What Is The Difference Between All The King's Horses And The Island

It is a rare occurrence indeed to discover a story told from the perspective of the villain. Almost always it is the hero narrating events; “All The King’s Horses” by Kurt Vonnegut and The Island by Michael Bay are no exception to this rule. However, what really distinguishes the protagonist from the antagonist? The characters of both stories are fundamentally alike in their outlook, despite appearing to be on opposite ends of a spectrum. When holding the fates of others in their hands, they form their decisions with a utilitarian mindset: an ethical philosophy that holds that actions are moral if the consequences benefit the majority. What separates them is their conflicting beliefs of what is of value, and what is not. Through a lens of value
While Pi Ying exclaims that the game is “fascinating” (Vonnegut, 3), Barzov “[looks] at the ceiling as though he were inwardly criticizing everything Pi Ying had said” (Vonnegut, 3), indicating his disapproval of the Chinese man’s sadism. Yet at the same time, he does not take initiative to step forward in these moments; when Kelly’s son is sentenced to die, he “[turns] his back to the board, unwilling to prevent the next step” (Vonnegut, 7). Because there is not enough at stake in these moments, Barzov does not interfere, though he may disagree with Pi Ying’s actions. Preventing Pi Ying from continuing with his game would only infuriate the guerilla chief, the chess game would still go on, and the Americans would only gain a few minutes of additional life–therefore, Barzov does not act. However, once Pi Ying is dead, he finally takes action and releases the Americans, because “‘[he has] no choice, as a representative of [his] government, but to see that all of [the Americans] are conducted safely through the lines’” (Vonnegut, 10). This decision is simply “a matter of practical politics” (Vonnegut, 10), since the Russian does not wish to instigate
While Kelly attempts to keep the Americans safe and is wary of the communists, so too does Lincoln attempt to keep the clones safe and is wary of humans. Nevertheless, like Merrick, Lincoln is also egotistical, and professes: “‘I just want to live. I don't care how.’” In the end, however, he also high values the lives of his fellow clones, and wants them to be free and realize the truth of their situation. This leads him to later return to the cloning facility to free his fellow clones before they are about to be gassed–though this puts him at risk, many more clones would be freed, and this makes the rescue worthwhile to him, as he ultimately values the combined happiness of all the clones more than his own individual happiness. This rescue results in many human deaths along the way, but Lincoln barely registers these losses because he does not value their lives. Lincoln’s values are the exact opposite of Merrick’s, and so it is little wonder they clash. Yet from a neutral perspective, both value their own kind, are egotistical, and feel no remorse at committing murder; in reality, they are two sides of the same