Klara and The Sun, Kazuo Ishiguro

Despite my previous post about not always enjoying sci-fi, dystopian of fantasy fiction, it never stops me picking up and trying new reads.

This particular 2021 novel surprised me, probably in the best way possible.

The plot 

Klara and the Sun is the latest work of Nobel prize winning author, Kazuo Ishiguro. It follows the story of ‘Klara’ (yes part of the reason I choose it). She is an artificial intelligent robot, referred to as an ‘AF’ (artificial friend) for home schooled children. She, and her kind, are built and bought as companions to ‘lifted’ children, who are home-schooled in this alternative future reality. The technology of these ‘AF’s is not really explained, but it is highlighted early on that each AF has an individual personality and temperament, much like humans. The AF’s are solar powered thus explaining to you the title of the novel.

It is told from Klara’s perspective and the narrative progression mirrors her learning through observation. In the beginning, when she is in the store from where she is bought, her early descriptions of the store and the small section of the outside world she can see from the window do not have emotional reactions in, or much depth in understanding the human interactions she witnesses. As the novel develops and Klara watches Josie and her family grow, Klara’s description gains a nurturing, caring side as she understands more and more what it means to be human, but more distinctly in this novel, what it means to love.

A little analysis 

As a solar-powered being, (can we say), Klara, and her kind have a unique ideology and outlook in terms of how and why they exist. They observe the sun as the ‘source’ of all nourishment, similar perhaps to God in religions. In her endeavour to help Josie, Klara is motivated by almost bargaining and striking deals with the sun to heal Josie. Klara believes the sun is the one ultimate source that can heal anything, especially when Josie’s close friend Rick is absent. At this point the reader can observe the difference between humans and AI. We know as humans, the sun is the source of all life and Klara picks up on this too knowing both she and Josie owe their lives to the suns existence. Yes we need: food, shelter, warmth and water. However, I think Klara misses out on a crucial human necessity of existence, what separates animals and human experience? It reminds me of an argument from Shakespeare's King Lear. Lear is challenged by his mean daughters asking why he needs soldiers and castles and he responds:

O, reason not the need! Our basest beggars
Are in the poorest thing superfluous.
Allow not nature more than nature needs,
Man’s life’s as cheap as beast’s . . .(2.4.307-8)

Here Lear states that humans need more than the fundamental necessities to be happy, and that without life being a little embellished beyond necessities, it has no difference from the life of an animal. Klara does not understand why the sun’s special nourishment does not help Josie in Rick’s absence. If we did not have love, connection and interactions with others, it makes us less human, Lear argues closer to animals or ‘beasts’. Although Lear is talking about soldiers and big castles, the principles remain similar; that we need more than the basics to be human. The importance of interaction and love is something that Klara learns over the course of her time with Josie and her family.

Further than that though, we can begin to understand the phrase 'The sun always has ways to reach us'. This phrase is on the cover of the book and seems to be the central message. Once finishing this book, I can affirm it is the phrase that sticks with you. My head sees the word sun as 'love'. Replace this and you can begin to analyse the story, ('Love always has ways to reach us'). 

My lovely name 

I've always followed Ishiguro, he is a great author. I can't lie I was drawn to this book as it had my name on!

The Latin meaning of the name (my name) Klara/Clara is: 'bright, shinning and clear'. I think the choosing of this name for his AI being was no accident by Ishiguro. Klara goes on a personal journey of ignorance to human love to clarity about the very mechanics of love. If you read it, as I don't want to spoil it all you will also see, how her own limitations on what she can provide and offer to her human companions become clearer to her. 

Questions

As you can probably gather, I really enjoyed this book. I was sceptical starting as the premise sounded a bit too sci-fi for me. Equally the middle of the book lost me a little. I also expected a non-ending which is pretty common with current fiction. I’d call a ‘non’ ending an ending which doesn’t answer things, doesn’t leave a message and doesn’t tie up anything. Happily, this novel surprised me literally three pages from the end. It is proper literature; provoking questions without giving whole answers, leaving the reader to decide upon their own interpretations but the final message is succinct and indisputable.

The whole premise of the novel could be served as an allegory for many human problems and questions that face us now. Not only scientific and futuristic ones, but ones that have continued to baffle humanity throughout history. Do we become individuals in our relationships with others? The novel shows that the love Jodie's family and friends have for her is her 'essence' or 'soul' that cannot be replicated. This creates the idea that our soul or spirit does not reside in ourselves but we exist in the love others have for us. 

Questions I believe the novel raised;

• What is in a soul? Can it be copied, programmed? – will this become a question as our technology becomes more and more advanced? (A sci-fi question)
• If someone we love dies - would we welcome their exact copy in a different shell or body? Would it be the same person? if it is not them - even if everything else, their walk, laugh and smile is copied exactly? (well I think I gave my answer above!) 
• Can technology replace love? Or if the loved one is copied then does the love, just like the copy, cease to be the authentic original version of itself. Is it the same?
• What is our existence if we can be accurately replaced?

More broadly:

• ‘What makes us unique from each other?’  Where does the uniqueness of ourselves reside? Head? Heart? Soul?
• Where is the soul? 
• But finally and centrally it asks; 'What is love?'

These are only my thoughts and musings while reading it. I urge you to read and make up your own mind!