Is Ruth a Good Friend After All?

Even though the author,  Kazuo Ishiguro, felt he represented three fundamentally good characters in Never Let Me Go it is hard to see Ruth as one of these. Ruth always seemed to be more controlling and demanding than a good friend. Even near the end when she told Tommy and Kathy that they should be together and try to apply for a referral I don't think that makes up for what she did.

While Ruth might have just been immature in the ways she treated Kathy I don't think that is an excuse for her behavior. When Ruth was telling Kathy after becoming a donor how she had lied to Kathy about her urges  she said "I knew how it worried you...I should have told you. I should have said how it was the same for me too, just the way you described it" (232). Here Ruth is admitting that she knew she was wrong and seeing that they were at the cottages for more than a year it is easy to assume that Ruth realized it was wrong when she originally lied to Kathy too and just chose not to apologize or fix the issue until she was on her deathbed.

Ruth also kept Tommy away from Kathy for years. She also knew about the rumor of deferrals while at Hailsham and believed it then, but she and Tommy didn't apply for one. She admits in the end of the story that she knew they were right for each other, but it seems like if she had really cared about them she would've told them to apply for a referral sooner since she and Tommy weren't going too.

Overall, I think Ruth's form of an apology to Kathy and Tommy was not actually enough to make up for her years of mistreatment. For the majority of Kathy's life she had lied to her and kept her unhappy even though she knew what she was doing was wrong. I don't think Kathy owed it to her to be her carer and forgive her in the end just because she was near death since Kathy's short life probably would have been a lot happier without her.

 The Choice of Passivity

I'm sure many of us have found Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go to be, in some ways, anywhere from odd to uncomfortable due to his choice in having the story focus not on the rebellion against injustice, but on the acceptance of suffering, and I am no different. Every day in class I find myself in some way having to choke down bile when we discuss the ramifications of this setting for our characters, as I'm sure most everyone can tell from my contributions to the discussion. However, I feel it is important that I both clarify how this makes me feel about the story and briefly reflect on the story's meaning.

 I must say that because, not in spite, of Ishiguro's choice, I find myself more interested in the story. The tale of rebellion is a compelling narrative, especially so here in America, as it is in a sense our own story, but while I know there are definitely still plenty of excellent stories of rebellion to tell, the story of quiet acceptance that Ishiguro has chosen here is a refreshingly new and distinct taste, one I cannot properly compare to anything I have come across. Besides, if the point of art is to evoke emotions, then Never Let Me Go has succeeded.

On the matter of the meaning of Never Let Me Go, there will be circumstances, situations, and eventualities that we, personally, cannot overcome. In the face of these events, we can sometimes yield greater results in not fighting against what will come, but in preparing for what comes after, even if we are not there to see it. This is a great show of strength as well, to accept that which cannot be changed in order to look past it.

Why is Kazuo Ishiguro’s writing so incredibly realistic?

            Ishiguro’s writing is strikingly different from that of a typical fiction novel. I think that his writing feels incredibly realistic and is somehow told so that it rings true. While there are a number of devices that help his writing stand apart, from the use of first person to making it relatable to telling the story as a memory; I think the most prominent and poignant aspect of his writing is how artfully he captures the experience of daily living.

            Never Let Me Go is told in first person and from the start draws the reader in by addressing the reader directly and being relatable. The start of the novel Kathy, the narrator, addresses the reader, saying “I can understand how you might get resentful” (2) and going on to say that she is sure you have heard rumors about Hailsham students (2). This is a very powerful move that immediately makes the reading personal. Furthermore, the world she goes on to describe is not that dissimilar from the present-day reader’s. Hailsham is rather like a fancy boarding school and the classes and social groups Kathy describes all seem very relatable. Not only is what Kathy describes important, but how she describes carries its own significance.

            The whole book is relayed as a memory. This makes the somewhat disjointed, rambling style of the book relatable. When one remembers, one does not go in a linear progression but rather is drawn from memory to memory by logic that is entirely beyond chronological order. In telling this book as a recollection, Ishiguro makes the crucial and ingenious distinction between his work and others. Most authors try to tell a story by relaying information in seemingly “real-time” and inevitably fall flat as human experience and process a staggering amount of information and stimuli as new events occur. Yet, by telling the story as a person recalling memories, Ishiguro is able to get away with not revealing every detail of an experience; when someone is telling a story about something that has already happened they have had the time to process the events and select which elements are worth sharing and which elements are trivial background noise. Thus, the story seems exceptionally real as a recollection of the past, a stroke of pure genius on Ishiguro’s part. Yet, it is not only how Kathy is telling the story that makes it realistic but what she recalls.

            The inclusion of those random everyday thoughts and experiences that run only through one’s head and that are not publicly shared makes  Never Let Me Go ring so true. The text is riddled with such experiences, but one towards the end of the novel was particularly striking to me. Kathy sees an old black and white photo of what Tommy’s recovery center’s parking lot used to be, a pool with a diving board, and has a sudden moment of realization that you can still see the metal structure of the diving board (218-219). This event is so specific and gives the writing such a personal and relatable touch, that the work transcends common levels or realistic writing and achieves a much greater integration of the reader into the story.

           

Why does Ruth seem to be such a bad friend to Kathy?

At first glance, I think it is easy to denounce Ruth as not only someone who is constantly a bad friend to Kathy but also as a rather loathsome person. Kathy often makes remarks that suggest with her broadened, older perspective she can understand Ruth better. However, I think upon closer examination Ruth is, to be sure a flawed character, but I think that she is within the bounds of understandable, if not normal behavior.  I feel that her appearance of being flawed and even cruel is largely due to the fact that Kathy is narrating rather than Ruth herself.

Ruth shows throughout the novel that she is a rather flawed individual. She constantly needs to be the center of attention, from her secret society to protect Miss Geraldine stretching all the way to her sulky petulant behavior at the cottages. In her relationship with Kathy she seems to be consistently trying to gain the upper hand. It is precisely this that makes Kathy such an unreliable or at the least highly subjective narrator. There is a decided power struggle between the two characters which renders Kathy unable to be an objective narrator. If Ruth was the narrator I think her inner monologue would make her actions seem less cruel and more understandable.

Ruth’s apparent animosity and cruelty is clearly exemplified on two of the occasions she mentions Tommy. In their Hailsham days, Ruth has Kathy try and talk Tommy back into his relationship with Ruth (103-104). In the later years of the cottages, Ruth preys upon one of Kathy’s deep fears when she informs her that Tommy only thinks of Kathy as a friend and “‘doesn’t like girls who have… well, you know, been with this person and that’” (201). From Kathy’s perspective both were pretty evil things to do. However, the reader must consider that Ruth must feel threatened by Kathy and her easy relationship with Tommy. Ruth also must know that given the chance Kathy and Tommy would have drifted together, which seems only natural to those who have read Kathy’s account. Yet, Kathy was Ruth’s best friend and it would have been a pretty egregious act for Kathy to immediately swoop in and start dating her best friend’s ex. Not to mention the fact that as a trio they have a bond of comparable strength between all the parties. Ruth and Kathy are best friends, Tommy can share confidences with Kathy, and Ruth and Tommy are dating. If Ruth suddenly lost the bond with Tommy and Kathy and Tommy’s bond had strengthened, the little Hailsham trio would be thrown off kilter and left Ruth disconnected from the two most important people in her life. While Ruth’s intentions may not justify her actions, I think that delving into her perspective completely transforms the events that transpire.

Thus, I believe the perspective from which one views the events that transpired between Ruth and Kathy can drastically shift the moral implications.

Seize the Hour

            Although the clone life of guardians, carers, donations, and completion is atypical to an actual human experience, the two upbringings are similar in many ways.  Hailsham students had an unusually normal time, as Miss Emily notes, “we sheltered you during those years, and we gave you your childhoods…your happiness at Hailsham” (268).  Just as many children in developed nations are shielded from danger and responsibility by their parents, the students at Hailsham were allowed to play, socialize, and relax in blissful near-unawareness for over a decade.  At first glance, nothing disqualifies these “poor creatures” (272) from appearing to be genuine human beings; they laugh, bully, discuss, fight, and die.  These resemblances are by no means unintentional.  In order to make his novel’s message more impactful, Ishiguro attempts to make his clone characters realistic and relatable to readers.  Never Let Me Go's major theme transcends science-fiction: old age and death are always approaching, so always cherish the time at hand.

            In Ishiguro’s world and ours, regardless of any action taken, life ends the same.  Truly, even for the most loving, talented, and intelligent people that have lived, “there’s definitely nothing.  No deferral, nothing like that” (266) from death.  Tommy and Kathy seek such an extension due to the nagging feeling that they “were doing all of this too late” (242) in their relationship; three bonus years, however improbable, might erase some of their regret.  Clearly, there are consequences to wasting away one’s youth in social insecurity, teenage drama, petty bickering, and fear of loss.  When Miss Emily states deferrals simply do not exist, Ishiguro is reaffirming that his audience should value passionate risks and bold talks instead of last-minute bailouts.

Ruth serves as Ishiguro’s primary example of a life plagued by procrastination and frivolity.  The thought of her immature actions keeping Tommy and Kathy apart torments her for years.  Only when she nears death does she attempt to fix it, pleading in denial, “It’s not too late. Kathy, listen, it’s not too late” (233).  The price of delaying this uncomfortable albeit important “serious talking” (234) with small talk regarding subjects “immediately in front of us” (221), parallels the toll of Ruth’s first donation.  Ishiguro’s audience should view Ruth’s demise as a precautionary tale against harboring repressed emotions, what-ifs, and regrets.  Ishiguro’s clone farming regime need not utilize force or brainwashing to prevent rebellion; the simple human nature of second-guessing and fear of failure prevents clones from achieving their most basic desires, let alone a total uprising.