Never Let Me Go Section 4

"I just waited a bit, then turned back to the car, to drive off to wherever it was I was supposed to be" (Ishiguro, 288).  The conclusion to Never Let Me Go is open-ended.  Kathy, who was depicted as the main character, has very little closure in the end.  The reader never sees her become a donor which the novel consistently acknowledges the importance of in a student's life.  Therefore, the reader learns the plot of the story has nothing to do with the development of Kathy as a student.  Instead, the main point is to convey a message of morals.  Never Let Me Go looks at the morality of society and how something good like saving someone you love can be equally bad at the same time.  Though they were destined to die young, they still achieved something through living with purpose.  Additionally, Kathy shows a desire to achieve closure in her life as she lives constantly in her memory world.  Therefore, the open conclusion is ironic in that the audience will not know what happened to her after her carer days.  Much of Kathy's story reminded me of the song "Born To Die" by Lana Del Rey.    

Never Let Me Go Section 4

Ruth remains true to a single characterization until she, Tommy, and Kathy are on their way back from Kingsfield.  At this moment, her character gains much more complexity.  She claims she kept Tommy and Kathy from being with each other which is how it should have been all along.  She expects the both of them to resent her for it as well.  But, the reader sees that she only wanted the best for them.  She discovers Madame's address and offers it to them.  The old Ruth would have taken both the address and Tommy even though they were never really in love.  As time has gone by, Ruth has learned to value her friendships more and express compassion.  The reader is incline to be skeptical of Ruth and her actions throughout the development of the novel.  With one moment of confession and repentance, all the skepticism is washed away and all the foreshadowing hinting at a relationship between Kathy and Tommy proven true  Then, in her own fashion, she challenges them.  "'You and Tommy, you've got to try and get a deferral.  If it's you two, there's got to be chance.  A real chance'" (Ishiguro, 233). 

Never Let Me Go Section 4

Never Let Me Go has a motif of expectations most of which go unfulfilled.  Ruth expects Tommy and Kathy to get a deferral and be with each other as long as possible.  Tommy and Kathy suspect that Madame hates them.  Most students, especially Hailsham students, believe in the idea of deferrals.  They never doubt the importance of the Gallery and what it could do for them.  They are led, rightfully, to believe they are worthy.  In their conversation with Madame and Miss Emily, Kathy and Tommy discover they have been proven wrong.  Deferrals do not exist.  Madame does not actually hate them.  The Gallery essentially accomplished nothing, and their lives had little to no meaning--outside of being donors--to the world.  Why, then, were they led to hope?  Miss Emily, again, gives the answer and addresses another theme.  Hope is better than despair; one lives a better life thinking things will be better than knowing they will not.  Though the end result to their lives are the same, the Hailsham students have something more than the other students in the end.  "'I can see,' Miss Emily said, 'that it might look as though you were simply pawns in a game.  It can certainly be looked at like that. But think of it.  You were lucky pawns'" (Ishiguro, 266).  Though this is a paradox, it serves true for the children.  Though their lives were destined to be tragic and they knew it, they still had hope which is better than nothing at all.

Never Let Me Go Section 4

Various people throughout the world support the ideology "kill one, save a thousand."  The novel Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro poses a similar, yet more radical question: what about kill one, save one?  This question begs yet another question: Who?  Would people be willing to allow the death of someone they do not know in order to save someone they love?  This novel attempts to answer this question in an almost futuristic manner.  Society does not want to be reminded that these "donors" exist which demonstrates a sense of guilt and regret for allowing such a society to manifest.  The question Miss Emily poses in Section 4 of the novel ironically serves as an all-encompassing answer.  She says, "How can you ask a world that has come to regard cancer as curable, how can you ask such a world top put away that cure, to go back to the dark days?  There was no going back.  However, uncomfortable people were about your existence, their overwhelming concern was that their own children, their spouses, their parents, their friend, did not die from cancer, motor neuron disease, heart disease" (Ishiguro, 263).  Here, Miss Emily answers all of the proposed questions.  If one is selfish, then it is worth it to kill one in order to save another.  It does not matter who is being killed so long as they are placed on the margins of society and as far from one's thoughts as possible.  Finally, a world that has been given an elixir will never be able to put it away or give it back, and such behavior would not be expected.  With this theme, the novel appears to offer a warning: do not let something like this happen because there is no way back once the world has gone there.