Thesis advisor: Gerald Easter / "Living in Truth in the Age of Automatization" is a discussion of dehumanization in the period of technological and bureaucratic supremacy. The article uses the writings of former Czech president Václav Havel and American novelist Kurt Vonnegut to argue that neither the automatization inherent within the Eastern Communist Model nor the mass consumer culture of the Western Capitalist Model are ideal, and to discuss the possibility of a third way, a way called "living in truth" which protects human dignity and the right of every man to pursue meaningful work in a society. / Thesis (MA) — Boston College, 2013. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Political Science.

<p>Vonnegut envisions a plutocratic America where the </p><p>aforementioned periphery has been made obsolete, where a corporate </p><p>oligarchy supersedes the presidency in authority. An example of </p><p>this structure is the absent father of the main character Paul </p><p>Proteus, George Proteus, who was before his death the National </p><p>Industrial, Commercial, Communications, Foodstuffs and Resources </p><p>Director, a position which might have been below the presidency at </p><p>that time , but the scales have tilted towards total domination by </p><p>those who fuel the economy, i.e. the corporations. The </p><p>‘unenlightened’ Shah, spiritual leader of Bratpuhr who is visiting </p><p>America to learn about the great American society, shakes his head </p><p>and calls it “Communism” (21), which it is, with the exception that </p><p>there is no Communist Party. In its place is the oligarchy of the </p><p>corporations which the government allows to prevent inefficiency.</p><p> I argue that the hegemonic masculinity, or the masculinity of the </p><p>patriarchy, provides both motivation and justification for the men </p><p>who are constructing the totalitarian state of Player Piano. I will </p><p>furthermore look at the effects, on both society and the </p><p>individual, of a hegemonic masculinity.</p>

Vonnegut envisions a plutocratic America where the aforementioned periphery has been made obsolete, where a corporate oligarchy supersedes the presidency in authority. An example of this structure is the absent father of the main character Paul Proteus, George Proteus, who was before his death the National Industrial, Commercial, Communications, Foodstuffs and Resources Director, a position which might have been below the presidency at that time , but the scales have tilted towards total domination by those who fuel the economy, i.e. the corporations. The ‘unenlightened’ Shah, spiritual leader of Bratpuhr who is visiting America to learn about the great American society, shakes his head and calls it “Communism” (21), which it is, with the exception that there is no Communist Party. In its place is the oligarchy of the corporations which the government allows to prevent inefficiency. I argue that the hegemonic masculinity, or the masculinity of the patriarchy, provides both motivation and justification for the men who are constructing the totalitarian state of Player Piano. I will furthermore look at the effects, on both society and the individual, of a hegemonic masculinity.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Kurt Vonnegut Jr.’s literary style transforms from his first novel, "Player’s Piano" (1952), to his final book, "Timequake" (1997). Most of his novels adhere to a similar style – the narrators face a puzzling societal fault that is exaggerated in their dystopian societies, which hides Vonnegut’s humanistic leanings. This thesis, however, focuses on Vonnegut’s authorial identity, his use of the alter ego, and eventual entrance into the novel. His authorial role challenges the literary theory expressed in “The Death of the Author”(1967) by Roland Barthes and further discussed in “What is an Author”(1969) by Michel Foucault. Barthes explains an author metaphorically dies after his book is published and Foucault questions the author’s role and importance to his novel. Vonnegut juxtaposes fictional and nonfictional material whereby his character is paramount to his work. Therefore, Vonnegut challenges Barthes and Foucault’s notion that an author restricts his work; rather, Vonnegut’s identity empowers his novels.

Since the mid-twentieth century, Kurt Vonnegut has enjoyed a permanent spot on the list of history’s most widely read and beloved American authors. Science fiction classics like Cat’s Cradle (1963) and Slaughterhouse-Five (1969) turned Vonnegut into a domestic counter-cultural literary sensation in the United States at mid-century. The presence of a loyal Vonnegut fan base in America, and in the west more broadly, is a well-documented fact. What is less well known among scholars and those familiar with Vonnegut’s work is his popularity in a far more distant place: the Soviet Union. Beginning in the late 1960s, Soviet citizens developed a voracious appetite for Vonnegut’s. Translations of his novels appeared regularly in daily newspapers and highbrow literary journals alike; a play adaptation of Slaughterhouse-Five enjoyed a multi-season run in the Moscow Army Theater; average citizens competed for membership in Vonnegut’s karass. These examples are suggestive of the ways that Kurt Vonnegut’s science fiction literature can serve as a gateway for scholars seeking to understand the Soviet Union during the 1970s. This report contends that Soviet interest in Vonnegut’s dystopian science fiction reflected larger shifts in Soviet attitudes towards pacifism, technology, individual wellbeing, human rights, and past and present wars. It situates these ideas in the context of domestic and global events to illustrate how the peculiar political conditions of the 1970s made this ideological convergence possible. It employs original American and Russian language sources, including Russian newspapers and journals, letters written by Vonnegut’s Russian translator, and Kurt Vonnegut’s own fan mail. At its core, this report challenges the assumption that political and ideological differences precluded Soviet and American citizens from identifying the conditions necessary for ensuring social and technological progress and a future without war. / text

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / In Vonnegut's second novel, the author sets up distinct character-based binaries that represent methods of looking for meaning in the universe. This paper attempts to show that outward-focused searches for purpose, i.e. those that are directed toward a "higher power," bring only division and harm into the world. As the novel's characters operate within their assigned binaries, most of them are able to abandon their nocuous philosophies in favor of an inward-focused search for meaning, which allows them to embrace a radically humbled humanistic perspective that places equal importance upon all creatures.