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:
" He has always pressed it, and he always will. We always let him and we will let him. The moments is structured that way" (117, Vonnegut)
ReplyDeleteQ: Why is it that in a book of war Vonnegut choses the idea of All time is All time? What does it say about war.
A: I think that in a war book Vonnegut chooses the idea of All time because he wants to say that we cannot prevent what already happened. For example, the traf. know that the universe will end in a mistake but they cant change it because it already happened. Same as a war it just happens we cannot go back in time to fix it. Billy questions if it is stupid to stop war and it is because it already happened. However, the advice that the tralf, gives him is to focus on the positive and not on the negative when he says "We spend eternity looking at pleasant moments- like today at the zoo. Isn't this a nice moment?" (Vonnegut, 117). The book is also written in an All time idea. Vonnegut jumps from one moment to the next there is no beginning, middle or end. I think that Vonnegut is telling us that we should focus about the good moments not the bad ones.
I totally agree with you Abby. I was going to use this quote for my post as well because I think it is so strong. Throughout the novel, Vonnegut describes a tragic event and follows up with "so it goes." And up until now, I had only thought of it as a part of his tone. However, now I am beginning to see it is bigger than that. Vonnegut is describing the death of our entire universe in a flash, and yet he still end with "So it goes." I wonder, what compels him to be so nonchalant towards such a large event. I think maybe Vonnegut was so numb and absent after the war that he no longer cares much for anything, at least on some level.
Delete"The Blue Fairy Godmother spoke frankly about how disgusting all the Americans were. "Weak, smelly, self-pitying-a pack of sniveling, dirty, thieving bastards," he said. "They're worse then the bleeding Russians."(127)
ReplyDeleteAre "The Blue Fairy Godmother's" words really just Vonneguts, and if they're his then why are his views on Americans so low?
The words used to describe the Americans are in my opinion very hurtful words. Perhaps this was one of Vonneguts only ways of showing his hate for war. I feel that Vonnegut describes Americans like this because he feels that our decisions, and aggressive attitude can sometimes be a little much, I also feel that because of Vonneguts PTSD he now has a different look on things. In addition, because of Slaughter House 5 being a anti-war book I feel that this is something someone might actually say about Americans. Now why someone might say something like this my guess is that it's because during this war many decisions were made, desicion so that right now we probably wouldn't have made. One of my lingering questions is still, why it is that Vonnegut chose such dark humor and like really on the low sarcasm to describe his experience in the war?
I agree with the majority of your viewpoints, Jose. I feel like if anything different were to occur during this period of time, there quite possibly could be a change in viewpoint from Kurt Vonnegut. What if the Americans decided to settle down on the highly aggressive attitudes towards opposing forces? Why is Kurt Vonnegut so serious about showing readers the disgusting things people have said during this timeframe (particularly to show how anti-war he is)?
DeleteI think that maybe what Vonnegut was getting at here was not that he was anti-American, but more that war gives people a false impression of the people in it. There's the false impressions like the whole Frank Sinatra thing, that soldiers are manly and strong and immediately amazing people, but there's also the false impressions that cause people to generalize and take sides, like this.
DeleteTo answer your question Klajdi, I think that Vonnegut tries to show the unsettling nature of War and how it is fought. He wants to bring to light the truth of its backwards nature: our wars are fought by our children, and in order to win the war and come home safely they must kill the other side's children. Now the way he does that is laterally: instead of blatantly telling us all the horrors of WWII and pounding images of death and destruction into our minds, he plants a seed of doubt with his dark humor about the war. While we begin to understand his dark, satirical humor, we begin to question our ideas and prejudices about war. Vonnegut seeks to stir the melting pot.
Delete"The intent of the Gospels was to teach people, among other things, to be merciful, even to the lowest of the low.
ReplyDeleteBut the Gospels actually taught this: 'Before you kill somebody, make absolutely sure he isn't well connected.' So it goes," (108-9)
What is this passages place in the book? What is it trying to say about Vonnegut?
I am reading this book looking at it as a sort of reflection of what Vonnegut has experienced. Now I infer that Vonnegut has become cynical over the years about certain morals that (American in particular) have imposed on us as people. I believe that this passage is a little bit of a shine of his opinion through his literature. He even goes on to describe how the "visitor from outer space" saw flaws within the Christian Gospels involving Christ's crucifixion. Vonnegut is putting to perspective the hasty and violent acts that humans commit. In this case, a higher power told the Jews that crucifixion is the answer, until God told them it was not right because he adopted Jesus as his son. I also think that its also taking a shot at World War 2, since the Nazis practiced Christianity and used it as a reason for their cruel acts. Maybe Vonnegut's use of dark humor has a more serious subtextual meaning?
I agree when you say that Vonnegut/Billy are cynical of what they've been told or what society and humanity believe. When Billy is in the Tralfamadorian's zoo he discovers that they "had no way of knowing Billy's body and face were not beautiful. They supposed that he was a splendid specimen"(144). When I read this I realized that beautiful is defined by the world we live in, and people unfamiliar to this social norm (babies, aliens) will not see these labels on people. I wonder what Vonnegut views as beautiful? Vonnegut sees "earthlings" and all of their mistakes. Yes, he sees those mistakes in war and death, but here he sees them in the judgment we cast upon each other. The Tralfamadorians give a new perspective of our world that Vonnegut wants the reader to begin to see.
DeleteI agree also that society shapes your opinions and views of the world, and I your post made me wonder in the Tralfamadorians are supposed to shed light on the strange social norms and things accepted in society that are morally unjust.
Delete"There isn’t any particular relationship between the messages, except that the author has chosen them carefully, so that, when seen all at once, they produce an image of life that is beautiful and surprising and deep. There is no beginning, no middle, no end, no suspense, no moral, no causes, no effects. What we love in our books are the depths of many marvelous moments seen all at one time" (88).
ReplyDeleteIs the explanation that the Tralfamadorian gives about their books, Vonnegut trying to explain his book?
I think that Vonnegut uses the explanation of the Tralfamadorian books as a way to explain how he sets up his book. While reading this book, you cannot help but wonder why Vonnegut uses this format and example of Billy Pilgrim to protest war. This goes back to the NPR interview where Vonnegut talks about his struggles writing the book, and makes the comment, “How can you write about pure nonsense.” Therefore, Vonnegut uses a format with no beginning, middle, with basically each flashback of Pilgrim’s life not being pertinent to one another. I think that Vonnegut uses the Tralfmadorian ideas about time, for his novel. Vonnegut, also doesn’t want to glorify war, and leaves no suspense or effects in the novel, he just recalls events as they happened. Vonnegut chooses each passage in the story carefully to produce an image of war, except while the image produced in the Tralfamadorian novel is beautiful, surprising, and deep, Vonnegut ‘s novel produces an image of war highlighting its atrocities.
“Oh Boy—they sure picked the wrong guy to lynch this time! And that though had a brother: ‘There are right people to lynch’”(139).
ReplyDeleteQuestion: How does Vonnegut’s tone portray his views on humanity, death, labels and war? What does this passage show that his views are?
Here Vonnegut is using sarcasm. He says “oh boy” forcing the reader to realize the ridiculousness of humanity and see that pain and death should not be dealt with lightly. Because he speaks of it lightly throughout the novel, we can’t help but know that what he is saying is wrong and we unconsciously become anti-war. Vonnegut raises the idea that people can be ignorant enough to think that some people deserve to by lynched. By picking the wrong guy it is implied that there is a right guy that needs to be killed because of the evils he has done. In fact, doing this, is a bigger evil itself. Vonnegut shows that humanity has ranked and categorized people. He explains that there are somebodies vs. nobodies, deserving of death vs. innocent, beautiful vs. ugly, rich vs. poor. All of these labels change the way others view us and the way we view ourselves. At this point in the novel we know that he is anti-war. Knowing this, I believe this passage ties to war because Vonnegut believes that no one country is better, stronger or more correct, although society labels them that way. War is murder and causes pain and suffering for eternity. He makes fun of this idea of being entitles to consequences because he knows that there are not different levels of people and no one deserves to be lynched. War in nonsensical because it ranks countries according to power through murdering those who “deserve” it.
I really like where you highlighted about the labels and you said how Vonnegut points out in this quote that there is a tag on everyone and this leads to judgment and harm because of what you are. "He explains that there are somebodies vs. nobodies, deserving of death vs. innocent, beautiful vs. ugly, rich vs. poor." When you said this it made me think of when Billy questions the Tralfamadorians about how to live in a peaceful community and they didn't really have an answer only that it may be peaceful now but war could break out any moment, so the best thing to do is focus on the positive and not on the war. So when we label and discriminate aren't we supplying ammunition for a war? When we focus on things we don't like about someone and label them that, that isn't focusing on the positive only the things we don't like. But then isn't it jsut ignoring the problem near you when you ignore the war, isn't it being selfish and acting like you don't care?
Delete"When a dashingly-clad officer addresses such a frumpishly dressed bum, he scolds him, as an officer in any army must. But the officer's contempt is not, as in other armies, avuncular theatrically. It is a genuine expression of hatred for the poor, who have no one to blame for their misery but themselves." (130)
ReplyDeleteWhat is the point Kurt Vonnegut is trying to make?
I believe what Kurt Vonnegut is trying to exemplify by the reference of this speech is that if certain people were allowed to run the country themselves, poverty will limit the amount of success in America. In the story, Kurt Vonnegut mentions how in every other nation but the Americas, there was a tale of a man who came from poverty but was so virtuous and wise. This would allow that poor but wise man to become, to quote the book, "more estimable than any other man with gold or power." In the Americas, however, those who are poor are highly frowned upon. Those financially gifted have nothing to do with the poor; they could completely disregard the non-wealthy and still live life the same. This may not seem correct, but I personally believe that Kurt Vonnegut is trying to say you should never disregard or disrespect anybody because no matter their place on the "totem pole" or how "gifted" they are, everybody has something to contribute to the situation. I am sensing that Billy Pilgrim may get some respect later in the story.
Yeah bro i completely agree with you. It's pretty much like the rich and the poor segregated and the poor are seen as unimportant. There was another quote after that paragraph on the next page that really exemplifies what's wealthy and poor. "They were known everywhere as self-pitying, least fraternal, and dirtiest of all prisoners of war, said Campbell. They were incapable of concerted action on their own behalf." Do you think Vonnegut is trying to warn us of what our reality is coming to by our actions and how we're built?
Delete"That's the attractive thing about the war," said Rosewater. "Absolutely everybody gets a little something"(111).
ReplyDelete- What is Vonnegut saying here, about the relationship between what goes on during the war and what the public knows? Who is Rosewater representing? What is Rosewater really saying?
This quote stood out to me for many reasons, the biggest one being that Rosewater almost talks about war in a positive way here, which is completely different from the mindset of the book so far. When I first read this quote I immediately noticed the new look at the war, to take this quote in the literal sense she liked the war because she got a huge, expensive diamond ring at the end. Although the literal meaning of the sentence is so demeaning, I believe that Vonnegut also wrote about, "...everybody gets a little something..." out of the war I also think he is talking about the outside worlds oblivion during this time. Nothing that was actually happening was told to anyone, sometimes a little bit of what happened got leaked but for the most part if you were not fighting in the war you didn't know what deaths and pain that the soldiers were experiencing. Rosewater, a rich girl who tends to eat a lot, had no idea the pain that Billy suffered through the war like all the others, and instead of taking away from it a large diamond ring celebrating love, they took away PTSD and those emotions of vulnerability, depression and embarrassment. This goes back to the discussion in class about all time is time and never escaping war. Billy took away from the war his experience which he will always know, he will always time travel back to their and experience it all over again. That is what he took from the war, but I still wonder if Vonnegut is trying to display Rosewater as naive and selfish for saying this about the war.
I completly agree with you, that people who are not in the war, don't know the full pain of war although it might be believed that soldiers in the war actually benfit from the war because they can take the spoils of the war from the poeple the conquer. This line "everybody gets a little something." is true for those who survive or the countries that win the war. Is Vonnegut saying that war can be beneficial? or is Vonnegut being sarcastic and implying that it's the opposite, that everyone is damaged by war?
DeleteI think that this is another instance of Vonnegut trying to make something sound so outlandish that we realize how much we disagree with it. We talked in class about the phrase "and so it goes", which he uses a lot at the end of sentences that otherwise would seem cataclysmic. He might talk about corpses or a friend being killed, but when he ends it with "and so it goes", we, as the reader, become outraged and think that he should be more serious about it, which was his intention all along. This quote relates to this because it seems crazy that the war would be attractive to anybody. We as readers think that this guy is insane by liking that everyone gets something from the war. While reading this, I personally thought that this was crazy because all people really gain is PTSD, disabilities, and simply horrible things. This, again, was Vonnegut's intentions all along. He wanted us to think that Rosewater was crazy for thinking this, which makes us think more about how little war "gives people".
DeleteGoing off of both of you I believe that Gaby highlights the question whether everyone is damaged by the war? And Grace talking about how the war leaves you with such negative effects, so how could you say that you really take something away from it?
DeleteI think Vonnegut is trying to use Rosewater to represent the people who are influenced by war. For example, Rosewater was influenced by war because he war in war. Before this chunk of reading we learn that Rosewater and Billy have something in common which is that they both found life meaningless after the war. In addition I thing Rosewater says this with sarcasm because I think Rosewater hates war and wouldn't want anybody to practice it again.
Delete“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: What is the Tralfamadorians view of life? Do they let things happen because they think fate is inevitable?
A: Because the Tralfamadorians can experience reality in four dimensions,(meaning they see across time) they know the future, past and present. For them, everything that will happen has happened and it can’t be change. Even though they can see the future, they don’t wish to change it, because they respect the flow of events that have created all time. I believe that the Tralfamadorians don’t let things happen due to fate, rather they respect the randomness of events as they unfold, but since they can choose what events they wish to experience and re-experience, they have the ability to ignore the traumatic times. They recommend to Pilgrim and the rest of the earthlings, that they concentrate on the good times.
I agree that they respect the flow of events that have created all time, but this made me think : What role is the Tralfamadorians playing?. To me it looks like they're actually playing a God role, where they could just end humanity anytime they want. And I disagree about them not letting things happen due to fate, because they actually see it as fate, as something that must happen referring to when they said " 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.”, which means it happened before, and it will happen again.
DeleteI agree with the fact of what they are but I don't think that are really there. Billy creates this figure to help him through these bad times of war and created these rules for them as a way to give him and answer and comfort for the way that he feels. Billy does not want to believe in death, so he created something that agreed. The Tralfamadorian's said, "that's one thing Earthlings might learn to do, if they try hard enough: ignore the awful times and concentrate on the good ones." (117) This is a wonderful way of thinking but isn't necessarily correct and isn't always true. One thing that is also interesting, even though he believes so deeply in these people, why does he keep flashing back to mostly the bad times?
DeleteI agree that this is the way the Tralfamadorians function. They know everything that has and will happen. However, this brings up the question of wether they are happy? The story says they go through war eventhough they know it will happen. If you know something horrible will happen yet you can't change it, wouldn't that drive you a bit insane?
Delete"But the Gospels actually taught this: Before you kill somebody, make absolutely sure he isn't well connected. So it goes"(108-109).
ReplyDeleteWhy does Vonnegut use the phrase "So it goes" after every death, even for those non-human or non-living? Is this time different? If so, what is the significance?
Though in class we have talked about the "So it goes" being an example of Vonnegut's satirical voice and a way we talks about death nonchalantly (I agree with these points), I want to go down a different path here. As I read this passage, I realized it was different from the other "So it goes" phrases because the deaths it is paired with are not specified, but almost inferred and generalized. Vonnegut makes a profound statement here: Rosewater describes his book to Billy; an alien is trying to learn "why Christians found it so easy to be cruel". The alien surmises that the Gospels' intent was to teach people good, wholesome morals, whereas what they actually taught was to make sure who you kill is not important. This contrasts with the other references of death and "So it goes" pairings because instead of mentioning one death, it is for all the people that will be killed in the name of Christianity. This "So it goes" is heavier than the others: instead of following death, Vonnegut clearly sends the message that it foreshadows the deaths that are yet to come in the name of religion. The phrase "So it goes" is used so often that we begin to familiarize ourself with it- we expect it. Vonnegut uses our expectation to trick us into familiarizing ourself with death and only here does he bring us back to realize, in horror, what we have overlooked.
"The flatcar sometimes crept, sometimes went extremely fast, often stopped-went uphill, downhill, around curves, along straightaways. Whatever poor Billy saw through the pipe, he had no choice but to say to himself, "That's Life"
ReplyDeleteHow is Vonnegut describing human life?
This quote right here shows everybody's life. Its basically saying that the human life goes through good times and bad when he says uphill and downhill. This quote really connects to Billy life because he went through a lot of uphills and downhills during World War 2. And now he always walking around depressed and sad not caring about his life so he could relate to this a lot. I also think that this quote can relate to the story we read about the oldman with wings. He was going through downhills because of the way he looked not what he had been through. But when the townspeople lock him up and feed him mothballs he can relate. So Billy is saying that just how life goes and everyone goes through that.
"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: Should we ignore all the awful times in our lives and only concentrate on the good? Are bad memories or experiences worth remembering, do they make us who we are?
This is when the Tralfamadorians are explaining to Billy how they have peace on their planet. Billy has a hard time trying to understand how the aliens are able to simply forget about bad experiences or just ignore them. His experiences in his life affect him so much that it seems crazy that anyone could just leave out some bits of history and only think about others. It is also absurd to him to think this way because he has no control of where (or when) in time he travels to and when that happens. The skips in time are usually triggered by or he jumps to a time that isn't so pleasant, and he doesn't have very much control of where he goes. He can’t simply forget moments or not live them, they come as they do and there is nothing he can change about that. Right now on Tralfamadore, he is the only human, and they referenced him as being a “perfect specimen”. He is all they have to know as human, and so he represents all of humanity for them. I think he also represents humanity to the reader though, because the reader (at least me) also thinks that the aliens are being outrageous. Billy’s character is so much molded by his memories and how much they have affected him that it is insane to think that he, or anyone, could just forget them. It sounds really cheesy, but I think it is a part of who you are, and that really can’t be changed. Just like the idea of time, every moment exists forever in that moment, separate from other moments, but there is nothing that can be done about it. I think Vonnegut is trying to once again cement kind of how much his own life was affected by war and how damaged both he and Billy are from their memories and experiences.
Another thought I had was do you think that Billy will eventually start to accept their beliefs or adhere to that way of thinking? I think throughout the book he has kind of picked up different theories from the Tralfamadorians, like their sense of time. He accepted that they were right in their thinking to some extent, but I don’t think he could accept this way of life. He is so affected and influenced by his memories that it makes up his life, and that can’t all be erased.
I agree with you Grace, I also found that interesting. While reading I was thinking maybe that specific part in the book is just Vonneguts way of expressing what it is that maybe he learned about the war. I also found it interesting that you said that Billy is molded by his memories because all we really know about Billy are the few memories he goes back too.
Delete" That's the attractive thing about war," said Rosewater. " Absolutely everybody gets a little something." (111)
ReplyDeleteQuestion: Dose this refer to the bad effects of war or the good effects of war? What tone does Rosewater use?
When reading this passage I noticed that even though both Billy and Rosewater may have found life meaningless and both may have witness a great deal of death, you can still see that they had different experiences with war. The book makes it look like Rosewater was actually referring to the engagement ring, but I felt like there was a deeper or more bigger meaning to the comment he made. I think Rosewater's comment refers to both the bad effects of war and the good things that come out of war, because there's an actual example of both things that are present : Both Billy and Rosewater are in a mental ward ( Bad effect) and Billy got the engagement ring from the war ( Good thing). And what makes it confusing is the tone that Rosewater is using, because it seems he's only taking about the good things that come out of war, and how war is attractive. But yet his tone sounds sarcastic which makes me think he referring to a bigger picture.
I agree with you when you say the tone sounds sarcastic. I do agree due to Vonnegut's belief on how nothing good can come out of war which I talk about below. Vonnegut knows that war is purely terrible because of personal experience and I think that everyone who has been in war knows this. Rosewater might not even being sarcastic, but actual trying to convince himself otherwise, that war can be good. There is a possibility that Rosewater might be succumbing to senile dementia in which case his thoughts on war are gone. There are so many possibilities on why Rosewater says this and I don't think that him saying this quote truthfully is one of them.
Delete"Somewhere in the night there were cries of grief. With nothing better to do, Billy shuffled in their direction. He wondered what tragedy so many had found to lament out of doors."
ReplyDeleteHow does this quote build on self consciousness especially referring to Billy?
When I first read this quote, I was sucked into it because in a way it partially describes Billy's life. He lives life as whatever happens happens, however with fear. Billy doesn't really stand up for himself, and somehow if you're thinking about him you can relate that to the part, "Somewhere in the night there were cries of grief." He griefs over acceptance and wants to fit in but no one see's him that way at all. Tragedy is one word of describing Billy's life. That's why when he travels through time or is day dreaming they're positive thoughts or results, he's doesn't have that in reality. As mentioned before, he's considered extra weight. Now this brings up a huge question. Was this how Vonnegut felt before he wrote this novel? How has his views changed about humanity?
"Everything was beautiful, and nothing hurt," (122).
ReplyDeleteI'm really liking the theme of the glorification of war right now, so I'm going to go with it. This quote made me think about the value we put on a person's life after they die. We attempt to sum up their experiences, and it ends up being really sappy and happy a lot of the time. This could be especially true with a solider, as a lot of the time it is seen as an honor to die in a war. What Vonnegut is trying to say here is that death in war is gruesome- it is nothing to be proud of. We should be able to recognize what every soldier went through, and remember their bravery and hardships and what they were forced to do, not just all the frilly Frank Sinatra stuff. This is just one of those moments where he really gets his anti-war theme across.
"An American near Billy wailed that he had excreted everything but his brains. Moments later, he said, 'there they go, there they go,' he meant his brains. That was I, that was me, that was the author of this book."(125)
ReplyDeleteQ; Why does Vonnegut choose to refer back to himself instead of following story line? why does he use this character to represent him?
It is quite odd that Vonnegut goes back to himself as a person no where through the eyes of Billy during this story. It is interesting that he uses such an insignificant, nameless character to represent himself as well. This was the first time, since the introduction, where Vonnegut referred to himself. It shows that he felt the need to show himself as a part of this story but almost so bland that it goes unnoticed. What he really is trying to show is that he's just like everyone else. He went through these war struggles that these other men, such as Billy Pilgram, went through. Now being a writer it was important to notify the readers that this isn't just about some character, this is really about him and his problems that he had. The first chapter of this book wasn't the book but was him speaking and really set off the tone for what would happen. This one simple line really shows how this is reality, not some story.
" Escape was out of the question. The atmosphere outside the dome was cyanide, and Earth was 446,120,000,000,000,000 miles away."
ReplyDeleteWhat does this line mean? Why did Vonnegut choose to create this moment on Tralfamadore and what does it reveal about escaping from war? Can you truly ever escape war?
I think Vonnegut’s choice of language in this quote is extremely important and helps to answer the question of if you can every fully escape the effects of war. He has created this alternate world and planet for Billy, Vonnegut chooses to make the planet extremely difficult to survive on, and separates from Earth yet there are so many parallels drawn between War fought by humans on our planet and Tralfamadore. Billy cannot escape Tralfamadore, but I’m not sure if he wants to because he is so intrigued fascinated with the Tralfamadorians and their world. I think this is one of the problems people face with war, it is scary and inhumane, but the horror and pain of it intrigues and interests human beings. I also found it interesting that he chose to create the atmosphere out of cyanide, because it is a chemical that can be used to create chemical weapons, commit suicide and murder, and was also used in gas chambers. It makes it impossible to leave Tralfamadore so Billy is trapped, and unable to escape much like he cannot escape war or the memories of war, that they show up all different places in life causing him to be constantly trapped and unable to escape these dark thoughts, to the extent that even on a planet he has made up, he is unable to forget the effects of war. I wonder is it because they are somehow comforting to him since they played such a large role in his life or has he formed them out of pure terror?
Ruby Ranson
I totally agree with what you are saying about how this is connected to being stuck in the war even after it. I hate to say this yet again but I think this is connected to the idea that "all time is all time" and that since it is all coexistent there is no escaping it. That's why I think he used this dome to make him seem trapped. I also think the outside of cyanide was used to show that horrible past can always haunt you and in reality no matter how hard you try to forget, the bad memories just keep on coming and they always stay with you somewhere.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"It was a simple-minded thing for a female Earthling to do, to associate sex and glamour with war...'I'm proud you were a soldier. Do you know that?'" (121).
ReplyDeleteThis quote constantly made me question the purpose of Valencia's character. Billy Pilgrim's wife is admiring and glamorizing the fact that Billy went to war. Valencia seems to represent the opposite of Billy and what Vonnegut is trying to say through Billy. Why is this/what is the purpose of this?
Valencia's character puzzled me from the moment Vonnegut introduced her. She seems useless to Billy, as he constantly questions why he even married her, even realizing he was insane for doing so (page 107). She is described as unattractive and constantly eating snacks, such as Three Musketeers and Mars Bars, and offering Billy her snacks as well. These seemingly unnecessary details about her snacking and useless affection towards Billy (offering him chocolate while is in the veteran's hospital) make give off the impression that she is unintelligent and unlike her husband. She is so unlike Billy and everything Vonnegut represents through him to the point where she associates sex and glamour with war, contradicting Vonnegut's anti-war theme. The tone used to describe Valencia comes off as condescending. For example, "It was a simple minded thing for a female Earthling to do..." (121). This statement seems to come from some sort of powerful figure because of their calling Valencia an "Earthling", as though her being an Earthling is some sort of unfortunate state she cannot help. "Simple minded" tells me that she is empty and unintelligent. Her thoughts and statements are so unintelligent and seemingly useless, that Billy Pilgrim generally responds with dull, one-word answers such as "um", "no", "good", and "sometimes".
In this response, I often use "seemingly" to describe Valencia's character (her thoughts...statements...seemingly useless) because I don't want to state that everything she says is entirely dumb- there must be more to her character, some sort of reason/point to her. She could be there to emphasize Vonnegut's anti-war theme. Being the opposite of this theme provides a strong contrast, making the theme stand out even more. When reading this quote, all I could think about was how wrong she was about glamorizing war and how ignorant, foolish, and insensitive it made her seem. She could also be here to represent innocence and naivety. Valencia is madly in love with Billy, praising whatever he does, and willing to do anything for him. She clearly has no idea what war is like, considering her "glamorous" expectations about it, and is praising Billy for his participation in it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"The Tralfamdorians tried to give Billy clues that would help him imagine sex in the invisible dimension. They told him that there could be no Earthling babies without male homosexuals. There could be babies without female homosexuals. There couldn't be babies without women over sixty five years old. There could be babies without men over sixty-five years old. There could be babies without men over sixty-five. There couldn't be babies without other babies who had lived an hour or less after birth. And so on.
ReplyDeleteIt was gibberish to Billy."
Question: Why does Vonnegut show Billy's perplexity to these new ideas? Is he trying to elaborate on the very unique traits that humans have in our limitedness?
I find myself constantly going back to the relationship between Billy and the Tralfmadorians. I'm sorry, I just had to write this down and I promise to move on after. I thought this was extremely interesting. It's a very long quote but I felt that the entire thing was necessary. I think that in a way he is trying to elaborate on the fact that as a race, we being humans, are truly limited and this causes emotion, inference, jealousy, curiosity, and many other things that would most likely seem irrelevant if we were not so simplistic. For many it is very hard to say that we are a simplistic race. But I think it is important to admit this. In a sense it is NOT a bad thing because with our simplicity, we seem to want to go beyond our limits and with that motivation and constant state of dreaming and wonder allows us to break the boundary more and more every day. That being said, I think that it is still seemingly impossible to comprehend every strange idea or unordinary idea that is said to be fact. We as a race are curious. Many say "Curiosity killed the cat." Well although that may be true, the cat had babies, and that's us, and although I may be taking the words of that statement way to literally, and I'm sorry for that, the point that I am trying to get at is that: humans are evolving exponentially, curiosity simply helps us speed the process. As the Tralfamadorians have said "all time is all time." We are going to evolve no matter what, but the speed is all depending on what actions we take. And with that we will have the ability to comprehend things that seem impossible today.
"He got out of bed, said 'Excuse me,' went into the darkness of the bathroom to take a leak. He groped for light, realized as he felt the rough walls that he had traveled back to 1944, to the prison hospital again"
ReplyDeleteThis quote confused me because I wonder why Vonnegut chooses to send Billy back in time as such inopportune moments in his life, such as this one.
I think that maybe Vonnegut sends Billy back in time at such strange moments to enhance the idea that war never really goes away, and that it will always be a part of Billy. Yes, Valencia and Billy had been talking about the war so it was not a completely random time to send him back but still, it seems a bit strange to me. Yet, adding on to this idea that all time is all time, I believe that Billy was not in fact sent back in time. I think that maybe he is just reliving the war in his head as he tells Valencia of the horrors he endured. Often, one has an easier time recalling an event if they go back to it mentally and I think that when it comes to recounting the war, this is upsetting to Billy because, much like Vonnegut, Billy does not want to remember his time there.
"Billy looked inside the latrine. The wailing was coming from in there. The place was crammed with Americans who had taken their pants down. The welcome feast had made them as sick as volcanoes. The buckets were full or had been kicked over." (125)
ReplyDeleteWas this passage placed in the novel to show how nothing in war can be genuinely good? Can anything in war be positive?
Many things can come out of war: tragedy, strife, PTSD, but goodness is not one of them. What seems good in war, is not good because it is happening in the worst place a person can be in. If you survive during war you will not be the same when you get home because of the torment you have seen. Due to this it is impossible to find good within war. I believe that in the passage above, Vonnegut was trying to portray this idea. He knows what lays inside of war and he definitely knows that none of it is good. His experiences are good enough to show that war is terrible. His intention was to make a war novel that is as real as possible, with no Frank Sinatras or John Waynes. The idea that nothing is good in war including the battles that Hollywood depicts as exciting and encapsulating is as real as a war story can get because that idea gives no fun to the reader, just insight. Vonnegut uses this idea to make his story more realistic because that is how he feels about war.
"'I'm going to lose what for you," she said. 'What?' 'I'm going to go on a diet. I'm going to become beautiful for you.' 'I like you just the way you are.' 'Do you really?' 'Really,' said Billy Pilgrim. He had already seen a lot of their marriage, thanks to time-travel, he knew that it was going to be at least bearable all the way."
ReplyDeleteIs time travel a curse rather then a miracle?
In this passage Billy Pilgrim states that he has already seen his marriage. The tone Vonnegut uses is one of disappointment and surrender. Maybe seeing so much causes Billy to underestimate what he has and give up on trying to achieve happiness. He wouldn't even allow his wife to go on a diet because he knew that it was useless. This ideology ties back to the Tralfamadorian belief that, "...Only on Earth is their any talk of free will." Billy seems to have learned more then he should from the Tralfamadorian and that has ultimately cursed his life rather then made it better. Is it better to be numb from knowledge and live happy, or to know everything and live disappointed?