"I'm young and happy. I'll never die. I'm skimming across the surface of my own history, moving fast, riding the melt beneath the blades, doing loops and spins, and when I take a high leap into the dark and come down thrity years later, I realize it is as Tim trying to save Timmy's life with a story" (page 233).
Through his stories and dreams, Tim O'Brien can change any story. He can make it into what he wants to believe. In his imagination, everything is perfect. He can bring any back to life so he can spend a little more time with them. He can pretend that they are not dead.
I think in a way, we all have our own ways at pretending that bad things don't happen and haven't happened. It's a coping tool. In his stories, O'Brien showed how many people coped, but this wasn't for him. I think that his last few sentences in the book are him saying that in his stories, he can make himself whatever he wants to be. He can change his childhood and his past to save himself from all the pain.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Entry #19
"'That old man,' she said, 'is he mad at you or something?' 'I hope not.' He looks mad.' 'No,' I said. 'All that's finished'" (page 179).
When O'Brien goes back to where his friend Kiowa was killed with his daughter, there are 2 farmers close by. His daughter notices that one of the men looks angry. To me, this sounds like the man is holding some kind of grudge. Maybe against Americans or maybe just personally against O'Brien. To me it seems ridiculous. The war had been over for some time and this man is still angry. Possibly his father or brother or son was killed in the war. Or possibly he just knows that the Americans reaped havoc on his country and for this he refuses to forgive them.
Grudges are part of human life. Everyone holds them at some point in time and they do nothing but hurt us. They ruin friendships and families, start wars and feuds. A grudge can be some one's downfall. Any grudge, big or small is not worth the consequences of such hate.
When O'Brien goes back to where his friend Kiowa was killed with his daughter, there are 2 farmers close by. His daughter notices that one of the men looks angry. To me, this sounds like the man is holding some kind of grudge. Maybe against Americans or maybe just personally against O'Brien. To me it seems ridiculous. The war had been over for some time and this man is still angry. Possibly his father or brother or son was killed in the war. Or possibly he just knows that the Americans reaped havoc on his country and for this he refuses to forgive them.
Grudges are part of human life. Everyone holds them at some point in time and they do nothing but hurt us. They ruin friendships and families, start wars and feuds. A grudge can be some one's downfall. Any grudge, big or small is not worth the consequences of such hate.
Entry #18
Protagonist- "In the interests of truth, however, I want to make it clear that Norman Bowker was in no way responsible for what happened to Kiowa. Norman did not experience a failure of nerve that night. He did not freeze up or lose the Silver Star for valor. That part of the story is my own" (page 154).
At the beginning of the novel, it seemed that Lieutenant Jimmy Cross was going to be the protagonist, but as the novel went on, it became clear that it was Tim O'Brien. He tells stories from his vantage point, but also that of other men he fought with. It seems that his flaw is just being human. He makes mistakes like when he couldn't save Kiowa in the stink field, but he blames himself for these accidents.
If you ask me, I don't believe O'Brien was at fault for Kiowa's death. While he may have been with Kiowa at the time, he couldn't have done anything to save him. Naturally, he blamed himself for this and I believe this is a flaw all humans have. We blame ourselves for things that couldn't have been stopped and the guilt often stays with us. This could be any one's downfall.
At the beginning of the novel, it seemed that Lieutenant Jimmy Cross was going to be the protagonist, but as the novel went on, it became clear that it was Tim O'Brien. He tells stories from his vantage point, but also that of other men he fought with. It seems that his flaw is just being human. He makes mistakes like when he couldn't save Kiowa in the stink field, but he blames himself for these accidents.
If you ask me, I don't believe O'Brien was at fault for Kiowa's death. While he may have been with Kiowa at the time, he couldn't have done anything to save him. Naturally, he blamed himself for this and I believe this is a flaw all humans have. We blame ourselves for things that couldn't have been stopped and the guilt often stays with us. This could be any one's downfall.
Entry #17
'"The thing is,' he wrote 'there's no place to go. Not just in this lousy little town. In general. My life, I mean. It's almost like I got killed over in Nam... Hard to describe. That night when Kiowa got wasted, I sort of sank down into the sewage with him... Feels like I'm still in deep shit'" (page 150)
War is selfish! It takes and steals from everyone who is involved: the men and woman fighting and the countries. And what does it give back? Nothing, except maybe the assurance that your country won, but don't forget about the thousands of men who died for this victory and the thousands more who were killed.
It seems odd to me how war affects everyone differently. For O'Brien, he came back and it was almost like nothing had happened. He went on to grad school at Harvard like he had originally planned and seldom told stories about the war, except through his writing. For Norman Bowker, the war was the end of him. It took parts of him that he never got back. I think that Norman's story seems more realistic than O'Brien's because I couldn't see many people just getting over such a traumatic experience.
War is selfish! It takes and steals from everyone who is involved: the men and woman fighting and the countries. And what does it give back? Nothing, except maybe the assurance that your country won, but don't forget about the thousands of men who died for this victory and the thousands more who were killed.
It seems odd to me how war affects everyone differently. For O'Brien, he came back and it was almost like nothing had happened. He went on to grad school at Harvard like he had originally planned and seldom told stories about the war, except through his writing. For Norman Bowker, the war was the end of him. It took parts of him that he never got back. I think that Norman's story seems more realistic than O'Brien's because I couldn't see many people just getting over such a traumatic experience.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Entry #16
"I had already pulled the pin on a grenade. I had come up to a crouch. It was entirely automatic. I did not hate the young man; I did not see him as the enemy; I did not ponder issues of morality or politics or military duty. I crouched and kept my head low. I tried to swallow whatever was rising from my stomach, which tasted like lemonade, something fruity and sour. I was terrified" (page 126).
When I read this quote, I wonder if this was O'Brien's first kill, his last kill, or maybe just one where he saw his victim up close and personal. The other men found it to be odd that he was acting the way he did after he killed the man. It was war they would say. But does war really make up for the fact that men on both sides are being massacred because they're governments can't work things out? Men are turned trained to be animals before they go to war and in some countries, they are trained from a young age. They are told to go out for the kill and not to think twice about it or even look back. O'Brien did not do this; he acted like a true human being and grieved for the other HUMAN BEING he had killed. He mourned for his fiance and his family and everything that young man might have become.
O'Brien killed this man out of instinct. He didn't do it for the normal reasons: hate, eminent danger, politics, or duties. He had been taught that the other person is a danger to him and this had been pushed into his brain so much that killing had become automatic. I think that often times, people get into the routines of life and they too begin to do things because it comes automatic to them. We need to open our eyes to life and not always follow what comes naturally. O'Brien is a perfect example to that. He did what came automatically to him, and this only brought him a life time of pain, regret, and agony.
When I read this quote, I wonder if this was O'Brien's first kill, his last kill, or maybe just one where he saw his victim up close and personal. The other men found it to be odd that he was acting the way he did after he killed the man. It was war they would say. But does war really make up for the fact that men on both sides are being massacred because they're governments can't work things out? Men are turned trained to be animals before they go to war and in some countries, they are trained from a young age. They are told to go out for the kill and not to think twice about it or even look back. O'Brien did not do this; he acted like a true human being and grieved for the other HUMAN BEING he had killed. He mourned for his fiance and his family and everything that young man might have become.
O'Brien killed this man out of instinct. He didn't do it for the normal reasons: hate, eminent danger, politics, or duties. He had been taught that the other person is a danger to him and this had been pushed into his brain so much that killing had become automatic. I think that often times, people get into the routines of life and they too begin to do things because it comes automatic to them. We need to open our eyes to life and not always follow what comes naturally. O'Brien is a perfect example to that. He did what came automatically to him, and this only brought him a life time of pain, regret, and agony.
Entry #15
Allusion- "'Tim it's a war. The guy wasn't Heidi- he had a weapon, right? It's a tough thing, for sure, but you got to cut out that staring'" (page 120).
When O'Brien killed a man and then saw the same man he killed, he went into shock. He kept staring at the man and his buddy, Kiowa is trying to comfort him here. He throws in the allusion to Heidi in order to point out that the man wasn't an innocent bystander or a young child. The man was coming to kill O'Brien and the other men and he only did what he had to do, but the guilt is still too much for him.
This quote shows how truly difficult the war was on the men who were fighting it. They had to see the terror they were reaping on others and although some acted like it was no big deal, it was. They knew that it was at any moment they fired their weapons they were choosing a persons fate. These men were basically playing God, choosing who would die and who would live. The only difference was that if they didn't choose correctly, it was their own life at stake.
When O'Brien killed a man and then saw the same man he killed, he went into shock. He kept staring at the man and his buddy, Kiowa is trying to comfort him here. He throws in the allusion to Heidi in order to point out that the man wasn't an innocent bystander or a young child. The man was coming to kill O'Brien and the other men and he only did what he had to do, but the guilt is still too much for him.
This quote shows how truly difficult the war was on the men who were fighting it. They had to see the terror they were reaping on others and although some acted like it was no big deal, it was. They knew that it was at any moment they fired their weapons they were choosing a persons fate. These men were basically playing God, choosing who would die and who would live. The only difference was that if they didn't choose correctly, it was their own life at stake.
Entry #14
"I was a kid. The thing is, I believed in God and all that, but it wasn't the religious part that interested me. Just being nice to people that's all. Being decent" (page 115).
Here, Henry Dobbins is talking to Kiowa about his interest in becoming a minister. His only reasoning for wanting to follow this career choice is so that he can be nice and decent to people. To me it seems that he is saying that he wants to do the opposite of what he was currently doing. He was out killing and massacring people in Vietnam and all he really wanted to do in life was be nice and decent.
I think that his short break at the church in Vietnam was a good chance for him to do this. He was able to spend time with two monks who had dedicated their lives to doing just that. I think that many people go into professions wanting to help people or just simply be decent to people, but somewhere along the way, possibly in the search for money, fame, or success, we lose our way. Wouldn't our world be a better place if everyone just went out everyday in an attempt to be nice and decent? Lives would be spared and war would be diminished just because we were civil and decent to one another. It might just be me, but this idea doesn't seem so far-fetched. I don't find anything difficult with just being decent.
Here, Henry Dobbins is talking to Kiowa about his interest in becoming a minister. His only reasoning for wanting to follow this career choice is so that he can be nice and decent to people. To me it seems that he is saying that he wants to do the opposite of what he was currently doing. He was out killing and massacring people in Vietnam and all he really wanted to do in life was be nice and decent.
I think that his short break at the church in Vietnam was a good chance for him to do this. He was able to spend time with two monks who had dedicated their lives to doing just that. I think that many people go into professions wanting to help people or just simply be decent to people, but somewhere along the way, possibly in the search for money, fame, or success, we lose our way. Wouldn't our world be a better place if everyone just went out everyday in an attempt to be nice and decent? Lives would be spared and war would be diminished just because we were civil and decent to one another. It might just be me, but this idea doesn't seem so far-fetched. I don't find anything difficult with just being decent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
