Evolutionary Philosophy
  • Home
  • Worldview
    • Epistemology
    • Metaphysics
    • Logic
    • Ethics
    • Politics
    • Aesthetics
  • Applied
    • Know Thyself
    • 10 Tenets
    • Survival of the Fittest Philosophers >
      • Ancient Philosophy (Pre 450 CE)
      • Medieval Philosophy (450-1600 CE)
      • Modern Philosophy (1600-1920 CE)
      • Contemporary Philosophy (Post 1920 CE)
    • 100 Thought Experiments
    • Elsewhere
  • Fiction
    • Draining the Swamp >
      • Further Q&A
    • Short Stories
    • The Vitanauts
  • Blog
  • Store
  • About
    • Purpose
    • My Evolution
    • Evolution 101
    • Philosophy 101

Review of "What Happened to Tom", a novella by Peg Tittle

11/14/2016

5 Comments

 
(Note: While I have been blogging about philosophical thought experiments, I was given a copy of a novella to review that is based upon a thought experiment. I decided to share my review on the blog this week because I have family visiting soon for Thanksgiving and I don't have time to do justice to the next thought experiment in my queue — it's a big one. I'm taking next week off, but then I'll be back to my usual blogging routine. Until then, try to enjoy the holiday all you Americans! I'm sure all of the regular family political fights will be much worse than usual this year...)

PicturePublished May 25, 2016 by Inanna Publications, 130 Pages, ISBN: 978-1-77133-293-4.
The humble thought experiment—usually a short, vivid, hypothetical scenario—has been used by philosophers since the dawn of the field to liven up their otherwise cold, logical arguments. From Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, to Derek Parfit asking readers to imagine themselves entering a teletransporter from Star Trek, thousands and thousands of thought experiments have been written in an attempt to tap into the emotional intuitions of readers, and ground philosophers’ abstract theoretical arguments into the concrete realm of the real world. On their own, these thought experiments have certainly been very useful little devices, and collections of them can make for some of the best introductions to the enduring issues in philosophy. In 2004, the feminist, writer, and philosopher Peg Tittle showed her command of the subject with the publication of What If... Collected Thought Experiments in Philosophy. Now, in 2016, Tittle has plucked one of the most famous modern thought experiments from that book—known as “The Violinist”—and used that short piece of microfiction as the basis for a full blown work of literature in the form of a novella. In general, as a writer of both fiction and philosophy, I think this is a very intriguing idea suffused with potential for both instruction and entertainment. This particular project, however, is faced with some significant difficulties because of the specific thought experiment that Tittle has chosen to use. A short history about it will help explain why this is the case.
 
In the fall of 1971, just a few months before Roe v. Wade was first argued before the U.S. Supreme Court, the philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson published a paper titled, “A Defense of Abortion,” which would go on to become perhaps “the most widely reprinted essay in all of contemporary philosophy.” (Parent, W., “Editor’s introduction” to Thomson, J. Rights, Restitution, and Risk, 1986.) The entire paper filled twenty pages in the original journal publication, but a 166-word thought experiment is surely the most discussed excerpt from it, as well as the one that formed the basis for Tittle’s novella. It’s such a quick read that it’s worth reprinting here in its entirety. (Note: I’ve added underlines to four sections for later discussion.)

“You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. The director of the hospital now tells you, "Look, we're sorry the Society of Music Lovers did this to you--we would never have permitted it if we had known. But still, they did it, and the violinist is now plugged into you. To unplug you would be to kill him. But never mind, it's only for nine months. By then he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.”
 
For this book review, I don’t want to wade into the arguments for or against abortion, but there are obviously several problems with this thought experiment if you were to try to consider it on its own as completely analogous to a pregnancy. As I have written in a blog post about the thought experiment, “the expected commitment isn't the same—9 months vs. a lifetime of responsibility (or wonder in the case of adoption)—and neither is the personal bond you can expect to develop. The thought experiment also seems highly dependent on the known quality of the person you are being hooked up to, rather than the (somewhat) unknown future of a child. The burden of costs are completely different, the support from family and society wouldn't be the same, the question of when life begins has been thrown out, the infringement on your own freedom is different by type and degree, etc., etc.” Other standard criticisms of Thomson's thought experiment include “the tacit consent objection” (kidnapping is not the same as consensual sex), “the responsibility objection” (women “invite” babies in with their actions), “the stranger versus offspring objection” (parents have legal duties to care for their children), and “the killing versus letting die objection” (abortions kill directly, whereas unplugging is only an indirect means).
 
These may sound like a damning list of criticisms, but all of them were addressed elsewhere in Thomson’s twenty-page paper. The thought experiment is actually just one element taken from a comprehensive set of arguments that Thomson made against the various points that are usually offered by the pro-Life side. “The Violinist” is therefore not meant to stand on its own, although it is often taken out of context and treated as if it were meant to be. This misunderstood flaw, however, could have been rectified in Tittle’s novella-length treatment of the thought experiment. From an artistic point of view, this is such a difficult scenario to dramatize because the protagonists are literally bound to one another for nine months with very little mobility available to them. Finding ways to add interest and tension to scene after scene after scene—which collectively stretch out over quite a long period of time but take place almost entirely within a single room—would be an extremely difficult task for any author. By addressing all of the standard criticisms listed above, What Happened to Tom could have overcome that problem by providing readers with a chance to hear many good conversations between smart people on both sides of the abortion issue. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case here.
 
In her novella, Tittle adds little from outside the very narrow scope of the thought experiment. For reasons I can only speculate about, she doesn’t fully explore the nuances of Thomsons’ whole paper. As such, the novella struggles as a work of fiction. What Happened to Tom is only 122 pages long and it’s a very quick read filled with lots of simple dialogue in short punchy sentences, but none of the many characters who flit through the book could be described as philosophically-sophisticated thinkers. In fact, Tom (the kidney donor), Simon (the violinist), all of Tom’s friends and co-workers, and all of the doctors, cops, and lawyers we meet, each turn out to be completely heartless and unhelpful. This might have been done in an effort to make Tom’s continued imprisonment seem plausible, but the result is that What Happened to Tom presents the reader with an incredibly bleak world where every single character is inept, juvenile, and unbelievably rude.
 
A few pages in, when Tom first wakes up from being drugged at a bar to find that he has been surgically attached to Simon, the doctor matter-of-factly explains the procedure to him, lets Tom rage a bit, and then just says, “Tom, you should be happy,” before she walks out. Shortly thereafter, Tom calls 9-1-1 and gets the brush off because his life’s not in “immediate danger.” The dispatcher says the cops will come see him the next day, even though he’s essentially been kidnapped. And when Tom finally talks to his girlfriend Beth for the first time after the ordeal, she doesn’t make a fuss about this extraordinary situation. She just says, “So what, you expect me to be your office assistant for nine months?” These interactions are intended to be equivalent to what happens to a pregnant woman, but here, for Tom’s highly unusual situation, the reactions continually ring false. I kept saying to myself as I read this that human beings just wouldn’t act this way.
 
Finally, near the very end of the book, we get one of the (surprisingly) rare dialogues between Tom and the man he’s attached to for nine months. When Simon asks why Tom didn’t explain this whole situation to his boss (who fired him, in another false equivalency), Tom tells Simon it’s none of his business. Simon responds by saying, “You still don’t know what makes you tick. … You’re a coward then.” After a little more back and forth, Tom says “Oh, shut up then! Just shut the fuck up!” The doctor entered the room at that time and upon hearing this outburst explains, “He’s lost control. Actually, that’s not quite right either. Lots of men lose control and it’s quite respectable. It’s called rage. He’s had control taken from him. And not only that. It’s been taken from him by a woman.” We’re told that Tom realized she was right and then said, “So? What’s wrong with that?” The doctor asked him, “Don’t you see how insulting that is?” “To who?” Tom replied. And the doctor finished with, “I rest my case.” After an entire novella full of such piling on top of Tom, this seems to be where Tittle rests her case too, but it is an unsatisfying climax.
 
While Tittle did decide to confine herself to the narrow issues contained in the thought experiment, we can see from these passages I’ve shared that Tittle also decided to make some substantial deviations from “The Violinist” when compared to the underlined portions of the experiment copied above. Tittle’s Tom was chosen at random, rather than carefully and as a good match. Tittle’s doctor was never sorry, and rather than blocking the Society of Music Lovers from operating on Tom, her doctor drugged him and did the operation without his consent. And at the end of the novella, we are told that Tom will not be obligated “only for nine months,” but that he’ll have to come back to help Simon for a few hours every day for the next several years. We might guess at why Tittle made such changes, but no matter the reason for them or the outcome of the debate over whether these were morally relevant changes or not, we can definitively state that What Happened to Tom is not perfectly faithful to the original thought experiment.
 
Because of the extreme scenarios in the story that just don’t ring true to life—which are not surprising, given they were based on an imperfect analogy to pregnancy to begin with--What Happened to Tom is not a work of fiction that can be read out of context. It is just too unbelievable. Additionally, just as “The Violinist” thought experiment did not stand on its own in its original philosophy paper, this novella also does not stand on its own as a thoroughly persuasive case for abortion rights. It is certainly an interesting artistic and philosophic endeavor, but because of its inherent flaws and authorial choices, the novella can only be recommended for philosophy teachers using it to provoke classroom discussion, or possibly for readers who enjoy revelling in extreme arguments against either pro-life advocates or any man who treats pregnant women with disdain. As someone who is outside of these target groups, I found What Happened to Tom to be a frustrating experience, albeit a thought-provoking one. Your experience may differ.
 
Disclosure: I was given a free copy of this book by its publisher Inanna Publication and Education Inc. for the purposes of a review.

5 Comments
Peg Tittle link
11/19/2016 08:53:47 pm

Ed, thank you for taking the time to put your thoughts about What Happened to Tom to paper, as it were. (Thanks also for the mention of my What If? Collected Thought Experiments in Philosophy.)

There are a few things you say that I feel I must respond to.

First, as indicated on the back cover, the novella is inspired by Thomson’s “Violinist”; it is not, as you’ve said several times in your review, based on it: What Happened to Tom was never intended to be a fictionalization of her experiment, nor a faithful expression of the experiment itself or her thoughts on the matter. I don’t know why you thought it was or should be.

Second, you call my characters heartless, unhelpful, inept, juvenile, and unbelievably rude. You say that “the [characters’] reactions continually ring false. I kept saying to myself as I read this that human beings just wouldn’t act this way.” Clearly, you and I live in different worlds. Duh. You’re a man living in a patriarchy; I’m a woman living in a patriarchy. Your experience of people, and men in particular, is different from mine. The same men who are helpful, mature, and considerate with you are dismissive and insulting with me.

Example one: When I was a teenager, I made an appointment to speak with my priest about something he’d said in a sermon. He apparently thought my doing so was ‘cute’ and essentially patted me on the head and sent me on my way after delivering a few glib reassurances that God knows best and all’s well with the world. I did not receive the hour-long debate I hoped for.

Example two: When I was a young adult, called a rustproofing shop to inquire about rustproofing my car, I was given about thirty seconds of the man’s time. When my male partner called the same shop and spoke to the same man, he was given a full three minutes of information (about the advantages and disadvantages of wax-based undercoating and oil-based undercoating, etc.). (Guess who was able to make the more informed decision as a result.)

Example three: When I was teaching university courses, my male students persistently challenged me; one even raised his hand to ask, when I was teaching remedial English to those who’d failed the entrance writing competency test, whether I was sure that was how to use a semi-colon. While I waited outside the class of one of my male colleagues, who’d invited me to give a special lecture on business ethics to his economics class, I was amazed at how quite and respectful the students were; my male colleague wasn’t interrupted, not even once.

Example four: I am fortunate to live on a lake now and when a newly moved in resident (male) parked his aluminum boat (which he has yet to use) right where I’d have to see it every time I looked out the window to the lake (my view until then was nothing but trees and water, and it was the view I enjoyed every day all day as I wrote), I asked if he’d mind just throwing a dark green tarp over the boat or, better yet, pulling it ten feet to the left where it would be hidden by trees. Absolutely not! It was his property and he had a right to do whatever he wanted on his property!! (It took me years to understand that for many men, to accede to, to grant, a woman’s request, however reasonable, is emasculating. As a result, such men are inconsiderate and dismissive; my wants don’t count, I don’t count, I don’t matter.)

Of course all of this is, of course, anecdotal. But how many anecdotes constitute convincing evidence? As many as are at the I Need Feminism and Everyday Sexism sites?

You conclude that What Happened to Tom “is just too unbelievable.” On the one hand, yes, the novel rings false. Because if that had happened to a man, if that kind of thing happened to men all the time, he would’ve been able to press charges, he would’ve have been told about the immunostimulant (and/or it would’ve been easily available), he would’ve been granted a reversal (he wouldn’t even have had to go to a committee to ask for one). All of this is suggested, apparently too subtly, by Tom’s lawyer when he says, halfway through the novella:

“Well, the other hand is, it’s not happening to everyone. If, say, one in every ten men suddenly woke up to find themselves a dialysator when they didn’t want to be, then I could do something. Class action, maybe. I could make a case that we need a new law or something. Actually, then, there’d probably already be a law...,” he trailed off.
“But there—”
“Certainly,” Gregory continued, “if five in ten men, let’s say—hell, if half of us had our bodies hijacked at any point in time, getting them back would be as easy as, I don’t know, as easy as getting a bottle of beer. And as cheap.” Gregory laugh

Reply
Peg Tittle link
11/19/2016 08:56:46 pm

[half of my response didn't make it through]

Gregory laughed.
Tom did not.

But here’s the thing: it would’ve happened, it has been happening to women for centuries. Women who want to press charges for rape are discouraged and dismissed. Women who want contraception have (had) to fight very hard for it; world-wide, many have not yet won that fight. Women who want abortion have (had) to fight very hard for it; those who have won that fight worry, reasonably, that the right will be taken away or that having that right met will be unjustly difficult. All of this is to say that the dismissive response Tom receives from the many other characters? Horribly realistic. If you’re a woman.

You mention in particular the response of Tom’s girlfriend: many men exhibit a similarly self-centered response to “I’m pregnant”; many go further and exhibit anger; many go further still and punch the pregnant woman in the abdomen (see this WHO report)—in which case, What Happened to Tom isn’t realistic enough.

I wrote What Happened to Tom partly because so many men don’t seem to get it; they don’t get that pregnancy can derail your life, and when the pregnancy is unwanted, the derailment is just cause for outrage. If they did comprehend that monumental life-changing consequence, they wouldn’t even dream of having intercourse without contraception.

I also thought that if men saw all of this happen to a man, they’d realize how outrageous it is, and maybe that would lead to change. But instead of recognizing it as outrageous, even offensive, you’ve dismissed it as unrealistic. Apparently, you’re oblivious to sexism.

Reply
@EdGibney link
11/20/2016 09:07:25 am

Here's the thing Peg, all of your anecdotes are perfectly believable because, yes, unfortunately, they are very common. The problem with What Happened to Tom is that you've tried to transport very common problems to a very uncommon situation and it just didn't work for me. If your book had been called What Happened to Tina and the only thing that was changed in it was the gender of your main character, it would have been exactly as unbelievable.

Your comments do make me realise that I missed an opportunity to express further support for the causes you and I are fighting for. You have your anecdotes about "life in the patriarchy," and I, as a sensitive male, have mine. They are different anecdotes to be sure, but if you read the rest of my writing you will see I am a pro-choice feminist fighting for cooperation and equality too. I didn't express my personal stances in the review because I thought the review shouldn't be about me, but in some sense reviews are always about the reviewer so I could have been clearer about that. The fact that I stand by your side, however, but still find your book flawed, may be even more damaging to it since my review can no longer be dismissed as easily as you would like to do. If you continue to insist that I can't "get" your work because I'm a man, then that just strengthens my point that I am outside of your particular target group....along with half the world's population as well. I wish you the best, and I'll fight by your side, but I stand by my review.

Reply
Peg link
11/20/2016 03:28:02 pm

Thanks for your reply.

One, allegories are often superficially unrealistic.

Two, I didn't say you "can't" get it b/c you're a man; I suspected you "didn't" get for that reason. At least one man HAS gotten it. (See RC's review at http://www.inanna.ca/catalog/what-happened-tom/.)

But thanks again for your engagement.

Reply
@EdGibney link
11/20/2016 05:14:59 pm

I read that review on Inanna's page for WHTT. I thought it was just a marketing blurb recap though, rather than any attempt to provide a critical perspective. But that's fine. I happily ended my own review saying, "your experience may differ," and that is true. I did say some people may find WHTT useful and I do believe that. I really do admire and support the type of work you are trying to do and would still much prefer to read something else by you than from any number of other people. I just couldn't conscientiously give WHTT a glowing review. Sorry. If WHTT was worthless, I wouldn't have even bothered to take such a long time to write my review. So there's that.

And I agree with your point #1. As another example of a superficially unrealistic allegory, I recommend you check out my first novel, Draining the Swamp. It's a bureaucratic fable with a strong female central character. To lend the air of an adult fairy tale to it, there are just a few nods to the reader about "our heroine" or other such quixotic phrases, but I found they were important signals to the reader so they knew exactly I was actually trying to do. I never got that kind of wink and a nod feeling from WHTT. It just sounded like "this is the way things really are and I'm angry about it," which elicited a response from me of "that's not the way things really would be." I hope that feedback is helpful.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Subscribe to Help Shape This Evolution

    SUBSCRIBE

    RSS Feed


    Blog Philosophy

    This is where ideas mate to form new and better ones. Please share yours respectfully...or they will suffer the fate of extinction!


    Archives

    January 2023
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    August 2021
    June 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    May 2019
    March 2019
    December 2018
    July 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    April 2012


    Click to set custom HTML
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.