Equality… Doesn’t That Mean the Same Thing for Everyone?

Harrison Bergeron, by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., is a short story about a future society whose people’s natural abilities and advantages are suppressed in order to eliminate the “menace” of competition. In the story, a couple’s extremely talented son rebels against the government by refusing to suppress his abilities and is subsequently killed; his parents watch the event unfold on television and immediately forget what they have just seen. In contrast, Battle Royal, by Ralph Ellison, is a short story set in the mid 20th century in the South amidst awful racial prejudice. Narrated by an African-American, the story details a humiliating boxing match that ten black men—including the narrator— are forced to fight in front of a group of white men. Afterwards, in a cruel juxtaposition, the narrator must cruelly give his well-prepared speech about continuing the peaceful unifying strategies of Booker T. Washington. In my opinion these two stories—despite having vast discrepancies in plot and setting— put forward two polar opinions on the same theme: equality.
In Harrison Bergeron, equality is presented towards the reader as an extreme; the government’s complete control over competition and natural ability makes no one very good at anything. For example, while Hazel (Harrison’s mother) has “a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn’t think about anything except in short bursts”(¶ 3) while George ( Harrison’s father), who is intelligent, is forced to wear a little radio in his ear to disrupt his thoughts every twenty seconds. Throughout the story, the narrator also inserts little comments about the society: “And she had to apologize at once for her voice, which was a very unfair voice to use. Her voice was a warm, luminous, timeless melody… and she began again, making her voice absolutely uncompetitive” (41). Because Vonnegut also mentions the “warm, timeless melody”, the reader can see what Vonnegut is really trying to say what he thinks about such a society. Because of the time period of this piece, I’m led to believe that this statement about total equality goes further than simply a sardonic comment on the benefits of natural selection. Rather, it is also a pointed remark on the failures of the communist systems and their respective countries. Through a dark, foreboding mood and occasional sarcastic comments on the nature of such a society, Vonnegut uses reverse psychology to underline the important of both equality and competition in American society.
As opposed to Harrison Bergeron, Battle Royal looks at equality from the other side of the “equality spectrum”: those who have none at all. In the story, a young black man is excited to recite his well-rehearsed speech on the importance of humility in order to obtain respect from the white man. Before he gives it, however, he is forced to degrade himself—along with 9 other young black men— in a pseudo-gladiatorial contest for ten dollars. As he spits out his own blood, dazed and tired from the fight, he begins to recite his speech. When he uses the phrase “social equality”, however, the crowd reacts derisively: “ The laughter hung smokelike in the sudden stillness. I opened my eyes, puzzled. Sounds of displeasure filled the room…They shouted hostile phrases at me. But I did not understand” (83). As the audience stops laughing, the narrator corrects himself and states that he meant to say “social responsibility”. In response, a small man in the front row states: “Well, you had better speak more slowly so we can understand. We mean to do right by you, but you’ve got to know your place at all times” (91). By putting the narrator through such abhorrent situations such as the fight and the ridicule of his speech, Ellison portrays the awful racial inequality present at this time.
While Vonnegut mocks an overabundance of equality and Ellison honestly portrays racial inequalities, both make equally significant points about equality. One, that equality is relative and, although a blessing in many respects should be kept within man’s own limits; the other, that equality is not true for all groups of people in the United States. After reading them in conjunction, the disgusting lack of equality in one story highlights the overabundance of it in the other. (711)