This reviews "How To Be Good" by Nick Hornby, with analysis using Aristotle's philosophy of ethics, precisely virtue and friendship. The paper closely focuses on the character of Katie and elaborately examines her inner self and her attempt to find means on becoming perfectly good. The paper examines her relationship to the main characters and how they implicitly or explicitly aid her in achieving her goal attaining her perfect self. Using Aristotle's Nicomachaen Ethics it is easier to derive some of Katie's conclusions and consequently find out "How To Be Good."
Main character, Katie, and her problem of not knowing "How to be Good" b.
The inner self
Nick Hornby's point of infinite answers
Believes she is good, but wants to show it (second self)
She is a doctor which self-implies her goodness
Thinks about world problems
Katie's Relations With
Realizes that doing something good doesn't excuse doing something bad b.
Her horrible husband
love for the sake of character
David and DJ GoodNews
David changes entirely
David turns into an exaggerated charitable man
DJ GoodNews moves in
DJ GoodNews' anti-materialism
DJ GoodNews' makes David even more exaggeratedly caring
DJ GoodNews' "act not words" theory
Katie's Realization (Conclusion
Love is enough
No perfect self
No wrong no right
No guidelines to "How To Be Good"
Nick Hornby's How to be Good raises some complex questions on what it means to be good. Katie Carr, a wife and a mother, is certainly trying to be good. She cares about Third World debt, about the homeless, and struggles to raise her children in good ethics. After all she is also a doctor, and that should self-imply her goodness. Nevertheless, she is having enough trouble holding herself and family together to make such a commitment to saving the world. So does this mean that Katie is not good, because she works hard as a doctor, but doesn't want to come home and breathe the problems of marriage? Like most people in the world, she's basically human looking to save the world while failing to save her own self. It seems as if this book is trying to lay philosophical guidelines to being good as does the Bible, Aristotle's ethics, or Cicero's Essay on Friendship. This perception is however false, as it rather directs the reader to his own conclusions by implicitly questioning these above mentioned works. Nick Hornby points to the demise of religion, as nobody goes to Church when looking for the definition of being good. He also points to the fact that everyone has a second self, which implicitly relates to Cicero's idea that everyone's second self, the one people can see, should reflect the inner self. In addition, the idea of the self also relates to Aristotle, Nicomachaen Ethics, where the inner self is elaborated in relation to what makes a person virtuous good. Nevertheless, it is the inner self that is being examined up more closely, simply because it holds the true qualities of a person. In writing this novel, Nick Hornby construct an idea, that in an attempt to create a perfect self, one finds infinite possibilities, with neither being right or wrong.
Katie is certainly a character that seeks to be good. "I'm not a bad person. I'm a doctor," (6) says Katie. A person who seeks to be good is certainly someone that feels that he is lacking goodness. Katie however, doesn't think of herself as lacking goodness. She believes she is a good person already, but wants to show it to in doing something that is good. In addition she thinks that doctors are good out of nature. "One of the reasons I wanted to become a doctor...
Cited: Hornby, Nick. How To Be Good. London: Penguin Books, 2001.
Woods, Vicki. "Midlife moral crisis in Holloway." The Spectator 26 May, 2001. Proquest. AUP Library, Paris. 3 March 2003
Please join StudyMode to read the full document