Though Vonnegut's writing career began in earnest in 1950 (with the publication of "Report on the Barnhouse Effect") he wouldn't gain public renown or financial comfort until the mid-to-late 1960s, and if not for an invitation to teach at the prestigious Iowa Writers Workshop in the fall of 1965 (not long after the publication of God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater), he might've given up on writing entirely. Nonetheless, the 60s represent the high water mark for Vonnegut's writing — specifically the trifecta of Cat's Cradle, God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater and Slaughterhouse-Five — and after the widespread success of that final book, he'd spend much of the 1970s in a tailspin, struggling with questions of his public persona, artifice and substance. It wasn't until a massive aesthetic reinvention, starting with Jailbird and continuing through Deadeye Dick, Galapagos and Bluebeard that he'd regain the fine fictional form of this earlier period.
Though the titular Eliot Rosewater is our protagonist, Vonnegut tells us in the novel's opening sentence that "[a] sum of money is a leading character in this tale about people, just as a sum of honey might properly be a leading character in a tale about bees." Specifically, he's talking about $87,472,033.61 (a lot of money then and now). Eliot is the primary trustee of the Rosewater Foundation — a philanthropic organization set up by his father, an Indiana senator, as a tax shelter — to whom the money belongs. At the heart of the novel is the question of qualities such as charity, fellowship, selflessness and generosity (as embodied by Eliot) and the place they occupy in a capitalist society. These concerns are perhaps even more important now than they were in the mid-60s, when Vonnegut's quaint sociological notions about humankind's duties to one another captured the imagination of young readers.
As Vonnegut slowly but surely worked his way towards being able to write Slaughterhouse-Five, we learn that Eliot, like Vonnegut, is scarred by his experiences during WWII and a major part of how he comes to terms with that is by valorizing the role firefighters play in society. Vonnegut himself had been a volunteer firefighter in the hamlet of Alplaus while he worked at GE, and his own admiration for them is mirrored in the novel, where he observes that they are:
As Vonnegut slowly but surely worked his way towards being able to write Slaughterhouse-Five, we learn that Eliot, like Vonnegut, is scarred by his experiences during WWII and a major part of how he comes to terms with that is by valorizing the role firefighters play in society. Vonnegut himself had been a volunteer firefighter in the hamlet of Alplaus while he worked at GE, and his own admiration for them is mirrored in the novel, where he observes that they are:
almost the only examples of enthusiastic unselfishness to be seen in this land. They rush to the rescue of any human being, and count not the cost. The most contemptible man in town, should his contemptible house catch fire, will see his enemies put the fire out. There we have people treasuring people as people.
 |
| Two prints by artist Tim Doyle of one of Vonnegut's most famous quotations (taken from this novel). |
God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater also serves as our first introduction to Kilgore Trout, one of Vonnegut's most-cherished creations. As depicted in the Arena documentary we watched on the first day of class, Trout is a prolific science fiction writer — author of more than 117 novels and 2000 short stories — albeit not one who has gained either critical or financial recognition: his work is usually published as filler in pornographic magazines. Eliot Rosewater is a diehard fan of his work, however, and through his influence, so is Billy Pilgrim, protagonist of Slaughterhouse-Five. He'll also appear in that novel, as well as Breakfast of Champions, Jailbird and Timequake, and Galapagos is narrated by the ghost of Trout's son, Leon Trotsky Trout. In 1975, Trout even published a novel in the real world, Venus on the Half-Shell (shown at right), though contrary to popular belief, the book wasn't written by Vonnegut, but rather a little-known science fiction author, Philip José Farmer. While Vonnegut had given Farmer permission to use Trout's name, he'd soon grow to regret that decision as casual fans and dedicated readers alike couldn't tell the difference between the two authors.
Like Trout, Eliot Rosewater would also become one of Vonnegut's favorite recurring characters, showing up again in our next novel, Slaughterhouse-Five, as well as the later books Breakfast of Champions and Hocus Pocus (which won't be part of our reading list this quarter).
Here's our reading schedule for the week:
- Tuesday, April 17th: Ch. 1-9
- Thursday, April 19th: Ch. 10-14
And here are a few supplemental links:
- "Do Human Beings Matter?," Martin Levin's New York Times review of the book: [link]
- A lovely essay in The New Inquiry on "Vonnegut's Firefighters," including his thoughts on the first responders who perished on 9/11: [link]
- The title of Vonnegut's 1999 collection of NPR vignettes, God Bless You, Dr. Kevorkian, consciously parodies this book: [link]
- In the late-70s, God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater was adapted into (I kid you not) a Broadway musical. Here's video of its opening act:
1.) Vonnegut says at the beginning of God bless you, Mr. Rosewater that, “A large sum of money is a leading character in this tale about people” (Vonnegut 7). If Vonnegut were to start Player Piano with a similar sentence it might say “IQ’s are a leading character in this tale about human significance” Vonnegut has the leading characters of money and IQ level be an issue that plagues the main human characters Eliot Rosewater and Ed Finnerty. Both characters seem to derive a sense of guilt from being either with a high IQ or the heir to a large sum of money. Both characteristics acquired through nothing other than being born. How does Eliot’s guilt about his inheritance and Finnerty’s guilt about his IQ level influence their actions in both novels?
ReplyDelete2.) Sylvia and Caroline share the last name Rosewater. Sylvia is a rich woman who tries to live serving the less fortunate but is simply unable to commit. Caroline is a middle class woman willing to sacrifice anything to be, or seem, rich. Both display characteristics of a “grass is always greener” mentality and both sacrifice their husbands. How does Vonnegut display this mentality in both women and its effect on both of their husbands?
1.) God Bless You Mr. Rosewater raises questions about sanity and insanity. In the beginning of the book, Senator Rosewater gives a speech, “and what methods did Caesar Augustus use to put this disorderly house in order? …He wrote morals into law, and he enforced those unenforceable laws with a police force that was cruel and unsmiling” (29-30). In contrast we also hear how Eliot Rosewater feels about American society in a letter , “Thus did a handful of rapacious citizens come to control all that was worth controlling in America. Thus was the savage and stupid entirely inappropriate and unnecessary and humorless American class system created. Honest, industrious, peaceful citizens were classed as bloodsuckers, if they asked to be paid a living wage. And they saw that praise was reserved henceforth for those who devised means of getting paid enormously for committing crimes against which no laws had been passed. ” (9). Throughout the book Eliot is deemed insane while his father is considered completely sane by everyone in the country. What does it mean to be sane in a society that itself seems insane and has turned inside out its ideals of equality and justice?
ReplyDelete2.) Eliot’s wife, Sylvia, meets with the Senator and his lawyers, McAllister and Mushari to discuss her divorce. The Senator is dumbfounded by his son’s decision to help the people in Rosewater, saying, “there’s absolutely nothing good about them” (68). Sylvia tries to assure him that the people are not so bad and she argues on Eliot’s behalf, “If I don’t make anything else clear tonight, at least let me make that clear: Eliot is right to do what he’s doing. It’s beautiful what he’s doing” (68). The Senator demands to know “one good thing” about the people Eliot is helping and Sylbia replies, “ The secret is that they’re human” (68). She hopes the men will grasp the importance of her statement, but is disappointed. Instead, Mushari gives her a “hideously inappropriate smile of greed and fornication” (69). Why do these powerful men not understand the importance of common humanity and is there any hope for a country faced with such blatant dismissal of that humanity?
1. After being introduced to Vonnegut’s style of prose, noticeable patterns of repetition continually play out from one of his novels to the next; Vonnegut’s 1965 work God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater is no exception. As it has been noted within our past discussions, women play a significantly lesser role in most all of Vonnegut’s books than that of men. In addition to that discovery, it is apparent that females not only exist primarily to forward their male companions, but they also lack healthy, strong, and loving relationships with them, as well. Many relationships are introduced to the reader in God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater, and, as the reader quickly learns, not one of them is practical. In spite of the majority of the Rosewater male-female relationships, “there was something to be said for Lister and Eunice: unlike Noah and Cleota and Samuel and Geraldine, they could laugh as though they meant it” (Vonnegut 14). Eunice was the rare discovery of a successful female (having been named the United States Women’s Chess Champion in 1927 and writing her own historical novel, Ramba of Macedon, which was a best-seller in 1936) and also an infrequent example of a happily married woman in one of Vonnegut’s novels. Eunice was killed in 1937 by means of a sailing accident; is it the least bit surprising that later on in the novel we discover that her only son, Eliot, was the cause of her death? Noting that Eunice was the only prosperous woman in terms of both success and male-female companionship in God Bless you, Mr. Rosewater, does the exposure to the fact that Eliot “killed his mother” reinforce the notion that all male-female relationships in Vonnegut’s books are rather pathetic and unsuccessful, though some may argue that Eunice’s death was merely an accident (Vonnegut 28)?
ReplyDelete2. In God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater, many generations of Rosewater’s are introduced, beginning with Noah, who initially accumulated the “Rosewater pile” (Vonnegut 11). From there, Noah married Cleota Herrick who gave birth to Samuel, who married Geraldine Ames Rockefeller who gave birth to Lister Ames Rosewater, who married Eunice Eliot Morgan who gave birth to Eliot Rosewater, who married Sylvia DuVrais Zetterling. From there, the lineage seemed to disappear; for Eliot failed to reproduce – “Begat he not a soul” (Vonnegut 15). Many times throughout the novel, Senator Lister Ames Rosewater declared “If only there had been a child,” or “The end of the Rosewater family is now plainly in view” (Vonnegut 46-47). Although “Eliot became a drunkard… an aimless fool,” a child of his would have the unbreakable entitlement to the rule of the Rosewater Foundation, regardless of the many accusations that he existed as an utter lunatic (Vonnegut 14). Toward the story’s conclusion, in the last chapter, it is brought drastically to Eliot’s attention that he is in question of fathering fifty-seven children, none of which are his in actuality; however, Eliot quickly realizes that if he were to have fathered a child, he/she “would inherit the Foundation automatically” (Vonnegut 189). In response to his realization, Eliot declared to legally acknowledge that each child said to be his in Rosewater County, Indiana was indeed his. Though without accepting each child and allowing he/she the right to his inheritance, Eliot Rosewater would have lost the Foundation to the Rosewater’s from Rhode Island, were his actions justified? Was the conclusion to God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater fitting for prose of Vonnegut, or did the actions from Eliot appear to be unexpected?
Kelsie Wilson
1. A recurring theme throughout many of Vonnegut’s books is the importance of having a purpose or use in life. In Player Piano and God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater the majority of people are poor and suffer from knowing they have no purpose. In chapter 14 Kilgore Trout explains, “Poverty is a relatively mild disease for even a very flimsy American soul, but uselessness will kill strong and weak souls alike, and kill every time” (265). By Eliot accepting the 57 claims of paternity in Rosewater and adopting all those children as his heirs, is he giving the children purpose or just an undeserved inheritance? (Which seemed to be Eliot’s greatest sources of unhappiness in the fist place).
ReplyDelete2. Throughout God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater the reader is uncertain of Eliot’s sanity. Following a very traumatic fight with his father at the end of chapter 12 Eliot seems to have finally gone off the deep end. After his father leaves he is physically petrified for several minutes and is unable to remember anything of real significance. When Eliot encounters Charley Warmergran and Noyes Finnerty they notice that Eliot is acting strangely. Noyes remarks, “ He heard that click, man. Man, did he ever hear that click” (236). The “click”, Noyes explains, is when a person finally snaps and is forever changed because of it.
In the final Chapter we see Eliot “come to” in a mental hospital after a year has gone by that he does not remember. It is at this time that Eliot realizes what he can do to try and save the people of Rosewater and keep the foundation out of the hands of Fred Rosewater. Is this moment of awakening and clarity a sign of Eliot returning to sanity or did the “click” break him for life?