The Adventures of Pinocchio - Book Report/Review Example

Today most people have the illusion that they know who Pinocchio is. They think him to be a wooden puppet that changes into a human boy; that he was swallowed by a huge fish; and that when he told lies his nose grew longer. These assumptions are right, though in a limited way. For, they are based on an understanding of Pinocchio from the sentimentalised Disney cartoons or the condensed versions of the novel that are thought to be more suitable for children. The original novel by Carlo Collodi, which today survives mainly in scholarly editions, is much longer, far more complex and interesting, and also far more intriguing. It is by no means a light hearted fantasy churned out for a Pax Americana audience, bit a serious fable about life and srt. It is a story about growing up _- and it is also, in essential ways, a story about growing up poor and Italian. Thus, doing an ethical analysis of such a character is not only difficult, but is also problematic in the postcolonial sense of the term. This is so, primarily because the actions of Pinocchio are emblematic of the subject position of his creator, in this case, Collodi. Before, we go on to analyse 's ethical or moral or utilitarian stance in the novel, it is important to realise why Pinocchio is a puppet. It is so, for puppets can appear as pure and absolute representatives of some individual types or character. Thus, Pinocchio, the puppet, becomes the ideal tool for imparting moral and political education to Collodi's readers. In other words, Collodi's puppet Pinocchio is an ideal instrument for pointing out the 'lacks' of an Italian society that was under going the political tensions of a brewing war in Europe and more importantly, the political condition of Italy itself. It is to be kept in mind that Collodi lived in a complex perio0d of Italuian history when there was a great push toward the unification of Italy. Collodi lived the new reality of a unified nation - a unification that he, a Republican against the Monarchists had ostensibly supported - with true ambivalence. Thus, the world that Pinocchio inhabits is full of angry, deceptive people who want to exploit, rob and even kill. Even when Pinocchio's enemies are fablized like the Cat and the Fox, they instantly remind one of the numerous con men that roamed about the streets of Florence and Tuscany in the 1850's and 1860's. These men were victims of poverty and did not have the basic amenities of life. They would do anything for a living and moral transformation was something they were bothered about. Thus, the world that Pinocchio inhabits is ruled by the concept of ethical egoism. Similarly, in his action, like the manner he scoffs his master, Gepetto, even before he is born: Ouch! You hurt me. (Collodi31); Pinocchio shows himself as true a propagator of ethical egoism. Pinocchio does things for his own interests, as that is the only way to survive in this world, and these are at times beneficial to others, detrimental to others and at points in the novel their repercussion just remains neutral. For, ethical egoism does not necessitate that individuals disregard the well being of others, or does it require that an individual refrain from taking the well being of others into consideration. It allows for the possibility of either as long as what is chosen is efficacious in satisfying self-interest. For some, it is the philosophical basis of their espousal of libertarianism or anarchism, which advocate that individuals do not coercively prevent others from exercising freedom of action. This is the reason why in Collodi's novel, even after the con men are punished, Pinocchio simply passes them in silence without pondering much about their moral transformation. The fact that he does so is because Pinocchio knows, like his creator Collodi, that con men would exist as long as poverty existed on the streets of Italy. The fact that Collodi's Pinocchio has an inherent scorn for established institutions: he mocks the artistic capabilities of Gepetto even when he is being carved out of wood, provokes two fist fights between two old friends (Master Antony and Gepetto) and is a cause of cause of constant torrment to his creator: makes his subject position for problematic from the modern virtue ethics point of view. As virtue ethics emphasises upon the criterions that makes a good person, rather than what makes a good action, we may be tempted to say that Pinocchio is sound from the teleological ethical point of view. However, the fact that he does not attain the state of Eudaimonia or "happiness", even at the end, emanates from the fact that Pinocchio is not made to inhabit an ice-candy Funland but a real Italy whose laws were questionable and corrupt. Through the mis-adventures of Pinocchio, Collodi implies a law system where it is the victim of a crime rather than the perpetrator who is punished. Thus, when Pinocchio goes to court to complain that he has been robbed, the judge, who is a gorilla, sends him, rather than the robbers to jail. Pinocchio is only released when he falsely admits that he is a criminal! If we consider this action of lying, we tend to realise that Pinocchio inclination towards the norms of ethical egoism is in sharp contrast to the ethical doctrine of altruism that holds that individuals have an ethical obligation to help or serve others. He upholds the norm by of dishonesty in order to save himself. This consciousness is not exactly Utilitarian, nor a form of consequentialism, but a consciousness that derives from inhabiting a world that is selfish, violent, unjust and violent. This act of Pinocchio also helps in elucidating his negation of the stereotypical hero with ethical values as in the Aristotelian sense of the term. Pinocchio, thereby, negates the popular idea that it is a moral tale of a bad boy, essentially good at hyeart, transforming into a traditional good boy who comes back to his family. His reconciliation with his family at the end of the novel may apparently look to adhere to the Italian sense of the family, but we must understand that his action comes more as a recluse to him than any will to do or become good. He attains no moral transformation, nor tries to hover in the subjective or objective states of eudaimonia. Pinocchio's action, thus in coming back to family, goes beyond the deontological ethics and consequentialist systems that try to provide guiding principles for actions that allow a person to decide how to behave in any given situation. The end implies showing Pinocchio, only by the dint of his hard labour, to support his foster father- as because hard labour is the only option that Pinocchio has in order to survive. It is more on the lines of a survival instinct rather than any moral realization of good or bad, even though his rebellious instincts are somewhat tamed. It would be more correct to say that Pinocchio comes to accept his life in Sartre's sense of "bad faith" More than trying to be utilitarian, which Pinocchio cannot afford given his subject position, he makes a decision of coming back in order to survive. In many ways, the action of Pinocchio can be compared to the discourse of the theatre of the absurd. May be from the point of Martin Esslin we could infer that Pinocchio survives, as he has no other option but to survive. If this reading sounds too dark for a "children's fantasy", it can definitely be excplained by the very beginning of the novel. Collodi's beginning: Once upon a time there was ''A king!' my little readers will say right away. No, children, you are mistaken. Once upon a time there was a piece of wood. It wasn't expensive wood, just the ordinary kind that we take from a woodpile in the winter and put it in the stove. Denies the cocoon of a romantic fairy tale to the novel. If we probe the matter more, we will realise that when Collodi was writing The Adventures of Pinochhio, he was writing a satire of the then Italian situation. He was, by no means of imagination, writing something for children or creating a fairy tale. For Collodi himself was of opinion that: Fairy tales are about devils (Collodi 15) Thus, when we try to analyse the ethical perspective of Pinocchio's actions we find that the world he inhabits, even with its godmothers and the Blue Fairy, is tinged in a colour of grotesqueness: something that makes them fascinating and repellent at the same time. Another thing to be kept it mind is the fact that Pinocchio is a picaresque novel. Thus, the actions of the maverick hero are not subject to ethical justification as they are to the cause of entertainment. Thus, if at all the novel involves deontological ethics it is from the point of view of the writer. One of the most important implications of deontology is that a person's behavior can be wrong even if it results in the best possible outcome. Keeping that in mind, all of Pinocchio's mis-adventures, including the parts where he meets a serpent or is caught in a trap or is mistaken for a fish by a monstrous green-haired fisherman, may be perhaps be said to reflect that the end justifies the means. At the same time if we recollect that the novel is an allegory where originally Collodi had killed Pinnocchio for his misdeeds, before the editors forced him to bring him back to life with the help of the Blue fairy, we realise that the novel as such defies to be confined within any canon of ethical interpretation. It is said that all-great works of art replicate life. If we keep this in view, we can infer that Pinocchio is a novel which is a satire of the contemporary Italian society. As such, there are a plethora of times when the novel and the actions of the hero may be judged from the perspectives of good and bad, of ends justifying the means or living life in bad faith. However, if there is any true representation of the novel and any correct evaluation of it, it qualifies as a work of art and hence defies the traditional constrictions of a singular discourse. Works Cited Collodi, Carlo. Thje Adventures of Pinocchio with an introductory Essay and Notes by Nicholas J Perella, Berkely: University of California Press, 1984. Lois Kuznets, When Toys Come Alive. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993. Read More