Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut
One of the few times when Billy finally shows raw emotion, is the sudden scene in which the scolding Germans show him the terrible state of the sickly horses. In that scene Billy goes from as happy and content as can be to boo-hooing like a little baby. That the sight of two dying horses, after living through an entire war, the deaths of many of his comrades and the fire-bombing of Dresden, is the only think that makes him cry is a testament to the human condition. Sometimes the mortality rates and the body counts reach so high, that we do not even fathom what kind of pain and suffering that truly causes. Consider Billy when speaking of the tombs of bodies buried beneath Dresden, he speaks of no sign of despair nor remorse, only practicality. Because there are so many bodies, they now just burn them rather than bury them. Throughout this entire town thousands of real human beings had perished, and what upsets Billy the most is the sight of two ill-treated horses. As Vonnegut says, "Billy cried very little, though he often saw things worth crying about" (Vonnegut 197). It is apparent that through all that Billy had seen from the war, he developed a very unrealistic view of death. This view of death protected him from the true finality of it and sugar-coated death into something that could easily be overcome if one were to just think differently. Thus it all goes back to what Vonnegut had said the entire time. 135,000 people were killed in that fire-bombing of Dresden, and so it goes...
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Billy's Anniversary
Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut
One of the oddest parts of the book is Billy's 18th wedding anniversary. Now this is saying something considering most the entire book is odd, yet this bit of peculiarity goes on explained and untouched for the rest of the book. It is the scene when Billy listens to the barbershop quartet sing "That Old Gang of Mine". For some reason or other, the actually changing of the notes and the sourness of the song cause Billy to come physically sick. He becomes so sick that in fact many can see it on his face. "They thought he might be having a heart attack, and Billy seemed to confirm this by going to a chair and sitting down haggardly" (Vonnegut 173). Kilgore Trout immediately assumes that Billy had peered through a "time window", which in all honestly is not that to hard to conceive. Then Valencia says to Billy that he looks like he's seen a ghost. However the word "ghost" is italicized. I believe it is italicized for a reason and that both Trout and Valencia's words were not far off. In that moment, it's as if Billy did go through a time window, in which he was reminded of the future in which all those people are dead. This applies even to the barbershop quartet, who were the last one's singing before that plane went down into the mountains.
One of the oddest parts of the book is Billy's 18th wedding anniversary. Now this is saying something considering most the entire book is odd, yet this bit of peculiarity goes on explained and untouched for the rest of the book. It is the scene when Billy listens to the barbershop quartet sing "That Old Gang of Mine". For some reason or other, the actually changing of the notes and the sourness of the song cause Billy to come physically sick. He becomes so sick that in fact many can see it on his face. "They thought he might be having a heart attack, and Billy seemed to confirm this by going to a chair and sitting down haggardly" (Vonnegut 173). Kilgore Trout immediately assumes that Billy had peered through a "time window", which in all honestly is not that to hard to conceive. Then Valencia says to Billy that he looks like he's seen a ghost. However the word "ghost" is italicized. I believe it is italicized for a reason and that both Trout and Valencia's words were not far off. In that moment, it's as if Billy did go through a time window, in which he was reminded of the future in which all those people are dead. This applies even to the barbershop quartet, who were the last one's singing before that plane went down into the mountains.
Derby's Big Moment
Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut
One scene which may not be as meaningful to most, yet I found much insight and humor in was Derby's little gung-ho speech in the name of democracy. When the traitorous Howard W. Campbell comes to the POW camp to recruit for his American-Nazi company, most of the men do not act. I find that this is less to do with their undying loyalty to the United States and more to the fact that they are all tired and broken and characterless. This point of being a non-character is mentioned a few times during this bit. Vonnegut finally blatantly admits that few of the characters within the story are real, thoughtful, dynamic, characters but "listless playthings of enormous forces" (Vonnegut 164). Yet in this one little scene, Derby does the perfect job of embodying the stereotypical, punch-drunk patriot who tells the evil Nazi commander to shove it. In the movies such an act is usually the big climax, and according to Vonnegut, in Derby's case, it was the climax of his life. However, to the rest of the beaten and used-up men of the American army, they could not care less. I find it intriguing if Vonnegut's portrayal of the men of the US army is truly accurate. So much of us are used to the typical stars and stripes loving American boy who goes off to war, kicks the crap out of Charlie, and comes home to tell the tale. Vonnegut's view is that of apathetic young men just trying to get by and get home to their families.
One scene which may not be as meaningful to most, yet I found much insight and humor in was Derby's little gung-ho speech in the name of democracy. When the traitorous Howard W. Campbell comes to the POW camp to recruit for his American-Nazi company, most of the men do not act. I find that this is less to do with their undying loyalty to the United States and more to the fact that they are all tired and broken and characterless. This point of being a non-character is mentioned a few times during this bit. Vonnegut finally blatantly admits that few of the characters within the story are real, thoughtful, dynamic, characters but "listless playthings of enormous forces" (Vonnegut 164). Yet in this one little scene, Derby does the perfect job of embodying the stereotypical, punch-drunk patriot who tells the evil Nazi commander to shove it. In the movies such an act is usually the big climax, and according to Vonnegut, in Derby's case, it was the climax of his life. However, to the rest of the beaten and used-up men of the American army, they could not care less. I find it intriguing if Vonnegut's portrayal of the men of the US army is truly accurate. So much of us are used to the typical stars and stripes loving American boy who goes off to war, kicks the crap out of Charlie, and comes home to tell the tale. Vonnegut's view is that of apathetic young men just trying to get by and get home to their families.
The diamond and the denture
Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut
One symbol that comes up consistently in this story is that of the diamond and the denture. Billy comes across this odd duo in the most fortuitous of events. The possessions were on the inside pocket of an old civilian coat that Billy was given to by the Germans on his arrival at the POW camp. The interesting thing is that of all the jackets of the piles of clothes and of all the POW's, Billy just happened to be paired with the most dismal yet most rewarding jacket. For inside, is the ornate denture and a 2 carrot diamond. The significance of these two objects is beyond me, however they do carry on the story and help emphasize Billy's insanity. For one, the reason it took him so long to even know they were in his jacket was because "he was told not to find out what the lumps were" (Vonnegut 137). The mere fact that voices are dictating his actions at this point heighten his sense of lunacy. He is obviously quite memorized by the odd couple. At the point where the German doctor is berating Billy for his clownish outward appearance, Billy's only response is to palm the possessions in front of the man and smile. This simple action makes it appear that Billy believes it to be a much more substantial and meaningful gesture towards the man, as if the possessions hold some sort of higher meaning.
One symbol that comes up consistently in this story is that of the diamond and the denture. Billy comes across this odd duo in the most fortuitous of events. The possessions were on the inside pocket of an old civilian coat that Billy was given to by the Germans on his arrival at the POW camp. The interesting thing is that of all the jackets of the piles of clothes and of all the POW's, Billy just happened to be paired with the most dismal yet most rewarding jacket. For inside, is the ornate denture and a 2 carrot diamond. The significance of these two objects is beyond me, however they do carry on the story and help emphasize Billy's insanity. For one, the reason it took him so long to even know they were in his jacket was because "he was told not to find out what the lumps were" (Vonnegut 137). The mere fact that voices are dictating his actions at this point heighten his sense of lunacy. He is obviously quite memorized by the odd couple. At the point where the German doctor is berating Billy for his clownish outward appearance, Billy's only response is to palm the possessions in front of the man and smile. This simple action makes it appear that Billy believes it to be a much more substantial and meaningful gesture towards the man, as if the possessions hold some sort of higher meaning.
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Billy's Thoughts on death
Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut
So Billy's perspective on time is obviously incredibly abstract and hard for the human mind to even fathom. One interesting concept that comes with his extraordinary outlook is his idea of death. It is a much more soothing concept to embrace. Billy states his idea to a little boy in this fashion, "that his father was very much alive in moments the boy would see again and again" (Vonnegut 135). According to the Tralfadorian concept of death, since all time (past, present, and future) exist the same, then those who have died are just in a bad state in that point in time yet are still very much alive in the other points in time. Such an abstract idea does pose as interesting and soothing idea to grasp, however, taking this practically, such an idea could never possibly apply to human beings who are unable to see the fourth dimension that the Tralfadorians do. Such a dimension is what enables them to always be with their loved one's, as long as they were to focus and live the time that they lived. Putting all philosophy aside, this idea is obviously a coping mechanism for Billy's tortured and corrupt mind. As a man who has seen the supposed "worst massacre in World War 2", he obviously has seen much death that he now must cope with. By going along with these wild ideas mitigate the eternalness and finality of death, he understates the concept to himself, making it much more easier to cope. It is all just another fiction of Billy's disabled mind.
So Billy's perspective on time is obviously incredibly abstract and hard for the human mind to even fathom. One interesting concept that comes with his extraordinary outlook is his idea of death. It is a much more soothing concept to embrace. Billy states his idea to a little boy in this fashion, "that his father was very much alive in moments the boy would see again and again" (Vonnegut 135). According to the Tralfadorian concept of death, since all time (past, present, and future) exist the same, then those who have died are just in a bad state in that point in time yet are still very much alive in the other points in time. Such an abstract idea does pose as interesting and soothing idea to grasp, however, taking this practically, such an idea could never possibly apply to human beings who are unable to see the fourth dimension that the Tralfadorians do. Such a dimension is what enables them to always be with their loved one's, as long as they were to focus and live the time that they lived. Putting all philosophy aside, this idea is obviously a coping mechanism for Billy's tortured and corrupt mind. As a man who has seen the supposed "worst massacre in World War 2", he obviously has seen much death that he now must cope with. By going along with these wild ideas mitigate the eternalness and finality of death, he understates the concept to himself, making it much more easier to cope. It is all just another fiction of Billy's disabled mind.
Billy's relationship with the speaker
Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut
The relationship between Billy and the speaker. Is as confusing and obscured as the events of this book. For the longest time, I even assumed that the speaker had once again changed his name for the book as he said he did in the beginning. Among many things, the speaker and Billy do have some very oddly peculiar moments. Moments that are so short and so insignificant yet as similar as can be. One example is when speaking of their dogs. Back in the beginning of the book, the speaker states, "I let him know I like him, and he lets me know he likes me" (Vonnegut 7). Much later in the book, Billy says something eerily familiar to this same sentence by the speaker. Also the speaker and Billy both share an aurora of lunacy to them. The speaker has his completely irregular and concise sentences, and Billy has the whole being abducted by aliens and time travel idea. However, later on through some very sneaky and inconspicuous hints, one realizes that Billy and the speaker are in no way the same person, considering the speaker exists within Billy's story. Intriguingly their paths cross, and some of the character's, such as Paul Lazzaro and OHare are all present within Billy's version. This possess the question, if the speaker was present through most of Billy's war experience, why did he tell the entire story through through Billy's version Then again, why did Kurt Vonnegut himself even include the initial speaker in his book and why didn't he just have the story told solely from Billy's first person perspective? I guess we may or may not know soon enough.
The relationship between Billy and the speaker. Is as confusing and obscured as the events of this book. For the longest time, I even assumed that the speaker had once again changed his name for the book as he said he did in the beginning. Among many things, the speaker and Billy do have some very oddly peculiar moments. Moments that are so short and so insignificant yet as similar as can be. One example is when speaking of their dogs. Back in the beginning of the book, the speaker states, "I let him know I like him, and he lets me know he likes me" (Vonnegut 7). Much later in the book, Billy says something eerily familiar to this same sentence by the speaker. Also the speaker and Billy both share an aurora of lunacy to them. The speaker has his completely irregular and concise sentences, and Billy has the whole being abducted by aliens and time travel idea. However, later on through some very sneaky and inconspicuous hints, one realizes that Billy and the speaker are in no way the same person, considering the speaker exists within Billy's story. Intriguingly their paths cross, and some of the character's, such as Paul Lazzaro and OHare are all present within Billy's version. This possess the question, if the speaker was present through most of Billy's war experience, why did he tell the entire story through through Billy's version Then again, why did Kurt Vonnegut himself even include the initial speaker in his book and why didn't he just have the story told solely from Billy's first person perspective? I guess we may or may not know soon enough.
Time Travel
Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut
One compelling mood that Vonnegut is very talented of inducing is this whole notion of timelessness. From the beginning of the book, the idea of time travel and the relativity of time is highlighted and even somewhat explained in parts. The explanations are helpful, yet still quit puzzling. How could someone begin to understand something as perplexing and abstract as a fourth dimension and past, present, and future all coinciding. Well, literary structure seems to do the trick. Through what I've blasted through so far, the entirety of this book is set very complexly and seemingly random where totally unrelated events can happen at any time. You are so easily swept off to so many of Billy's life events no matter if it past or present or future. The truth is, giving the context of this book. There is no past or present or future. By reading this book we are swept through a grand story, with not a true beginning, middle, or end. The reader begins to adapt to this notion of timelessness and then starts to embrace it. A book itself can help describe some of the philosophy of this story. In a book, who's to say what is present. As you read one page, that is presently what you are reading, but just as soon as you are done with that you may move ten pages behind and be presently reading that as well. As the Tralfamadorians say, "What we love in our books are the depths of many marvelous moments seen all at one time" (Vonnegut 88)
One compelling mood that Vonnegut is very talented of inducing is this whole notion of timelessness. From the beginning of the book, the idea of time travel and the relativity of time is highlighted and even somewhat explained in parts. The explanations are helpful, yet still quit puzzling. How could someone begin to understand something as perplexing and abstract as a fourth dimension and past, present, and future all coinciding. Well, literary structure seems to do the trick. Through what I've blasted through so far, the entirety of this book is set very complexly and seemingly random where totally unrelated events can happen at any time. You are so easily swept off to so many of Billy's life events no matter if it past or present or future. The truth is, giving the context of this book. There is no past or present or future. By reading this book we are swept through a grand story, with not a true beginning, middle, or end. The reader begins to adapt to this notion of timelessness and then starts to embrace it. A book itself can help describe some of the philosophy of this story. In a book, who's to say what is present. As you read one page, that is presently what you are reading, but just as soon as you are done with that you may move ten pages behind and be presently reading that as well. As the Tralfamadorians say, "What we love in our books are the depths of many marvelous moments seen all at one time" (Vonnegut 88)
Simultaneously living.
Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut
The greatest proof of Billy's abduction being totally fabricated through his warped mind comes from the early on in chapter 4. Although the book keeps a consistency in being very inconsistant, it does form somewhat a pattern when referencing the beginnings of his abduction. As he is taken from earth and lead through the process of being captive to the Tralfamadore, a parallel scene is developed as Billy is also run through the process of being captive to the Germans. As he traveled through space being enlightened by the speak box, he simultaneously is being hauled across the whole of Germany as a prisoner of war. As he is stripped of his clothes by the Germans, he also is presented naked in an exhibit to the rest of the Tralfamadore. He is studied and looked down upon as stupid, as seen from the questions asked through the talking box and the pamphlet on American's as prisoners. The fact that both events are so similar posses the idea that Billy fabricated the future scenario in his head to make life easier. In order to produce such vivid events his mind just coupled the ideas he had learned from his science fiction books with events of his real life. One line that seems to sum up this whole idea is, "So they were trying to reinvent themselves and their universe. Science fiction was a big help" (Vonnegut 101).
The greatest proof of Billy's abduction being totally fabricated through his warped mind comes from the early on in chapter 4. Although the book keeps a consistency in being very inconsistant, it does form somewhat a pattern when referencing the beginnings of his abduction. As he is taken from earth and lead through the process of being captive to the Tralfamadore, a parallel scene is developed as Billy is also run through the process of being captive to the Germans. As he traveled through space being enlightened by the speak box, he simultaneously is being hauled across the whole of Germany as a prisoner of war. As he is stripped of his clothes by the Germans, he also is presented naked in an exhibit to the rest of the Tralfamadore. He is studied and looked down upon as stupid, as seen from the questions asked through the talking box and the pamphlet on American's as prisoners. The fact that both events are so similar posses the idea that Billy fabricated the future scenario in his head to make life easier. In order to produce such vivid events his mind just coupled the ideas he had learned from his science fiction books with events of his real life. One line that seems to sum up this whole idea is, "So they were trying to reinvent themselves and their universe. Science fiction was a big help" (Vonnegut 101).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)