The Ironic End of "Harrison Bergeron" Revised Intro

“Harrison Bergeron”, written by Kurt Vonnegut, is a short story that tells of the ironic shortcomings of a seemingly perfect man who dies in the hands of his suppressive American government in 2081. Harrison Bergeron, born in a nation that makes equality the main focus of life, defies his oppressive government on live television by tearing off his handicaps that weigh him down and cloud his handsome figure. The suppresive government fights back by shooting him. Using Harrison Bergeron, Vonnegut toys with our expectations of the story’s end by adding irony to Harrison Bergeron’s actions to comment to those who believe that all civilizations should primarily focus on equality. Vonnegut uses Harrison Bergeron to show his audience how irony can change one’s perception of the future, and how irony can be used to show the hidden truth behind the clouded expectations.

“Harrison Bergeron”, a short story written by Kurt Vonnegut, tells of a seemingly perfect man who ironically dies at the hands of his oppressive American government in 2081. Harrison Bergeron, born in a nation that makes equality the main focus of life, defies his oppressive government by tearing off his handicaps to show the world that a government created around equality hinders progress and the drive to shine above rest. The oppressive American government fights back by shooting him on live television to show everyone that death is the result of inequality. Vonnegut toys with our expectations throughout the story by portraying Harrison Bergeron as an incredible, indestructable hero who can defy a nation and its rules but is killed in an instant by a handicapped woman with a shotgun. Using Harrison Bergeron, Vonnegut shows his audience that if equality became the main focus of government, progress stalls, and we lose our greatest advantage above all other creatures, our imagination.

Fear and Love of a Familiar Face

In Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”, Act 1 Scene 5, Hamlet realizes he must murder his uncle to redeem his father’s his fathers good name and bring to light the evils of the recently crowned, King Claudius. As the ghost of Hamlet’s father speaks to Hamlet, the ghost explains that he was murdered by Claudius, and that Hamlet should, “let not the royal bed of Denmark be/A couch for luxury and damnéd incest” (1.5.89-90). The ghost is setting up Hamlet’s mission and motivation to commit treason to save his father from his firey. Branagh tries to portray Hamlet as a Prince and son who is afraid, moved, and appauled by the sight of his dead father and by the image of his uncle killing his father. Branagh is trying to set up Hamlet’s motivation for killing the King by giving Hamlet a warm, touching sight (his father) while still keeping the tone serious so Hamlet completes his mission (the ghost’s armor and facial expression). Also, Old Hamlet tells of his time in purgatory and the flames and pains that are washing away his sins. This painful description of Hamlet’s father’s pain urges Hamlet to act more quickly to save his father from suffering by setting the truth free about the murder of the old king. Though difficult, Branagh portrays Hamlet as speaking to a ghost, whom he loves, and bad omen of chaos to come. This portrayal is difficult to act because no one really knows how they would act in front of a ghost who represents love and turmoil. This scene is setting up the main climax of the story when, hopefully, Hamlet kills his uncle and sets his father’s soul free from the pains and sufferings of purgatory. Hamlet makes sure no one else hears of the ghost and the presence of Old Hamlet to make sure Claudius is vulnerable to attack and set the State of Denmark right.

Deception Within the Throne

In William Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”, Claudius, the new King of Denmark, has just married the widowed Queen of Denmark, who is also the mother of Prince Hamlet. Claudius seems to be a kind and respectable kind on the outside, but Hamlet believes him to be devious and greedy. I agree with Hamlet’s ideas of Claudius because Claudius married the grief-striken Queen when the King was, “But two months dead—nay, not so much, not two.” (1.2.142) Hamlet is resentful of his mother’s quick marriage after his father’s recent death. Claudius, uncle of Hamlet, wanted the power of the throne and couldn’t wait to take it no matter the rudeness or suddenty of his rise to power. Claudius wants everyone to believe he is a kind, noble king, whereas, I believe him to be a selfish King with a love for Hamlet. His kindness only reaches so far when he denies Hamlet’s request to go to Wittenberg to study by telling Hamlet, “we beseech you, bend you to remain/Here in the cheer and comfort of our eye,/Our chiefest courtier, cousin, and our son.” (1.2.119-121) I believe he is only saying this so he can watch over his heir to the throne to prevent any treasous actions and ideas. Claudius even convinces Gertrude, the Queen, to agree to try and convince Hamlet to stay. Notice, Hamlet only agrees to stay after his mother asks not his King. “I shall in all my best obey you, madam.” (1.2.124) Hamlet even address that he is only staying because his mother asked him to by saying “madam”. Hamlet believes Claudius to be abbusive to a frail woman like his mother by marring her in her time of weakness. Hamlet detects that, even while old King Hamlet was alive, Gertrude was still emotionally and physically frail, and she clung to him for support. But, once he died, the Queen clings to another power, Claudius. Hamlet, though he is disappointed with his mother’s stability, agrees to her requests though these requests come from the mouth of Claudius. He is using Gertrude as a puppet; the only puppet/ person Hamlet will listen to. Claudius, while he is kind to most, uses Gertrude to get what he wants from Hamlet and wants Hamlet to be his pawn that he can summon whenever just like his mother. I believe Claudius to be a cunning, deceptive man, who is trying to take control of Denmark due to his greed and power-hunger.

The Ironic End of “Harrison Bergeron”

 “Harrison Bergeron”, written by Kurt Vonnegut, is a short story that tells of the ironic shortcomings of a seemingly perfect man who dies in the hands of his suppressive American government in 2081. Harrison Bergeron, born in a nation that makes equality the main focus of life, defies his suppressive government on live television by tearing off his handicaps that weigh him down and cloud his handsome figure. The suppressive government fights back by making his perfect body equal to everyone else’s by shooting him. Using Harrison Bergeron, Vonnegut toys with our expectations of the story’s end by adding irony to Harrison Bergeron’s actions to comment to those who believe that all civilizations should primarily focus on equality. Vonnegut uses Harrison Bergeron to show his audience how irony can change one’s perception of the future, and how irony can be used to show the hidden truth behind the clouded expectations.

  In Harrison Bergeron’s world, equality is treated as the focus of civilization, and through suppression and handicaps, people are forced to be average and equal. As for Harrison Bergeron’s parents, his father, George, has a device in his ear that transmits a noise to make it hard to concentrate and remember, and his mother, Hazel, is an average woman who has little to no handicaps. For Harrison Bergeron, Vonnegut creates a world in which his individuality cannot be expressed by law and are looked down upon to the point in which he cannot contain himself, and he dies trying to become emperor. These handicaps and suppresion show us that in Harrison Bergeron’s world, people are controlled and forced to not be the best that they can be by the government. Vonnegut wants us to see that any revolt against these laws is against the norm and can result in severe punishment.

Vonnegut’s set up of this world, where equality is valued above all else, leads into an ironic end where Harrison Bergeron dies, and his parents, because of their handicaps, can’t remember that their son was shot and killed on live TV. Using the fact that equality is treated above all else, Vonnegut creates many instances of tragic irony that seem harsher than most life in America today . One example of irony would be when Harrison Bergeron declares himself emperor and tears off his disabilities but dies in the end, leaving his parents heart broken until their disabilities make them forget what they just saw and their sorrow. Geroge asks his wife, “‘You been crying?’ he said to Hazel. / ‘Yup,’ she said, / ‘What about?’ he said. / ‘I forget,’ she said” (Vonnegut 6). This excerpt shows that no matter how terrible or how hard people try to remember their handicaps stop them from thinking too deeply into sadness and the flaws of their government. The parents’ forgetfulness of this tragic moment shows that the government, making equality the highest priority, doesn’t make families and neighbors stronger; it hurts and weakens them to the point that people can’t remember that their own child has just died. On a broader scale than just the Bergerons, Americans all wanted equality so badly that they sacrificed everything for it. Ironically, the desire for equality caused the dearth of freedom for all Americans and the suppression of individuality and imagination. Americans were giving up the morals that made them great for the imaginative idea of equality. Vonnegut uses these examples of irony to twist our perception of the ending and show us, in Vonnegut’s opinion, the true path that a government based upon equality will go.

Vonnegut uses the irony within “Harrison Bergeron” as a tool to make a comment to those who believe equality should be the focus of any civilization. Vonnegut uses irony as a tool to show us that our expectations might lead us astray and the truth might be what we least expect. With irony, he tells a story of how a nation, once prosperous with great minds and inventors, can be changed so dramatically for what all thought was the “greater good”. This misperception of the “greater good” is what Vonnegut is trying to tell those who believe pure equality is the key to happiness. Today, we live in a innovative democracy, while Harrison Bergeron lives in a suppressive oligarchy within the same nation and land but within different times and different morals.