The Role of Perception in Never Let Me Go

 

Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go presents a dystopic world in which technology bestows people with the ability to produce clones. These clones have the same cognitive and emotional capacity as people have, meaning, they are basically people. However, they are viewed as inferior to people and looked down upon. Most importantly, they are destined to donate their vital organs once they are ready, dooming them to a futureless life to which they reluctantly and desperately accept. Their submission to such a cruel and unfair system doesn’t stem from their inherently obedient nature. In fact, clones are not congenitally submissive, they revolt against the injustice provided that they recognize it. Thereby, it is their lack of experience that deprives them of the ability to even recognize the unfairness of the system subjecting them to a cruel end. Ishiguro portrays a correlation between what the characters experience and how they react to injustice to emphasize on the importance of perception. In this essay, I shall analyze the ways in which the subjective perception plays a role in characters’ reaction to injustice and I will argue that it is the perception of the characters that grants them the ability to oppose the system yet it is also the very instrument that imprisons them within the system.

Ishiguro puts importance on injustice to show that it is not the oppression that holds clones back from revolting against, it is their own perception neatly forged by the guardians that blind the clones from seeing the cruel and unjust world. Isıguro’s Never Let Me Go accommodates two major oppositions to the system, and they both emerge because of injustice. The clones object to not receiving compensation token when Madam takes away their artwork. They do not revolt against other rules obliging them, or not go outside, and most importantly to die for others. The only structure they find unfair is the very structure that bestows them a sort of privilege and then partially takes it away. Kathy touches upon the ground for the feeble revolt against the token system and says that the dissatisfaction started because “The Exchanges, with their system of tokens as currency, had given us a keen eye for pricing up anything we produced” (p.19), and that “keen eye” allows them to see a fragment of injustice. The exchange system intrigues the clones because it merits their artwork a value, and when they are exposed to a situation where their work is not given value, they recognize the injustice and act accordingly. This suggests that the clones can identify a flaw in a system that begets unfairness, but the unfair structure of the system itself remains invisible to the eyes that haven’t seen any other system. To put it another way, because the clones are born in the system and grew up being imposed by the guardians, in their perception this mechanized and cold structure, depriving them of any individuality or a sense of specialness, is normal. Thereby, it is completely normal for them to write poems and draw pictures that they don’t want in exchange for the only source of currency they could have in Hailsham. Precisely, instead of revolting against the fundamental structure of the token system, they revolt against a small flaw that obstructs them from having more tokens. In more general terms, they do not go against the unfair system itself, they go against the ramifications and products of it.

This incompetent approach to finding a remedy for the unfairness demonstrates itself in almost every character because they are also imprisoned by their limited perception. Tommy and Kathy’s desperate attempts to find a deferral as Tommy’s end gradually comes indicates their implacable desire to live. However, they do not even mention refusing to obey their destiny. The primary reason for their unquestioned submission to their destiny stem from the fact that they don’t know they can refuse to obey it. From the start of their birth, they are repeatedly “told and not told” that they are destined to die. This repeating method shows itself in various scenes, “Sure enough, she was soon saying things Tommy found difficult to follow. But she kept repeating it until eventually, he began to understand” (p.14). This repetition alludes to the guardians’ manipulative approach to the clones who are imprisoned by their own perception that they are destined to die, and they cannot escape from their destiny. Ishiguro portrays the clones as submissive pawns whose minds are manipulated so neatly that their perception, in a way, causes their downfall. However, at very the end of the novel, Miss Emily and Madama reveals their plan in establishing the Hailsham. They state that their only aim was to prove to people that clones also have souls, because of that they shouldn’t be treated inhumanely. They lastly, unveil that their core aim was to improve the conditions clones live in. This allegedly shows that Miss Emily and Madama are not sinister and what they are attempting to do is fixing the unfairness to which the clones are exposed. However, their professedly innocent attempt doesn’t fix the essence of the problem. The problem is that people are producing clones, that are basically people, to die miserably for others. The attempt to remedy the poor situations cloners are in does only alleviate the unfairly heavy burden the cloners are subjected to carry. In a way, they are not fixing the unfair system, they are only trying to fix the product of the unfair system which is, in a nutshell, salting the sea. This incompetence, and lack of awareness are not the result of their sinister nature, they are in fact, not sinister. Ishiguro portrays such inadequate attempts to show that people are imprisoned by the time and society they live in which shape their perception.

 

In conclusion, Ishiguro portrays clones very similar to soldiers. They both die for the sake of others, they are most significant when they are at prime and are most healthy. However, different than soldiers, the clones are looked down upon which raises the question that begs to be answered: Why don’t they refuse to donate? s. In their perception, they simply can’t refuse. This is this precise reason why the narrative doesn’t even remotely touch upon the possibility that they can escape from their destiny. The heavy manipulations they are subjected to almost programs them to submit themselves to the hands of others. According to Miss Emily and Madam, their actions bring only benevolence, because they think that all their deceptions serve as a shelter for the clones. Even though it is a controversial dilemma whether this justifies anything or not, it captures a very core idea that challenges ethics. The slavery was justified by the idea that black people were not as human as white people were. Women were oppressed because they were viewed as an inferior form of men. The progressive time unraveled that such superstitions were incorrect. However, there was a time where those beliefs were regarded reasonable. This shows how fragile and unreliable our perception of the world is. Ishiguro’s depiction of perception stands as an example of why we shouldn’t blindly trust our perception.

 

ISHIGURO, K. A. Z. U. O. (2018). Never Let Me Go. FABER AND FABER.