Originally written on 10 November 2020

Despite the objective mysteriousness of the future and its definitive prospects, Americans occupy their time with considerations and predictions about the future quite often. In fact, 48% of people’s thoughts are devoted to future-oriented thinking; this totals more thinking time than that devoted to the past and present combined.

There is a fair share of people with optimistic and pessimistic views, but the majority allegedly possess fears of what is to come. Twice as many Americans express worry when looking into the future than those who do not, with 72% of Americans acknowledging a likelihood for notions such as technology and the government to become destructive to the human race.

Common humane desires are also questionable notions in futuristic examinations. Equality is a concept among them, as people voice their wishes for an entirely equal society, where everyone is viewed and treated alike. However, such a notion could become unimaginably faceted with pitfalls, at least if taken literally. It happens that the government has quite the power when it comes to these matters, and there is evidently the plausibility for abuse of power that frankly follows any entity that holds a similar degree of control.

These theoretical issues and futuristic curiosities are bundled together in 20th-century author Kurt Vonnegut’s short story, “Harrison Bergeron” through prognostication, a telling of the future. In order to direct people’s attention to the possible dangers ahead, Vonnegut offers an exhaustive list of warnings for the foreseeable future, and these warnings include the dangers of literal equality across people and the possibility of a tyrannical government, but perhaps, more precisely, he displays the image and logistics of a society existing with the former and the latter simultaneously.

If one is too good-looking, they must wear “hideous” masks, so they can appear uglier.

Vonnegut, the American novelist is best known for his satirical, sarcastic, and futuristic focus. Much of his themes will “highlight the horrors and ironies of 20th-century civilization.” These ideas aid well in the fact that “Harrison Bergeron” is a satirically-written story.

In the dystopian science-fiction short story published in 1961, Vonnegut portrays a setting where utter equality exists. The story takes place in the year 2081, with every human being made entirely equal to one another, and therefore, any potential for competition is diminished.

This world is made out to be entirely under the control of the government, with every person restrained from being themselves in one way or another. They are forced to wear handicaps that are variegated based on the strengths of every individual. If one is too physically strong, they wear heavier weights on their bodies than others, keeping them from performing above the average level—average being defined by the government. If one is too good-looking, they must wear “hideous” masks, so they can appear uglier. This world is dominated by the government in terms of the rights, abilities, and freedom of the public.

Early on in the story, George Bergeron, the father of Harrison Bergeron and the husband of Hazel Bergeron, is watching televised ballet dancers, one of the only available broadcasts, and the narrator said, “They weren’t really very good-no better than anybody else would have been, anyway. They were burdened with sashweights and bags of birdshot, and their faces were masked, so that no one, seeing a free and graceful gesture or a pretty face, would feel like something the cat drug in.” The ballerinas were required to wear masks, and, as indicated here, the purpose was to steer away from causing envy in viewers.

Professor of English at the University of Central Oklahoma Lexi Stuckey mentioned a note Vonnegut revealed about his own interpretation of his story. Vonnegut stated, “’I can’t be sure, but there is a possibility that my story ‘Harrison Bergeron’ is about the envy and self-pity I felt in an over-achievers’ high school in Indianapolis quite a while ago now’” (86). Hence, he conveys the idea that envy plays a notable role in “Harrison Bergeron” and it may have been inspired by his own experiences.

If envy is possible, so is inspiration, which can result in competition, which would warrant specialization, diversity, and the need for qualifications. However, all of these results would deem a society unequal because occupants will all be at different levels in every aspect of life. Therefore, in order to ensure equality, everyone must literally be equal.

Yet, as noted, several crucial components of the efficacy and pleasurableness of a society are diminished in this world. For starters, individuality is a goner. If everyone is entirely alike in capacity, there will be little to no difference across people.

There will never be another original thought and therefore, no advancements or steps forward.

George and Hazel Bergeron are alike in that they both cannot retain a thought for very long. George was an intellect prior to being handicapped, and individuals like him are more heavily capped so they are no longer capable of behaving above average. “Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn’t think about anything except in short bursts.”

Both of them struggled to communicate with one another or remember virtually anything after its occurrence. For instance, their son, Harrison was murdered before their eyes on national television, and they were not able to recognize him or understand what they had seen.

Moreover, the equal society that Vonnegut portrays also lacks any moderate form of education or potential for advancement. Regular jobs cannot exist because applicants have to be qualified, and if everyone is the same, one of two things can happen: everyone is qualified and gets hired or no one is qualified, and no one gets hired. Illinois State University English student Sara Denovellis suggested in a reaction to this analysis that society becomes “pointless, stagnant, and has no direction.” There will never be another original thought and therefore, no advancements or steps forward.

Into the bargain, researcher Dr. Tracy L. Cross explored a comparison between Vonnegut’s narrative and young, gifted students in the classroom. She decided that a world like the one in “Harrison Bergeron” is presenting itself in today’s academic society. Dr. Cross defined equality under the eyes of the government as “…meaning the same for everyone—everyone being held to the same (single) standard” (15).

She then shifted to the gifted students in schools and how they cannot excel in without challenges or the space to host accomplishments. “Using that same understanding when thinking about the educational needs of students with gifts and talents creates an unnecessary limitation on their intellectual growth. Moreover, it can cause issues in their psychological well-being” (15). And what about recognition, and positive reinforcement, or just the idea of rewarding achievement? This is all being torn down at the hands of the mission to treat all students equally, regardless of their efforts and excellence amongst other students.

Dr. Cross examined the obstructions these students face in schools where curricula and laws attempt to close the achievement gap and eliminate competition to savor other children’s self-esteems. In “Harrison Bergeron,” every human being is doomed to live naïve and limited. She declared that students rightfully establish in their academic performance that their accomplishments and potentials are highly dissimilar compared to peers, thus revealing that there cannot be a single way that students are viewed and taught in school.

Hence, to level off the classroom is to undermine and harm the minds of the gifted and demand too much of other students. The goal of schools [and society] should be “…to maximize the potential of all students [or all people], and not to merely meet minimum competencies” (Cross 15). In “Harrison Bergeron,” all people must do the opposite of Cross’s suggestions and meet a minimum level of intelligence.

As implied, not all students learn equally, and thus, not all students should be held to the same standards. One student in a classroom may be struggling to keep up, while another may feel they are breezing through classes, and what Dr. Cross argued is that, in both cases, the students are not learning, or rather, not maximizing their potential.

Conformity then parallels equality. “The hive mind quality of the citizens shows how equality could slip into conformity” (Denovellis). If everyone conforms, everyone is equal, and vice versa. Conformity could, in fact, be a necessary and sufficient condition for equality. This is clearly seen in the story, as all individuals abide by the laws and never remove their handicaps no matter the circumstance, including George and Hazel.

In the middle of the story, the two engage in a conversation. Hazel eventually notices how tired George is, so she advises him to remove his weights. George responds by exclaiming he does not believe it is worth the act. “’If I tried to get away with it[…],then other people’d get away with it-and pretty soon we’d be right back to the dark ages again, with everybody competing against everybody else. You wouldn’t like that, would you?” George fears societal demise resulting from such a minor form of disobedience.

It is also important to note that the reference George makes to the “dark ages” of competition is a reference to current society, as the story takes place about six decades from today. Nevertheless, the two eventually agree that engaging in such rebellion would spark a domino effect and harm the ‘perfect’ world they are in.

Another one of Vonnegut’s illustrations eludes to governmental control, their use of brainwashing, and the infliction of oppression. Vonnegut expresses the notion of an excessive, insensible government along with the response of the government to rebellion.

If anything were to be informative, watchers could learn something and, therefore have an advantage over others, which would create an unequal society.

According to an article in Psychology Today, written works in dystopian fiction often have a futuristic perspective, where governmental rule takes a toll on society. The article states that, in these fictional stories, “…the future is frequently a place of impending catastrophe or, just as often, one in which the individual will be crushed under the foot of a totalitarian regime.” The government in the story has complete control over all that people endure, and the condition at which residents of 2081 are living is arguably catastrophically restrictive.

For starters, there is a $2,000 fine for every bead removed from handicapped weights, plus a two-year prison sentence. In addition, anything aired on television must be simple and noneducational. If anything were to be informative, watchers could learn something and, therefore have an advantage over others, which would create an unequal society, apparently.

The government works to brainwash people and make them ignorant to what is truly happening. Governmental figures anywhere that have the agency to influence much of the societal perspective can be flawed, warranting a civil need to question authority, and Vonnegut portrays the process.

This is where he is shot in front of the nation for his acts, and no one watching was able to recall what they had seen.

Harrison, whom the story is named after, has been jailed for attempting to overthrow the government. He is handicapped very heavily due to his innate mental and physical abilities. It is implicit to readers that Harrison is one of the only people in this world that sees through the corruption everyone else is blind to.

At the end of the story, he manages to escape his prison cell and works his way onto the stage full of ballerinas on live television. An announcer appears to try and relay the news of Harrison’s appearance but cannot finish due to his mental handicap, keeping them from being able to speak properly “…since the announcer, like all announcers, had a serious speech impediment. For about half a minute, and in a state of high excitement, the announcer tried to say, ‘Ladies and Gentlemen.'”

A ballerina takes over and reads the script, announcing, “’Harrison Bergeron, age fourteen,’ she said in a grackle squawk, ‘has just escaped from jail, where he was held on suspicion of plotting to overthrow the government. He is a genius and an athlete, is under-handicapped, and should be regarded as extremely dangerous.”

The only reason he is regarded as “extremely dangerous” is because he is exceedingly talented and above average, as clarified by her note that he is a genius and an athlete, both attributes deemed admirable in today’s society. He grabs the microphone from the ballerina and makes statements of mockery toward the government and its regulations. He removes all his handicaps and lures one of the ballerinas to do the same with him. He is demonstrating an active protest and hoping to spark change. This is where he is shot in front of the nation for his acts, and no one watching was able to recall what they had seen.

…the government hopes to keep individuals at a capacity below that which allows them to question and critically think in order to maintain their views of the world being adequate the way it is.

The entire occurrence of Harrison dying is disregarded by the government, the public, and even his own parents. Vonnegut provides clarity to the idea of media distortion and regulation that works to bar certain reports or information from being publicly aired and shared while solely allowing selective transmission. This resorts back to the constraining handicaps, which stifle people from recollecting or functioning properly in general, and this allows the government to further its acts successfully since no one is capable of noticing.

In many societies, this type of regulation is reflected. Scott Gehlbach and Konstantin Sonin, researchers from the University of Wisconsin-Madison published an article titled “Government Control of the Media” stating just these facts. They claimed “…the government uses the media to mobilize citizens in support of actions that may not be in their individual best interest” (1). In the case of the world of “Harrison Bergeron,” the government hopes to keep individuals at a capacity below that which allows them to question and critically think in order to maintain their views of the world being adequate the way it is.

It also becomes evident Vonnegut is depicting rebellion as an idea that can warrant capital punishment. In some ways, he evokes critical societal ideals while also demonstrating what he sees in the government and what is possible. Most civil disobedience is done for a purpose that is in opposition to something endured by the people, and whether sensible or not, the idea of such disobedience is considered a form of free speech and advocacy for injustice and, thus, should be permissible, as civilians wish to voice their concerns, and alternatives are much less effective at obtaining the attention of policymakers, which is the ultimate goal. In the United States, such actions are permissible to a certain degree, but this is not true for all societies.

In the story, Harrison erupts after being imprisoned for denying the laws of the government to be weighed down. His escape from incarceration and public outing was a protest against their heavy restrictions, both physical and otherwise, and Harrison was killed for this… on live television.

In Iran, over 300 people have been killed and thousands incarcerated as of Septemeber 2022 during their participations in protests against their government following the killing of a woman for not wearing a hijab, an Islamic scarf that covers the hair, the proper way. Hence, the brutality and injustice Harrison endured is not a foreign occurrence in the real world, and headlines on such happenings have only been on the rise.

Acts like these by governments signal the use of extensive power and control over citizens. When considering the fact that citizens like those in Iran are advocating for change and being murdered for their well-intentioned objections, the government abusing their power and eliminating the voice of civilians becomes even more likely.

Vonnegut most likely intended for the audience to acknowledge Harrison’s rebellious quality; he contends that, although outwardly going against corrupt authority may be essential to the wellness of the mass’s living conditions, it could also be very dangerous, so those considering should proceed with caution… or otherwise commit to serving as a sacrifice for the greater good and hope their suffering translates to their desired change and is not glossed over, as in “Harrison Bergeron.”

Readers are taken through a series of plausible scenarios in the future, demonstrating an array of possibilities inspired by the now. Since the story takes place in 2081, it is hypothetical based on current realities and possibilities. Vonnegut took into account several different factors including corrupt government and/or authority, blind followers and a lack of critical thinking, technological destruction, and the dire desire of people to live in an equal society, and the potential consequences of this happening.

While his story is highly interpretable, two of the most prominent messages are regarding equality under the law and a world regulated entirely by governmental rule. He warns readers of what is foreseeable. Thus, with his short story, he is in the midst of an attempt to open eyes to critically considering societal dreams, such as that of a perfectly equal world, and caution the world of detrimental ventures of the governmental figure, that could end in a vacuous people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References (MLA) 

Cross, Tracy L. “Disrupting Social Contracts That Affect Gifted Students: An Homage to Harrison Bergeron.” Gifted Child Today, vol. 32, no. 4, Fall 2009, pp. 14–15. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1177/107621750903200406.

Denovellis, Sara. Peer Review of “Kurt Vonnegut’s Warnings for the Future.” English 130—Illinois State University. 9 Nov. 2020

Gehlbach, Scott, and Konstantin Sonin. “Government Control of the Media.” Journal of Public Economics, vol. 118, Oct. 2014, pp. 163–171. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eoh&AN=1469599&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

“Kurt Vonnegut.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 7 Nov. 2020, http://www.britannica.com/biography/Kurt-Vonnegut.

Mendonca, Duarte, et al. “At Least 326 Killed in Iran Protests, Human Rights Group Claims.” CNN, Cable News Network, 13 Nov. 2022, https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/12/middleeast/iran-protests-death-toll-intl-hnk/index.html.

Samuel, Lawrence R. “Why Do We Think So Much of the Future?” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 9 Aug. 2018, http://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/future-trends/201808/why-do-we-think-so-much-the-future. 

Smith, Aaron, and Monica Anderson. “Americans and Automation in Everyday Life.” Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech, Pew Research Center, 6 Aug. 2020, http://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2017/10/04/automation-in-everyday-life/. 

Stuckey, Lexi. “Teaching Conformity in Kurt Vonnegut’s ‘Harrison Bergeron.’.” Eureka Studies in Teaching Short Fiction., vol. 7, no. 1, Eureka College, Oct. 2006, pp. 85–90.

TEDx Talks. How to Get Your Brain to Focus | Chris Bailey | TEDxManchester. Performance by Chris Bailey, Youtube, 5 Apr. 2019, youtu.be/Hu4Yvq-g7_Y.

Vonnegut, Kurt. Harrison Bergeron, 1961, http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html.