeup.” There would be less of a variety of people and everyone would be the same. This would not only be the good qualities, but also the bad that would pass on. Since clones and the original donor will look alike and have the same DNA, it would be nearly impossible to tell the difference. Overtime, they would lose their individuality and uniqueness. For example, say a crime was committed.
Secondly, “the most the human race has to loose by playing around with cloning is that the genetic diversity would be lost (Andrea Castro, 2005).” Reducing the genetic differences will produce clones that are grossly overlarge, many animals will be born with genetic mutations, and there will be a higher “risk of disease transfer (Saskaschools, 2003). “A review of all the world's cloned animals suggests that every one of them is genetically and physically defective (Leake, 2002).” Mutations will be passed on to the younger generation because if a cloned species has a mutation in their DNA this mutation will be passed on. Cloning has been linked with diseases of ageing, arthritis and, cancer.
In the article that I chose there are two opposing viewpoints on the issue of “Should Human Cloning Ever Be Permitted?” John A. Robertson is an attorney who argues that there are many potential benefits of cloning and that a ban on privately funded cloning research is unjustified and that this type of research should only be regulated. On the flip side of this issue Attorney and medical ethicist George J. Annas argues that cloning devalues people by depriving them of their uniqueness and that a ban should be implemented upon it. Both express valid points and I will critique the articles to better understand their points.
Imagine a world in which a clone is created only for its organs to be transplanted into a sick person’s body. Human cloning has many possible benefits, but it comes with concerns. Over the past few decades, researchers have made several significant discoveries involving the cloning of human cells (ProQuest Staff). These discoveries have led to beneficial medical technologies to help treat disease (Aldridge). The idea of cloning an entire human body could possibly revolutionize the medical world (Aldridge). However, many people are concerned that these advancements would degrade self-worth and dignity (Hyde and Setaro 89). Even though human cloning brings about questions of bioethics, it has the potential to save and recreate the lives of humans and to cure various diseases without the use of medication (Aldridge, Hyde and Setaro).
What makes humanity and what makes the clones of Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro different is that the clones, or students as they call them in the book, do not have reproduction capabilities. They are the same in the fact that they do have the same mannerisms and behavior patterns as the humans. The characters have these humanistic qualities, but society does not view them as human. They are viewed only as surfs or as the lowest scum of society’s class system. For instance, Kathy’s and Ruth’s relationship of how Ruth has a jealous streak regarding Kathy’s
Kazuo Ishiguro’s critically acclaimed 2005 Novel Never Let Me Go was influenced by cloning and stem cell research in the late 20th century. Many ethical discussions were raised, and Ishiguro displayed his perspective from his about clones that demonstrate the human experience to the core. The story was adapted into a film by the same name in 2010, directed by Mark Romanek. The novel explores plot, setting, character, literary techniques and themes by telling the story of cloned organ donors, forced to die for the good of humanity, all of which are well represented in the film adaptation.