Final Thoughts

Well, the time has come for my last blog post in College Lit. Also, this is most likely my last blog post in my high school career as well. I'm glad I had this class as part of my last quarter ever here at McFarland High School. It's the last high school English class that I will ever take. Weird. I definitely got a lot out of this class. We read and watched a lot of works that I quite possibly would never have seen. (True West anyone?) There was quite a bit of diversity from "A Rose for Emily" to Slaughterhouse-Five to Persepolis. That's part of why enjoyed this class so much. I will definitely miss our discussions and being in class with everyone. I got more out of what we read because of it. College Lit was a little strange, considering most of what we did had an element of weird, but it is also definitely one of the most memorable classes I've had.

Pixton Remix

http://www.pixton.com/comic/2xajdchc

Pixton Comic Strip

Here's the link: http://www.pixton.com/comic/tx9sn9j6

Banned and Challenged Books

Last week we talked a bit about banned books, especially since Slaughterhouse-Five is one of the most frequently challenged/banned. When I was looking up info, I was surprised at how many of my favorite books are on the lists for the most frequently challenged. Whether or not the reasons for challenging these books are valid depends on the individual's point of view, but it just made me sad to look at these lists. Many books are challenged "to protect children." But, those books are often written for an adult age group, so children probably wouldn't be reading them anyway. What bugs me the most though, is that so many wonderful books are challenged, often by people who haven't even read them. So, while I think books shouldn't be banned, I have this to say to anyone who wants to challenge one. PLEASE READ IT FIRST!

Billy Pilgrim Goes Back to the Future

One of the biggest questions with Slaughterhouse-Five is: What is time in this book? or How does Billy's time traveling work? It's something I'm thinking about a lot as I read more and more of this book.

One comparison I can think of is, of course, Back to the Future. Time is a continuum, and as the Tralfamadorians say, everything that ever has happened, is happening, and will happen is going on simultaneously. That is why Marty and Doc (and Billy) are able to travel into the future and back to the past as many times as they do. But, in Back to the Future, if Marty runs into himself in the past/future, the whole fabric of the universe could be upset, which isn't the case for Billy.

Billy travels back and forth in time, but it doesn't seem to be that he disappears from one time or another. His mind simply seems to transport into the body of his past or future self. So, theoretically, he is simultaneously living all the moments of his life. My question about that is, since he is only aware of one moment at a time, does he remember his life in some sort of nonchronological order? He jumps in time to random ages, for example he might be 20 then 40, then 25. Being that Slaughterhouse is nonlinear, it seems that Billy's life is nonlinear as well.

He often seems to travel while sleeping as well, so I often wonder whether his time travel is just dreaming, memories, or simply a product of the insanity from PTSD and his head injury. However it works, Billy seems to travel back and forth to more significant moments in his life, moments he visits again and again, as if his life is one big Moebius strip in time. Slaughterhouse-Five definitely makes me look at time differently, as there doesn't seem to really be a past, present, or future Billy, because it all depends on what time he is in at any given moment.

War Movie Comparison

There are many different war movies to choose from to compare to Slaughterhouse-Five. Platoon is a movie about the Vietnam War. It follows one platoon during their time at war, exploring the relationships between the characters, their struggle within themselves, and what war is really like. The movie is especially about how war can affect the soldiers that are fighting it.

The film shows the reality of war. It is definitely an anti-war movie. I think the filmmaker, Oliver Stone's goal was to show what really goes on. The movie focuses on how soldiers think, and how fighting in the war affects them, and teaches them about life. This way, viewers can understand soldiers more, especially from Vietnam, when a lot of horrible things go on. Viewers can see the horrors of war up close as the soldiers do, and maybe they can learn from it.

Slaughterhouse-Five and Platoon are very different, yet they are similar in many ways. They are both anti-war, and they both go from a soldier's point of view to show what they really went through. Their goal is to show what war is really like. However, Vonnegut focuses more on how soldiers are affected after the war, while Stone focuses on how soldiers are affected during it. Vonnegut also focuses on one particular character, Billy Pilgrim, while Stone, although he is telling it from the viewpoint of one character, Chris Taylor, it tells the story of multiple characters, focusing on how they relate to one another. In my opinion, both Vonnegut and Stone's goals are the same.

I think Mary O'Hare would like this film because it doesn't glamorize war. It shows that the soldiers really are "babies." It shows war as it really is, with none of the glamour that she hated so much, and which distorts perceptions of war.

Some Wisdom from Slaughterhouse-Five

One quote from Slaughterhouse-Five that really caught my attention was on page 19.

"I have told my sons that they are not under any circumstances to take part in massacres, and that the news of massacres of enemies is not to fill them with satisfaction or glee."

This quote is very powerful, and I think it's a piece of wisdom that everyone should listen to. War does more harm than good, yet it keeps happening. The second part of the quote about the massacres of enemies made me think of when bin Laden was killed recently. So many Americans rejoiced and celebrated that day. Somehow that seems wrong to me. I'm not saying that his death isn't a relief, because it is. But the image of people rejoicing and celebrating makes me uncomfortable. Getting true joy, "satisfaction or glee" out of the death of anyone seems wrong, no matter who they are. I know that because of bin Laden many people have died, so it is justice. But, it's part of a vicious cycle. If we keep killing each other peace will not come, and the cycle is perpetuated by the satisfaction anyone feels at the expense of others. If each side is satisfied or gleeful about the other's pain, we will get nowhere, and we will always be seeking revenge. That applies to any conflict in life, and no one should have to live that way.