Dec 8, 2009
Tragic Ending?
Was the death of Ishmael a tragedy? After reading Ishmael by Daniel Quinn, that question was posed in class today and I would like to suggest that the death of Ishmael was not a tragedy but a hopeful ending. As Ishmael states, “I mean only that I’ve finished what I set out to do. As a teacher, I have nothing more to give you” (Quinn 254). Ishmael had taught the narrator all he could learn and when he died it was a symbol of the end of a chapter. When the narrator found out that Ishmael had died from pneumonia, his expression was that he, “stood there blinking at him (gentlemen at the carnival), unable to fathom what he was getting at” (Quinn 260). When the narrator first found out about Ishmael’s death, he was shocked and in disbelief, not knowing what to do next. When he gathered Ishmael’s belongings and went home he, “discovered there were messages on both sides [of the poster]” (Quinn 262). For the narrator to find the two messages, this was a start of a new chapter, signifying that he had hope. “With gorilla gone, will there be hope for man?” the readings of these words gave the narrator a hope that he could go forward with what Ishmael had taught him. Ishmael had once told him, “What you do is to teach a hundred what I’ve taught you, and inspire each of them to teach a hundred” this was told to the narrator when Ishmael explained that he could save the world, just as it was written in the ad (Quinn 248). Ishmael’s death was not a tragedy but an example that we are supposing to move forward and to hold onto the knowledge we have been given or discovered on our own.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think Lyndsay is quite right. The death of Ishmael is not a tragedy, or portrayed as one. Quinn writes in a way that allows the reader to see the death of the gorilla as an inspiration for the narrator. At some point in a student's life, they must leave their teacher, as such, this is true of the teacher-student relationship portrayed in the novel. The death of Ishmael marks the narrator as a graduate who now must be able to go forth and teach on his own.
ReplyDeleteI would like to further Lyndsay's idea a bit utilizing the message of the sign that the narrator finds upon his initial visit to Ishmael's room and upon his last.
Thoughout the novel, readers are able to witness the decline of Ishmael. After being captured from the wild, he is a captive in various ways, eventually reaching the home of Walter, who seems to be Ishmael's teacher or at least, partner. After the marriage and then death of Walter, Ishmael's condition slowly deteriorates. He goes from his home in Walter's house to eventually keep house in the room where the narrator finds him. His condition gets worse, we find out later that his benefactor's daughter has died and that as such the rent for his room has not been paid. Ishmael is put back in captivity and remains there until his death, alarmingly brought about by the conditions of new home. Early in the novel the narrator finds the sign that asks "With man gone, will there be hope for gorilla?". Seemingly the novel's ending illustrates the answer to this question. No, this particular gorilla will not have a hope when man is gone because man has imposed captivity upon him, by placing him in a cage, he has no access to self-sufficiency.
The sign also features the message, "With gorilla gone, will there be hope for man?". This message gains meaning only after synthesis of the rest of the novel's text, contrasting the first message, which can easily be interpretted in different contexts. Ishmael has been the teacher who seems quite able to lead the audience out of "captivity". Much as we might like to think that this is possible, even Ishmael himself cannot do this, we learn, as his own captivity is causal to his demise. Upon realizing this, the novel may seem to have more of a negative message, however, Ishmael seems to posit this question as a challenge, rather than a lament. Ishmael, it seems has given the narrator the tools for hope and change and as we have seen throughout the novel, expects something in return, the continued study of the narrator, perhaps eventually to be followed with the realization that he is ready to teach, himself.
I strong agree Lyndsay's statement that "For the narrator to find the two messages, this was a start of a new chapter, signifying that he had hope" because I also interpreted his death as the chance that Takers can have a hope for future.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I would like to explain my interpretation about Ishmael's former message that "With man gone, will there be hope for gorilla?" (p.262). In this case, I figured out these sentences as criticism from Ishmael to Takers (us). I believe that his meaning of "man" indicates Takers, and then the word "gorilla" is shown as the delegate for all of other animals. Therefore, my interpretation is that whether other animals except human (Takers) would be able to survive or not after human disapered from the world which has already created the way to exist for human. That is, in this Taker's world, one of the ways to resolve the condition of the world is that not human is gone but that human have to engage to helping by themselves, but other animals. We would have to resolve our problem which we made by ourselves.
Second, I would also like to show my interpretation about another Ishmael's message that "With gorilla gone, will be hope for man?" (p.263). In fact, this is similar to Lyndsay's contents. I suppose Ishmael appeals to the narrator's mind that how he would act his next behavior after he received the lecture from Ishmael. Actually, this concept is similar to my another concept about the film "the 11th Hour". That is, after he got the first step in order to solve the problem, that weather he realize the contents or not is depending on his will. Even though all of Ishmael's suggestion is enable to realize in the world of Takers, as a result, every consequences would be based on Takers' behavior.