Billy's Fears

       I am actually starting to enjoy the randomness of Slaughter House Five because it allows for Vonnegut to plug some random philosophical thoughts and ideas into his writing.  One of my personal favorites from Chapter 8 was, "There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations, because most of the people in it are so sick and so much the listless playthings of enormous forces.  One of the main effects of war, after all, is that people are discouraged from being characters" (208-209).  I think in this quote we see what Billy is trying not to become although he does have his moments being the "listless playthings of enormous forces" such as the Tralfamadorians.  He wants to be a character, he wants to be in this book, and he wants to have a story to tell so badly that he finds himself jumping from place to place in time to find something interesting enough to make himself a character. Although Billy has made it quite obvious he doesn't fear death because he has seen it happen many times, I think he fears being forgotten or not having an interesting enough story to tell.

Weirdness

As I was reading chapter 5 tonight, I could not help but notice that Billy (apart fromm being just really weird) maybe can "become unstuck in time" sort of all the time.  For instance, on page 135, Billy says how Derby describes the "Earthlings" and the weather and how the "Earthlings" dont want to inhabit "Earth" sometimes.  But, they aren't on Tralfamadore.  They're in the hospital prison talking about war, yet Billy can see Derby in one eye talking to him and Derby being shot in the future in the other eye, while using terminology one can relate to science fiction/Tralfamadore.  I just think its weird.

Vonnegut attempting to be subtle

         As I was reading the first half of Chapter 5 I saw many instances where I couldn't tell if Vonnegut was being blatantly obvious or attempting subtlety and failing.

         For instance, in chapter 1 Nancy is eating a Three Musketeers Bar, In chapter 2 we find out that Billy's group in the War was called the Three Musketeers, and in Chapter 5 Billy's wife to be is eating none other than a Three Musketeers Bar.  Now, either Vonnegut really likes his chocolate covered fluffy whipped candy Bars or he is attempting to be subtle in showing how war is everywhere.

        Another instance is when two separate people speak of how the War is the Children's Crusade.  Although this is a nice comparison, it is quite rare that two people would have the exact same specific thoughts on the war.
     
        Another observation I made was how Vonnegut often contradicts himself severely.  On page 127, Billy explains how everyone thought he was going crazy because of how his father had thrown him into the pool and taken him to the edge of the grand canyon.  Then on page 132 Rosewater says how its a shame that Billy's father is dead because "a boy needs a father." Now, if this were true and Billy did need his father, why would he be the reason that he is going crazy in the first place?

     And on a completely separate note, what was with the giraffes on page 126? Was anyone else a little confused about that one?

Ahh so this is what its forr...

Heyy guys I don't about you but I got a little too excited seeing 3 vocab words in the reading! We saw covetously, unmitigated, and unambiguous!!! WOAH!! Pretty cool, I'm more impressed at the fact that I still remember their definitions, so it goes. 

Hipster Quotes and STUFF

Nicki and I discovered a lil' gem while flipping through Slaughterhouse Five.  We found some quotes that are constantly leeched and hardly ever given proper credit. For example, I'm sure you've seen the occasional 'hipster' (ugh) bring out the "everything was beautiful and nothing hurt" quote in some sort of attempt to one-up everyone. Yes, we all love to tweet these interesting and scholarly things, but I think it's a little weird to equate knowledge with the amount of classic books we can quote.

Think about it, I mean, if someone around 20 years old told you they've never read The Catcher in the Rye, what would be your reaction? It's just a little silly that there's an expectation to be familiar with certain books, and if you're not, you're deemed an idiot or something. Is reading Shakespeare is a prerequisite to having a brain? I have a feeling Mrs. K might think so. But anyway.

What do you guys think? Does reading Vonnegut, Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Bukowski, Salinger, etc. make someone smarter? Or does at least seem that way? I can quote a lot of Salinger, maybe Bukowski, but not much Hemingway, and I have an awful math grade. I'd probably date a guy that knows more Beastie Boys lyrics than he does Shakespeare sonnets. But this is all just my opinion. What about yours?

So it goes

Vonnegut must really love the saying "so it goes" because it seems to appear in every other paragraph. I just keep getting the feeling that Vonnegut either does not buy the stories of others, and feels the need to share this with the reader by including "so it goes" or maybe he is not completely sold on his own story. I found myself not trusting him completely, it is hard to explain in words why I feel this way. An explanation would probably include many hand gestures, which I cannot convey over the internet.  By the end of the reading I could not stand seeing the words "so it goes," I personally found it very annoying and unnecessary, but I am sure there is some purpose to it that I have just not discovered yet.

Titles

I don't know why, but for some reason I have extreme difficulties choosing a title. I always write my essay first, then do all my proof-reading and rewrites, then eventually chose a title. Sometimes I don't even write a title and hand in a name-less paper. I'm not entirely sure what makes deciding on a title so difficult, but maybe it's just one of those things that I'm incapable of doing for no reason. Does anybody else have paper-writing mental blocks on one certain thing every time?

"You don't believe in God until the plane is crashing"

Throughout the last chapter there was a lot of reference to religion. When asked, Catherine said she didn't have a religion. A better answer would be my husband, or Frederic as she stated earlier. Also when the baby was dead, Frederic said even though he doesn't follow a religion, the baby would have been baptized. So we see all this secularism, the suddenly BAM!, Frederic sounds like the most religious person you would ever meet. When Catherine is in her last breaths, Frederic prays to God like he never has before. He also asks Catherine if she wants a priest to come. Where is this coming from!? He also contradicts these feelings with thoughts of death, how it is inescapable. Yes it is what is expected when someone is dying, but I never thought we would see this change in Frederic.

The ending

I love that the ending of AFTA was abrupt. At first I was aggravated, because I wanted to know more, but after I while I found myself content with the ending. An ending any different I don't think would have fit. I also enjoyed that fact that it was raining when Catherine died, and how before she had seen death in the rain. Maybe, she saw her own death in the rain. Frederick did not go back to the war in book five the war came to him. When Catherine died, it was like being at the front again, where death is all around Fredrick. Catherine died in a hospital, and while there is a lot of life in a hospital, there is also a lot of death, just like there is at the front.

A Farewell to Fretting..phew!!

Sooo I don't know about you guys, but I actually had a LOT of fun writing this parody and was stressing over nothing..phew!! I thought it would be impossible to mimic this wonderful author's techniques but  I am surprisingly proud with my work. It was kind of a way to take a breather over the heavy topic of the book, yet  still staying focused.  I think we should have more assignments like these, what do you guys think??? :)

Tummy

While reading, one thing really stood out to me, and it is probably one of the most insignificant things: that Fredrick used the word tummy. He tells Catherine: "Tell me when you're tired," I said. Then a little later, "Watch out the oar doesn't pop you in the tummy." (237) Personally, when I think of someone using the word tummy, I think of a child or a mother. I first I thought that maybe Hemingway was calling to light Fredrick's immaturity, but personally I think Fredrick has grown up in the past couple of chapters. Also I don't take Fredrick for a "tummy" kind of guy. I sure, when he was in the army, if he had used the word tummy, he would have got slapped. Honestly, I have no idea why this stood out to me.

Contradictions

So I realized while reading last night, that is whole book is really contradicting itself. Going way back when, to when we did the harkness, one of my only comments was about the horse race chapter, and how the characters almost excepted defeat when they bid on the horses they liked, and not the ones that would win them money. But if the horse race really did represent war, then why would they except defeat? Didn't they say that defeat was worse than war? And if so, why do they keep wanting everyone to stop fighting and stand down? Wouldn't that mean they were all defeated?
And also, all the male characters in the book talk about sex and girls without any restrictions really. I mean, some of it is disguised, but its pretty easy to figure out when they are talking about sex. But then, whenever they use a swear, its cut out of the book. On pg. 171, Aymo tells one of the girls, "'Don't worry...No danger of --' using the vulgar world. 'No place for --.' I could see she understood the word and that was all." What word are they talking about? It can't be that bad, considering they talk about sex like its a game. Just some food for thought.

Just a Thought

This is of course meant to be a less formal post...... but is it just me or is 'A Farewell to Arms' falling apart a little bit? Or perhaps, it's just Frederic Henry. I'dve thought it'dve been that Catherine was the one to fall to pieces without him, and granted, we've not heard from Catherine, but it seems almost as if Frederic's bought into her 'no separate me' story. Maybe it's just the drudgery of war without their love story - an interesting and valid point Hemingway could be making, but it really seems as if things are falling apart a little bit. Most of us aren't huge Catherine fans, but I have sympathy for her and I'm almost missing her part in the novel at the moment. It's as if Frederic's gone back to his apathy, but minus the independence he possessed before Catherine.

Then vs. Now

In class we've talked about how it is somewhat unfair to judge Frederick based on today's standards and I think there is proof of how much the world has changed in the reading due today. On page 164 they mention how the prostitutes from the soldiers whorehouse are being put into a truck as part of the evacuation and Bonello says, "I'd like to have a crack at them for nothing. They charge too much at that house anyway. They government gyps us." Today, the government would never even consider providing prostitutes for soldiers at war, let alone possibly making a profit from it. Because exploiting women in this way was normal during WWI, the way Frederick treats Catherine and how he interacted with her before they really knew each other seems much more normal to me.

Will war ever end?

As I was reading the assignment for tomm, the only thing that I kept thinking was... Can Hemingway address the question of whether or not the war will end one more time? Almost every chapter includes the characters commenting on how the Austrians will attack/not attack, and whether they will attack or not attack and how they're all "so tired" of war in general.  But yet the entire time, not one person actually gives the reader a sense of WHEN the war will ACTUALLY END.  The fact that the characters have no idea of the war's end and basically in their eyes war will go on almost forever it seems, reiterates the essential theme in the novel that war is a "circle" and is "never-ending".

Mountains

Throughout A Farewell to Arms Frederic mentions the mountains whenever he speaks of the war.  In the beginning of the novel, Frederic says that all of the mountains beyond the river haven't been taken or invaded.  Later in the novel (Chapter 19) Frederic says "I did not see how it could go on.  Even if they took all the Bainsizza and Monte San Gabriele there were plenty of mountains beyond for the Austrians.  I had seen them.  All the highest mountains were beyond".  Through his descriptions, Frederic makes the mountains seem pure and untouchable, as if they were a peace he could reach out to but never touch.  They also symbolize the desire to take over more and more land in a war, and how you could never have enough because the highest mountains/largest desires would always be beyond.  I think the mountains really bring up questions about Frederic's desires in the war, and his desires with Catherine.

Victory vs. Defeat

          As I was reading chapter 26 a few quotes grabbed my attention and offered some interesting questions. Frederick is talking with the Priest about the war (all anyone seems to talk about) and Frederick says, "It is in defeat that we become Christians" (156). He then later on goes on to say that you become "like Our Lord".  This made me question what he was trying to say here.  Did he mean that we die in defeat and therefore join our lord in death and heaven or do we in death become closer to the lord?

          Another confusing conversation I found in chapter 26 was when Frederick and the Priest were debating about whether defeat or victory was worse.  They say that they have hoped for victory but they also don't believe in it anymore.  When Frederick says he he doesn't believe in victory the Priest responds by saying he doesn't believe in defeat.  Perhaps the most confusing part of his comment is when he says "Though it may be better"

         In summary, the main questions I am asking are, How in defeat do we become Christians? and How is victory worse than defeat? or phrased in another way, How is defeat better than victory?

Kasprak Weighs In

I wish there could be "like" button on the blog. (Now that I have said that, I'm willing to bet some smart techno-savvy type will tell me it's possible....) You're all doing a great job, and I especially love when something we read in class connects to something you're doing just for fun, like movies or other books you've read.  Also enjoying the close reading of the text in some posts. Keep up the good work.... See you all tomorrow!

Bourne Ultimatum

I know that we have already talked about war, and if there is a way to actually win a war, but last night I was watching Bourne Ultimatum (here is a link to a summary for those who have not seen the movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0440963/synopsis)  and it got me thinking on the topic again. At one point in the movie a head of a CIA search team, whose job it is to hunt Jason Bourne, orders someone to kill two CIA agents: one for leaking information on a dirty operation, and the other for presumably helping Bourne. Another agent protests and says "You start down this path (killing two of your own agents), where does it end?" to which the head agent responds "It ends when we've won." Just be be clear in the movie Jason Bourne and the CIA are at "war." The quote brings up the question of how does one win a war? People are killed on both sides, and in the end nothing is really gained. I have to say when this part came on I became really excited since it connected to A Farewell to Arms.  I hope I did not ramble on and I hope this makes sense to everyone.

:(

As I was reading through AFTA tonight I was just overcome with the feeling of sadness.  Why you may ask? Well, I think all of Fredric's desensitization is finally starting to get to me.  Throughout tonights chapters, Fredric seems more and more removed and unable to sympathize with his comrades.  Although there are many examples of his desensitization, I think the best example is on page 146 when he has this conversation with Rinaldi,
"This war is killing me Rinaldi said, "I am very depressed by it." He folded his hands over his knee. "Oh" I said.
"What's the matter? Can't I even have human impulses?" (146)
Perhaps Fredric's desensitization is simply a coping method...ideas?