1) Please choose a line, and explain why it stood out to you. You can make a connection, ask a question, or notice literary tools and ponder the ways that Vonnegut achieves meaning. Please make sure that your passage is significant and reflects some BIG ideas that struck you. REMEMBER: DO NOT REPEAT PASSAGES OR IDEAS FROM YOUR CLASSMATES. 2) Don't forget to respond to someone else's post! Answer their questions, or pose a question of your own! Use textual evidence.
"...Lily came into Billy's and Rumfoord's room with an armload of books. Rumford had sent her down to Boston to get them. He was working on a one volume history of the United States Army Air Corp in World War Two. The books were about bombings and sky battles that had happened before Lily was ever born"(184)
ReplyDeleteI think that through this quote Vonnegut is demonstrating his fears. He fears that in the future generations our kids and their kids will forget the lessons of war and how gruesome it was. He fears that young and gullible people like Lilly will be brainwashed by arrogant inhumane people like Rumfoord to believe(and be taught) that our past wars were solely battles won and not lives lost. Vonnegut fears that our younger generations will forget the meaning of death and how horrible it is and will be taught to live for power and revenge and to fight for these things when the goings get tough.This all demonstrated through the characters of Lily and Rumfoord, both completely ignorant to the subject of war and how disgusting-not GLORIOUS- it actually is, regardless of the wins/losses
Lily is an example of the generation we have today. She doesn't want to know about what happened before she was born because she simply doesn't care. Lily is representing the new generation that doesn't care. Many of us know a whole lot about media gossip and prefer to watch Kim Kardashians life than the news. It is true and I could say that i am part of that sad group.
DeleteI've noticed this too! Lily is sort of the extreme of this group. She likes being married to someone much older because they like to do the "knowing" for her. Its as if he is a father figure to her. I also find it funny that you use the Kardashians as a reference to pop culture, because they sum up a lot about what this generation is known for.
DeleteI agree you. I think that Vonnegut might be saying that history is written by the victor, and that since we won the war, we don't focus on the casualties, but rather on the success. I think that Vonnegut might also be saying how heavily we rely on other people, espicially for knowledge.
DeleteDoctors had given her pills so she could continue to function, even though her father was broken and her mother was dead.” (Vonnegut, 188).
ReplyDeleteQ: What does Vonnegut say about family in regard to war?
I wanted to focus on the outside life of Billy. Billy’s family is not given as much importance to Billy like the war and the trafalmadorians. We learn that Billy’s wife’s name is Valencia and with her he had Barbara and Robert. Barbara has to help his father until he dies. She is like a mother to him literally. However, not much is said about Barbara and it leaves me to think about her life. In this quote she had recently lost her mother and her father was at the hospital. If that happens to me I would be very depresses. And I do think she is depressed because she is given pills to go on with her life. On the other hand we have Robert. On the next page we learn that Robert was a high school dropout, an alcoholic and had been arrested. We see that Robert became a good example after he had done all these wrong things. From experience, parents influence a lot to the education and the life of their children. In addition kids, most of the time. Want to be like their parents. Was Billy a bad father? I think he was but not because he wanted to be, but because he was depressed from war that he didn’t pay attention to his family. On page 176 it says, “ Billy liked him but didn’t know him very well. Billy suspected that there wasn’t much to know about Robert” We find that Billy puts and excuse to knowing better his son. He believed ‘there was nothing to know’. I believe that war affects the way of thinking. It also takes a big part of your life and doesn’t give you awareness of the people around you.
I LOVED what you wrote here, Abigail. Most of the time, we hear stories about the children of parents going through rough periods in their life, whether it'd be from school, from drama and mishap amongst their circle of friends, etc. I definitely appreciate how Kurt Vonnegut sort of gives a point of view from the parent struggling. The parents should be the most stressed out of the family, they have to provide and raise their child until they venture off into a life of their own. I also appreciate how Kurt Vonnegut touches upon subjects not many other authors look at, or maybe look at with such depth.
DeleteI think this is a very good point. We haven't discussed this much, but, as you wrote, it is a very significant part of Billy's story. Family deeply affects us, as we all know from our own experiences. I think a huge question is how has war altered not only Billy, but his family? How do war's effects go beyond the soldiers? Here we see, in Vonnegut's simplistic tone, how rough Barbra's life has been because of the war the war affected her father. War "broke" Billy. But war didn't stop there. Billy's first hand interaction with war affected everyone he knew. This shows how strong and pervasive war is in people's lives.
Delete"He was all straightened out now. His posture was wonderful and his shoes were shined and his trousers were pressed, and he was a leader of men. 'Dad-?' Billy Pilgrim closed his eyes again," (189).
ReplyDeleteWhy does Billy do this? Is he trying to convey something?
Billy has an incredible amount of things on his mind. He is sitting in the hospital talking to himself in his sleep, which really gets across how much the war affected him. His son is in the military, so judging by the way he feels about war, he is probably unhappy with his son's profession as of now. He closes his eyes because he is not happy with what he sees. He would rather spend time in his brain than talk to his son, which explains what his family goes through when they worry about him. (Inference Alert!!) I wonder if the family talks about him as if he were "dead" to them?
I completely agree with you, Billy was not happy that his son was a soldier and a successful one. He was honored for killing, which we can assume from the many medals that his son had. In fact Vonnegut goes into details about how Billy’s son was a failure when he was young, he was an alcoholic, a criminal etc. almost s though it’s propaganda to go be a soldier to straighten up. It’s ironic that the son, who is always in war, is the last one left standing in the family. I wonder, is Vonnegut ironically trying to portray how war is a way to survive life without facing everyday reality?
DeleteWhat is crazy is that I was thinking the same thing! I find the idea of Billy hating the fact that his son is a soldier interesting. Most people don't want their children in the army because of the fear that they will lose them to the war, but Billy's son survives and he still doesn't like to talk about it. He closes his eyes (which I think is the way Vonnegut says "Billy is time traveling now") because he wants to get away. In class we discussed how Billy uses time travel as a way to avoid hurtful memories or things that remind him of hurtful memories. I think it is pretty interesting that Vonnegut called him "a leader of men". He was not a leader and almost all the leaders he had, or encountered, were not people you would look up to. Also, I think that, Gaby, you are spot on. He WAS honored for killing people, and we can assume that Billy does NOT approve. I think that it is also true what you said about the propaganda. When people recruit they prey on the weak, as we discussed in class, and in this case it is Billy's alcoholic, criminal son. I wonder if
DeleteVonnegut really believes that we should be completely anti-war and if so, how are we going to protect ourselves from others? This says something about human nature because, in Vonnegut's eyes, humans are constantly trying to murder each other for no apparent reason which shows that no one is safe.
Delete“’It was all right’ said Billy. ‘Everything is all right, and everybody has to do exactly what he does. I learned that on Tralfamadore.’”(196)
ReplyDeleteThis line stood out to me because I think Vonnegut is saying that there is no free will. Billy didn’t have a choice to not be in war, because there are always people in control of the situation whether they’re in the war, or not. People in power make things happen with the effect of others suffering in order for them not suffer, they don’t have to get their hands dirty. In this case Rumfoord is the one in power in the hospital room, so in order for Billy to prove himself to Rumfoord, he tells him that he was in Dresden at the time. Billy wants to share his experience because war is something that deeply affected him and he can never escape it, and he wants historian (Rumfoord) to know the truth about war and its horrors
I completely agree with you how there is always someone in power, and how those people are always going to want to control someone. I remember talking about at some point, maybe not in this class, how many times people believe in a "normal" society everyone has a place, whether it be a job or relationship, that they have to master and never change. In this "normal" society your place and role effect one another so it is your responsibility to complete your task. As I continue to read your post I realize that the Tralkfamadore societies consist of contribution from all, they all observe them in the zoo, they all acknowledge that no matter what they will be the ones to end the world. They are together in their beliefs and Billy takes notice, pointing it out in the quote you used. Combining the "normal" society and the Tralfamadorian way I believe that the by everything is all right Billy means he understands what it means to have a role in society, fulfill it in order to make sure the community is together in whole.
DeleteWOW!, That is exactly what I was trying to explain in my post, but I couldn't think outside the box. I thought the same thing, power really was this big theme when it came to Rumfoord, and I also thought it had something to do with war, that made him this type of commanding character. But I thought maybe Billy was just trying to connect with him in some way.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Billy mentioned casually that he had seen part of a blue movie she had made. Her response was no less casual. It was Tralfamadorian and guilt-free. "Yes-" she said "and I've heard about you in the war... (207)"
ReplyDeleteThis quote stood out to me because I think it is saying a lot about war and human nature's response to the past. This quote and the paragraph that elaborated on the topic discuss how many people experience things such as war and it becomes less scary to remember if you share it. Other times people tend to block out an experience like war. War no matter what is devastating, many times people don't like to talk about it because its reliving the experience all over again. I believe that Vonnegut wrote this quote to talk about how human nature many times cover up the past, whether it is embarrassing or to horrible to relive. But how can we try to forget our pasts if they made us to who we are today? Billy Pilgrim wouldn't be the same if he didn't fight in the war. Montana Wildhack wouldn't be the same if she didn't make the "blue movie." I believe Vonnegut is trying to put forth that our experiences make up who we are, why hide them. Yes they might be painful to remember but aren't they also painful to suppress? Isn't it better for Montana to know everything about Billy - even is she has heard it, since it is a part of Billy why be annoyed about hearing it so many times?
I agree with you Maggie. When I first read that line, I thought that it was so interesting because Montana did not seem to mind at all that Billy had seen an embarrassing part of her past. And on top of that, she responded to his comment by just stating that she has heard about him in the war, meaning that she was trying to sort of "get back" at him with an equally as embarrassing time from his life. But if that is the case, why did he mention his time in the war? This brings me to your point that I agree with. I think that Vonnegut was trying to say something along the lines of, war is not a prideful thing in ones life, I think that Billy is ashamed of his time in battle.
Delete“Rumford simply insisted, for his own comfort, that Billy had it. Rumford was thinking in a military manner”(246).
ReplyDeleteIn my last post I explored the idea that war brainwashes those affected by it causes them to think a certain way, or not at all. Here Rumford is one of those affected by this. He thinks in a cruel and unforgiving manner that is described as the “military manner”. He doesn’t care about the truth. He doesn’t care about the weak, which is shown through his constant wish for Billy to die. He believes that the “good ones” should live. He is one of those who see “right people to lynch” and “wrong people to lynch”. Vonnegut says this is the wrong way of thinking. Rumford is unable to see the truth because he isn’t strong enough. He seeks comfort by telling himself lies because it is easier to ignore.
In my life, I see myself doing this daily. It is humans’ natural instinct to ignore what causes them pain. It is selfish, and it hurts others, but it shields us from the suffering. We often see people, who we may think are below us. When a homeless person asks us for money, we ignore, because it is inconvenient, and often it causes us pain. Like Rumford, we make up an excuse for ignoring the agony of others.
Tori, what you said is wonderful- I agree 100 percent. I think Vonnegut argues in this book that ignoring the pain won't make it go away. And I agree that we go everyday ignoring things for a variety of reasons. We put death and misfortune at the back of our minds, partly because we are bombarded by it and partly because if we thought about the death in the world all the time it would engulf our being and cripple us. But, on the other hand, just looking for the good things in life is naive and ignorant, we must "accept that there are things we cannot change"(209) but have to courage to change the things we can and understand the difference. The question is: Is it better to ignore the pain because it shields us from the suffering (like you said)? Or is it better to understand the pain and accept it as an inevitability?
DeleteI absolutely agree with both of you! Leo in response to your question i think ideally it would better to try to understand and accept pain and suffering but it is one of the larger struggles we face as human beings. It is much easier said than done to accept that pain and suffering but I think it is deffinetly something Vonnegut wants you to question while reading this book.
Delete"It was about an Earthling man and woman who were kidnapped by extra-terrestrials. They were put on display in a zoo on a planet called Zircon-212”(201)
ReplyDeleteDoes Billy Pilgrim really time travel? Or, is there another explanation? What is Vonnegut saying, then, about Billy? About War?
In class, we have alluded to the theory that Billy does not actually time travel: that it is just a coping mechanism he uses to deal with his experiences in the War. This quotation has illuminated this theory for me- I agree. I think that Billy dreams, fantasizes and hallucinates Tralfamadore and his travels through time. For instance, Tralfamadore is based on the planet “Zircon-212” from a book by Kilgore Trout and the extra-terrestrials in the book capture a man and a women to put in a zoo on their planet- the same happens to Billy with the Tralfamadorians. He finds himself in a zoo with Montana Wildhack. Furthermore, we also discussed how earlier in the book, the words of Billy’s German prison guards (“Vy me? Vy You…”-paraphrase) match those of words spoken by a Tralfamadorian. Billy draws from his subconscious to create the elaborate fantasy of Tralfamadore.
But, more importantly, we must ask the question: “So what?” So what if Billy does not time travel; that its all in his head? Billy buried his memories of the War so deep in his mind that they became part of his subconscious: Billy believes in his fantasies, even though they are false; only manifestations of his experiences of the War. He copes with the War in this way, something he was never able to do during the War. During the war Billy was in a stupor- in shock. Vonnegut is making a large argument here about Billy and about War and its impacts. I think he argues that War twists and destroys both the livelihoods and minds of those it surrounds. Vonnegut also argues that we accept this and then shun what the war spits out. We cast away all the bad and become obsessed with the good. Vonnegut argues that we cannot see the truth- we fear we will become blind by it and so we suppress the memories- the truths- of War to please the public and keep it at ease. For if the world was to understand the nonsensicality of War and the horrors it inflicts no one would want to start one. Then where would we be?
In the word of Mr. Letiecq... Strong... I completely agree with you about how the truth is such a fearful thing and how we tend to numb ourselves with lies. This is what the Tralfamadorian ideology is essentially. Forget the bad and only think of the good, ironically this is what Billy uses to cope with his war experiences. This brings up the question of wether Billy created the Tralfamadorians to help himself, or is he actually time-traveling. But another great point you bring up is so what? Vonnegut isn't trying to make us understand whether Billy is time-traveling or not rather he wants us to question how the truth can have such a great impact on someone.
DeleteI think agree with Barak in that your points are extremely strong, and with that I obviously agree. I think that what you mentioned about the "Vy you? Vy anyone" quote and its connection to the fictitious ideas that Billy composes with his inspiration of Trout has a lot to do with Billy's confusion of this question. For the longest time I was convinced in that Trout inspired Billy subconsciously with the Tralfamadorians. Both starting in "Tr," I don't know I notice weird things that aren't necessarily true. Going back to the "Vy" quote and its connection Billy's beliefs, I think not only are his creations a coping mechanism for his experience in the war but a substitute for his denial in that he really has no idea to the question of "Why me?" He is struck dumb and in reality, he is not traveling through time in space, he is really stuck in the past of the war in the present. He lives every second after the war still stuck in it because the horrors and devastations stay have both figuratively and literally scarred him. I think this is why Vonnegut constantly describes his feet as being ivory and blue/cold. He's frozen in time.
Delete"Engraved on the outside of the locket were these words: God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom always to tell the difference" (209).
ReplyDeleteThe first time we encountered this quote was when we read chapter one. Billy mentioned that he had a plaque in his optometry office that had this quote. When I first read this, I did not think a big deal of it, but now I feel that we can put it in perspective. Throughout the novel, we learn about Billy in a very odd manner. We learn about the Tralfamadorians and how they believe that "all time is all time" and that moments live forever. Moments are "fixed" and that is something that you cannot change. I feel that Billy truly believes that. He lives with the Tralfamadorians. He follows their philosophies... because of this I feel he does not believe in change, but he believes in destiny. Billy cannot changed what happened to him, nor can he change his himself (which everyone does not really seem to like). He seems trapped in this time... in this "all time is all time" world in which he cannot escape. He is trapped in all of his terrible memories of the war, and all of his terrible memories outside of war that follow him through "all time". This reminds him that he cannot change anything because as the Tralfamadorians say "Everything has always happened, always will happen, and is always constantly still happening." And I think that it is intresting that he keeps this reminder on his desk at work, where he will see it constantly. It seems pretty terrible and depressing to remind yourself that your decisions are meaningless. Why does he want to be reminded of this?
That's a really good point you made Daillyn. I also found it ironic that Billy should find this quote so relate able and important considering it goes against everything he learned from the Tralfamadorians. Also the fact that it is on the locket of Montana, who he has created a fake, double life with millions of miles away from Earth and reality, seems significant. Perhaps Vonnegut decided to write this in to show how Billy does question the fact if he has no say in his future and choices? As well as the idea that there's no free will. Billy is caught between the lessons of these terrestrial beings who do offer a broader view on the world, but then again there are more humane concepts that Billy will find more appealing, considering that he does want to escape from the shadow of memories that follow him around.
Delete"She applied her power brakes and the mercedes slammed into her from behind. Nobody was hurt, thank God, because both drivers were wearing seat belts. Thank god, thank god." (182)
ReplyDeleteVonnegut's excessive use of "Thank God" displays a sarcastic tone from Billy Pilgrim, almost as if he simply wants his wife to die. I find this interesting because Valencia seems so devoted and loving towards Billy however he feels know emotions towards her whatsoever. When the doctors told him she had died he barely even reacted. This got me thinking that maybe he feels as if he doesn't deserve to be happy. He doesn't deserve a wife, he doesn't deserve kids, he doesn't deserve to live. Of all the people who fought so bravely and patriotically in the war, he was the one to live. A worthless nobody who has barely done anything, in some sad way he's took all of his anger out on his wife who seems to me like such a great and loving person. She was willing to drive all the way to the hospital after going through a car crash just to see her husband. However, he doesn't even feel sad about the fact that she died... that's just messed up.
"Rumfoord was thinking in a military manner: that an inconvenient person, one whose death he wished for very much, for practical reasons, was suffering from a repulsive disease" (192)
ReplyDeleteThis passage was very interesting in my opinion. I think that Vonnegut might be trying to make an example of the military mindset in a civilian life. Perhaps to say that since Rumfoord was an Air Force commander, Rumfoord is still in that military mindset. Vonnegut maybe trying to highlight to ongoing effects on war. That after being in the war probably 50 years ago, Rumfoord still thinks he maybe in war, or sometimes starts to think like he's in war. Also, this made me think about how war is fought. The warring countries or sides portray each other horribly. Each opposing side thinks of one another as repulsive. Perhaps Vonnegut is using this passage to highlight how war is fought. How each side blindly starts to hate and think of each other as repulsive without giving much thought and consideration to their decision. Just like Rumfoord's decisions and actions toward Billy Pilgrim.
" That's not a human being anymore. Doctors are for human beings. They should turn him over to a veterinarian or a tree surgeon. They'd know what to do. Look at him! That's life, according to the medical profession. Isn't life wonderful?." (190)
ReplyDeleteThis passage relates back to my post yesterday on chapter 8 on the dehumanizing of men after war. And this is a perfect example, we have a man here named Rumfoord, who is basically a retired brigadier general in the Air Force Reserve, with the same set of mind like every other man whose been in the war. So, in his view life is pointless if you're weak, and I think this may have been an effect he got from the war. War changed his character, it changed his point of view, and his definition of what life means. So, in a way he's dehumanizes Billy just because he's weak, and he humanizes himself just because he's stronger. I noticed that a big theme of this passage would be power. Since, it looks like Rumfoord is a man of power and command. Maybe it could have been based on what he saw and his experience. But then again a question still remains : How does war change a person's perspective of life?, why does this happen?.
I completely agree with you and I think you made a really great point. It is crazy how after war, men are dehumanized to the point of being referred to as animals or even trees. On top of what you said, I think that Vonnegut is trying to be overly absurd to make us realize what we think. I've come to the conclusion that the entire book is basically Vonnegut being outrageous enough to make us realize how crazy it is. Here, it seems so extreme that Rumford is being separated fro the human race to such a degree, that it makes us think about it and analyze it, which is Vonnegut's entire intention.
DeleteI disagree with both of you. Although you are both correct in that men seem to be dehumanized after war, and that that is a central theme in this book, I don't think that was the direction that that quote was really headed in. First off, Rumfoord is only a historian and doesn't really know what is it like to be in war. He doesn't think that Billy is useless because of how war has treated him, but he thinks Billy is useless and he is dehumanizing him because he is nothing like the glorified soldier Rumfoord believes in. To me, this quote is more of a representation of Rumfoord's shallow character, dehumanizing Billy because he contradicts his invalid expectations for war. I don't really think it has much to do with the affects of war.
DeleteHowever, Pamela, I do agree with power being a theme in this passage! I wrote something similar in my post. I think Rumfoord shows power because of people like Lily who listen to him. Lily represents a lack of free will and powerlessness.
Grace, thanks for expanding the theme I was talking about, you really made me think of many other factors towards what Vonnegut was saying. And Elsa, I'm actually happy you disagreed with me because now I got to see the other side of my point, and I agree with what you're saying. And even though I didn't write about Lily in my post, great point on her, she is definitely connected to the idea of Rumfoord's power.
Delete"She applied her power brakes, and a Mercedes slammed into her from behind. Nobody was hurt, thank God, because both drivers were wearing seat belts. Thank god, thank god." (182)
ReplyDeleteThe vibe that I am getting from this quote is just weird. As I read through chapter nine, what kind of bothered me (not in a bad way) was this part where Kurt Vonnegut mentions God a lot. I feel what Kurt Vonnegut does here is poke fun at the idea of having a God. Vonnegut mentions the car crash that Billy's wife, Valencia, was in and the fact that nobody was hurt because they were safely strapped in due to their seat belts. I think what Kurt Vonnegut is emphasizing from this small scene in the story is miracles such as people walking away from a car crash unharmed is no mere act of God, God did not not have anything to do with it, it was simply because of Valencia's decision to put on her seatbelt is what made her walk away unharmed (but her car got decimated, I feel so bad).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"'He's simply echoing things we say,' said Rumfoord. 'Oh," said Lily. 'He's got echolalia now.' 'Oh.'" (192).
ReplyDeleteI wonder what Vonnegut is saying about society through Rumfoord and Lily.
To me, this conversation represented Lily's and Rumfoord's shallow relationship- Rumfoord makes some sort of arrogant assertion and Lily blindly agrees. They were such a stereotypical couple that I questioned their purpose in the book- why did Vonnegut include this seemingly irrelevant and superficial couple during a significant time of realization in Billy's life (just as he creates the Tralfamadorian world and concepts)? Rumfoord represents the image that Vonnegut is going against in this anti-war book. He is a haughty historian who glorifies the war and rejects any idea that contradicts that. For example, when Billy says he was in Dresden during the bombing, Rumfoord ignores him and says he has "echolalia". He rejects Billy's statement because Billy truly knows what war is like, and that it is filled with destructiveness and death. As mentioned in the story, "Rumfoord simply insisted, for his own comfort, that Billy had it [echolalia]" 192.I can conclude that someone with genuine knowledge and experience with the war scares Rumfoord, as they will contradict his unrealistic idea of war. Lily, Rumfoord's young and naive wife, knows nothing other than what Rumfoord tells her to know. I feel like this couple represents society and their uninformed views on war. There are people like Rumfoord, who glorify war, distort people's view of it, and lack experience in war, and there are people like Lily, who are ignorant and naive and have no choice but to listen to the Rumfoord's of the world. I also wondered if Lily was some sort of other symbol in this book- a symbol of a lack of free will, naivety, and powerlessness.
She applied her power brakes, and a Mercedes crashed into her from behind. Nobody was hurt thank god, because both drivers were wearing seat belts. Thank god, thank god."233
ReplyDeleteI picked this line because I found it very ironic and interesting. He says thank god but then immediately states a reasonable explanation for why no one was hurt, yet thanks god again. I think this speaks to his idea that both (and I do not want to offend anyone who is religious/ believes in god) religion and war are pointless. Vonnegut is trying to say there are logical explanations for why things happen, and that often religion can complicate things when you need it to or can justify something for just “being”, it is very bias in that way. I also found it interesting that Vonnegut chose to make the car that hit Valencia a German brand. I think that not only this line but the entire scene of Valencia’s death speaks to the idea that war is pointless because in the end Valencia doesn’t die form the impact of the German car hitting her own but form the effects of the car crash and the carbon monoxide emitted by her own engine. This is to say that war is no ones fault it just happens and it is terrible, and all parties who participate end up paying the price.
Ok, so this passage is really long (basically the whole page), but this is the ending.
ReplyDelete"Poor Valencia was unconscious, overcome by carbon monoxide. She was a heavenly azure. One hour later she was dead. So it goes" (183).
This is right after the plane crash, and Billy was transported to a hospital and Valencia was driving to the hospital to meet him, and Vonnegut opens it by giving away that this is her death. On the road, she is in a car accident, but instead of dying there, she dies after getting to the hospital. I think that we can relate this to Vonnegut's portrayal of death being completely random, unfair, and unexpected. When they were living in the slaughterhouse, the cooking lady told them that all the real soldiers were dead, and they agreed with her. I think a good question to ask is why were these random men who could barely fight the ones who survived? Billy feels like he shouldn't have survived. And even out of the few men who unfairly survived, Edgar Derby was the most competent, and he ended up being killed after the war. When reading this passage, I obviously assumed that Valencia was going to die in this horrible car wreck she was in, but the fact that she didn't die then and actually lived to be killed by carbon monoxide is extremely ironic. I think that Vonnegut uses this also because it is almost funny how ridiculous it is, just like Derby's death. She survived this car accident, and then died from air poisoning. He survived a war and the bombings of Dresden, and then died for taking a teapot. I think that Vonnegut is trying to say that there is no rhyme or reason to who dies and when and it is completely unfair.
"'Time traveling again?' said Montana. It was artificial evening in the dome. She was breast-feeding their child." (207)
ReplyDeleteThis line stood out to me because Montana is doing such a normal, every day thing in a completely fake environment built to simulate human life. The reason this stood out is because the conversation that follows, about Billy's time travel, is a relatively important dialogue. However, it also has the tone of a couple catching up on their days over dinner. This seemingly normal and somewhat mundane scene is in fact taking place on a planet far from earth in an enclosed habitat surrounded by a cyanide atmosphere. That to me is very creepy. It almost feels as if Billy's life is all some sort of mirage, or at least some parts of it are.
I completely agree with you Mika. This leads to the question of if it just feels like a mirage or if it actually is. The way it is even described in Tralfamadore just seems so fake. This world I believe is a figment of the imagination and I wrote about his too.
DeleteI agree. I think Connect writes like this a lot; he combines mundane things with topics like aliens, time travel, and scarring, violent events. My question is why does he do it?
DeleteI believe he may be sending a message about how unexpectedly these things happen. Some examples would be a plane crashing while people are singing on it and an ordinary civilian being tossed into war.
" 'Americans have finally heard about Dresden,' said Rumfoord, twenty-three years after the raid..."
ReplyDelete" 'Why would they keep it a secret so long?' said Lily.
'For fear that a lot of bleeding hearts,' said Rumfoord, 'might not think it was such a wonderful thing to do' " (Page 191).
I thought this quote was very interesting not for the reasoning that Rumfoord gives to Lily, which before I say what I would like to say, is totally rational, but for the idea of why people stall when holding in knowledge. In this sense it was an event that not only destroyed the Nazis that were in Dresden but tons of American's and captured Jews as well and innocents. Today as teenagers, we are constantly keeping in information and that information sometimes stays hidden forever, and sometimes it blows up in our faces. I guess the question that I wanted to ask about this quote is, is it worth it? As Rumfoord says, Dresden was kept quiet because people were afraid others would get angry and sad. This is a very rational thought. That being said, I can't help but wonder if it would've been for the better to tell the people. Even when secrets aren't released they bury deep inside of us and this creates shame of ourselves at times and/or lowered self esteem. It makes me wonder how long I think I could keep the secrets that I hear from others and/or keep for myself, without blowing up. The world is constantly based off of power, fear, money, and control. This is all enforced, or not, with law and government/authority usually. Today in a world with constantly growing media and things like the releasing of information by Snowden, the time in our lives has come to the point where privacy is nonexistent.
What I take out of this is that people are constantly putting things of until it's too late. I think about this idea a lot because it is so apparent in society. This is occurring right now with the American government and it is not proving to be suitable. Putting large issues off in my opinion is the downfall of the world because small thing that are put of lead to larger thing being put off, and then there are mass problems because we feel like we've run out of time. I think this idea represents the main characteristic of human population very well.
Delete"He moved because of absent minded politeness taking a trout book with him, the one about Jesus and the time machine. The time traveler in the book went back to bible times."(page 203)
ReplyDeleteThis is the first time in the book that what happens to Billy s actually referred to as time travel. The big question here is, has this all been figment of his imagination based on Trout's books? I believe that Billy is not actually time traveling. During this book they do not actually show the horrible state that Billy is in mentally. Vonnegut mentions that Billy checks himself into a mental institution but Vonnegut never shows how horrible he really is doing. I think because of his PTSD, he managed to create this full world based on just this imagination created by trout. He did this to make his life better for himself but not purposely. Even later in the book he talks about the magazines with Montana on the cover. These magazines say that she died in a river but he has these visions that he was with her. MY only question that makes me doubt my point is how did he know Montana if this didn't actually happen? What if this is actually happening to him?
Billy's daughter Barbara came in later that day. She was all doped up, had the same glassy-eyed look that poor old Edgar Derby wore just before he was shot in Dresden. Doctors had given her pills so she could continue to function, even though her father was broken and her mother was dead.
ReplyDeleteThis moment really intrigued me because of the way she was described like Edgar Derby. We all know him as a crazy character, and now Barbara's having a hard time since Valencia pasting. I believe that Vonnegut is trying to make a connection with his past only using one of the side characters to describe the pain instead of Billy. Its such a difficult time that Barbara is described as glassy-eyed, the same look as Derby before he was shot. This moment gives mental images of the pain, suffering, and great changes from the results of Valencia's death.
"'He bores the hell out of me!' Rumfoord replied boomingly. all he does in his sleep is quit and surrender and apologize and ask to be left alone'"(184).
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me of the conversations we've had in class concerning movies and the image of war. I think in this passage Rumfoord clearly describes the image we are not used to seeing in a war movie. He describes this veteran soldier, Billy, as basically a coward and a quitter, and the describes this behavior as boring. It seems as though he himself may be used to the heroic images of soldiers walking away from explosions and surviving a shower of bullets by diving in slow motion behind a fort of rubble. However, we as readers know this is quite the opposite of true war. In war, one, like Billy Pilgrim, is terrified and wants to surrender and wants to be left alone and not see the death amd destruction and the so it goes. Keeping in mind that Rumfoord is a writer, it makes sense that he'd be used to this story-like fairy tale style of thinking. We can, however, also compare him to Connect who has experience in the war and writes about it in its full glory, or lack thereof. I may be getting off track, but Rumfoord may be Vonnegut's creation out of necessity to see a human being, a writer like himself, with a drastically different point of view from his own.
"Billy looked at one out of the corner of his eye, and saw this question on its cover. What really became of Montana Wildhack? So Billy read it. He knew where Montana Wildhack really was, of course.
ReplyDeleteDoes this quote make it even more confusing if Billy in imagining this time-travel or if it is real? Has Billy been taking many of his life experiences and using them to create his own fantasy world?
I get more and more confused when I see connection between Tralmafadore and Earth. It makes me feel as if Billy is suffering from mental disabilities and that Tralmafadore is a figment of his imagination. Still, I like to believe that Tralmafadore is real for the sake of the novel. I enjoy seeing connections but now it seems that Billy is just remembering a woman he's seen in a pornographic film. It makes it sound even worse when Billy thinks that he know where she actually is because that makes him sound even more crazy. I am having trouble figuring out if Billy is truthful, or if he is a crazy man against the world.
"I deeply regret that British and U.S. bombers killed 135,000 people in the attack on Dresden, but I remember who started the last war and I regret even more the loss of more than 5,000,000 Allied lives in the necessary effort to completely defeat and utterly destroy Nazism. So it goes," (page.187)
ReplyDeleteA: I found this passage really interesting because it brings up the topic of how people think there's a justification in war. In this passage it clearly shows how one person's perspective is that, in order to get rid of one bad thing, a certain amount of people must die in the aftermath of it. Do people really try to justify war to make themselves feel better? Eaker also mentions that he remembers who started the war anyways, so in order to finish it they need to kill a larger amount of innocent people at a faster rate, thus using tactic like atomic bombs. I find that Vonnegut is really trying to point here that it doesn't matter who started the war, or what not but that war will always be complete nonsense.There is no justifying killing people because in the end we are all human beings.