|
©
Humanist, Nov 92, Vol. 52:6.5-6.
Why
My Dog Is Not a Humanist
by Kurt
Vonnegut
The
1992 Humanist of the Year ponders the many meanings
of "humanism" Kurt Vonnegut is honorary
president of the American Humanist Association. On
May 1, 1996, in Portland, Oregon, Vonnegut accepted
the American Humanist of the Year Award. What follows
is the text of this acceptance speech.
I
was once a Boy Scout. The motto of the Boy Scouts, as
you know, is ''Be Prepared'' So, several years ago I
wrote a speech to be delivered in the event that I won
the Nobel Prize for Literature.
It
was only eight words long. I think I had better use
it here. "Use it or lose it:" as the saying
goes.
This
is it: ''You have made me an old, old man''
I
think I got this great honor because I've lasted so
long. I dare to say of humanism what Lyndon Johnson
said of politics. He said, ''Politics ain't hard. You
just hang around and go to funerals.''
Forgive
me if I am not solemn about my award tonight. I am here
for your companionship and not any award.
Nicholas
Murray Butler, the late president of Columbia University,
was said by H. L. Mencken to have received more honorary
degrees and medals and citations and so on than anyone
else then on the planet. Mencken declared that all that
remained to be done for him was to wrap him in sheet
gold and burnish him until he blinded the sun itself.
This
is not the first time I have been accused of being a
humanist. All of 25 years ago, when I was teaching at
the University of Iowa, a student all of a sudden said
to me, ''I hear you're a humanist.''
I
said, "Oh, yeah? What's a humanist?"
He
said, ''That what I'm asking you. Aren't you getting
paid to answer questions like that?''
I
pointed out that my salary was a very modest one. I
then gave him the names of several full professors who
were making a heck of a lot more money than I was and
who were doctors of philosophy besides--which I sure
as heck wasn't, and which I am not now.
But
his accusation stuck in my craw. And in the process
of trying to cough it up so I could look at it, it occurred
to me that a humanist, perhaps, was somebody who was
crazy about human beings, who, like Will Rogers, had
never met one he didn't like.
That
certainly did not describe me.
It
did describe my dog, though. His name was Sandy, although
he wasn't a Scotsman. He was a puli--a Hungarian sheepdog
with a face full of hair. I am a German, with a face
full of hair.
I
took Sandy to the little zoo in Iowa City. I expected
him to enjoy the buffalo and the prairie dogs and the
raccoons and the possoms and the foxes and the wolves
and so on, and especially their stinks, which in the
case of the buffalo were absolutely overwhelming.
But
all Sandy paid any attention to was people, his tail
wagging all the time. What a person looked like or smelled
like didn't matter to Sandy. It could be a baby. It
could be a drunk who hated dogs. It could be a young
woman as voluptuous as Marilyn Monroe. It could have
been Hitler. It could have been Eleanor Roosevelt. Whoever
it was, Sandy would have wagged his tail.
I
disqualified him as a humanist, though, after reading
in the Encyclopedia Britannica that humanists were inspired
by ancient Greece and Rome at their most rational, and
by the Renaissance. No dog, not even Rin Tin Tin or
Lassie, has ever been that. Humanists, moreover, I learned,
were strikingly secular in their interests and enthusiasms,
did not try to factor God Almighty into their equations,
so to speak, along with all that could be seen and heard
and felt and smelled and tasted in the here and now.
Sandy obviously worshipped not just me but simply any
person as though he or she were the creator and manager
of the universe.
He
was simply too dumb to be a humanist.
Sir
Isaac Newton, incidentally, did think that was a reason
able thing to do--to factor in a conventional God Almighty,
along with whatever else might be going on. I don't
believe Benjamin Franklin ever did. Charles Darwin pretended
to do that, because of his place in polite society.
But he was obviously very happy, after his visit to
the Galapagos Islands, to give up that pretense. That
was only 150 years ago.
As
long as I've mentioned Franklin, let me digress a moment.
He was a Freemason, as were Voltaire and Frederick the
Great, and so were Washington and Jefferson and Madison.
Most
of us here, I guess, would be honored if it was said
that such great human beings were our spiritual ancestors.
So why isn't this a gathering of Freemasons?
Can
somebody here, after this speech, if you don't mind,
tell me what went wrong with Freemasonry?
This
much I think I understand: in Franklin's time--and in
Voltaire's--Freemasonry was perceived as being anti
Catholic. To be a Freemason was cause for excommunication
from the Roman Catholic Church.
As
the Roman Catholic population of this country grew by
leaps and bounds, to be anti Catholic--in New York and
Chicago and Boston, at least--was political suicide.
It was also business suicide.
None
of my real ancestors, blood ancestors, genetic ancestors
in this country--every one of them of German decent--was
a Freemason, so far as I know, and I am the fourth generation
Vonnegut to be born here. Before World War I, though,
a lot of them took part in the activities of a highly
respectable but not impossibly serious organization
much like this one, which they called ''the Freethinkers.''
There
are a few Americans who call themselves that still--some
of you in this room, no doubt. But the Freethinkers
no longer exist as an organized presence of which communities
are aware. This is because the movement was so overwhelmingly
German American, and most German Americans found it
prudent to abandon all activities that might make them
seem apart from the general population when we entered
World War I. Many Freethinkers, incidentally, were German
Jews.
My
great grandfather Clemens Vonnegut, an immigrant merchant
from Munster, became a Freethinker after reading Darwin.
In Indianapolis, there is a public school named after
him. He was head of the school board there for many
years.
So
the sort of humanism I represent, to which I am an heir,
draws energy not from the Renaissance or from an idealized
pre Christian Greece and Rome but, rather, from very
recent scientific discoveries and modes of seeking truth.
I
myself at one time tried to become a biochemist--as
did our darling, terribly missed brother Isaac Asimov.
He actually became one. I didn't have a chance. He was
smarter than me. We both knew that, incidentally. He
is in heaven now.
My
paternal grandfather and father were both architects,
restructuring the reality of Indianapolis with meticulously
measured quantities of materials whose presence--unlike
that of a conventional God Almighty--could not be doubted:
wood and steel, sand and lime and stone, copper, brass,
bricks.
My
only surviving sibling, Dr. Bernard Vonnegut, eight
years my senior, is a physical chemist who thinks and
thinks about the distribution of electrical charges
in thunderstorms.
But
now my big brother, like Isaac Asimov near the end of
his life, surely, and like most of us here, has to admit
that the fruits of science so far, put into the hands
of governments, have turned out to be cruelties and
stupidities exceeding by far those of the Spanish Inquisition
and Genghis Khan and Ivan the Terrible and most of the
demented Roman emperors, not excepting Heliogabalus.
Heliogabalus
had a hollow iron bull in his banquet hall that had
a door in its side. Its mouth was a hole, so sound could
get out. He would have a human being put inside the
bull and then a fire built on a hearth under its belly,
so that the guests at his banquets would be entertained
by the noises the bull made.
We
modern humans roast people alive, tear their arms and
legs off, or whatever, using airplanes or missile launchers
or ships or artillery batteries--and do not hear their
screams.
When
I was a little boy in Indianapolis, I used to be thankful
that there were no longer torture chambers with iron
maidens and racks and thumbscrews and Spanish boots
and so on. But there may be more of them now than ever--not
in this country but elsewhere, often in countries we
call our friends. Ask the Human Rights Watch. Ask Amnesty
International if this isn't so. Don't ask the U.S. State
Department.
And
the horrors of those torture chambers--their powers
of persuasion--have been upgraded, like those of warfare,
by applied science, by the domestication of electricity
and the de tailed understanding of the human nervous
system, and so on.
Napalm,
incidentally, is a gift to civilization from the chemistry
department of Harvard University.
So
science is yet another human made God to which I, unless
in a satirical mood, an ironical mood, a lampooning
mood, need not genuflect.
©
Humanist, Nov 92, Vol. 52:6.5-6.
|