SciFi and Fantasy eBook Club discussion

The chrono-synclastic infundibulum in "Sirens" and Rumfoord's resulting existence throughout time resonates to some degree with Vonnegut's later Slaughterhouse Five and Billy Pilgrim being "unstuck in time."

In "Sirens", at least on the one hand it seems to suggest a sort of universal determinism (or fatalism?), in that all time could be considered a sort of illusion, where everything that has happened, is happening, and will happen exists at once and forever. Thus Rumfoord knows the "future" (though he is not omniscient).

On the other hand, the fact that he actively works to make that future happen -- and ultimately it would appear to be the inhabitants of Tralfamador that were truly making things happen -- would seem to indicate that perhaps free will might have an effect. Or, is free will just another illusion?

What do you think: is Vonnegut saying there is or is not free will, or is he just playing with our minds to make us ask difficult (and perhaps unanwerable) questions of ourselves?

Discuss....

Hmm...only 7 views and 0 replies.

Oh well, I tried.

I feel that he makes us ask ourselves, 'what is free will?' - I am free not to go to work, but then I would not eat. Thus I work. In Vonneguts mind that is a removal of free will. My interpretation thus far anyway. - That's all I have for you ATM Charles... hopefully more to come once I have finished the book :)

I seem to have missed this thread the first time around but got an email notification today.

Although I love stories that involve time travel, I have always had a problem with the very question you ask, Charles. Rumford knows the future and what will happen, so why does he have to work to make it happen? It seems to me that authors want it both ways. We are fascinated with the idea of knowing the future, but if the future is truly knowable, then there is no free will, and suddenly, that's not an interesting story.

For myself, I am a total believer in free will. I don't think the stars or the date of our birth predict our future and I don't think Anyone or Anything has a plan for us. It's up to us to create our own futures.

However, Fate, Destiny, the gods playing with our lives...they all make great stories.

I've read a few neuroscientists take on free will and determinism and I wonder if the more appropriate term would be fatalism, at least from a scientific point of view.

But the impression I got, superficially, is that mankind was more or less set up like a ball and pin to deliver one spare part to a stranded alien. Now that deed is done, we're on our own with no one pulling strings.

Thinking back on this book and his later work, along with the above comments (thanks), I wonder if Vonnegut is, in fact, trying to say in a satirical way that he thinks it's absurd that the things humans have done over the centuries (in particular World War II in his case) are part of some divine (or Tralfamadoran) plan. Instead, we -- as a whole -- are solely responsible for all those "man's inhumanity toward man" sort of things.

Or not. :-)

To me it seemed that no one had much control at all over what happened to them. Every time a character tried to avoid the fate dictated to them by Rumfoord, he or she ended up exactly where Rumfoord said they'd be. Kind of a bummer, really.

I couldn't respond when you first made this comment, because I wasn't far enough into the book. I'm still only about half through - this isn't a book that I've felt compelled to read, although I'm not hating it. But at least so far, I feel like he is saying that free will is an illusion - at least as far as the occurences in the book. Good point Charles about Vonnegut maybe using this to mock the idea of a divine plan.