Interesting argument, bad execution*.
What defines the soul? What distinguishes human beings from machines? Isnīt the emotional field, the capacity to have emotions? Can a machine be so perfect to the point it can develop any human characteristic like envy, jealousy, hope, love?
"We didn't have The Gallery in order to look into your souls. We had The Gallery to see if you had souls at all."
For me this sentence is nothing but absurd. I can imagine a computer, a robot creating a piece of art, but I canīt imagine they dreaming or suffering. I am not really able to define my beliefs and I wonīt get into this subject, but in my opinion, if a cloning succeeds itīs not only because of some bright people happened to know how to do it. If you know what I mean.
Kathy, Tommy and Ruth are some of several special children who grow up in an austere English boarding school called Hailsham. The thing is that these children are all clones created by the government with the purpose to provide organ transplants to humans. Itīs interesting to note that theyīre mostly based off of what they call trash: prostitutes, criminals, etc. Why that?
"If you ask people to return to darkness, the days of lung cancer, breast cancer, motor neurone disease, they'll simply say no."
Wouldnīt we? Wouldnīt we say "oh, theyīre not humans and they come from the worst type of people, people our society doesnīt need". So how much humans (in the meaning of "Christians") we are? And how different would we be from them?
Human condition and contradictions, justifications, lies. Thereīs a particular dialogue that called my attention:
- Ruth, why do you do that thing? Squeezing Tommy's shoulder.
- I'm allowed to touch Tommy, aren't I?
- It's the way you're touching him. You know what I mean.
It's copied from that television show.
- That's so not...
- Don't tell me "that's so not true." All that behavior,
that's not what people do out there, in real life, if that's what you were thinking. (...) You copy them, and they copy from a television show.
Maybe you donīt think about these things, so you wonīt get my point, but what I am asking is: wow original we are? Donīt we tend to live our life copying what we think is the right just as an escape from the only truth we know, our mortal condition?
And, even knowing Iīm going too far and that itīs not a question the film brings, this particular dialogue made me think of how most of us live just like them, how we see us as simple mortals with determined lives when people out there (in our case, usually famous people), are the only ones allowed to live fully.
*Itīs unacceptable to think that any of them would rebel against their condition, against the system. Not even one of them would refuse to pass their bracelet in that indifferent gesture of workers punching in and punching out the time clock?
** Thereīs a quote in the film Lisbon Story that can work as a synopsis or the epilogue of Never Let Me Go: "The Iight of the burning candIe gave me the feeIing that I am nothing, I am a fiction. What do I expect from this worId? What do I expect from you and from myseIf? I could have prophetic powers, understand all mysteries and all knowledge, I could have faith that would move mountains, but if I didn't have love, I would be nothing." (Pessoa, December 1934)