"Derby spoke movingly of the American form of government, with freedom and justice and opportunities and fair play for all. He said there wasn't a man there who wouldn't gladly fie for those ideals." pg 164 Vonnegut
I've got to say this book wasn't that bad. It was fairly easy to read and moved along quite quickly. It also made an interesting social commentary about the harsh realities of war. But overall I was left underwhelmed. There was no big climax or exciting scene. Even Vonnegut admitted that the closest moment to one was when poor old Edgar Derby stood up and defended America and its values. The author could have added some description of the bombing or some more interesting stuff about his alien encounters. Instead he chose to focus on the moments in a person's life and how they were effected by war. I understand he did this so as not to glamorize war by describing big action scenes and focusing on the despair of the people, but it was kind of boring. Maybe I'm just not deep enough to enjoy the social commentary, but I just didn't like it. Maybe I'm not supposed to like it though, because people aren't supposed to like war. Just maybe that was the point all along.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Slaughterhouse Five Anti-War
"I take it you find war a very comical thing... Did you expect us to laugh?" pg. 151 surgeon
So this book makes it very apparent just how terrible war is. It highlights all the awful deaths and bombings. It forces people to look at the harsh realities of war. But does this mean war should be done? And if there is never any war then what is the solution? World peace would be ideal but that probably will never happen. In fact, as sad as it is, I feel like war is inevitable. However I think that people cannot be so quick to jump to bloody, violent wars every time they have a dispute about something. If people would stop being so aggressive and focus more on finding peaceful solutions instead of focusing on making war machines then maybe a solution could come about. There will always be war but war doesn't always have to be going on. This book wants to force people to see how bad war is in hopes that people will be less likely to resort to war.
So this book makes it very apparent just how terrible war is. It highlights all the awful deaths and bombings. It forces people to look at the harsh realities of war. But does this mean war should be done? And if there is never any war then what is the solution? World peace would be ideal but that probably will never happen. In fact, as sad as it is, I feel like war is inevitable. However I think that people cannot be so quick to jump to bloody, violent wars every time they have a dispute about something. If people would stop being so aggressive and focus more on finding peaceful solutions instead of focusing on making war machines then maybe a solution could come about. There will always be war but war doesn't always have to be going on. This book wants to force people to see how bad war is in hopes that people will be less likely to resort to war.
Slaughterhouse Five Characterization
"There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations, because most of the people in it are so sick and so much the listless playthings of enormous forces. One of the main effects of war, after all, is that people are discouraged from being characters. But old Derby was a character now." pg. 164 Vonnegut
Even Vonnegut admits in this book that there is not a lot of characterization. He says this is because in the war everyone is so sick, tired, hungry, and worn out to be characters. However some do stand out that he focuses on. These include Billy Pilgrim of course, Lazarro, and Poor Old Edgar Derby. Billy Pilgrim represents all the soldiers that are driven mad because of the war. They lose their minds, and though they try to re-enter society they find that because of what they experience they can't. Lazzaro represents all the soldiers who are angry because of the war. Their hearts are full of anger and hate which is the source of the war. Edgar Derby represents the ideal soldier who does not want to fight, but steps up to protect freedom and the citizens of America. I believe that all those soldiers that aren't characterized actually stand for something as well. They represent the millions of soldiers everyone tries to forget about when they think about war. They become nameless casualties who no one wants to believe died so horribly. If society was forced to recognize their names and their life stories they would realize how terrible war is and wouldn't be so quick to resort to it.
Even Vonnegut admits in this book that there is not a lot of characterization. He says this is because in the war everyone is so sick, tired, hungry, and worn out to be characters. However some do stand out that he focuses on. These include Billy Pilgrim of course, Lazarro, and Poor Old Edgar Derby. Billy Pilgrim represents all the soldiers that are driven mad because of the war. They lose their minds, and though they try to re-enter society they find that because of what they experience they can't. Lazzaro represents all the soldiers who are angry because of the war. Their hearts are full of anger and hate which is the source of the war. Edgar Derby represents the ideal soldier who does not want to fight, but steps up to protect freedom and the citizens of America. I believe that all those soldiers that aren't characterized actually stand for something as well. They represent the millions of soldiers everyone tries to forget about when they think about war. They become nameless casualties who no one wants to believe died so horribly. If society was forced to recognize their names and their life stories they would realize how terrible war is and wouldn't be so quick to resort to it.
Slaughterhouse Five Tone
"There were hundreds of corpse mines operating by and by. They didn't smell bad at first, were wax museums. But then the bodies rotted and liquefied, and the stink was like roses and mustard gas. So it goes." pg. 214 Vonnegut
The tone of this book is very understated and almost sarcastic. Vonnegut always downplays the significant and horrific deaths of people in the book. He does this through the use of phrases like "so it goes". He also moves on quickly after bringing something up. It kind of seems like he doesn't even care or he's bored. However, there is an undertone of sympathy that shows up in the book. For instance Vonnegut calls a character "Poor Old Edgar Derby" and references the soldiers' shriveled stomachs. Though these tones may seem conflicting they actually compliment the meaning of the book. The book is trying to force people to see how awful war is, but it also wants people to understand how so many people think of war nonchalantly and how wrong that is. His regular tone throughout the book represents how most people glaze over the bad things in war. However the more sympathetic parts of the book highlight how he truly feels war should be looked at. My using these two varying themes he instills a sense of sympathy and guilt in people who condone war.
The tone of this book is very understated and almost sarcastic. Vonnegut always downplays the significant and horrific deaths of people in the book. He does this through the use of phrases like "so it goes". He also moves on quickly after bringing something up. It kind of seems like he doesn't even care or he's bored. However, there is an undertone of sympathy that shows up in the book. For instance Vonnegut calls a character "Poor Old Edgar Derby" and references the soldiers' shriveled stomachs. Though these tones may seem conflicting they actually compliment the meaning of the book. The book is trying to force people to see how awful war is, but it also wants people to understand how so many people think of war nonchalantly and how wrong that is. His regular tone throughout the book represents how most people glaze over the bad things in war. However the more sympathetic parts of the book highlight how he truly feels war should be looked at. My using these two varying themes he instills a sense of sympathy and guilt in people who condone war.
Slaughterhouse Five Setting
"You lads are leaving this afternoon for Dresden-- a beautiful city, I'm told." pg 146 an englishman
There are several settings in this book but most of them are either in Illium, Germany, and Tralfamadore. Illium represents what most people view as real life. It is your average American town where people have average jobs such as optomitrists. However, this life doesn't show the real cruelty of humans and the harsh reality of life. Dresden and the other parts of Germany represent that true reality. It shows all the death and despair humans are capable of inflicting on one another. This is a place far from home and unfamiliar. No one is clean or happy, and they are all on edge. These circumstances represent the truth about life in war and the truth about terrible reality. Tralfamadore is obviously not real, but it represents one of the most realistic aspects of life. Tralfamadore represents life as a whole and its overall value instead of what we see in each part of it. It also introduces life as everlasting. Even though they say they aren't very interested in Jesus Christ their ideas about life most resemble that of the Christian faith. All of these settings show a different aspect of life and how it's viewed in different situations. All have elements of realism, but also offer a different prospective of it.
There are several settings in this book but most of them are either in Illium, Germany, and Tralfamadore. Illium represents what most people view as real life. It is your average American town where people have average jobs such as optomitrists. However, this life doesn't show the real cruelty of humans and the harsh reality of life. Dresden and the other parts of Germany represent that true reality. It shows all the death and despair humans are capable of inflicting on one another. This is a place far from home and unfamiliar. No one is clean or happy, and they are all on edge. These circumstances represent the truth about life in war and the truth about terrible reality. Tralfamadore is obviously not real, but it represents one of the most realistic aspects of life. Tralfamadore represents life as a whole and its overall value instead of what we see in each part of it. It also introduces life as everlasting. Even though they say they aren't very interested in Jesus Christ their ideas about life most resemble that of the Christian faith. All of these settings show a different aspect of life and how it's viewed in different situations. All have elements of realism, but also offer a different prospective of it.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Slaughterhouse Five: Connection Between Kurt Vonnegut and Billy Pilgrim
"Billy answered. There was a drunk on the other end. Billy could almost smell his breath—mustard gas and roses. It was a wrong number. Billy hung up." Kurt Vonnegut Pg. 73
I've heard a lot of theories about just how Kurt Vonnegut as a narrator and Billy Pilgrim connect. Some people think that Billy and Kurt know each other somehow and he's telling Billy's story that Billy told him. Other people think that Billy is famous for being the crazy nut and that Kurt just wrote down the stories he heard. Then other people suggest a much more far out theory. Some people think that Billy Pilgrim and Kurt Vonnegut are actually the same person. I highly doubt that though because there are certain times in the book where Kurt will mention that he was at the same place where Billy was. They can't really be at the same place doing different things if they are the same person. Even if they aren't the same person they must be connected somehow, but how? Why does Vonnegut feel the need to tell Billy's story? Clearly it's important to him but why? Hopefully it will be revealed later in the book, but I know I can at least rule out that they are the same person.
I've heard a lot of theories about just how Kurt Vonnegut as a narrator and Billy Pilgrim connect. Some people think that Billy and Kurt know each other somehow and he's telling Billy's story that Billy told him. Other people think that Billy is famous for being the crazy nut and that Kurt just wrote down the stories he heard. Then other people suggest a much more far out theory. Some people think that Billy Pilgrim and Kurt Vonnegut are actually the same person. I highly doubt that though because there are certain times in the book where Kurt will mention that he was at the same place where Billy was. They can't really be at the same place doing different things if they are the same person. Even if they aren't the same person they must be connected somehow, but how? Why does Vonnegut feel the need to tell Billy's story? Clearly it's important to him but why? Hopefully it will be revealed later in the book, but I know I can at least rule out that they are the same person.
Slaughterhouse Five: How Crazy Is He?
"I am a Tralfamadorian, seeing all time as you might see a stretch of the Rocky Mountains. All time is all time. It does not change. It does not lend itself to warnings or explanations. It simply is." Tralfamadorian Pg. 85-86
This is the story of a man named Billy who believes he becomes "unstuck" from time and travels to different parts of his life including when he is abducted by aliens. I'm not going to lie, if somebody told me this happened to them I would think they need to be committed. But Billy doesn't necessarily come off as crazy in the story, more like misunderstood. Or maybe the war has driven him to be crazy. It wouldn't be the first time a soldier goes insane, and the book does talk about how unstable Billy is. This sounds like a pretty solid combination to make a man think that he's been abducted by aliens and all his life is flashing before his life, hence the time traveling. Or just maybe he really is time traveling and maybe he really was abducted by space creatures. Maybe... To me it just feels like a stretch which is weird because I like to read books about wizards and hunger games and never once did I question the sanity of these characters. I think because this story is so intertwined with such a realistic event it's harder to think of this story as make believe. Because the story seems so real it's hard to think of time travel and abductions as real. Right now I think he's crazy but only time will tell.
This is the story of a man named Billy who believes he becomes "unstuck" from time and travels to different parts of his life including when he is abducted by aliens. I'm not going to lie, if somebody told me this happened to them I would think they need to be committed. But Billy doesn't necessarily come off as crazy in the story, more like misunderstood. Or maybe the war has driven him to be crazy. It wouldn't be the first time a soldier goes insane, and the book does talk about how unstable Billy is. This sounds like a pretty solid combination to make a man think that he's been abducted by aliens and all his life is flashing before his life, hence the time traveling. Or just maybe he really is time traveling and maybe he really was abducted by space creatures. Maybe... To me it just feels like a stretch which is weird because I like to read books about wizards and hunger games and never once did I question the sanity of these characters. I think because this story is so intertwined with such a realistic event it's harder to think of this story as make believe. Because the story seems so real it's hard to think of time travel and abductions as real. Right now I think he's crazy but only time will tell.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)