Project Hail Mary is in part about cowardice and inexorability and the philosophical quandary of whether or not the ends justify the means. In order to understand this, we have to understand both the character Eva Stratt and Ryland Grace, as well as their relationship. In embarking on this question, we must also account for the perspective in which the book is written.
The book is written from Ryland's perspective, and that shapes the narrative by disregarding fundamental truths that lie outside of Ryland's opinion and personal reality. By his account, Ryland is a normal middle school science teacher, albeit with a doctorate in molecular biology he rarely uses.
While this is true, Ryland is also set up to be an extraordinary individual. He is a leading expert in his field. He becomes the lead researcher on humanity's most important project after making the ultimate discovery. He becomes so woven into the very fiber of the project that he can no longer be removed.
When the story arrives at the big, sacrificial ask, which is typically the point in most stories where the unwitting hero would accept his fate for the good of the people, Ryland says no. What normal, sane person would want to strap themselves to a rocket and be shot into space, with little to no training, and a conclusion of death by their hand or some other tragedy? We empathize. We understand. And yet.
Ryland was never normal. By his own standards, sure, but not to anyone else in the book, least of all Stratt.
Let’s look at his counterpart. Eva Stratt is a ruthless, effective leader with a morally dubious code only defined by preventing humankind from extinction. She was placed in this position by the powers that be, due to her ability to get results. She is, by all definitions, not a coward. She does not fear the choices she knows she has to make and does not avert her gaze. She goes to court. She paves the Sahara. She watches as a nuclear bomb blows up the arctic shelf. The debate of whether or not these choices were 'correct' aside, they were choices she made because no one else would. No one wanted to shoulder the responsibility or the blame.
This is a story told through Ryland's perspective. It is all the more satisfying when who Ryland believes himself to be is at odds with who everyone else believes him to be. Ryland is scared. His trust is betrayed. He has been put in an impossible situation and everyone is confused and disappointed that he is not willing to rise to the occasion. Ryland has told the audience, with unwavering certainty, throughout every flashback that he is replaceable and worthless only to be utterly confused by why people don't agree with him.
Ryland relies on the safe guard, the guise, of being a regular, normal man only when it suits him. He leans into normalcy to protect himself. He downplays his own importance throughout the entirety of the book in the hopes that it will be enough to save him from amounting to anything great that could be knocked down in the future by failure. When Eva Stratt lays bare all his truths as she has come to know them, it is cruel but true. Eva never flinches and she never lies.
The story is asking us to consider the cowardly person a hero and the person who does not flinch in the face of difficult, horrific choices as a villain. Typically the reverse is true. To what extent is inexorability favorable? To what extent is cowardice necessary? Cowardice is an integral part to the story and ensures that the emotional beats of it work. Without Ryland's tendency to flinch and flee, we would not feel the impact of Eva's choices. He is quick to pass judgement on her character, often describing it in ways that alienate her own humanity, as are we, because the book is his inner monologue.
When she sends Ryland to his cell where he is to remain until the ship's launch, she avoids him for four days. She looks away. That is not a person unaffected by their choices. Ryland even comments on that being the longest time they've been apart since the start of the project. She was hoping he'd rise to the occasion so he would not have to be at the receiving end of a choice she did not want to have to make, but he does not. To her, she sees a man who is fundamentally good and capable of the job. A man that she hoped would help her shoulder the enormity of her responsibility after standing by her side for years. Being forced to go on this mission against his will was horrific, and there is no excuse for doing that to another human being. We empathize. We understand.
Eva saw who he was before he did. What defined him as a person? Who was he willing to die for? To fight for? Even as the external audience, it seemed he did not know the answer to those questions even before his memory and life were taken from him. Eva made that choice for him. In fact, it was made by the person that made the same kinds of choices in some form or another over and over throughout the entirety of the book. The logical choice, the choice supported by all evidence presented to her, was that Ryland was the best candidate for the job. The difference is that this choice is up close and personal. It is because of our empathy we do not want Ryland to be sent to his death, but Eva Stratt cannot afford to act on empathy.
Without cowardice haunting his own thoughts, we as the audience would not feel the impact of his own choices further down the line. Ryland's heroic moments stagger throughout the present day story, but are cemented by the end of the book. Ryland's 'hero moment', the moment, comes when he chooses to save Rocky. It is more impactful than the prior, similar choice, because we have seen this relationship develop in a meaningful way, and we have seen who Ryland is and the choices he makes when he is unburdened by past failures of who he once was.
A good man, as Eva Stratt knowingly said. She was never a liar.
Liking a character and empathizing with their situation does not suddenly absolve them of all the ways other characters in the book, including Ryland himself, view him. Nor does it disregard the context provided in the book that outlines how fear and low expectations have guided his choices throughout his life. He was a coward. Anyone in his situation would be a coward. The beauty of the story is that the importance of the life Ryland builds after he is disgraced from the academic community (the life he refuses to return to) is the life that ends up saving him.
To deny Ryland cowardice and to ignore Eva's burden is to flatten both of their characters, allowing no room for complex exploration of what it means to be a human struggling to do what is necessary in the face of right and wrong. To explore identity when juxtaposed by navigating a nonconsensual situation.
The story ignores the idea that bravery is the only foil to cowardice. It ignores the idea that bravery is fundamentally good and right, and cowardice is weak and wrong. Ryland Grace being a coward allows the narrative to extend grace toward him. He is rewarded for his meaningful and well built bravery with a long life, and a relationship that defines his very existence. Eva Stratt saves the world, despite the irreparable damage she does to it, and all the judgment the world passes on to her in the process. These characters only work because they operate in contrast to one another, and draw attention to the way cowardice and bravery bleed into one another throughout the entirety of the story.
titsay
kianamaiart
baratheonpilled
pixelskylines
izzy806
origamiaround
