For
tonight's blog, please choose a line from the text, quote it (with the
page number), and then ask a question based off of this line. AUTHENTIC
QUESTIONS ARE GOOD! IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S OKAY TO START A POST WITH,
"THIS LINE CONFUSED ME..." Then, try to answer your own question. Dig deep. Perhaps try out a couple of potential answers. Perhaps, in your answer, provide/connect your analysis to an idea of a piece of textual evidence from earlier in the novel, or a short story we've read. DO NOT REPEAT SOMEONE ELSE'S QUOTATION/IDEA. MAKE SURE THAT THE LINE IS FROM PP. 107-137.
YOU MUST ALSO RESPOND TO A CLASSMATE'S QUESTION. Agree or disagree, but make sure that you add something new-- a new idea, a reference to another part of the book. Include textual evidence as you push the conversation forward.
Format:
"...." (#).
Question:
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete“Today we do. On other days we have wars as horrible as any you’ve ever seen. There isn’t anything we can do about them, so we simply don’t look at them.” (116).
ReplyDeleteQ: What do the Tralfamadorians symbolize in the story? Are they good or bad?
Upon reading this quote the Tralfamadorians did not give me a good impression, rather I thought of them as ignorant and not carrying the perfect weapon Vonnegut could use in a war story. However at the same time, when Billy describes war, he illustrates the idea that “He was being stupid”(116). Then I thought that in reality, the Tralfamadorians represent a utopian race with certain values exactly the opposite of humans, therefore in reality they are a dystopia. Their values may seem perfect but in truth are so rationalist that they lose a sense of emotion and theoretically non-human. This connects to class on how we talk of the Tralfamadorians being non-human and not sharing our common belief in how we view the world. I think though that Vonnegut as a human activist is trying to say something more. He wants to prove that we cannot think like humans, however we also can’t be aliens to our own kind, we must stay in touch with our romanticist side and think rationally. Vonnegut wants to portray that we cant think black and white, no radical romanticist and rationalist, there is a middle grey in between where both thoughts can be incorporated, However, if we stay one end of the spectrum we will achieve nothing. Either, we continuing fighting or leave behind those that we love because we bow down to a predetermined fate. So then I wondered, is Billy Pilgrim one of the few who wants to incorporate Tralfamadorian ideas such as “so it goes” to improve humanity as a whole?
I disagree with you when you said that "the Tralfamadorians represent a utopian race with certain values exactly the opposite of humans." When the Tralfamadorians are sharing their views on humans and war in this part of the story, they discuss how there is nothing anyone can do about war, and it has to be accepted because it will just happen. These opinions do not contradict human ideas, but they do however, contradict Vonnegut's. One of Vonnegut's many points in this book is that humans sit back and do nothing while destructive things like war are occurring, because they believe that war is unavoidable. Throughout the novel, Vonnegut has displayed that human's nonchalance about war is wrong, and when the Tralfamadorians display this same nonchalance, it becomes clear that the views of Tralfamadorians and humans do, in fact, correspond. I believe that by creating a connection between their opinions, Vonnegut wanted to show just how many people (and in this case, aliens) are so ignorant to the destruction of war.
DeleteJenna, I agree with you when you say that Vonnegut doesn't believe in humans sitting back "and do nothing while destructive things like war are occurring, because they believe that war is unavoidable". What interests me is that Vonnegut also believes that war is inevitable. He believes that "wars are as easy to stop as glaciers"(3). Vonnegut is an activist, and naturally believes that war is pointless murder. I think that the message that Vonnegut is trying to send is the following: While certain aspects of life can be changed by free will, there will always be tragic and unpreventable occurrences. This, however, does not necessarily mean that people should sit back and say "so it goes".
DeleteI agree partly with both of you. I believe the entity which the Tramalfadorians represent is extremely important to the purpose of the book, and this quote shows the views of common people who have disconnected themselves from society through ignorance. Vonnegut uses this as well as other evidence to show times in which humans allow themselves to disconnect themselves from large issues because they feel they have no presence in the issue and that there is nothing they can do about it. The enlightenment of the Tramalfadorians allows them to see into the fourth dimension, and they believe this makes them smarter than us. At this point in the book it is unclear what the purpose of this idea is, but it can take two directions. Vonnegut could be trying to ask us to stray from our tendency to see what we want and open our vision to see issues as a larger picture, or ask us to do the opposite and show the way society forms when we take everything at face value.
Delete"'So-' said Billy gropingly, 'I suppose that the idea of stopping war on Earth is stupid too.'"
ReplyDeleteWhat do the Traflmadorian's reveal about Vonnegut's view of free will?
Vonnegut made the Traflmadorian's a race of aliens who don't believe in free will, and they think there is no way to prevent war on Earth. The Traflmadorian's know everything that has, had, and will happen in the Universe, but Vonnegut made these characters do nothing about it. Instead they just use the phrase "so it goes" and just focus on the good things that happened, ignoring the bad ones. I think Vonnegut made these characters not because he believes we have no say in our future lives, but just the opposite. Vonnegut made these characters to show the reader how crazy it is for one to not try to change things, and just let bad stuff happen. Vonnegut wants people to think about changing things and "stopping war" for example. If Vonnegut thought we didn't have free will, why would he have written an anti-war book, but he doesn't think that. A question I have is does Billy really believe in free will, or is he just saying he does because it is simpler and more detached?
the quote is on page 117
DeleteI agree with you when you talk about the fact that Vonnegut made the Tralfamadorians unable to change fait, that what is said to happen will happen and thats all. I believe that Vonnegut might also be using this idea to show us what most humans may think, that we cannot change fait. Yet, Vonnegut believes that if we actually did try there would be many things that could be avoided. This now leads me to question what the Traflmadorians actually are suppose to represent. Until now I had thought that the Tralfamadorians represented what Vonnegut thinks humans should be like, but if Vonnegut does think that we have free will then why do the Tralfamadorians say that we do not have free will. As you also said it is crazy for humans to not try to make changes, but is it possible?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"That's one thing Earthlings might learn to do, if they tried hard enough. Ignore the awful times, and concentrate on the good ones" (117).
ReplyDeleteQuestion: What would be the result of ignoring bad times like the Tralfamadorians think humans should do?
Having positive experiences is something that is crucial to have a fulfilling life. In order to determine whether an experience is good or bad, it is compared with a previous one. Therefore, acknowledging bad times is necessary, because it forces you to recognize the good and joyful ones as well. In conclusion, I think that ignoring bad times would not be beneficial for anyone, especially Billy Pilgrim. Billy has had many bad experiences in his life: war, starvation, the death of his loved ones, etc. However, without these experiences to compare things to, Billy would not be able to fully appreciate the positive things. For example, when Billy and the other American prisoners arrive at the POW camp, they are cold, hungry, and have just been through hell. But, when the Englishmen preform their comedic version of Cinderella, Billy laughs and enjoys himself, because, to Billy, the play is 100x better than anything he’s experienced in the war thus far. In conclusion, I disagree with the Tralfamadorians in their opinion that humans need to learn to ignore negative experiences, and think that it is essential to acknowledge everything while going about life.
I completely agree with you. It all ties back to the idea that there is no good without bad. Bad experiences are hard to get through, but can teach us some of the most beneficial lessons as we grow up and help positively form who we end up being as human beings. I never thought of this before you said it, but this is the second Tralfamadorian philosophy that I disagree with. I disagree with the way they believe in coping with death and the idea that negative experiences should be forgotten. Perhaps a new question could also be is Vonnegut juxtaposing the Tralfamadorian and human beings to emphasis the way that humans live life- or should not live life?
DeleteI agree with you and this idea that bad experiences are needed. Regardless of what the bad experience was, it is used as a base for what a good experience has to be like. Without bad experiences people wouldn't learn how to move on. It's the same thing with mistakes. If you completely ignore the mistakes you make in life, how are you suppose to learn from them? I think that Vonnegut is trying to demonstrate that human often times push aside the bad because they don't like to realize that something bad occurred. In reality we need bad experiences to develop as people.
DeleteI agree with all three of you guys. You guys all had some very strong points that stated the necessity of good and bad occurrences. In addition to your thoughts I believe that without the knowledge of prior mistakes you cannot benefit from them and use them for situations yet to come for better decision making. Also if you just avoid the bad feelings and situations that occur in the past you can never be grateful for your accomplishments or you may never feel satisfaction. If bad results are just avoided technically you would be living in a society with no feelings and everyone is the same because they wouldn't be able to better themselves without proper life experience.
DeleteEmely Recinos
ReplyDeleteQuote: "Every other army in history, prosperous or not, has attempted to clothe even its lowliest soldiers so as to make them impressive to themselves and others as stylish experts in drinking and copulation and looting and sudden death. The American Army, however, sends its enlisted men out to fight and die in a modified business suit quite evidently made for another man, a sterilized but unpressed gift from a nose-holding charity which passes out clothing to drunks in the slums. (pg 165) (Note my pg numbers are different)
Question: Does Vonnegut include this quote from Howard W. Campbell, Jr. primarily to show us how uninformed most Americans are about how American soldiers are treated like when at war? Does he agree with Howard W. Campbell, Jr.?
Answer:
Vonnegut writes this to show the comparison between the American army and armies of other countries. In other countries he says that the countries provide proper clothing and food for their soldiers even if its all just for appearances. They are dressed in proper uniforms no matter if they are in war being drunk, lazy, or killed. They die looking like a hero. Yet in the American army, soldiers are given nothing. Not for appearances or even to survive. The men are given uniforms that were not even meant for them. Out of all the countries, America treats its soldiers the worst. It not only uses unequipped men but also does not provide any support to the soldiers in anyway. Vonnegut is mocking the American Army by showing us how they treat their soldiers. Everyone thinks that in war the men all wear their great uniforms, and carry around all their weapons ready to defend themselves, but this is not the reality of the situation for most soldiers. As we were discussing in class, Vonnegut uses a lot of repetition in the story in order to get his message across about his view on war. By repeating constantly through the story how much the American soldiers suffer, he proves to us that war indeed is not what we all may think it is. He also describes the horrible conditions they live in and no one ever does anything to help the soldiers. He really wants to make it clear how unhuman it is to put thousands of men into these poor conditions. That not only is it horrible that they are sent there in the first place, forced to kill other people, but they also have to endure tragedies themselves. Vonnegut even rights that, America is basically just sending its men out of the country into war, to their death. Vonnegut must agree in some way with what Howard W. Campbell, Jr. is saying about the American Army. America doesn't realize what it is doing to most of its soldiers.
"The visitor from outer space made a serious study of Christianity, to learn, if he could, why Christians found it so easily to be cruel"(108)
ReplyDeleteAre their comparisons that can be made between the Tralfamadorians and the outer space being in the book "The Gospel from Outer Space"?
Vonnegut has been placing religious references throughout the novel, and it is shown that he has been comparing some of them to the Tralfamadorians. As we already know, the Tralfamadorians are mentioned because they can see in the fourth dimension, and Billy wants to show people how to see the world like in this way. The Tralfamadorians also wonder why humans use the idea of free will. Just like the visitor from the book who is trying to find out why Christians are cruel, the Tralfamadorians are trying to examine the human race and find out why they think that they can change how events in life occur. This is the main reason why they took Billy and put him in a zoo. I think of them as somewhat of religious pioneers on a goal to change the world.
What do you mean by comparing religion to the Tralfamadorians? I am a little confused about that because i felt like Vonnegut was more comparing views again. Similar to what we discussed in class today as looking at our society from a far and realizing its pretty scary and messed up. The religion topic is great though, but I think Vonnegut was trying to bring in the topic of people who have lost people but are religious so they have a reason to keep smiling and being strong to those who do not have a religion and who do not really knows what to do when someone passes away because to them its just a passing, the person is in no pain anymore and they are gone. Kind of like the Tralfamadorians in away.
Delete"Billy switched on a floor lamp. The light from the single source threw the baroque detailing of Montana's body into sharp relief. Billy was reminded of the fantastic architecture in Dresden, before it was bombed" (133). The essential question that I had after reading this quote was how is war incorporated into Billy's life now that he's experienced it first hand? Or is it even incorporated at all? I completely think that war, even when he's on Tralfamadore or traveling through time, plays a predominant role in Billy's life. Although it might not be completely obvious, I feel that the war is always on Billy's mind in a sub-conscience way. This quote is a prime example. Even when he's about to have sex, Billy compares Montana's body to architecture where the war took place- and further goes to mention the bombing of this place. Prior to experiencing such a beautiful and meaningful event, Billy is having thoughts of war and violence. After experiencing so much violence first hand, I feel that Billy can never go back to normal. He will always be a violent person in the sense that he thinks violent thoughts and relates everything back to war. I am not saying he is physically a violent person, but his mindset is subtly driven by the idea of war. War is incorporated into all of his thoughts and all of his thoughts can be related to war. Once you enter the war there is no escaping it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. Billy will never be the same because of the experiences he went through. He thinks of the terrible events that he happened to him in the war and it is dominant over the meaningful and important events in his life. He is doing the complete opposite of what the Tralfamadorians advise humans to do, which is to ignore the these bad experiences. Even though he tries to follow the Tralfamadorians way of life, he still cannot ignore the bad memories that he has.
DeleteI agree with you that Billy is strongly affected by the war and how it has taken over his train of thought. I think it definitely scared him because the scene where the people are being boiled in the water tower shows up multiple times. I also think this is one of the reasons why he says "So it goes", because he needs to find a way to put the war and deaths of of his mind. But i disagree with what you said about Billy becoming a violent person, I think the ways he says peaceful is by going to Tralfmadore and communicating and living in a peaceful society.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"... they naturally thought... Oh boy--they sure picked the wrong guy to lynch that time! And that thought had a brother: 'There are right people to lynch.' Who? People not well connected. So it goes" (109).
ReplyDeleteWhat is Vonnegut saying about human nature? How does this connect to the Tralfalmadorians point of view?
Vonnegut is a humanist which means he believes in the value of humans and human life. This idea that human lives are dispensable, and if its not me then I shouldn't worry about it is a mentality that has been around since the beginning of time. It is exemplified in everything from action movies to genocide. It has become so much a part of human culture that we no longer question it. Vonnegut is taking a stance on this. He is using the Tralfalmadorians seeming disgust and fascination with human views to show us how ridiculous we are. The idea that even aliens, who are supposed to be savages, think that we are strange for killing each other is Vonnegut's way of bringing what we do into perspective.
"'He has always pressed it, and he always will. We always let him and we always will let him. The moment is structured that way.'" (117)
ReplyDeleteQ: How does this quote further exemplify Vonnegut's idea that humans have no free will?
A:
This quote further exemplifies the idea that humans have no free will because, it demonstrates how humans have no control over their actions. The Tralfamadorians believe that everything is set in stone and that your future actions have already been decided. Vonnegut uses this idea of no free will to mock humans. In reality what I think he's trying to demonstrate is that people always have a choice over what actions they make. Whether or not people choose to act upon this, is up to them. People are often mislead by this idea that there is no other way to do something, so they decide to just let it be. This relates back to what was talked about in class today. Expanding on the idea of whether or not Vonnegut believes human have free will. I agree that we do but it's up to us to use the freedom given to us. The future isn't set in stone, mostly because it hasn't even happened yet. The actions we make in the present determine our future. If we didn't have free will then how would we be able to make our own decisions.
I agree with you, that Vonnegut uses satire to mock the human view that there is no free will. To some extent there may be things that are going to happen regardless, however we also have a lot of control over our fate. We can choose not to say something, we can choose not to take an action that could completely change our course through time. I believe that Vonnegut believes in free will however his experience in the war and that every man goes in believing they are going to live however most of them die, twisted his view.
DeleteYes! I agree, I think Vonnegut believes in free will but that we have to be motivated to use it. This is what I was trying to say in my comment yesterday. Just because the tralfamadorians don't believe in free will doesn't mean Vonnegut himself feels that same. I completely agree that he us using mockery, satire, and juxtaposition to get his point across. Vonnegut said in the first chapter that he forbid his sons from fighting in wars or making weapons. He wouldn't do that if he thought war would always happen and we might as well say "So it goes." If we are active and not apathetic, we can change our future.
Delete“I'm proud you were a soldier. Do you know that?” (121)
ReplyDeleteWhy did Vonnegut include this in the book? What is he trying to say about pride and moral values?
This quote is interesting to me because it can be perceived in many different ways. Valencia Pilgrim, Billy’s wife tries to turn this idea of war into a respectable event. I think the quote did a good job of explaining their marriage. She seems like a very sweet person who is yet very oblivious just like Billy came off to the other soldiers in the war. She has all good intentions it’s just the thing that she says and her ugly appearance; Billy feels a type of pathetic empathy for Valencia. Billy knows all the traumatic experiences he has gone through in the war and doesn’t express pride of being a soldier. I think Vonnegut did a really good idea in showing how others from the outside perceive war in such pride thing. Soldiers are looked as honorable people, which they are. However, if we look at the actions that they are required to take it’s not exactly the most morally correct thing to do. Vonnegut brings up a good question, how should we balance good intention with moral rule?
Well, usually a good intention goes hand in hand with the moral rule. There is no good intentions about war, from my perspective to say the least. It's all useless cruelty towards one another. Morality is something all humans have, and all humans are born with good intentions when they come into the world. Some may fulfill that, and others not so much. Others will be blinded by the greed and temptation of the other side, leaving the pendulum swinging between both morals and good intentions.
Delete“The visitor from outer space made a gift to Earth of a new Gospel. In it, Jesus really was a nobody, and a pain on the neck to a lot of people with better connections that he had. He still got to say all the lovely and puzzling things he said in the other Gospels” (109)
ReplyDelete“From this moment on, He will punish horribly anybody who torments a bum who has no connections” (110)!
What is Vonnegut trying to say about morals of religion and the mentality of “earthlings”?
In these two quotations (I found it necessary to use both) the morals of religion that people have come to count on are being questioned. Vonnegut, a humanist, sees all people as equal. Here, he justifies that not everyone is given equal opportunities. The argument being made here is that if Jesus were not the son of God, people wouldn’t listen to him. He still would have said the “lovely and puzzling things”, but the majority of people would have disregarded him because he is not “well connected” (109). In other words, his opinion is irrelevant. This mentality is evidently distorted, because Jesus’ ideas and words of wisdom have continued to influence people. Some random person could very well be walking around with revolutionary ideas, but his or her voice will never be heard because of lack of connections. Vonnegut is using the Tralfamadorian mindset in order to allow the audience to view the bigger, and clearly flawed, picture.
"Somebody in the zoo crowd asked through the lecturer what the most valuable thing he learned on Tralfmadore was so far, and Billy replied, 'How the inhabitants of a whole planet can live in peace! As you know, I am from a planet that has been engaged in senseless slaughter since the beginning of time. I myself have seen the bodies of schoolgirls who were boiled alive in a water tower by my own countrymen, who were proud of fighting pure evil at time." (116)
ReplyDeleteWhat does Vonnegut think about humans? Why does he choose to compare Earth and Tralfmadore?
Vonnegut thinks that humans are violent and unattached to others. Humans kill one another during a war with out hesitation because they believe they are doing the right thing. Vonnegut clearly shows in this quote how people kill others nonchalantly by using the example of people being boiled in water towers. Also a common phrase Vonnegut uses is "So it goes", which means that all the deaths and people dying in war does not really matter and many people believe it does not. The reason why Vonnegut compares Earth to Tralfmadore is because he wants to clearly show the differences between a plant in the state of peace and a planet constantly in a state of war. On the planet Tralfmadore the creatures do not usually fight, but it does come around rarely, and on earth there are world wars and small wars, there is always a conflict. Vonnegut is trying to show that the reason that people on earth are so violent is because there is non-stop fighting and wars.
I agree that Vonnegut used this scene in the zoo as a metaphor of humanity and wrong values that are dominant in today’s society. Tramalfadorians are necessary piece of this story, because humans have to be seen with different, no-human eyes, in order to get realistic picture of who we are today. Vonnegut needed someone other the human, otherwise his story would not be convincing, because one of the lost values of the humans was “believe”.
DeleteAren, Vonnegut’s comparison of the fictional Tralfmadore and the real Planet with which we live on does question the morality of humans. In my opinion the comparison is not that of our willingness to kill, but the ease of our justifying our own morality. On Tralfmadore people do not exist for a finite amount of time, they have always existed, and they will always exist. For humans, our time is brief and finite. We, to our own knowledge, cannot perceive after our own deaths. Yet we find justification in cutting someone’s finite time short. For us murder is the act of permanently removing someone from the universe forever. It cannot be justified by any but the most extreme circumstances. Yet we can find these circumstances being used as justification time and time again. This is the bleak reality of which we perceive, and Vonnegut finds so wrongful.
Delete"All Billy could see was the dot at the end of the pipe."
ReplyDeleteThis quote stood out to me because of the connection it has to the other ideas I had throughout the book. Humans can only see in the third dimension, and are unable to see the way the Tramalfadorians see in the fourth dimension, and vice versa. Attempting to describe the way Billy sees the world, the Tramalfadorians show billy seeing one dot out of the whole of his vision, unable to control what he sees, and he has no choice but to say "That's life." Vonnegut uses this as an addition to the phrase "So it goes" to further show the way humans tend to concise the topic of death in order for us to justify our inaction towards it. Saying "That's life" or "so it goes" allows us to live our lives with the idea that there is nothing we can do to stop the problems in the world. Vonnegut uses these terms to spark an opposite reaction from us, asking us to take a stance against the problems in the world that we allow to be invisible to us. In a way, Vonnegut is asking us to see out of more than just the tiny dot at the end of the tunnel, and expand our vision to see the world for what it is, problems and all, and see the ways we can and can't change it.
My question was
Delete"How does this relate to Vonnegut's use of "so it goes?"
I agree with what you say about the way humans tend to concise the topic of death, with the phrase, "so it goes". However, as humans, I don't think we're capable of changing what we see, for the better. I believe Vonnegut uses the term "so it goes", to show how there are problems to be faced in the world, yet there is nothing we can do. We can only observe these obstacles, but we cant change them. Like war, nothing can be done about it, we see it as it is, and that's that.
DeleteYesenia, is there really nothing to be done about war and all your obstacles? An immovable fact of life seems a bad choice to write a book against. We have to be able to do something, at least in Vonnegut's eyes.
Delete-Ben Flood
"He supposed that the intent of the Gospels was to teach people, among other things, to be merciful, even to the lowest of the low. But the Gospels actually taught this: Before you kill somebody, make absolutely sure he isn't well connected. So it goes."
ReplyDeleteQuestion: Is Vonnegut's opposition to religious affiliations depicted through this quote?
Answer: Vonnegut is a self described atheist. The Bible is a book of lies. It is meant to be open ended and allows the reader to interpret it anyway he or she wants to. The Bible says to be merciful to people that are in a lower social class than yourself, to give charity to them, feed them when they're hungry, clothe them when they're warm. However, it's the same book that states, "A man that lays with another man should stoned to death." The Bible isn't accepting as it is claimed to be. Vonnegut knows religion is the cause of most wars. Just look at the Holocaust for example, in World War 2, they were massacred by the millions by the Germans who wanted one predominant race and Judaism to be wiped out. Vonnegut is stating that the Bible actually teaches you how to be cruel. It teaches the readers how to deceive and kill silently. It's about killing nonbelievers. Vonnegut doesn't follow an organized religion because of the disgusting antics within them.
The quote is from pages 108-109.
DeleteI agree with some ideas you stated, however I do not think this quote was targeted as an intro into Vonnegut's religious preference. I also do not believe that he wants to describe religion as a whole corrupt. Rather I believe Vonnegut wants to expose the corrupt practices in church, and how sometimes the faith of the people is abused. Sometimes religion can be twisted to whatever the oppressor may be trying to convey therefore abusing their power. To go even farther I believe that Vonnegut used the powerful theme of religion to explain that in the time of war there are no boundaries to what can be used as a weapon. Firearms are nothing compared to the alliance of the people who are driven by their passionate faith and in war anyone will abuse even holy texts, to control other.
Delete"He was all well. He had graduated from the Ilium School of Optometry-third in class of forty-seven"(118).
ReplyDeleteQuestion: How come Billy is more intelligent only in Optometry school, when Billy is described opposite of intelligent?
Answer: When reading this line I immediately thought, wow, Billy got top three? I thought Billy was suppose to be the opposite of smart? Almost every character in the book insults Billy because of his ignorance. Including Roland Weary, "Saved your life again you dumb bastard"(34). However, Billy manages to graduate third in class of forty-seven in the School of Optometry, the study of the eye. This seems to be Billy's strongest sense of knowledge. During Billy's encounter's in Tralfamadore, the topics he comes across, are only about humanity's flaws in the real world. Billy is the only one who knows the actual truth about "earthlings" and their messed up flaws, so how does this make him dumb? I believe Billy is the only wise character, despite the fact that he is described the opposite. His knowledge in optometry, demonstrates Billy's wisdom to real eyesight of reality on earth.
I agree with your observation, I also believe Billy had the highest scores because he was able to observe and "see" more than normal people. Vonnegut describes Billy as ignorant because Vonnegut wants to create a character that does not suit the physic of a hero, but instead an average person. But even though Billy wasn't a bright person, he was able to use his talent of "using his eyes" on Earth.
DeleteIt's true that Billy is more intelligent in Optometry school. However, war and being a solider is completely different. He is the smartest character in the book. But this is an anti war book, the main point is to display how bad war is. Billy is intelligent and surrounding him with people who commend war shows who actually is the smarter person, because war is bad and Billy recognizes that.
Delete"Billy's fiancee had finished her Three Musketeers Candy Bar. Now she was eating a Milky Way."(110)
ReplyDelete-Why does Vonnegut characterize Valencia as "always eating"?
I have a theory that Vonnegut didn't incorporate Valencia into the novel just to create a character to whom Billy does not want to get married to. Valencia was characterized as "fat" because she is the character to symbolize wealthy people. Valencia comes from a rich family, her father owns the Optometry school Billy attends. She is always eating candy bars which symbolize greed. The reason I believe this is because if you normally think of a wealthy person, you picture someone greedy and fat. So, Valencia is always eating because it shows that the rich always dig for more money and are never satisfied with their greed.
I agree with you for the most part. Valencia isn't only portrayed as Billy's mistake but also as a representation of wealth. She comes from a wealthy family, where she is always eating candy bars almost because she can afford them. I do disagree with your perspective on wealthy people. They are in fact portrayed as big and greedy but ironically I would think most rich people today are slim and extravagant. To me, wealthy people don't spend there money only on food and necessities but on expensive things just to show off. Then again, I should think about the time period this novel was written in.
Delete“That’s the attractive thing about war,” said Rosewater “Absolutely everybody gets a little something” (111)
ReplyDeleteQ: What is Rosewater’s opinion of war through this quote? What is Vonnegut showing?
A: When I read this passage, I noticed that Rosewater talks about war in a positive way. This goes against the mentality of the book. In this passage Valencia tells Rosewater that “Billy got the diamond in the war”, her tone shows how she in particular likes war because of the expensive jewelry she had received. Likewise, Rosewater’s tone of his reaction demonstrates a degrading of war. We then assume that he perceives war as a time where “everyone gets a little something”. Vonnegut portrays Rosewater as a person who is oblivious of war. Today, many people who don’t fight in war don’t realize how traumatizing it can be. Since veterans say they will never forget their past experiences, we can conclude that there is no escaping war. Unfortunately, I now realize that Billy will always relive his experiences of war. Consequently, Billy’s time travelling is an effect of never forgetting the past.
I disagree--I think Rosewater is not oblivious to war and he understands that it affects everyone in some kind of way. When he says that "everybody gets a little something", he means war can affect people positively, negatively, or somewhere in between, so he recognizes that soldiers can possibly have a very traumatizing experience in war. I think Vonnegut uses Rosewater to further emphasize that many of us who have not been directly affected by war should disregard popular movies' portrayal of brave, handsome soldiers, and acknowledge the brutality of war.
DeleteQuote: “Billy was displayed there in the zoo in a simulated Earthling habitat. Most of the furnishings had been stolen from the Sears Roebuck ware house in Iowa City, Iowa. There was a color television seat and the couch that could be converted into a bed. There were end tables with lamps and ashtrays on them by the couch. There was a home bar and two stoles. There was a little pull table. There was wall-to-wall carpeting in federal gold, except in the kitchen and bathroom areas and over the iron manhole cover in the center of the floor. There were magazines arranged in a fan on the coffee table in a front of the couch.
ReplyDeleteThere was a stereophonic phonograph the phonograph worked. The television didn’t. There was a picture of one cowboy killing another one pasted to the television tube. So it goes.”(112)
Question: Is the Vonnegut’s description of Billy in zoo some kind of metaphor of the today’s society?
Answer:
Trough out the years our society has changed I a lot of ways. People become selfish and humanity becomes exception. In Vonnegut’s story there is a “picture of one cowboy killing another one pasted to the television tube”. To me, that is metaphor of how humanity is seen today. This scene was a kind of mirror when you can see human beings trying to kill each other. But why you might ask? Well the answer is in our society and the way we were raised. Since we were little we are influenced by people around us to do anything to get to money and power. Some people are ready to do anything for it even kill someone. That is what I think Vonnegut is trying to say and show how badly our society work and that they have to change.
"Rosewater read out loud again: Oh boy - they sure picked the wrong guy to lynch this time! And that thought had a brother: 'there are right people to lynch.' Who? People not well connected. So it goes." pg. 109
ReplyDeleteQuestion: What is Vonnegut saying about religion? What is he saying about morality and humanism?
Answer: This quote stood out to me because it is a very unusual view of religion in general and of the crucifixion of Jesus in particular. Vonnegut is using an event central to Christian belief to make a moral point. I think he believes that any type of elitism is wrong, including organized religions. Many religions consider they own people to be 'the chosen ones,' in some manner superior to other human beings. Vonnegut is known for being a humanist, who values all human life and the choices of all human beings. He wants to make the point that exclusivity, even between faiths, is wrong. Saying that it is wrong to lynch a Christian implies that it is fine to lynch a non-Christian. I agree with Vonnegut's morals, but wonder why he chose the science fiction novels-within-a-novel by Kilgore Trout to deliver this message.
I used this same idea as a response to my quote which was totally different but i completely agree. Vonnegut use everything he believes in a contradicts it in order to prove a point. I like the use of Christian also because they a portrayed of people who never do wrong but in reality they make the most mistakes ever. I feel as if they try so hard to be so perfect and only do things for the grace of god but in reality they hurt more people than they actually help. In relations to the values of human life, only if it is your life is it valuable which what everyone or more specifically Christians cares about
DeleteI agree with you Francesca when you talk about there not being ever a right or wrong person to kill. All human life is important, and Vonnegut must think so as well. Through out the entire story so far he keeps saying "So it goes." I feel that he says this in order to mock the belief that some people may have when looking at death. They see someone getting killed but don't really care because they think that there must be a reason as to why that person is being killed. Vonnegut wants us to realize that this mentality is wrong, that there is never a sufficient reason to justify the killing of a person. Vonnegut hopes to help us see the injustice made by not caring about the death of certain people just because some reason has been given for killing someone. That we cannot just simply look the other way as someone is dying. It is inhumane to decide who should be killed and who shouldn't.
Delete" There were 5 sexes on Tralfamadore, each, of them performing a step necessary in the creation of a new individual. They looked identical to Billy---because their sex differences were all in the fourth dimension." (114)
ReplyDeleteWhy does Vonnegut use the fourth dimension so much? What does the use of the fourth dimension represent about humans?
Answer: I believe that Vonnegut uses the fourth dimension to show how oblivious humans are to the depth of people or things around them. He uses this to show that other life species pay more attention to thing that surround them and take things in to consideration and depth. he tries to portray earthlings (humans) as careless. It also show how selfish humans are if it doesn't involve them or effect them in any way then it doesn't matter. Vonnegut also connects this to how much people actually care and what concerns them. Vonnegut being a humanist uses this form of ignorance as one of the biggest problems that human beings have.He tries to show us as many things that are wrong with the human race in order to fix it. So even though we may argue that the novel goes against everything he believes in he does it for our benefit.
I totally agree, I think this fourth dimension idea plays into the dynamic between the humans and Tralfamadorians that is being portrayed. Tralfamadorians are usually shown to be superior or more advanced than humans. By comparing the two races Vonnegut shows both the error in the human way and the benefit. For example, like you said Vonnegut reveal the ignorance of humans, however previously he also showed how the belief in free will separates us
DeleteOn page 109 the paragraph that starts with "The visitor from outer space...." Vonnegut talks about the resurrection of Jesus and the Crucifixion. But he does it in such a, i don't want to say mocking way because that's not the right word, but it was more of a "silly people believing with no facts". I don't really have a question, I have more of a realization or like idea. I was talking about the book with older sister who has read one of Kurt Vonnegut's books before and we just started comparing his ideas and how he protest a lot through his words. When he talks about how thunder erupted and how God adopted Jesus as his son. He is telling it from the Tralformadarian people's perespective. I feel like what he is really trying to say is when you hear something or when hear someone talk about something and you have no knowledge of it you seem to agree with it or take it into consideration, like following the crowd.and that's what connect back to war. People only know about war from what they see in the ads, what they hear from other people. But the same people who are judging and trying to state facts about war have never been in one themselves. That being said, I think Vonnegut uses the Crucifixion and Resurrection as a way of saying, nobody has proof of anything unless they experience it. But yet we follow what we hear, what we see. We see children bibles and the kids, they believe the stuff that is being read to them. Christians were told here's the bible live it breathe it be it because it is the word of God. And that's what we did and continue to do even with no physical proof. Which is also probably why Vonnegut refers to "human beings" as being weird and strange. Because of what we choose to believe and how we get our resources to back up our beliefs. And that's wrong because you have no right to make any comment over war and if it is good or bad unless you have experienced war and saw the things these youngsters had to see.Basically, not everything is what it's cracked up to be, you got to really go into depth with it.
ReplyDelete"Billy was displayed in a zoo in an Earthling Habitat.....there were no walls, no place for Billy to hide...[Billy}took a leak. The crowd went wild."
ReplyDeleteQ:What is Vonnegut trying to show in this passage?
I have to admit the, I can tell that there is significance to this passage but i am not entirely sure what that significance is. The first thing that came to mind was how this really puts in perspective how little humans are compared to the rest of the universe. Even though we often think that we are the center of everything and we have absolute control, this passage really contradicts that. The mighty human is seen as nothing more than an animal we might have in a zoo. Another thought I had came from noticing how Vonnegut portrays the alien race. I think they are a humanistic race but just more developed. They show some of the same qualities of humans such as seeking entertainment (in this case from Billy) and are also very analytical. I think the Tralfamadorians are kind of like humans with very dulled emotions. And I think Vonnegut might be saying that we are becoming more and more desensitized to the world and soon we will become like the Tralfamadorians, almost purely analytical, we will loose some of our identity, what sets us apart will be gone
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQuote:
ReplyDelete"'How the inhabitants of a whole planet can live in peace! As you know, I am from a planet that has been engaged in senseless slaughter since the beginning of time."
Question:
How does Vonnegut express billy's feelings towards the human race?
Vonnegut characterizes billy's feelings towards the human race is sort of a disappointment, he expresses that humans cannot solve ones problems without violence. He also mentions the idea that humans have immoral qualities and carelessness towards one another. It almost seems that billy a human himself gives up on mankind his own species and almost prefers to stay in Tralfamadore with the Tralformadarians. Billy envies the fact that they live a life of peace with no wars, no violence, but living a life by neglecting the problems in ones society. I support most of billies thoughts on the careless nature of human beings, but i believe humans do not intend to be cruel but it is more of a price one has to pay to defend ones rights/beliefs.
“Montana was under heavy sedation. Tralfamadorians wearing gas masks brought her in, put her on Billy's yellow lounge chair; withdrew through his airlock. The vast crowd outside was delighted. All attendance records for the zoo were broken. Everybody on the planet wanted to see the Earthlings mate.” (132)
ReplyDeleteHow does Vonnegut compare humans to animals?
I was born in DC. When I was younger, I used to visit the National Zoo. As an act of goodwill towards the United States, China has lent Pandas to the National Zoo, as well as other Zoos. Those Pandas were bred. I remember the excitement of the having these two rare creatures breed in our own Nation. You could watch them live on webcam, there movements were live tweeted. It made National headlines when twins were born. This reminds me greatly of the passage Vonnegut has created. The humans are more than attractions they are a symbol of dominance. Not only do these aliens watch us breed for there amusement but they personally facilitate it. We are but creatures to them. We are cows in there slaughterhouse. Should they want to eat us, they would have no problem. We find this scary and distasteful, but it is only what we inflict on the creatures around us. The aliens are to us as we are to cows. We have more shared genetic material with a banana than them, and they know it.
Good panda analogy there. The only difference between pandas and us is scale. But that doesn't seem very Vonneguty to me to be honest. Vonnegut the humanist making us intergalactic mating pandas? If I had to guess I would say that this whole example of the Tralfamadorians watching Billy in the zoo is more an artifice for shock value than anything.
Delete"Should they want to eat us, they would have no problem. We find this scary and distasteful"
Exactly. I believe Vonnegut would say that we aren't meant to be eaten. That we shouldn't be treated like animals to slaughter. The Tralfamadorian practice, though fake, has one parallel in reality, if not a perfect one. The POW camps. Billy and the other soldiers were in fact animals there. Only living because they were kept alive. I think the message here is clear. Humanity is not to be caged and made a spectacle. We are above that.
-Ben Flood
“Everything Was Beautiful, and Nothing Hurt” (122).
ReplyDeleteQ: What is Vonnegut portraying about soldiers’ coping mechanisms?
This confusing phrase was written on a gravestone, presumably Edgar Derby’s. I noticed that this is the first drawing in the book, which may indicate significance. This quote reminds me of the way Billy copes with his life after war. He always seems very ‘out of it’ and he does not pay close attention to what is really happening around him. For example, he does not realize that the heat in his house is not on and it is freezing—his daughter calls him a child because of this. I think Billy’s indifference to his surroundings after the war is a mechanism to cope with the atrocities he had witnessed in the war. During a meeting at the Lions Club, the speaker favored “increased bombings” in North Vietnam and Vonnegut says, “Billy was not moved to protest the bombing of North Vietnam, did not shudder about the hideous things he himself had seen bombing do. He was simply having lunch with the Lions Club, of which he was past president now” (60). This is an example of Billy blocking out his emotions because if he let them in, the evil and pain he saw and felt in the war would come crashing in and he would go even more insane. At the moment, everything in his post war life is more or less not traumatic and “nothing hurts” (122). I think Vonnegut points out this type of coping mechanism to portray the suffering of many soldiers in war, which causes them to block out emotions. This can further support why Vonnegut is against war.
I agree with this, I believe that Billy needed to form some sort of coping mechanism to deal with the atrocities of war. I would also like to add on, and connect it to a quote between the Tralfadorians and Billys conversation " I suppose that the idea of preventing war on Earth is stupid". " Of course.. On other days we have wars as horrible as any you've ever seen...We simply don't look at them. We spend eternity looking at the pleasant moments." This is connected to the quote on page 122, because Tralfadorians believed in pleasant moments, and not being phased by horrid things- and the quote proposes a similar concept. This may be one of Vonneguts ways of indirectly stating, that war is inevitable even though it negatively affects almost everything. However, it is up to the person on whether or not they shall be affected by this brutality, and act on it.
DeleteLily Barby
ReplyDeleteQuestion: Does Vonnegut believe that the human nature is corrupt, how does he portray human corruptness through Billy’s experiences?
“I am from a planet that had engaged in senseless slaughter since the beginning of time. I myself have seen the bodies of school girls who were boiled alive in a water tower…Earthlings must be the terrors of the universe! How can a planet live at peace” (116).
I think this quote is extremely important to the structure of the book. Vonnegut himself was a humanist and strongly believed in anti-war. To him, war is just senseless; the idea of murder against your own race is cruel. However, you are not just born with a corrupt nature. It is the way you develop as a child, the influences around you, personal experiences, family etc that can transform a person into this corrupted nature. It is the way that society is formed that interferes with having somebody develop without corruptness in their lives. For example, Roland grew up around a family who treated torturing weapons. Surely, this lead to him becoming the cruel, glory-seeker and ignorant person he was in war, and in general. He portrays human corruptness through the many things he experienced in war. He states, “I myself have seen the bodies of school girls who were boiled alive in a water tower”. This brutal and traumatizing experience IS due to the corruptness of human nature, to seek, destroy and kill. The feeling of revenge, power and previous influences can overpower someone’s own logical thinking and reasoning. I wonder, if Roland ever asked himself, why am I doing this? Why is this important to me? Vonnegut explains that human corruptness has been in place from the beginning of time, and that these earthlings are creating this chaotic system on the Earth, that may never find peace. To many conflicting opinions, ideas, perspective etc. are in this world, not everyone can compromise, and certainly not everyone can get along. However, can this lead to things of mass destruction such as war and violence? Vonnegut implies his opinion on the stupidity of war, when the Tralfadorians laugh at Billy, and say that you cannot change this, and should have no will to because it is impossible, you just ignore it, and focus on the happy things.
"'We know how the Universe ends-' said the guide, 'and Earth has nothing to do with it, except that it gets blown up, too'" (117)
ReplyDeleteIf we are so small and insignificant, why do things, or try to change things?
Vonnegut actually makes this question easy to answer in my opinion, but its still an interesting question. Of course, in Vonnegut's eyes, we aren't totally insignificant or useless or tiny. He believes the fundamental basis of the Tralfamadorian's dismissal of us is flawed. Look to the Tralfamadorians, if you will. they are in fact omniscient. They have seen all of creation, know everything that will happen and why. Yet they leave it as it is. Many people believe they can't change the world because they don't know how or don't have the power, but what I'm getting from Vonnegut here is that power or knowledge don't decide our ability to change things. To change things, you have to actively change things. You have to want to change things. So there is my answer to the question. Its an interesting question because its so central to Vonnegut's anti-war stand point. War is a fact right now, one that passivity will not change. Active change is the way out, according to Vonnegut, hence the Tralfamdorian section we read.
-Ben Flood
Emely Recinos
ReplyDeleteQuote: "In the next moment, Billy Pilgrim is dead. So it goes. So Billy experiences death for a while. It is simply violet light and a hum. There isn't anybody else there. Not even Billy Pilgrim is there." (pg 182)
Question: Is this Vonnegut's idea of death? What does this reveal about him?
Answer:
This is incredibly crucial in understanding Vonnegut's view on death. Throughout the entire story he has made suggestions that lead us to believe that he does not believe in life after death. He has shown us how he believes that we should all live for now, the present, and that we shouldn't be thinking about the after life because there is no after life. He believes that we should be good and nice to each other not to achieve the right of going to heaven but just because that is the more humane thing to do. In this quote we finally understand how he envisions death, and why everything that we should do, should be done in the present because there is no after life. When writing that Billy dies, he describes it as a place where all there is, is just a violet light and a hum. There's nothing special or rewarding about it, which is contradictory to what most religions promise death to be. Further more, he says that there was no one there with Billy, Billy is alone in death. Not even Billy is there. This really caught my attention because he is saying that not even Billy is there, so there's nothing and no one in this place of death. This leads me to ask what death actually is for Vonnegut, if not even the supposed dead person is there. What's also interesting is Vonnegut's choice of words when he says that "Billy experiences death for a while" He does not say that Billy dies or that he's gone, he instead says Billy experiences death. Vonnegut might be telling us that he believes death to be, just a state, not a permanent thing. Its something that is experienced not actually lived. Vonnegut also says that Billy experiences death just for a while, so here it is further shown that for Vonnegut death is not permanent and is just something we experience for some time but eventually we come back to life. Which makes sense as to why Vonnegut keeps telling us that the ideas that religion give us about death are wrong, and that there's nothing to look forward to in death. It is not even something that we stay in forever, eventually we come back, so all good that we need to do has to be done on Earth in life.
It really helped me in the understanding of the book. thankyou :) incredible analysis
ReplyDelete