Commandant and Gould: Similar but Different

Though we have compared the similarities and differences of the Commandant and the Surgeon, I was also struck by the similarities and differences of the Commandant and Gould, something we have not yet discussed in the blogs or classes. Both of these men were “criminals” and both were driven and plagued by questions concerning their identity and the meaning and purpose of life. Just as Gould struggles to find his identity but is unable to grasp this elusive goal as he continually declares that he could not be defined by a single definition, the Commandant also strives to obtain an identity as a “man of destiny” but every effort to do so by adopting grand projects ultimately end in bitter disappointment. Both men try to obtain or grasp ever elusive goals to satisfy the questions and longings of their soul. However, many difference s are revealed throughout the book. The chief difference lies in the essence of their beliefs concerning identity. The Commandant strives to be seen as a man of destiny who built a utopian “nation” admired by many as flocks of tourists and visitors flood to see the great wonders the Commandant had built.(165) In essence, the Commandant’s identity was found in how people viewed him- his fame and glory. As a result, though he builds great buildings and undertakes grand projects, he is never satisfied because of the absence of tourists. In contrast, Gould continually insists that his identity is not based on other people’s opinions and resists being defined by men. In the beginning of his dealings with the Surgeon and the Commandant, he attempts to please them, making it his goal to do whatever they want him to do. Gould writes that “the fish were at the beginning only a job” and says that he had felt compelled to paint for science and hated what he did. However, he began to develop “feelings for the fish” as “they began to interest me, and then to anger me.” (213-214) Gould began to actually desire, enjoy, and be satisfied in his paintings of fish not because of other’s opinions or praises but because of the action itself. In a sense, he had found his identity and meaning in life by painting fish. It is this key difference between the two men that I believe Flanagan is trying to show that basing one’s identity on fame and glory will end in disappointment and extreme dissatisfaction whereas one can eventually enjoy and be satisfied with the sometimes “normal” things in life. For Gould, it was painting fish.