The Dean Koontz Community

[Tackycat]

Mr. Murder appears to be an anti-cloning novel. However, Alfie is created for purposes that almost anyone would agree are unethical . Those who beleive human reproductive cloning should be allowed present it as a basic human right. They argue that it will be childless couples and certain individuals who will one day want to have their child cloned. Governement will not have anything to do with it. If so, what is Koontz's position?

[dnurse]

I just finished Mr. Murder recently and enjoyed it. I have no idea what his position is on cloning. Has he formally stated it in an interview anywhere?

[WhiteWolf]

I have no idea if he has ever formally stated an opinion on cloning anywhere, but I would imagine that if you wrote him a letter and asked him that he would answer it thoughtfully.

But just at a guess, based on all of the books I've read from him and the position I KNOW he holds on utilitarian bioethics, I would say Mr. Koontz is thoroughly opposed to human cloning. The Alfie character may not really touch on the topic specifically, but Koontz often writes about the idea of "dopplegangers" and never in a positive fashion.

If you really want to get a better idea of what Koontz thinks about cloning, I would suggest reading all three of the FRANKENSTEIN novels, just to see how he portrays Victor Helios and his desire to build a master race, essentially through the cloning of living people into his puppet monsters.

Yeah. I think it's pretty safe to say Koontz is not a big fan of human cloning. But how about dogs?

[Tackycat]

I would guess that you are right. I have not read the Frankenstein novels, but form what I'v heard of them, he protrays Victor as very evil. If he wants to take a strong stand agaisnt human reproductive cloning, however, he ought to write a novel about the possible consequences of cloning even as a supposed human right. If only mad scientists and corrupt governments are the ones cloning in his books, then he really doesn'st say much about the evils of cloning per se, only that the wrong people shouldn't be allowed to do it.

[masha99]

Just based on his religion alone he would be opposed to it. I'd be SHOCKED if he wasn't. His worldview is very consistent.

[Schrijvertje]

A story of a clone discovering he's not "real". That's like the movie "The Island". Plenty of explosions in that one, since it is Jerry Bruckheimer and Michael Bay in the production seats, but ignore that and concentrate on the story.

There's a difference in cloning a physical body and copying a consciousness. How unique is a clone? Combine it with the artificial intelligence questions and it becomes really difficult to make a stand. If it was just an inanimate body, without any intelligence/consciousness/soul, I think the modern medical world would be revolutionalized. It would simply become a "spare parts" factory.

Then again, that might be even more creepy.

I'm sure Koontz has opinions on every subject he writes about, but he's probably restricted in making them public due to legal and public relation matters. At least in fiction, you can always fall back on the "it's not me, it's the characters" line.

[masha99]

Koonts has never shied away from making his views known. He's pretty outspoken against utilitarian bioethics for examlpe.

I think if they cloned just organs, most people would have no problem with that. But "cloning" has come to mean a whole organism, and once you make a brain it becomes really iffy.

[Tackycat]

I don't really see how anyone can oppose clonign based on one's faith. The reason for this is that the Bible (I assume Koontz susbsribes to some form of Chirstianity) is entirely mute on the subject. the same with abortion and other related issues--the Bible just doesn't say. In order to use religion to oppose like human cloning, one must interpret certain passages to support one's position. Of course, you can also interpret other passages to support cloning as well.