What tendencies in American society is Vonnegut satirizing? Does the story argue for anything?

Respond with higher-order critical thinking to the following prompts about “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut.

What tendencies in American society is Vonnegut satirizing? Does the story argue for anything? How would you sum up its theme?
Is
Diana Moon Glampers a “flat” or a “round” character? Would you call
Vonnegut’s characterization of her “realistic”? If not, why doesn’t it
need to be?
From
what point of view is the story told? Why is it more effective than if
Harrison Bergeron had told his own story in the first person?
Two
sympathetic critics of Vonnegut’s work, Karen and Charles Wood, have
said of his stories: “Vonnegut proves repeatedly…that men and women
remain fundamentally the same, no matter what technology surrounds
them.” Try applying this comment to “Harrison Bergeron.” Do you agree?
Stanislaw Lem, Polish author of Solaris
and other novels, once made this thoughtful criticism of many of his
contemporaries among science fiction writers: “The revolt against the
machine and against civilization, the praise of the ‘aesthetic’ nature
of catastrophe, the dead-end course of human civilization—these are
their foremost problems, the intellectual content of their works. Such
SF is as it were a priori vitiated by pessimism, in the sense
that anything that may happen will be for the worse.” (“The Time-Travel
Story and Related Matters of SF Structuring,” Science Fiction Studies 1
[1974], 143-154.) How might Lem’s objection be raised against “Harrison
Bergeron”? In your opinion, does it negate the value of Vonnegut’s
story?

Last Completed Projects