The AP English Language and Composition course is designed to enable students to become
skilled readers and writers in diverse genres and modes of composition. As stated in the
Advanced Placement Course Description, the purpose of the Language and Composition course
is “to enable students to read complex texts with understanding and to write papers of sufficient
richness and complexity to communicate effectively with mature readers” (The College Board,
May 2007, May 2008, p.6).
Friday, September 18, 2009
Things They Carried 3 Questions/ 3 Observations
Post your questions and observations in the comment box provided.
My 3 observations 1)O'Briens writing style is very difficult for me to understand because i can't quite tie together with the reading, what emotion the narrator himself feels for the situation of the soldiers in vietnam.
2)Alot of people come back from the war feeling as though they are out of place more connected to those they shared time with during the war, but in the novel (alot in the first chapter) the author shows only a fellowship/brotherhood between certain people and then a mistrust of others from others.
3) I really am drawn to the parts of the novel that humanize these soldiers, like when O'Brien lists the things they carried with them.During the war alot of people ignored the fact that the war was drafted and forgot that these men wanted so badly to be at home.
1. Throughout all of the chapters that I've read so far, O'Brien is extremely straightforward. He's blunt about the killings of his "friends", and then just moves onto another subject.
2. In the chapter Spin, I like that he goes off into different mind sets within each paragraph. It's makes it a little bit more mind grasping.
3. Love the references to Bonnie and Clyde.
4. Why doesn't he tell somewhat of the truth, instead of making up what happened to him in the war?
5. Why is it that it's just one persons opinion?
6. Why wouldn't he want to face his problems, instead of plotting running away?
1. I noticed the extremely metaphorical nature of the book.
2. I noticed the nature of the characters as they start to develop. They have wants and opinions and they all have different motivations for being in the war.
3. I noticed the things they actually carried. I find it interesting how they have lots of baggage at all times and it is very metaphorical at times. They carry both supplies and heavy emotions and a lot of other things. Its really interesting.
Why is it that no one stands up to fight this war and object?
1. Why does O'Brien write that the soldiers' greatest fear is the fear of blushing? 2. Why do you think the character in O'Brien's "peace story" so eager to return to the fray? 3. What reasons does O'Brien's literary self give for not wanting to go to war?
Observations O'Brien conveys the emotional states of the various soldiers well, making sure not to dwell overlong on the state of one character or another in chapters where they are all present.
Each soldier is very well characterized, especially by the list of individual things that each carried that differed from the norm.
I especially enjoyed the passage in which O'Brien's character drives away from home (pg. 46-47).
1. One thing that I noticed in the book that really caught my eye, was that anytime someone died they found a way to laugh about it. They always tried to make the best out of really bad situations like when Curt Lemon died.
2. Every time he starts to remember a happy story about the war, a death just pops up. But he brings it up so nonchalantly that you don't realize that the story has taken a turn for the worse.
3. When faced with the decision of whether or not to run to Canada to escape the draft or stay and be drafted, O'Brien stayed. This shows just how much the opinion of others affected him. So much that he would risk his life for his reputation when he could have just as easily started a completely new life in Canada.
Questions:
1. Everyone else in their platoon seems to have a close relationship with someone (Cross and Martha, Kiley and Lemon). Who is O'Brien close to?
2. Why did Rat Kiley torment the baby water buffalo?
observations: 1. The many details O' Brien adds makes the narrative extremely intriguing and grips the audience.
2. O' Brien writes very bluntly instead of adding lots of embelishments and fancy language. This has a significant effect on the tone of his book. Especially when the blunt comments are referring to violence.
3. Each chapter skips around to different characters continually. Especially in the first chapter, "The Things They Carried"I find this a great way of introducing the characters and developing the characters.
Questions:
1. Why did O' Brien not run off to Canada?
2. How much of the book is based on O' Brien's actual experiences and how much was fiction?
3. Were all the details about how much they carried and what they carried factual?
Obrien keeps his tone and feelings rather monotone through out the chapters we've read, but still we feel sympathy for the platoon, and the soldiers in the war, is that the kind of reaction he looking for in the audience?
Obrien talks about deaths of his fellow soldiers very simply with little feeling,is this a reflection of how it is in war? or is it just his style of writing?
in spin he talks about the lighter side (though its hard to believe there could be), does he tell us this to lighten the mood of the book, or make us not feel sympathy towards the soldiers?
i really enjoyed the entire part revolving around the pebble, at first it seemed almost useless, and i suppose it may have been, but i think the way Obrien went into detail about that simple stone made that section a little more personal, and overall made me enjoy it a bit more. (pg 8)
Questions: 1.) Some of the things mentioned in the first chapter--some of the "things they carried" seemed out of place. What was the significance of those things, if any? 2.) Why wasn't Cross able to stop thinking about Martha even when he knew he was putting his mens' lives at stake. Why couldn't Cross seem to let go of Martha even many years after the war? 3.) There was one small paragraph on "peace time". How come the man in the story went back to war even though he was safe and supposedly happy with his nurse?
Observations:
1.) I thought it was interesting that the author spent a large chunk of text talking about the various things the men carried and how much they all weighed. I would be interested to know whether or not there was any special significance in that or if O'Brien was just showcasing the great weight that each man had to bear and how they differed.
2.) I loved that in the first chapter, O'Brien talks about how men go to war because they are embarrassed not to and then at the end of the last chapter we read, "On the Rainy River", he talked about how HE himself (the character, I mean) went to war because he was embarrassed not to.
3.) I don't understand how anyone could possibly go to war as someone forced under the draft. The section in "On the Rainy River" where the author is talking about how he was just a normal kid: "I was not soldier. I hated Boy Scouts. I hated camping out. I hated dirt and tents and mosquitoes. The sight of blood made me queasy, and I couldn't tolerate authority, and I didn't know a rifle from a slingshot."
1) How much of this is autobiographical? How much of his different characters come from his own life?
2) If one were to assume that the majority of O'Brien's stories in this book are drawn from personal experience, will he, at some point, write true fiction in the sense that his characters DON'T go to Vietnam? For example, is there a story that involves the main character jumping the boat and going to Canada, "carrying" the psychological burdens along with him, instead of staying on the boat and going overseas to the war as the main character in "On the Rainy River" did?
3) What is the significance of the other characters, and how much do they relate to the author himself or the other men in his platoon, such as the fictitious Cross and Kiowa?
-Comment-
1) As I read the first chapter, I found myself asking the question, “What is the significance of this, and that?” There were almost too many stories in the first short story itself, and with limited action, the development of each of these stories was minimal. I understand, to a point, that O’Brien is trying to paint a bit of a picture of the men overseas and connect them to the characters’ home life. However, at a certain point, it just seemed as if the story itself wasn’t complete. Either it had too much unnecessary detail (lists, really), or there needed to be more development of the characters and “plot.” There wasn’t much, even as I take Lieutenant Cross’s marginal development into account. It honestly didn’t make me think that the author was actually in the war himself because of the underdeveloped characters and lists of military weaponry. I believed that there was something very significant and powerful in the short story, but I couldn’t really find it, and it seemed that the story was just one of many regretful and lonely war story that tells people that they miss being home and don’t want to be there.
Questions: How much of the chapter, On the Rainy River is fiction? Particularly his hallucination where he sees his future friends and loved ones.
Was Martha a possible reflection of Tim O'Brien's love life during the war?
Has any of the soldiers mentioned in this novel, including Elroy Berdahl contacted O'Brien since the publishing of this story?
Observations: The vivid memories of the weight each man carried is astounding. To know that each man could carry what they wanted allowed them to bring good luck charms or objects of value. The fact that they didn't mind the extra weight shows how much reminiscence was left of home.
1. I really like the character Lieutenant Cross and the story presenting his love for Martha. For Cross in a way Martha kept him sane during the war by distracting him from the horrific things surrounding him, however those distractions got in the way of him doing his job properly and put his men in danger. 2. The meeting O'Brien and Cross meet up together years after the war and remember was a really good moment. Although they experienced horrible things while at war when they were talking and remembering the good and funny times that happenend and the friends they made during the process. 3. On page thirteen O'Brien writes about when the group found the dead Vietnamese boy at the bottom of the irrigation ditch. The character Mitchell Sanders talks about the moral of what they found and he jokes about it. I found this interesting because it was like he had to put in a perspective in his mind to make it seem like not big deal even though to a person like me it was a very big deal.
1. Why did none of the men try to comfort Cross and tell him it really wasn't all his fault that Lavender was killed? 2. Why didn't O'Brien run to Canada and continue the life he was planning on before the draft came. 3. Since everyone had the different things they carried. What was the thing O'Brien carried?
Observation 1: The role of a loved one, the role of missing someone back home.
Each day the soldiers wake up at unimaginable hours, fight all day, and live on no sleep. On top of that, they are alone. They miss those back home, they miss the touch, the kiss of their wives', they miss their children and their sweet little voices. Sometimes that urge and need for passion and love, is bought through services of the Vietnamese women. Buying love, buying passion, is a selfish act, but sometimes the men could not hold back on the interest of the other sex.
Observation 2: The things the men carried.
The materials that the men carry allow their character and traits to show. For example Dave, the hygiene freak, carries his toothbrush, dental floss, and several bars of stolen hotel soaps.
What would you carry?
Question 3: How significant does Tim O'brien make the other characters seem? Who were his closest mates?
I enjoyed reading about what the soldiers carried . It brought more of their characteristics out and the certain things that they valued . Although his writing is hard to understand because there is no direct plot , it is exciting to read .
O'Brien describes certain things with no remorse.
I love how O'Brien starts with one subject but in the same sentence switches so quick , it keeps me interested in his work and excited to read what comes next .
Observation 2: Another thing that shows the pride in men was the fact that they would rather die in war, fighting, than any other way. In the chapter On the Rainy River, O'Brien is about to leap off of the boat, into a free life full of Canadian times, but he is taken by his pride. He wants to go to the war and fight because he would be embarrassed not to. This one moment now changes O'Brien's whole life; past memories of pulling the grenade to kill the foreigner, and losing good friends. He chooses to take on these hardships because he is embarrassed not to.
1. Tim O'Brien is very detailed in his writing. For example: Lemon was laughing at Rat Kiley, he took a step, "the booby-trapped 105 blew him into the tree. The parts were just hangling there, so Dave Jensen and I were ordered to shinny up and peel him off. I remember the whie bone of an arm. I remember pieces of skin and something wet and yellow that must've been the intestines." He could've easily described that in two sentences but he doesn't, he wants us to be there with him.
2. He is very random but it makes the reader want to read more.
3. Those men don't know how to cope with things in the correct manner so they take thier anger out in the wrong way. They do that for such a long period of time that they become inferior to sensitivity, they loose all respect for innocent objects.
Belisa Rodriguez asked why Rat Kiley attacked the baby water buffalo.
I think he did it firstly out of emotion. He needed to release his emotions and he did it the only way that the war permitted him to do so, through violence.
I think the buffalo was just in the wrong place in the wrong time. It was the most vulnerable thing and if they hadn't picked it up along the way, Rat could have acted out with violence against his other friends without thinking.
In a way, it's a good thing that he did this to the buffalo.
Several people asked why the author would run away and not simply face his problems.
The author states that he felt he was 'too good' for the war; in that he was well educated, non-violent, and had what he perceived as a bright future ahead of him. These facts, mixed with the paralyzing fear of having to go fight and likely die for a cause in which he did not believe, are the main reasons that O'Brien chose, at first, to run away rather than face his problems.
why did none of the men try to comfort cross and tell him it really wasn't his fault that lavender died?
as obrien makes clear, the war and stories in general are best when blunt and to the point without useless and petty details. i think this applies to the question. the men do not want to sugar coat or comfort each other, things are hard, they have to learn to except and move on if they want to survive.
Observation 3: The chapter, How to Tell a True War Story, left an engraving in many reader's minds. The section is short, but its meaning lasts longer than I would like. Rat Kiley was so deep in sorrow over the death of his comrade, Curt Lemon that he let go of all that was inside him. O'Brien's short passage of the torturing of the animal was so touching not to the mind, but to the stomach, where O'Brien believes all should feel a true war story. Those few words became implanted into my mind as to the real meaning of War stories, that there is no moral. Anyone can tell a war story, as long as they keep going at it.
In response to Jahmal's second question... It would seem that the objective of the author's bluntness is to firmly establish a feeling of dismay at the seeming heartlessness of the characters. Especially in the case of the baby buffalo incident, O'Brien's writing is purposefully blunt to make the reader feel unnerved and to wonder at the sanity or stability of the characters. Also, it makes the war seem more destructive--not only does it kill and wound physically but it destroyed the psyche of so many promising young men.
Marina asked, why Obrien had no one that he was close to? I believe that O'Briens character is a loner in a sense, because no matter how much of it is supposed to be realistic it is still a story and by him not having many emotional ties he is made the narrator of the story, and because the novel is supposed to make the reader question what is and isn't true the person relaying The Things They Carried would have to be there, not someone telling a story they heard. It makes his voice a character thats there but then again isn't
This is a repsonse to Hannah's question regarding Cross's inability to let go of Martha. I am obviously not Jimmy Cross, nor am I his creator, but I think that the blame can be put on love; Cross's love for Martha and desire (more or less) to live with her consumes him throughout the war. After the war, or at least towards the end of his tour, Cross still loves her, regardless of how his love develops. Perhaps he keeps Martha in his mind as a reminder of the wartime, or a reminder of the love that kept him so happy, as opposed to the love that seemed to make him hurt so much over time. Perhaps he holds on to her in his mind as a new idea, as "Martha" prime, a boon that was lost, or a "love" that carried him through.
I really enjoyed reading this chapter, I liked the whole story and how O'Brien described things so cleary that I could imagine how Mary Anne felt because she was in a new place. She wanted to discover new things she took risks. He is telling one of his own stories through this story. I liked what Tim O'brien said about sexist attitudes and how we should get rid of them.
Mary Anne, a young blonde from Cleveland took the meaning of war to the farthest extent. She was so curious and intrigued by Vietnam's mysterious and culture buried forests. After meeting the Green Beret's, she became enveloped with the adrenaline that combat provided her with. Mary Anne told Mark that this is what she was made for. In those nights where she was in ambush, Mary Anne felt alive. She could feel her blood moving and mind focused on the enemy, so different from her previous life in the states. It was these moments where she developed enough strength and independence to walk off into the mountains, never seen again.
Question: Why did O'Brien feel the need to make Mary Anne so cannibalistic? The tongue necklace was told to exaggerate her new self, but is it really needed?
This story made a dramatic change on the view of woman and their role in the war . Mary Anne was a very brave person to want to be apart of a "mans war" and she pretty much made a difference . I like O'Brien writing and how he describes everything so good to not be true .
My 3 observations
ReplyDelete1)O'Briens writing style is very difficult for me to understand because i can't quite tie together with the reading, what emotion the narrator himself feels for the situation of the soldiers in vietnam.
2)Alot of people come back from the war feeling as though they are out of place more connected to those they shared time with during the war, but in the novel (alot in the first chapter) the author shows only a fellowship/brotherhood between certain people and then a mistrust of others from others.
3) I really am drawn to the parts of the novel that humanize these soldiers, like when O'Brien lists the things they carried with them.During the war alot of people ignored the fact that the war was drafted and forgot that these men wanted so badly to be at home.
1. Throughout all of the chapters that I've read so far, O'Brien is extremely straightforward. He's blunt about the killings of his "friends", and then just moves onto another subject.
ReplyDelete2. In the chapter Spin, I like that he goes off into different mind sets within each paragraph. It's makes it a little bit more mind grasping.
3. Love the references to Bonnie and Clyde.
4. Why doesn't he tell somewhat of the truth, instead of making up what happened to him in the war?
5. Why is it that it's just one persons opinion?
6. Why wouldn't he want to face his problems, instead of plotting running away?
1. I noticed the extremely metaphorical nature of the book.
ReplyDelete2. I noticed the nature of the characters as they start to develop. They have wants and opinions and they all have different motivations for being in the war.
3. I noticed the things they actually carried. I find it interesting how they have lots of baggage at all times and it is very metaphorical at times. They carry both supplies and heavy emotions and a lot of other things. Its really interesting.
Why is it that no one stands up to fight this war and object?
Why is everything so blunt throughout the book?
Why wouldnt the main character face his problems?
1. Why does O'Brien write that the soldiers' greatest fear is the fear of blushing?
ReplyDelete2. Why do you think the character in O'Brien's "peace story" so eager to return to the fray?
3. What reasons does O'Brien's literary self give for not wanting to go to war?
Observations
O'Brien conveys the emotional states of the various soldiers well, making sure not to dwell overlong on the state of one character or another in chapters where they are all present.
Each soldier is very well characterized, especially by the list of individual things that each carried that differed from the norm.
I especially enjoyed the passage in which O'Brien's character drives away from home (pg. 46-47).
1. One thing that I noticed in the book that really caught my eye, was that anytime someone died they found a way to laugh about it. They always tried to make the best out of really bad situations like when Curt Lemon died.
ReplyDelete2. Every time he starts to remember a happy story about the war, a death just pops up. But he brings it up so nonchalantly that you don't realize that the story has taken a turn for the worse.
3. When faced with the decision of whether or not to run to Canada to escape the draft or stay and be drafted, O'Brien stayed. This shows just how much the opinion of others affected him. So much that he would risk his life for his reputation when he could have just as easily started a completely new life in Canada.
Questions:
1. Everyone else in their platoon seems to have a close relationship with someone (Cross and Martha, Kiley and Lemon). Who is O'Brien close to?
2. Why did Rat Kiley torment the baby water buffalo?
3.Why didn't Curt Lemon's sister write back?
observations:
ReplyDelete1. The many details O' Brien adds makes the narrative extremely intriguing and grips the audience.
2. O' Brien writes very bluntly instead of adding lots of embelishments and fancy language. This has a significant effect on the tone of his book. Especially when the blunt comments are referring to violence.
3. Each chapter skips around to different characters continually. Especially in the first chapter, "The Things They Carried"I find this a great way of introducing the characters and developing the characters.
Questions:
1. Why did O' Brien not run off to Canada?
2. How much of the book is based on O' Brien's actual experiences and how much was fiction?
3. Were all the details about how much they carried and what they carried factual?
Obrien keeps his tone and feelings rather monotone through out the chapters we've read, but still we feel sympathy for the platoon, and the soldiers in the war, is that the kind of reaction he looking for in the audience?
ReplyDeleteObrien talks about deaths of his fellow soldiers very simply with little feeling,is this a reflection of how it is in war? or is it just his style of writing?
in spin he talks about the lighter side (though its hard to believe there could be), does he tell us this to lighten the mood of the book, or make us not feel sympathy towards the soldiers?
i really enjoyed the entire part revolving around the pebble, at first it seemed almost useless, and i suppose it may have been, but i think the way Obrien went into detail about that simple stone made that section a little more personal, and overall made me enjoy it a bit more. (pg 8)
Questions:
ReplyDelete1.) Some of the things mentioned in the first chapter--some of the "things they carried" seemed out of place. What was the significance of those things, if any?
2.) Why wasn't Cross able to stop thinking about Martha even when he knew he was putting his mens' lives at stake. Why couldn't Cross seem to let go of Martha even many years after the war?
3.) There was one small paragraph on "peace time". How come the man in the story went back to war even though he was safe and supposedly happy with his nurse?
Observations:
1.) I thought it was interesting that the author spent a large chunk of text talking about the various things the men carried and how much they all weighed. I would be interested to know whether or not there was any special significance in that or if O'Brien was just showcasing the great weight that each man had to bear and how they differed.
2.) I loved that in the first chapter, O'Brien talks about how men go to war because they are embarrassed not to and then at the end of the last chapter we read, "On the Rainy River", he talked about how HE himself (the character, I mean) went to war because he was embarrassed not to.
3.) I don't understand how anyone could possibly go to war as someone forced under the draft. The section in "On the Rainy River" where the author is talking about how he was just a normal kid: "I was not soldier. I hated Boy Scouts. I hated camping out. I hated dirt and tents and mosquitoes. The sight of blood made me queasy, and I couldn't tolerate authority, and I didn't know a rifle from a slingshot."
-Questions-
ReplyDelete1) How much of this is autobiographical? How much of his different characters come from his own life?
2) If one were to assume that the majority of O'Brien's stories in this book are drawn from personal experience, will he, at some point, write true fiction in the sense that his characters DON'T go to Vietnam? For example, is there a story that involves the main character jumping the boat and going to Canada, "carrying" the psychological burdens along with him, instead of staying on the boat and going overseas to the war as the main character in "On the Rainy River" did?
3) What is the significance of the other characters, and how much do they relate to the author himself or the other men in his platoon, such as the fictitious Cross and Kiowa?
-Comment-
1) As I read the first chapter, I found myself asking the question, “What is the significance of this, and that?” There were almost too many stories in the first short story itself, and with limited action, the development of each of these stories was minimal. I understand, to a point, that O’Brien is trying to paint a bit of a picture of the men overseas and connect them to the characters’ home life. However, at a certain point, it just seemed as if the story itself wasn’t complete. Either it had too much unnecessary detail (lists, really), or there needed to be more development of the characters and “plot.” There wasn’t much, even as I take Lieutenant Cross’s marginal development into account. It honestly didn’t make me think that the author was actually in the war himself because of the underdeveloped characters and lists of military weaponry. I believed that there was something very significant and powerful in the short story, but I couldn’t really find it, and it seemed that the story was just one of many regretful and lonely war story that tells people that they miss being home and don’t want to be there.
Questions: How much of the chapter, On the Rainy River is fiction? Particularly his hallucination where he sees his future friends and loved ones.
ReplyDeleteWas Martha a possible reflection of Tim O'Brien's love life during the war?
Has any of the soldiers mentioned in this novel, including Elroy Berdahl contacted O'Brien since the publishing of this story?
Observations:
The vivid memories of the weight each man carried is astounding. To know that each man could carry what they wanted allowed them to bring good luck charms or objects of value. The fact that they didn't mind the extra weight shows how much reminiscence was left of home.
1. I really like the character Lieutenant Cross and the story presenting his love for Martha. For Cross in a way Martha kept him sane during the war by distracting him from the horrific things surrounding him, however those distractions got in the way of him doing his job properly and put his men in danger.
ReplyDelete2. The meeting O'Brien and Cross meet up together years after the war and remember was a really good moment. Although they experienced horrible things while at war when they were talking and remembering the good and funny times that happenend and the friends they made during the process.
3. On page thirteen O'Brien writes about when the group found the dead Vietnamese boy at the bottom of the irrigation ditch. The character Mitchell Sanders talks about the moral of what they found and he jokes about it. I found this interesting because it was like he had to put in a perspective in his mind to make it seem like not big deal even though to a person like me it was a very big deal.
1. Why did none of the men try to comfort Cross and tell him it really wasn't all his fault that Lavender was killed?
2. Why didn't O'Brien run to Canada and continue the life he was planning on before the draft came.
3. Since everyone had the different things they carried. What was the thing O'Brien carried?
3 comments/questions thus far...
ReplyDeleteObservation 1: The role of a loved one, the role of missing someone back home.
Each day the soldiers wake up at unimaginable hours, fight all day, and live on no sleep. On top of that, they are alone. They miss those back home, they miss the touch, the kiss of their wives', they miss their children and their sweet little voices. Sometimes that urge and need for passion and love, is bought through services of the Vietnamese women. Buying love, buying passion, is a selfish act, but sometimes the men could not hold back on the interest of the other sex.
Observation 2: The things the men carried.
The materials that the men carry allow their character and traits to show. For example Dave, the hygiene freak, carries his toothbrush, dental floss, and several bars of stolen hotel soaps.
What would you carry?
Question 3: How significant does Tim O'brien make the other characters seem? Who were his closest mates?
I enjoyed reading about what the soldiers carried . It brought more of their characteristics out and the certain things that they valued . Although his writing is hard to understand because there is no direct plot , it is exciting to read .
ReplyDeleteO'Brien describes certain things with no remorse.
I love how O'Brien starts with one subject but in the same sentence switches so quick , it keeps me interested in his work and excited to read what comes next .
Observation 2:
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that shows the pride in men was the fact that they would rather die in war, fighting, than any other way. In the chapter On the Rainy River, O'Brien is about to leap off of the boat, into a free life full of Canadian times, but he is taken by his pride. He wants to go to the war and fight because he would be embarrassed not to. This one moment now changes O'Brien's whole life; past memories of pulling the grenade to kill the foreigner, and losing good friends. He chooses to take on these hardships because he is embarrassed not to.
Observations:
ReplyDelete1. Tim O'Brien is very detailed in his writing. For example: Lemon was laughing at Rat Kiley, he took a step, "the booby-trapped 105 blew him into the tree. The parts were just hangling there, so Dave Jensen and I were ordered to shinny up and peel him off. I remember the whie bone of an arm. I remember pieces of skin and something wet and yellow that must've been the intestines." He could've easily described that in two sentences but he doesn't, he wants us to be there with him.
2. He is very random but it makes the reader want to read more.
3. Those men don't know how to cope with things in the correct manner so they take thier anger out in the wrong way. They do that for such a long period of time that they become inferior to sensitivity, they loose all respect for innocent objects.
Questions:
1. Why does he say "A war story is never true."
2. Why the baby buffalo?!
3. What did Tim O'Brien carry?
Belisa Rodriguez asked why Rat Kiley attacked the baby water buffalo.
ReplyDeleteI think he did it firstly out of emotion. He needed to release his emotions and he did it the only way that the war permitted him to do so, through violence.
I think the buffalo was just in the wrong place in the wrong time. It was the most vulnerable thing and if they hadn't picked it up along the way, Rat could have acted out with violence against his other friends without thinking.
In a way, it's a good thing that he did this to the buffalo.
Several people asked why the author would run away and not simply face his problems.
ReplyDeleteThe author states that he felt he was 'too good' for the war; in that he was well educated, non-violent, and had what he perceived as a bright future ahead of him. These facts, mixed with the paralyzing fear of having to go fight and likely die for a cause in which he did not believe, are the main reasons that O'Brien chose, at first, to run away rather than face his problems.
why did none of the men try to comfort cross and tell him it really wasn't his fault that lavender died?
ReplyDeleteas obrien makes clear, the war and stories in general are best when blunt and to the point without useless and petty details. i think this applies to the question. the men do not want to sugar coat or comfort each other, things are hard, they have to learn to except and move on if they want to survive.
Observation 3:
ReplyDeleteThe chapter, How to Tell a True War Story, left an engraving in many reader's minds. The section is short, but its meaning lasts longer than I would like. Rat Kiley was so deep in sorrow over the death of his comrade, Curt Lemon that he let go of all that was inside him. O'Brien's short passage of the torturing of the animal was so touching not to the mind, but to the stomach, where O'Brien believes all should feel a true war story. Those few words became implanted into my mind as to the real meaning of War stories, that there is no moral. Anyone can tell a war story, as long as they keep going at it.
In response to Jahmal's second question... It would seem that the objective of the author's bluntness is to firmly establish a feeling of dismay at the seeming heartlessness of the characters. Especially in the case of the baby buffalo incident, O'Brien's writing is purposefully blunt to make the reader feel unnerved and to wonder at the sanity or stability of the characters. Also, it makes the war seem more destructive--not only does it kill and wound physically but it destroyed the psyche of so many promising young men.
ReplyDeleteMarina asked, why Obrien had no one that he was close to?
ReplyDeleteI believe that O'Briens character is a loner in a sense, because no matter how much of it is supposed to be realistic it is still a story and by him not having many emotional ties he is made the narrator of the story, and because the novel is supposed to make the reader question what is and isn't true the person relaying The Things They Carried would have to be there, not someone telling a story they heard. It makes his voice a character thats there but then again isn't
This is a repsonse to Hannah's question regarding Cross's inability to let go of Martha. I am obviously not Jimmy Cross, nor am I his creator, but I think that the blame can be put on love; Cross's love for Martha and desire (more or less) to live with her consumes him throughout the war. After the war, or at least towards the end of his tour, Cross still loves her, regardless of how his love develops. Perhaps he keeps Martha in his mind as a reminder of the wartime, or a reminder of the love that kept him so happy, as opposed to the love that seemed to make him hurt so much over time. Perhaps he holds on to her in his mind as a new idea, as "Martha" prime, a boon that was lost, or a "love" that carried him through.
ReplyDeleteObservations on Sweetheart of the Song Tra Bong
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading this chapter, I liked the whole story and how O'Brien described things so cleary that I could imagine how Mary Anne felt because she was in a new place. She wanted to discover new things she took risks. He is telling one of his own stories through this story. I liked what Tim O'brien said about sexist attitudes and how we should get rid of them.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMary Anne, a young blonde from Cleveland took the meaning of war to the farthest extent. She was so curious and intrigued by Vietnam's mysterious and culture buried forests. After meeting the Green Beret's, she became enveloped with the adrenaline that combat provided her with. Mary Anne told Mark that this is what she was made for. In those nights where she was in ambush, Mary Anne felt alive. She could feel her blood moving and mind focused on the enemy, so different from her previous life in the states. It was these moments where she developed enough strength and independence to walk off into the mountains, never seen again.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: Why did O'Brien feel the need to make Mary Anne so cannibalistic? The tongue necklace was told to exaggerate her new self, but is it really needed?
This story made a dramatic change on the view of woman and their role in the war . Mary Anne was a very brave person to want to be apart of a "mans war" and she pretty much made a difference . I like O'Brien writing and how he describes everything so good to not be true .
ReplyDelete