Oh Baby Baby....

In the context of the story as a whole, this is not a valid argument. By giving them their childhoods, Miss Emily took away their adulthood, and subsequently took years off of their lives considering the options that may have looked at (running away, etc) if they had known what their future held. I do understand why the guardians might have wanted to shelter them, but I have a feeling that my reasoning is entirely different from Miss Emily's and Miss Lucy's. If I was in that situation, I may have sheltered the kids because I don't know how there's any way I could possibly explain to them the future that awaited them. But, I get the feeling that Miss Emily sheltered them because she had some subtle belief that the whole cloning/donations system was valid; Miss Emily was one of the characters that gave into the "this is what I'm supposed to be doing" mentality. I get this feeling from the passage toward the end of the novel when Kathy and Tommy go to visit  Madame and Miss Emily to see if they can get a deferral. While she comes off at first as a kind, loving, old friend, her responses to Kathy and Tommy's questions have an undertone of passiveness and fakeness to them. These undertones are particularly revealed by Madame's commentary during the conversation. After Miss Emily finishes telling Kath and Tommy about the wonderful lives the guardians gave them at Hailsham, Madame chips in and says "Don't try and ask them to thank you. ... Why should they be grateful? They came here looking for something much more. What we gave them, all the years, all the fighting we did on their behalf, what do they know of that? They think it's God-given. Until they came here, they knew nothing of it. All they feel now is disappointment, because we haven't given them everything possible" (Ishiguro 265). While Madame's comments definitely reveal a her feelings that the guardians are under appreciated, her comments are much deeper than that; her comments also convey a sense of righteous anger at the whole system that they have been a part of. It seems like Madame just wants to come out and say, "Yes, we made the best of what life was like for the children as future donors. But, we could have made the best of their lives by giving them options besides becoming donors." Madame, like Tommy, seems to be filled with regret that she didn't do something to question the parameters around her. Because none of the guardians actively did anything to cause themselves or the children to question the "parameters" set around them, I do not think avoiding telling them about their future to "protect" the children is a valid argument.

One thing I have regretted in my adolescent life has been wasting my childhood, in my opinion. On days when I have to work until nightfall, and still go home to do schoolwork, I think back to the days when I whined about boredom, about being forced to nap, and really wish that I had the perspective to appreciate the time I had. Now, I will accept that, if the children were told that they were going to be harvested for their organs, they might have been a bit more somber. However, in light of the regret I've felt because I didn't know how much I should have taken advantage of the freedom of childhood, I think that if I were blindsided with the fact that I would be spending my life only to be an organ farm, I would be filled with a bit more than regret. By not letting the children know about the pain they will face in life, Miss Emilie leaves them totally unprepared for it. Not only will they not be able to live full, fruitful lives (which is the reason a life of pain is redeemable at all), but they won't have had the ability to make up for lost years of fun in their childhood. Although it does seem kind of irrational to argue that children would strenuously work to have fun, giving them the option to embrace their freedom as kids is more kind than making the decision to keep them in the dark.