In the slides, I brought up Justice Antonin Scalia’s use of “Harrison Bergeron” in a dissenting Supreme Court opinion. Vonnegut is among the most quotable of 20th-century authors in English, dispensing quips, aphorisms, and confusing proverbs about the modern human condition. His genius is for simple, compressed phrasing that exposes depths of contradiction, joy, pain, or confusion:
Here’s an example: “One of the few good things about modern times: If you die horribly on television, you will not have died in vain. You will have entertained us.”
How is this quotation relevant either to “Harrison Bergeron” or “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow”? How do these stories see television and its social impact?
Or, if you prefer, how does the quotation shed light on an actual and widely televised death that “entertained us” in recent years? Perhaps some of the truth(s) in Vonnegut’s comment are proven by how often we see people dying on our screens.
“One of the few good things about modern times: If you die horribly on television, you will not have died in vain. You will have entertained us.”
This quote is relevant to “Harrison Bergeron” in a pretty obvious way: the climax of the short story is about someone dying a terrible death while both of his parents watch on their television. I think the quote is possibly dissonant as well as reinforced in the context of the story in the way Vonnegut says “…You will have entertained us.” The story reinforces the quote through the way Harrison’s mother and father react to their son being murdered live on television. His mother, forgetting what exactly she had seen on TV that made her cry exclaims, “’Gee – I could tell that one was a doozy…’” She cannot remember what she just viewed but mindlessly convinces herself that she was entertained by it nonetheless. On the same note, George responds with, “‘You can say that again…’” to which she literally does say it again. The ending really feels like it perfectly encapsulates the quote brought up in the prompt as it demonstrates that no matter what atrocity might appear in the media, people are so “brainwashed” (these feels like too conspiratorial of a word but I couldn’t think of a better one) that it will be worth it for their amusement.
Elements of “Harrison Bergeron” and the above quote are eerily similar to the 24 hour news cycle that dominates our lives. Every single day we’re shown horrible event after horrible event, and sometimes I worry that we have been desensitized to tragedy. Like Aria notes, death on television is so far removed from people’s personal and real lives. Perhaps viewers of televised tragedy don’t completely understand what they’re viewing and thus do not feel all the real and painful emotions that come with witnessing a tragic event with one’s own eyes. The entirety of “Harrison Bergeron” takes place while Hazel and George sit in front of the TV; a device used to sedate and make people obey. With television as a buffer between humans and the horrors of the world, everything seems less important, less serious, less tragic. With our constant news consumption, our attachment to social media and television and the Internet, and our detachment from the “real” world, everything simply feels “less.” Terrible things aren’t so terrible when you see them happening all the time.
Like Johnny and Nate, I also immediately thought of the murder of Black Americans at the hands of law enforcement when I read this prompt. Americans have seen a disgusting number of Black people murdered on video and these videos are shared over and over again on the news and social media. In one sense it’s spreading awareness and providing necessary evidence to prosecute the officers at fault. On the other hand, however, it’s just trauma porn or the pointless and voyeuristic consumption of other people’s pain. It’s painfully familiar to read about the government murdering citizens with no fear of reprisal in “Harrison Bergeron.” They know they will not be held accountable because everyone is afraid and has been pacified to the point that they’re also working toward the common goal of total “equality.” This is grossly similar to the fact that American police officers know they’re being filmed and watched by millions of eyes, and yet continue to brutalize citizens, especially black citizens, because they know they can get away with it. The quote, in classic Vonnegut style, pokes fun at a rather dark element of modern society, in a way that might make you chuckle at first then shudder in realization.
I think the point that Vonnegut is trying to make with this statement is that TV (and even writing) cannot emulate real life. Death on a tv is nowhere comparable to experiencing death in real life. There is a space of detachment, a distance between the viewer and what they are witnessing. When shown through the filter of a tv screen, it almost doesn’t seem real. I think Vonnegut makes this point through his writing. Although extremely dark, he writes in a way that almost feels lighthearted and comical. He directly expresses the point that all storytelling is entertainment, even if it is dark and deals with death. TV, even if showing footage of real things, is also still entertainment. I think Vonnegut understands the constraints of storytelling and plays with them, knowing that his role as a writer isn’t to emulate real life but to comment on it.
Similar to Johnny, my first thought on quote is the prevalence of video footage of Black Americans being brutalized and killed by police. Most of the deaths we see on television occur during fictional stories, but from Michael Brown to George Floyd, the average person has probably seen more Black people killed on the news or social media than any other group. This footage holds significance in the court of law and attempts to hold police officers accountable. On the other hand, writers have coined the term trauma porn for the media’s act of spotlighting a marginalized group’s pain for the sake of entertainment. News sources and individuals share videos of these killings to “spread awareness” or share “the truth” at the expense of Black people who have a harder time viewing the footage. Videos of Black people murdered entertain and console non-Black people.
The Vonnegut quote forces me to reconsider my definition of entertainment. I feel angry and upset at every viral story of police brutality as I’m sure most of us do, but it still counts as a form of entertainment. I don’t know what the alternative is to be more considerate of peoples’ emotions , but it’s important to acknowledge deaths on the news without watching it like a consumer. It’s hard to get away from this trend because once a murder goes viral everyone watches the clip and talks about it. Is it better to not watch videos of police brutality?
The events depicted in “Harrison Bergeron” made me think about the countless deaths that have been covered on news channels and the sad reality that I have almost grown numb to them. Although our society doesn’t have mandatory headphones that cause blasts of incredibly loud noises into our ears as they do in “Harrison Bergeron”, I believe we have an almost as disorienting distractor in the amount of information that is shoved into our heads on the internet, social media, and mainstream media throughout our daily lives. In a society with 24/7 coverage of events, it is impossible to keep up with everything going on, let alone care about every piece of news, even when it involves death. I think of the countless mass shootings that have occurred in my short lifetime and the short and intense activism that follows. And then the silence, as if it vanished from our minds. This phenomenon reminded me of the closing conversation between George and Havel in “Harrison Bergeron,” where Hazel recalls that there was “something real sad on television,” to which George later suggests that she “forgot sad things”.
“One of the few good things about modern times: If you die horribly on television, you will not have died in vain. You will have entertained us.”
The immediate connection I see between Vonnegut’s quote and his writing comes from “Harrison Bergeron.” Despite the tragic death of their own son in front of their eyes, the Bergeron couple feel nothing but a few moments of lingering sadness after viewing it. Their own flesh and blood means nothing to them but some entertainment on television that raised emotion. It seems that entertainment comes out of even sad moments, because emotion comes from witnessing it. And for everyone else watching television at the same time as the Bergerons, the death of Harrison was just the death of a criminal, and much more amusing in its entirety than it was to the couple. The same aspect exists in “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow,” but in a much more comedic manner than Harrison Bergeron. The whole city/country watches, laughing, as Cramps’ remaining relatives fight over his belongings and room. No one is phased by the death of the old man, despite not knowing that he isn’t actually dead. They all revel in his death, and the relatives’ reaction is displayed across televisions everywhere. To me, Vonnegut is emphasizing television’s role in numbing the general public to displays of death, horror, and grief. I don’t think death is always shown solely for its entertainment value, but its constancy on tv allows people to turn a blind eye even if they’re not amused.