Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Spirit opens with the narrator reading the newspaper and finding himself
both disgruntled and intrigued by a personal advertisement. The ad indicates
that a teacher is looking for a student interested in saving the world. For
most of the narrator's early life, he had searched for such a teacher, and he's
angry that only now is one looking for him. He's sure the ad is a hoax, but he
goes to the indicated address, only to find an empty office space with a
gorilla in one of the rooms, looking at him through a glass pane. The gorilla is
able to speak with the narrator telepathically, and the narrator quickly
realizes that this is the teacher he's been searching for.
The gorilla's name is Ishmael. He was caught in the jungles of Africa at a
young age and has lived his life in captivity ever since. He started out in a
zoo, then ended up in a traveling carnival, and finally was purchased by
Walter Sokolow, with whom he learned to communicate telepathically.
Through his telepathic connection, Ishmael was able to have Mr. Sokolow get
him books and help him educate himself. Ishmael's primary investigation
began with the issue of captivity but grew into a more comprehensive
exploration of humanity and the shape of the world. Ishmael, having been
apportioned part of Sokolow's estate after Walter's death, is mostly
independent and lives his life in the city, trying to find students to help
spread his teachings.
Ishmael and the narrator begin a series of meetings wherein Ishmael helps
the narrator understand his cultural history. Ishmael divides humans into two
groups: Leavers and Takers. Takers are members of the dominant culture,
which sees humans as rulers of the world, whose destiny is to grow without
check and dominate first the planet, then the universe, through technological
innovations. Leavers are members of tribal cultures that live more simply,
following the same basic rules that govern other populations on Earth.
Ishmael helps the narrator see that while it may seem that Taker culture has
outwitted the ecological rules that govern other life-forms, in many ways
Taker culture is in freefall, doomed to crash once it has depleted the planet of
its biological and environmental resources.
In addition to helping the narrator see the traits of Taker and Leaver cultures,
Ishmael shows the narrator how various cultural myths have helped shape
both cultures. One of the main myths he discusses is the story of Adam and
Eve. Ishmael helps the narrator see that while Taker culture, through the
dominance of Christianity, sees this myth as explaining its own creation,
historically this myth was used by Leaver cultures to explain the expansion of
Taker cultures. Leavers were trying to understand why Takers had turned to
agriculture and were trying to force their way of life on the Leavers. Leavers
used the myth to explain that it was because Takers had eaten of the Tree of
the Knowledge of Good and Evil the tree the gods must eat from in order
to know who should live and die. Thus, the Takers were acting like the gods
because they believed they'd gained the gods' knowledge, when in reality,
such knowledge does not belong to any life-form on Earth.
Toward the end of their discussions, the narrator gets caught up with
personal matters, forcing him to miss several days of meetings with Ishmael.
When he finally returns to Ishmael's office, Ishmael is nowhere to be found.
He tracks Ishmael down to a traveling carnival and visits him at night, so
they can finish their lessons. The narrator comes up with a plan to rescue
Ishmael from the circus by buying him from the circus's owner. By the time
he gets the cash together, however, Ishmael has died from pneumonia. The
narrator gathers up a few of Ishmael's remaining belongings and starts
contemplating how he'll fulfill Ishmael's command to become a teacher
himself and help other people see the problems with Taker culture and find a
new way to live in balance with other life on the planet.
The narrator throws his newspaper out in a huff, but after a few minutes,
rescues it from the trash bin. He's upset by an advertisement placed by a
teacher looking for a student interested in saving the world. Mostly, he's
annoyed because he spent years of his idealistic youth looking for such a
teacher. Though certain the advertisement is a scam, the narrator goes to
the address indicated in the advertisement.
He ends up at a nondescript office building and enters a large, nearly empty
office. Once inside, he explores and finds a darkened window to an adjoining
room; in the room is a gorilla. Stunned, the narrator is uncertain what to do
until a voice in his head tells him to sit down and relax so he's better able to
listen. Quickly, the narrator realizes the gorilla is communicating with him
telepathically. The narrator sits down, and the gorilla tells him about his
background.
The gorilla, which the reader later learns is named Ishmael, was taken from
the jungles of West Africa to be kept in a zoo in the United States. During the
Depression, the zoo sold him to a traveling circus, where he lived for several
years. During that time, he realized he was called Goliath and spent his time
in captivity pondering the question: why? Why is life like this, so boring and
distasteful?
One day, a man shows up and tells him he is not Goliath, which shakes his
world; he no longer feels like an individual. The man, Walter Sokolow,
purchases Ishmael and moves him to a gazebo on his large estate. On their
first visit together, the man tells Ishmael he is Ishmael, making the gorilla
feel like he has a self.
Mr. Sokolow is Jewish and had recently learned his family was killed in the
Holocaust, so he spends some time sharing his grief with Ishmael, assuming
the beast can't understand him. But Ishmael gently touches the man's hand.
Mr. Sokolow tries to teach Ishmael to speak, but the process frustrates them
both. Finally, Ishmael concentrates on sending his thoughts to the man and
they realize they can communicate telepathically. Mr. Sokolow becomes
Ishmael's teacher and companion, and through his friendship with Ishmael,
recovers from his grief, marries, and even has a daughter, whom he names
Rachel.
Analysis
The narrator digests this information and shares his own past experience. He
tells Ishmael he wrote a philosophy paper in which the Nazis had won World
War II and taken over the world and wiped out all races besides the Aryan
race, and in doing so, erased all history of a world in which other races even
existed. In the narrator's paper, two Aryan students are talking and one of
them says he feels like he's been lied to, but he's not sure what the lie is, nor
can he know since all prior knowledge has been wiped out. The narrator says
he feels this way, too. Ishmael sympathizes and says that, while it may not
matter if one individual discovers the lie, it could change the world if the
entire human population discovered the truth. He says no more and the
narrator goes home for the evening.
The next day the narrator returns, both scared and excited, his passion for
saving the world reignited.
Analysis
Through the form of the novel, the theme of captivity, and the use of
foreshadowing, Quinn provides the groundwork to answer the novel's central
question: why are things the way they are? First, as the narrator and
Ishmael's relationship develops, it takes on the archetypal form of a teacherstudent relationship. Quinn's use of this archetype alludes to other texts that
use it, such as Plato's Socratic dialogues. Similar to Socrates, Ishmael uses
rhetorical strategies, such as asking guiding questions and storytelling, to
engage his pupil and help him discover various truths.
Ishmael's key subject is captivity. The theme of captivity is initially revealed
through Ishmael's life story. Recall that, prior to his life as a teacher, Ishmael
lived in a zoo, a traveling circus, and an airy gazebo. All three experiences
shaped his thinking and helped him gain not only a stronger sense of self,
but also a clearer understanding of the world around him. For example, at
the zoo, he discovered that his "wild" life prior to the zoo was much more
interesting and happy than his life in the zoo, causing him to wonder why
such a change in circumstance occurred. Building on this discovery, while he
was in the traveling circus, his relationship to humans changed. Whereas at
the zoo, humans only talked to each other, at the circus they directly
addressed him, causing him to see himself as an individual. Ishmael uses his
experiences in captivity to comment on the human condition, suggesting
that humans are captive to a "civilizational system" and are unable to see
the "bars of the cage."
Ishmael explains that Mr. Sokolow was obsessed with studying Nazi Germany
and tells the narrator that the key to Hitler's success was his ability to tell a
story and have people believe it. The German people suffered so much after
World War I that they were hungry to believe his story of Aryan supremacy,
and even those who dismissed it as a story were caught up in it unless they
fled Germany.
Ishmael continues by explaining that Mother Culture is feeding us a story
that's so pervasive we don't even hear it anymore, but it informs every
moment of our lives. His job is to help the narrator hear the story and see his
The novel's central question and theme why are things the way they are
evolves in Part 4 through Ishmael's use of imaginative exercises and
Socratic dialogue. To begin, Ishmael encourages the narrator to imagine
Earth without man. Through this creative exercise, the narrator sees the
world in a new way and better understands his culture myth that man has
evolved to conquer the Earth. Additionally, Ishmael illustrates his points
through further questioning of the narrator. For instance, by asking the
narrator to explain how Takers justify the destruction of the world's natural
resources and wildlife, the narrator says that Takers would see this as the
price that must be paid to advance human culture. Ishmael uses the
narrator's response to build to his next point: that the Takers have it wrong
that they are paying the price it costs to be "the enemy of the world."
The next day, Ishmael and his student try to figure out the end of the story.
First, Ishmael has the narrator review the story so far; in doing so, the
narrator is able to continue it. He says that while man has been put on Earth
to conquer it, in conquering it he's caused a lot of problems. The solution to
those problems is to continue pursuing mastery of the world at every level so
as to finally achieve a manageable paradise, and in doing so, be able to
spread out and conquer the universe.
Ishmael applauds the narrator's efforts, but asks him what the "but" is. The
narrator figures out that the unspoken "but" at the end of his story is that
humans are inherently flawed and thus will continue to screw up their pursuit
of paradise.
The narrator is incredulous; he can't believe that it's false that human nature
is flawed. Ishmael asks what evidence his culture uses to back up its claim of
being flawed, and the narrator admits it only uses its own history not the
history of the Leavers or, that is to say, of hunter-gatherer cultures.
Ishmael tells the narrator there are a few more pieces of the puzzle they
need to cover before they can go on to the next level. He brings up the topic
of prophets and asks the narrator why Taker culture is so obsessed with
prophets. The narrator says it's because Mother Culture says humans do not
know how to live, so they rely on prophets to tell them what to do. Once
again, Ishmael applauds the narrator's efforts and builds on his statements,
concluding that the flaw in humans is that they do not know how to live; if
they knew how to live, their flaw would be in check. He says that Taker
philosophy is pretty depressing and that there is indeed another way to look
at humankind. But he puts that off for tomorrow, saying that today has been
about sightseeing seeing the pieces of culture natives to that culture take
for granted.
Analysis
In Part 5, Ishmael uses storytelling as well as metaphor to help his pupil
understand the cultural myths structuring his understanding of the world.
First, Ishmael encourages the narrator to use story to understand the
trajectory of Taker culture. The narrator, having learned from his experience
with telling the first and middle part of the Taker story, quickly finishes the
story. He explains the Taker goal of conquering the world in order to achieve
paradise. Thus, once again, Quinn uses storytelling as both a tool for
understanding within the narrative as well as within culture, for storytelling is
what allows the narrator to see his cultural story more objectively.
Additionally, Ishmael uses metaphor to help his pupil gain a better grasp of
what they've achieved so far. The metaphor Ishmael uses is that of
sightseeing. He explains that tourists see all the sights of a nation to which
the natives have grown so accustomed that they don't see them anymore.
Through this metaphor, Ishmael helps the narrator understand what they've
accomplished: they've started to see the landmarks of Taker culture that the
narrator has taken for granted his entire life. Now that the landmarks are in
place, Ishmael foreshadows that the narrator is ready for the next step to
see the world through the Leavers' eyes, rather than the Takers'.
Ishmael greets the narrator playfully the next day, wondering if he's excited
about the discoveries they'll make. Ishmael begins by making a parallel
between Taker culture and the first aeronauts. He says that aeronauts tried
to fly before understanding the law of aerodynamics, but that nonetheless
the law of aerodynamics applied to their attempts. Ishmael's goal is to define
a similar, unarguable law about how to live.
Ishmael continues by bringing up another metaphor, regarding the discovery
of gravity. The narrator agrees with his premise that no one was shocked by
the fact of gravity as they'd all seen that objects fall toward the earth.
Ishmael pushes the narrator to explain how the law was discovered then; the
narrator says through studying matter. Thus, Ishmael suggests that, in order
to understand how to live, one must study life. The narrator explains that
Mother Culture would suggest that humans are above any law that applies to
the rest of life on earth. Ishmael sets out to show how, regardless of what
Mother Culture says, the law of living applies, and that he'll use the analogy
of gravity and flight to explain.
Ishmael begins by suggesting that the Takers' gods tricked the Takers in
three ways: First, they're (the Takers) not the center of the universe, though
they act like they are. Second, humans evolved just like everything else,
even though they feel above evolution. And third, that they're not actually
exempt from the laws of life. Ishmael explains by describing an early attempt
at flight. He describes a man pedaling a bi-winged contraption. He says that
if the man runs off a tall cliff, he will experience free fall for long enough that
it will feel like flight to him, even though he's not actually flying. Additionally,
the man will keep pedaling because so far it's working, even though below
him he'll see abandoned crafts just like his own. But, eventually, he'll fall to
the earth because his craft hasn't followed the rules of aerodynamics.
Ishmael suggests that Taker culture is in the same boat: it's an experiment in
free fall, even though it feels like flight, and Takers are accelerating toward a
crash. Takers also see abandoned attempts at civilization (for example, the
Mayans) but nonetheless believe that their attempt will survive because it
has "worked" so far. The narrator jumps in at the end of Ishmael's lecture and
says that people will just try to do the same thing all over again if the
narrator's culture ends in catastrophe; Ishmael sadly agrees.
Analysis
Through the use of several analogies, Ishmael presents his ideas about
civilization and natural laws to the narrator and furthers Quinn's arguments
regarding humanity's place in the world. The first analogy Ishmael employs is
that of aerodynamics. He explains that early aeronauts struggled to obtain
flight but were unaware of the law of aerodynamics and were thus largely
unsuccessful because they could rely only on trial and error. He uses this
analogy to explain Taker culture: it is obedient to a law about living, but it is
ignorant of that law and so is unable to see how it's doomed to fail.
The second analogy Ishmael uses is the discovery of gravity. He employs this
analogy by asking the narrator how Newton discovered gravity. After Ishmael
asks a variety of leading questions, the narrator suggests that Newton
discovered the law of gravity by observation. Ishmael also builds on this
analogy to explain that the only way to understand what laws organisms
must live by is by observing living organisms.
Finally, Ishmael combines these two analogies to create an extended
description of the problem of Taker culture. He compares Taker culture to a
man in a flying contraption that does not obey the laws of aerodynamics; it
may appear he's "beat" gravity because he's in free fall, but gravity will
eventually catch up with him. Similarly, while Mother Culture tells Takers that
they're above the laws of life, they too are in free fall, and eventually their
civilization will also crash due to its inability to follow the laws of life. Through
these three analogies, Quinn furthers his argument that humankind is at the
brink of a catastrophe.
Ishmael invites the narrator to imagine himself in a foreign land where
everyone is happy and peaceable. The people he visits, the C's, explain that
they eat their neighbors (the B's), and the B's eat the next people over (the
A's), and the A's eat the C's. Ishmael says that as a visitor, the narrator
might be baffled by these practices, but that everyone in the society finds his
confusion amusing, as they say it is the law of the land and it works for them.
Ishmael then challenges the narrator to find, without asking the A's, B's, or
C's, a means by which to discover what the law is that they follow. Through
more questioning, the narrator discovers he has three guides with which to
narrow down the law by which they live: what makes their society successful,
what people in the society never do, and what a person who has broken the
law has done that the others never do.
Then, Ishmael explains the signs of the law that life follows. He says that
outside the Taker culture, animals coexist with their predators in relative
peace. For instance, a lion kills only because he's hungry; he doesn't
perpetrate some sort of gazelle massacre. All of the species of creatures on
the planet have followed this rule and prospered; it is only that when a
portion of humans decided to abandon the law and live beyond it that Earth's
ecosystems were thrown out of balance.
Ishmael instructs the narrator to leave and to come back only after he's
discovered the rule or rules by which the Leavers and the rest of life on Earth
live. The narrator feels dejected at this prospect and goes out for a drink. He
realizes that he doesn't want to complete this task, not so much because he
doesn't want to know the answer, but because he wants to have a teacher
for life, and once he's learned Ishmael's lesson he'll be left alone again.
Analysis
In this section, Quinn employs analogy to explain Ishmael's perspective on
the world, and he expands the archetypal teacher-student relationship
between Ishmael and the narrator. First, Ishmael's use of analogy once again
allows the narrator to see the problems with his culture via example rather
than directly. The analogy Ishmael uses is that of the A, B, and C societies, in
which all the people eat each other and live in harmony because they're
following the rule of their society. Ishmael's analogy allows the narrator to
better see how wildlife also follows similar rules and that Takers have tried to
abandon such rules. For instance, a documentarian of wildlife might highlight
the gore and violence of a lion killing a gazelle, but, as Ishmael points out,
the lion is not the enemy of the gazelle; rather it eats what it needs and
leaves the rest of the herd alone.
Furthermore, Quinn explores the teacher-student dynamic through Ishmael's
latest assignment for the narrator. For the first time, Ishmael tells the
narrator to leave and not return until he's figured out the rules by which to
live. The narrator is upset by this proposition as he realizes that, if he's
successful, he'll eventually no longer be Ishmael's pupil. Thus, Quinn shows
both the appeal and complications of teacher-student relationships. On one
hand, the teacher and student benefit from proximity and gain excitement
for their subject via their interactions. On the other, the more successful their
interactions, the sooner their relationship will come to an end. Thus, the
narrator must face the question: what will he do with what he's learned?
What will he become when he's no longer a student?
It takes the narrator four days to figure out the basic laws of life. He returns
to Ishmael on the fifth day with his findings. He says the three basic rules are
1) do not exterminate your competition for food; 2) do not destroy your
competitors' food supply in order to grow your own; and 3) do not deny
access to food to others. Ishmael approves of the narrator's rules and asks
what they promote. They decide it promotes diversity and survival for the
community as a whole since it favors no species above the rest. Having
come to this conclusion, the narrator sees that Taker culture is not so much
clumsy in its execution of civilization, but is actually at war with the rest of
the planet.
Ishmael then presents a brief overview of ecological principles. He says that
when food supplies increase, populations increase. Additionally, when
population increases, food decreases and when food decreases, population
decreases as well. His explanation of these principles leads him and the
narrator to discussing the role of agriculture in Taker culture. Ishmael
Through the use of storytelling and allusion, Quinn begins to explain Leaver
culture and add further details to the comparison and contrast between Taker
and Leaver cultures. Once again, storytelling proves to be an essential
teaching strategy for Ishmael. In these sections, the basic story he tells
explains the roles of gods and humans and the problems that occur when
humans take on the role of the gods. Thus, the story's allegorical nature
allows the narrator to understand more deeply the problems with Taker
culture.
Recall that earlier, stories helped the narrator understand the rules of life
and the importance of following those rules. This story builds on that
knowledge by showing the narrator that Taker culture believes it has the
right to disobey those rules because it has obtained the knowledge of the
gods, which is the ability to determine what should live and what should die.
The second tool Quinn uses is an allusion to the biblical account of the fall of
Adam and Eve. Quinn uses this allusion to connect the novel's central
question (why things are the way they are) to one of the most influential
texts in the world. To accomplish this, the main way Ishmael uses the allusion
is to help the narrator see the Bible story in a different light. First, Ishmael
helps the narrator see that no version of the Bible's telling of the story
provides a reason for why the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is
forbidden. Ishmael makes it clear why this is so: it's forbidden because the
knowledge of the gods does not belong to any life-form on Earth; no creature
has the right to decide what should live and what should die. Second,
Ishmael reveals the roots of this story as one the Leavers told to explain the
Takers. He does this by explicating why it's called The Fall rather than The
Ascent: if Takers had originated this story, they would have said such
knowledge was theirs and that obtaining it marked the rise, rather than the
decline, of humankind.
Thus, through the use of story and allusion, Quinn begins to more deeply
contrast Taker and Leaver culture. One of the key differences between the
two is their cultural attitudes to the rest of life on the planet. For instance,
Takers believe their cultural role is to expand and spread their way of life to
others as it's the "right" thing to do. Leavers believe everything has a right
to live the way it prefers to no single way is right for everyone, and
everyone has a right to select their way as long as it doesn't infringe on
others' right to life and food.
Ishmael pushes the narrator to look more closely at the story of The Fall. If
the Takers did not create the story, then who did, he asks the narrator. The
narrator can't remember, and Ishmael tells him it would be the Semites, the
ancestors of the Hebrews. Ishmael shows the narrator his own map of the
expansion of the Agricultural Revolution to further his point. His map
illustrates that the agriculturalists were surrounded by herders. For the
agriculturalists to expand and fulfill their Taker "destiny," they had to take
land from the herders. Ishmael instructs the narrator to read the story of Cain
and Abel to better understand how this expansion took shape.
In the story of Cain and Abel, Cain represents the Takers who must kill the
Leavers (Abel) in order to expand agricultural production. Once again,
Ishmael has brought the narrator's attention to a story that, while familiar,
makes more sense when looked at from the Leaver perspective. Thus, Cain
and Abel aren't actual brothers, but representatives of different human
cultures.
Ishmael explains that because the Leavers didn't fully die out or become
completely assimilated into Taker culture, the Takers, through the spread of
Christianity, came to adopt a tale that once was used to show their
shortcomings as one of their own creation myths.
Analysis
In sections 9-11, Ishmael once again uses allusion and storytelling to
broaden the narrator's understanding of Taker and Leaver culture. The key
allusion in these sections is to the story of Cain and Abel. In the Bible story,
Cain and Abel are brothers; Cain's a farmer and Abel's a herder. Cain's
jealousy of Abel eventually induces him to murder Abel. By alluding to this
story, Ishmael adds to the narrator's understanding of Taker and Leaver
culture and the divide between the two. According to Ishmael, Cain is
representative of Takers and Abel is representative of Leavers. Leavers used
this allegory to explain the spread of Taker culture during the Agricultural
Revolution. Recall that earlier in Part 9, Ishmael alluded to and expanded on
the story of The Fall. When looking at both allusions and the added
information Ishmael brings to both, the narrator better grasps Ishmael's
philosophy and his take on how the world has come to be dominated by
Taker culture.
Second, the function of storytelling continues to expand. So far, storytelling
has been used as a teaching tool by Ishmael and as a term for the way a
culture understands itself. For instance, recall that Ishmael first began
explaining Taker culture by trying to get the narrator to tell the Takers'
creation myth (i.e., the story of the Big Bang and evolution resulting in
humankind). Now, Ishmael also shows the narrator that cultures can use
story to explain other cultures' behaviors. Both the story of The Fall and Cain
and Abel were tools Semites used to explain the expansion of agriculture and
the people who threatened their way of life.
Furthermore, the Takers' appropriation of this story in the Bible suggests that
another part of Taker culture is appropriating Leaver culture in order to
dominate it. By taking the stories of The Fall and Cain and Abel for their own,
the Takers have obscured the point of these stories and have made Leaver
culture even more invisible and diminished when compared with Taker
culture.
Ishmael has the narrator explain how the Leavers came to formulate these
stories about the Takers. The narrator explains that Leavers saw the Takers
as being crazy, acting in a way that was totally foreign to them. So, in order
to understand why the Takers were invading their land and taking it from
them, they had to figure out how they got to be the way they are. So, they
decided the Takers had taken the wisdom of the gods and were trying to use
it as their own and that the gods, upset with these Takers, had banished
them from the garden of life, forcing these people to get their food through
the hard work of farming.
Ishmael approves of the narrator's explanation and expands on it by saying
that this explains why agriculture is characterized as a curse in these stories,
for the Leavers could not understand why a people would want to work so
hard to subsist.
The narrator, however, still has a few questions. First, he asks why Cain is
the firstborn and Abel the second-born son. Ishmael and the narrator explore
this question and decide that Cain and Abel are to be interpreted
symbolically and that in many allegories it is the second son who is for a long
time overshadowed by the firstborn, becoming an underdog hero of sorts.
The narrator is also confused about Eve, since Eve's name doesn't mean
woman (as Adam's means man), but rather means life. Ishmael explains that
when the Takers took from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, they
made the decision to grow without limit. Thus, the person who offers them
this opportunity is called life. Ishmael says this idea is continually
perpetuated in Taker culture as Taker families see bearing children as a right,
regardless of overpopulation's effect on other life-forms.
Finally, Ishmael asks the narrator to reiterate what they've discussed. The
narrator stumbles along, trying to figure out how the story makes sense from
a Taker perspective. The best he can do is to suggest that the issue, in the
Taker perspective, is not the right to have the knowledge of the gods, but the
issue of disobedience Adam fell from grace not for the knowledge he
obtained, but for disobeying the gods' order. The narrator agrees with
Ishmael that the story makes much more sense when told from the Leavers'
perspective.
Analysis
In the final sections of Part 9, Quinn revisits the ideas presented earlier in
Part 9 by analyzing the Leaver-originated myths Ishmael and the narrator
have already discussed, looking at the symbolic features of characters in
these myths, and finally exploring how these myths have been appropriated
by Taker culture. First, Ishmael and the narrator analyze what they've learned
about the myths of The Fall and Cain and Abel so far. To begin, Ishmael asks
the narrator to explain how these myths came to be in the first place. The
narrator answers this question by explaining that the Leavers were trying to
work backward from the Takers behavior: the Takers are acting in a way no
one else does, how did they get to be this way? The myths thus serve to
explain Taker behavior. Thus, Ishmael helps the narrator to see how Leavers
saw the Takers as cursed (not special or blessed, as Takers see themselves).
Ishmael and the narrator's analysis intensifies through looking at the
symbolic qualities of the characters in the stories, mainly Cain, Abel, and
Eve. First, Cain and Abel are symbolic of brothers, and are not to be read as
actual human brothers. Thus, Abel becomes the overshadowed but righteous
younger brother featured in many allegories, and Cain the overbearing older
influences Ishmael's reaction to him when the narrator finally finds Ishmael
weeks later. Ishmael is cold, distant, and wary of the narrator's desire to fix
the situation. Ishmael's reaction to his new, caged life suggests that while he
wants to teach humans, he's also learned to distrust their benevolence and
resents his dependency on the kindness of humans in order to have a decent
life.
Additionally, Quinn employs the use of action and setting to heighten the
tension around Ishmael's disappearance. Recall that, for the most part, the
novel has taken place through the dialogue between the narrator and
Ishmael, heightening the sense of them as teacher and student, isolated
from real-world demands. Ishmael's disappearance and the narrator's
resulting search serve to place their philosophical discussions in a more
grounded setting: they are subject to the demands and challenges of the
world they've been discussing so thoroughly. Furthermore, Ishmael's new
location a cage in a traveling carnival helps the reader see why his
studies have been so important to him. Having grown up in captivity, Ishmael
understands the pain of having one's fate controlled and so he passionately
wants others (for example, his students) to understand not only the physical
but the cultural boundaries to their existence in order to help them achieve
the freedoms of which he is often deprived.
In closing, Quinn's use of characterization and focus on setting and action
add complexity to the themes Ishmael and the narrator have explored so far.
First, by calling into question Ishmael and the narrator's roles as teacher and
student, Quinn shows they are both fallible and that the topics they're
exploring are subject to and part of the difficulties they face outside their
student-teacher relationship. For instance, the narrator must work for a
living; Ishmael must pay his rent. These mundane responsibilities and
challenges are just as much a part of what Ishmael is trying to get the
narrator to understand that is, his cultural heritage and the state of the
world as the historical and anthropological ideas with which he presents
the narrator. Indeed, for the narrator to truly be able to help save the world,
he must learn to reconcile the demands of his daily life with his desire to be a
force of change in the world.
The narrator checks into a hotel near the carnival where Ishmael is caged to
try to figure out what to do next. He returns to the carnival later in the
evening and bribes a worker to let him spend some time alone with Ishmael.
Ishmael jumps right in where they left off. Quickly, they summarize what
they've covered so far: the Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel myths that are
at the roots of Taker culture. Their goal is to figure out what it all adds up to.
In order to help the narrator understand this, Ishmael asks him to define
culture. The narrator defines it as what's passed along from generation to
generation. For Leaver cultures, culture has evolved since the start of the
species and is passed down from generation to generation. For Taker
cultures, while some knowledge is passed down through the generations,
there's a value placed on newness and a rejection of ancient ways as out-ofdate and useless.
Ishmael praises the narrator's thinking and asks him when he thinks such
cultural amnesia began taking place. Through Ishmael's guidance, the
narrator understands that this amnesia has been part of Mother Culture's
teachings since the inception of Taker culture.
The narrator and Ishmael dig a little deeper to try to ascertain the different
types of information Taker and Leaver cultures transmit to new generations.
Taker cultures pass down to each generation ways to better produce things;
Leaver cultures pass down ways to live well for a particular culture. Through
this discovery, the narrator concludes that this is also why Taker cultures are
dependent on laws and prophets they want to know the one right way to
do things, not just a way among many. Thus, Ishmael helps the narrator see
that Leaver cultures are subject to evolution and have been evolving since
humankind formed on the planet and that, just as with many life-forms on
the planet, once they go extinct, a certain kind of knowledge is lost forever
with each one that vanishes.
Analysis
Upon returning to the philosophical focus of the novel, Quinn develops the
contrast between Taker and Leaver cultures through the ideas of cultural
amnesia, transmittal of knowledge, and evolution. First, Quinn uses the idea
of cultural amnesia to explain one of the essential differences between the
two cultural systems. In Taker cultures, inventiveness is valued over what's
tried and true. Thus, Ishmael explains that Mother Culture teaches Taker
culture to dismiss the old ways in favor of new ways, resulting in a culture
that experiences a sort of amnesia. In contrast, Leaver cultures value ancient
ways, and memory plays a vital role in the transmittal of cultural information
particularly how each generation lives and learns to live by learning from
the prior generation.
Additionally, each culture transmits some knowledge from generation to
generation, but that knowledge is very different for each culture. For Takers,
what is transmitted is knowledge of production, according to Ishmael. For
example, Takers transmit knowledge of agricultural production over the
centuries, constantly expanding and improving on the technology used to
grow crops. In contrast, Leaver cultures transmit knowledge about living well
and the way of life of a specific culture rather than the means of production
(agricultural or otherwise) that that culture uses. For example, as the
narrator points out, tribes, such as the Navajo, know what works for them as
a culture, but do not suggest that their way of life works for everyone.
Thus, Quinn uses the idea of evolution to further explain the differences
between Taker and Leaver cultures. In scientific terms, evolution is the
adaptation of a life-form to the environmental forces surrounding it; over
years and years, the life-form evolves to best deal with the environmental
factors each generation faces. In Leaver cultures, their cultural structures
evolved over centuries, much as an organism would, allowing their cultural
practices to adapt and support their livelihood in the environment in which
they find themselves. Taker culture, however, also evolves, though not in
response to environmental factors. Instead, it responds to its cultural beliefs
that man is made to rule the world and that everything in the culture is
designed to bring the environment under humankind's command.
The next day, the narrator and Ishmael resume their talk. Ishmael challenges
the narrator to think of why he wants to know the story Leaver cultures enact
now that he knows the Takers' story. At first, the narrator is unable to provide
a legitimate answer, but finally he realizes that he, like others who are
worried about the destruction of the world, needs a new story to enact it's
not enough to toss off the old one.
To begin their exploration of Leaver cultures, Ishmael asks the narrator what
Mother Culture would say the Agricultural Revolution was about. The narrator
says it's perceived as a purely technological development, whereas Ishmael
attests that it was much more than that. He says that Mother Culture also
teaches that life before the Agricultural Revolution was horrible and that to
live that way would be reprehensible. He suggests that the narrator and
everyone in Taker culture still holds this belief even the poorest members
of Taker culture, who may be homeless, jobless, and lacking opportunities to
improve their lives.
In order to help the narrator better understand Takers' dismissal of Leaver
lifestyles and Leavers' tenacious desire to keep their lifestyles, Ishmael takes
on the role of a Leaver and the narrator the role of a Taker trying to convince
the Leaver to adopt a Taker lifestyle, to give up hunting and gathering to
become a farmer. In their roles, the narrator and Ishmael go back and forth
and the narrator tries to convince Ishmael's "Leaver" persona that life will be
easier if he knows he always has food and doesn't have to worry about
finding it every day. Ishmael's character finds this insane as he's never
worried that food wouldn't be there the whole world is filled with food. If
no deer today, then rabbits, for instance. The narrator keeps pushing and
finally tells Ishmael that while he may have enough food, he doesn't have
enough to free himself from the gods from the fickleness of fate, so to
speak. He says that the gods are useless and that to have a better life,
Ishmael's character must take matters into his own hands, to ensure he has
food no matter what the gods let happen.
The narrator realizes that the point of Taker culture is to live outside the
hands of the "gods" that is, to no longer be subject to the rules that
orchestrate ecosystems and biological balance. Leavers, however, live
according to these rules and find it satisfying, as they never have to work too
hard to eat and accept the benefits and hardships of living according to the
laws of nature.
Analysis
Quinn employs the use of anecdote and role-playing to help Ishmael and the
narrator regain their teacher-student relationship and push the narrator to
more fully understand the philosophical ideas Ishmael presents. Ishmael uses
an anecdote to help the narrator understand his own way of thinking about
to save the world. Now that the narrator understands the historical
circumstances leading up to the current state of the world, he's at a loss for
what he's supposed to do about it. Ishmael suggests being a teacher. By
having Ishmael, as the teacher, suggest his student become one, Quinn
stresses the significance of student-teacher relationships as central to social
change. Thus, Ishmael and the narrator are not only representative of an
allegorical model of learning (similar to Socrates and his pupils, for instance)
but are also a model for cultural change, for, as Ishmael suggests to the
narrator, the only way to change people's actions is to start with their minds.
Furthermore, Quinn uses the metaphor of prison to help focus the narrator's
role as a teacher. Recall that earlier in the novel, Ishmael explained that one
of his motivations to educate himself was to better understand the idea of
captivity. Ishmael returns to the idea of a prison to remind the narrator of the
powerful ways Mother Culture hides the bars of her "prison." Thus, the
narrator must use his understanding of this prison to help his fellow prisoners
see what binds them to their ecologically destructive way of life. While the
narrator is overwhelmed by his task as a teacher, Ishmael's provided him
with useful metaphors, such as the prison, as well as the stories he's used in
his instruction, to help the narrator reach others as he himself was reached.
The next day, the narrator initiates his plan to rescue Ishmael from the
carnival. First, he must drive back to the city. On his way there, his car breaks
down. Once he gets it to a shop, he withdraws as much cash as he can from
all his accounts. With a little over two thousand dollars, he hopes to buy
Ishmael's freedom. He's not sure how he'll house and transport a gorilla, but
he has faith he'll figure it out.
A couple days later, he realizes he should rent a van since his car is in the
shop. He drives back to the carnival, only to find it has moved on. While at
the empty fairgrounds, one of the workers informs the narrator that Ishmael
died of pneumonia. The narrator is shocked and gathers up a few of
Ishmael's belongings that were left behind. He frames one of Ishmael's
posters and hangs it in his home.
Analysis
In this final section, the narrator is forced to come to terms with Ishmael's
death and his responsibility to carry on with Ishmael's teachings. The first
step the narrator must take is to realize his own culpability in Ishmael's
passing. For instance, he acknowledges that he was too self-absorbed during
their last meetings to see how sick Ishmael really was. Additionally, he calls
Mr. Sokolow's butler, Mr. Partridge, to tell him about Ishmael's death. During
the phone conversation, he chastises him for not helping him help Ishmael.
And, while Mr. Partridge helps the narrator see that Ishmael may not have let
them help him, the narrator comes to terms with his own short-sightedness.
In order to continue his growth, the narrator must take Ishmael's teachings
to heart and put them into practice. Quinn indicates this through the
narrator's inheritance of Ishmael's belongings. Through the gathering up of
Ishmael's notebooks and drawings, the narrator symbolically takes on the
role of teacher. However, aside from taking Ishmael's things, it's unclear
what the narrator will do next. Quinn ends the novel with the question of the
narrator's intentions unanswered as demonstrated through the narrator's
inspection of Ishmael's poster that says on the back, "With Gorilla Gone, Will
There Be Hope for Man." The novel ends with this question to the reader,
forcing the reader, along with the narrator, to contemplate what action
should come next after such philosophical debate and discussion.
Part Six
The next day, Ishmael begins the session by reiterating the Taker axiom that
knowledge about how to live is obtainable. Ishmael counters this axiom,
however, suggesting that one can find laws on how to live if one consults
whats actually there (96). He proceeds to uncover those laws with the
narrator.
N
Download a Free Audiobook
N
The strategy he employs is looking to the community of all life - and not just
the community of humans - to determine these laws. As example, he points
out that humans are as subject to laws like gravity and genetics as any other
creatures are. Therefore, the issue involves identifying which natural laws
might provide guidance on how to live.
The gods, according to Ishmael, played three tricks on the Takers, each of
which troubled Taker society because it contradicted Mother Culture's story.
The first was that the gods did not place the world at the center of the
universe, which challenges the idea of human centrality. Secondly, the gods
arranged for humans to evolve like any other species, thereby challenging
their feeling of uniqueness. And thirdly, the gods did not exempt man from
natural laws, laws which must be followed unless a species wishes to court
extinction. Over the centuries, the Takers adapted to these first two
discoveries, but they deem the third unforgivable.
To explain how Takers fallaciously believe themselves exempt from natural
laws, Ishmael compares Taker civilization to the first flying machines. An
airman testing one of those early machines might take off on it from a cliff
and believe that he is flying even as he is simply falling at a reduced rate. He
might see the ruins of failed machines on the ground below him, but he
simply wonders why they stopped trying to fly - he does not realize they
have crashed. Similarly, humans look at failed civilizations and simply
wonder why they stopped trying to succeed. Believing that their method of
living has worked thus far, Takers proudly persist in their way of life.
However, the truth is that we are heading for a crash, as we squander
irreplaceable resources while only a relative few people recognize the
danger.
Part Seven
Next, Ishmael presents the narrator with a puzzle. He asks him to imagine
living in a strange society that works extremely well. In this society, people
called As serve as food for those who are Bs. Similarly, Bs are food
for Cs, and then Cs for As. This society conforms to a law, which
allows them a friendly, peaceable existence. Ishmael asks the narrator how
he would discover what this law is, without asking the citizens directly.
The narrator decides that he would look at the society from two sides. First,
he must determine what makes the society work; second, he must determine
what they do not do. To help, Ishmael provides that one man has been found
guilty of breaking the law, and is sentenced to die. Assuming he has access
to that criminal's biography, the narrator concludes he would assess what
this man has done that nobody else in the society has done. Under those
three parameters, he could potentially discover the law.
Ishmael points out the world existed in harmony for 3 billion years until the
Takers (about 10,000 years ago) decided that man would no longer follow the
peace keeping law (118). In the wild, lions and gazelles are not enemies,
even if they hunt one another. Though the Takers might view them as
antagonists, a lion will only kill a gazelle to survive - that relationship reflects
the life cycle. Five hundred generations in, the Takers have the world on the
brink of death, but believe that the fault is an inherent flaw in humanity,
rather than their own choices.
Ishmael asks the narrator to leave and discover what this "peace keeping
law" is. When the narrator expresses doubt in his abilities, Ishmael reminds
him to use the parameters he discovered in the puzzle. If the law had not
been followed from the beginning of time, the Earth would have remained
barren. Like the criminal in the puzzle, one species (the Takers) has broken
the law, so the narrator must identify what they have done that others (the
Leavers and animals) have not.
That night, the narrator feels anxious and angry, but cannot initially identify
the reason. After a while, he realizes he is upset that his lessons with Ishmael
will eventually end, while he actually wants "a teacher for life" (122).
Analysis
In this section of the novel, Quinn continues derailing the common human
assumptions about civilization. One of the novel's most important allegories
is that of the early flying machines. The crux of the argument is that there is
a major difference between flying and falling, and civilization is currently in
the process of the latter. What makes the allegory so important is that it
reminds us that perspective is as important as action. We must first
recognize the truth is we are to enact change.
This point is important towards understanding Ishmael's point about the
three tricks that the gods played. The irony is that though humans consider
science to be their greatest achievement, the discoveries of science have