РефератыИностранный языкSlSlaughterhouse 5 Themes Essay Research Paper The

Slaughterhouse 5 Themes Essay Research Paper The

Slaughterhouse 5 Themes Essay, Research Paper


The Themes of Slaughterhouse-Five


The first theme of Slaughterhouse-Five, and perhaps the


most obvious, is the war and its contrast with love, beauty,


humanity, innocence etc. Slaughterhouse-Five, like Vonnegut’s


previous books, manages to tell us that war is bad for us and


that it would be better for us to love one another. To find the


war’s contrast with love is quite difficult, because the book


doesn’t talk about any couple that was cruelly torn apart by the


war (Billy didn’t seem to love his wife very much, for example.)


V onnegut expresses it very lightly, uses the word “love” very


rarely, yet effectively. He tries to look for love and beauty in


things that seemingly are neither lovely nor beautiful. For


example, when Billy was captured by the group of Germans, he


didn’t see them as a cruel enemy, but as normal, innocent people.


“Billy looked up at the face that went with the clogs. It was the


face of a blond angel, of a fifteen-year-old boy. The boy was as


beautiful as Eve.” (Vonnegut 1969 p.53).


An interesting contrast in Vonnegut’s books is the one


between men and women. Male characters are often engaging in


fights and wars, and females try to prevent them from it. The


woman characters are often mentally strong, have strong will, and


are very humane and loving. A good example is Vonnegut’s dialogue


in the first chapter, when he talks with his old friend O’Hare in


front of O’Hare’s wife:


Then she turned to me, let me see how angry she


was, and that the anger was for me. She had been talking


to herself, so what she said was a fragment of a much


larger conversation. ‘You were just babies then!’ she


said.


‘What?’ I said.


‘You were just babies in the war–like the ones


upstairs!’


I nodded that this was true. We had been foolish


virgins in the war, right at the end of childhood.


‘But you’re not going to write it that way, are


you.’ This wasn’t a question. It was an accusation.


‘I – I don’t know,’ I said.


‘Well, I know,’ she said. ‘You’ll pretend you


were men instead of babies, and you’ll be played in the


movies by Frank Sinatra and John Wayne or some of those


other glamorous, war-loving, dirty old men. And war will


look just wonderful, so we’ll have a lot more of them.


And they’ll be fought by babies like the babies


upstairs.’


So then I understood. It was war that made her so


angry. She didn’t want her babies or anybody else’s


babies killed in wars. And she thought wars were partly


encouraged by books and movies. (ibid p. 14-15)


Another place where Vonnegut expresses the previously mentioned


qualities of women is the part where Billy becomes “slightly


unstuck in time” and watches the war movie backwards:


When the bombers got back to their base, the


steel cylinders were taken from the racks and shipped


back to the United States of America, where factories


were operating night and day, dismantling the cylinders,


separating the dangerous contents into minerals.


Touchingly, it was mainly women who did this work. (ibid


p.74-75).


In reality, of course, the women were building the weapons


instead of dismantling them.


The most often expressed theme of the book, in my opinion,


is that we, people, are “bugs in amber.” The phrase first appears


when Billy is kidnapped by the Tralfamadorian flying saucer:


‘Welcome aboard, Mr. Pilgrim,’ said the


loudspeaker. ‘Any questions?’


Billy licked his lips, thought a while, inquired


at last: ‘Why me?’


‘That is a very Earthling question to ask, Mr.


Pilgrim. Why you? Why us for that matter? Why anything?


Because this moment simply is. Have you ever seen bugs


trapped in amber?’


‘Yes.’ Billy, in fact, had a paperweight in his


office which was a blob of polished amber with three


lady-bugs embedded in it.


‘Well, here we are, Mr. Pilgrim, trapped in the


amber of this moment. There is no why.’ (ibid p.76-77).


This rather extraterrestrial opinion can be interpreted as our


being physically stuck in this world, that we don’t have any


choice over what we, mankind as a whole, do and what we head for.


The only thing we can do is think about everything, but we won’t


affect anything. This idea appears many times throughout the


novel. This is one of the examples, when Billy proposes marriage


to Valencia:


Billy didn’t want to mary ugly Valencia. She was


one of the symptoms of his disease. He knew he was going


crazy when he heard himself proposing marriage to her,


when he begged her to take the diamond ring and be his


companion for life, (ibid p.107).


This excerpt directly shows that Billy didn’t like Valencia very


much and that he actually didn’t want to marry her. However, he


was “stuck in amber”. Or, for example, Billy knew the exact time


when he would be killed, yet didn’t try to do anything about it.


Anyway, he couldn’t have changed it. The death bears comparison


with mankind’s fate. The main thing Vonnegut probably wanted


people to think about has something to do with wars on Earth.


Vonnegut says so in the part where Billy discusses the pro blems


about wars with the Tralfamadorians (p.117). They tell him that <

/p>

everything is structured the way it is and that trying to prevent


war on Earth is stupid. This means that there always will be wars


on Earth, that we, people, are “designed” that way. There might


be people striving for eternal peace, but those people must be


very naive and probably don’t know humankind’s nature. We know


that wars are bad and we would like to stop them, but we are


“stuck in amber.”


This point of view also might explain why there are no


villains or heroes in Vonnegut’s books. According to Ernest W.


Ranly, all the characters are “Comic, pathetic pieces, juggled


about by some inexplicable faith, like puppets,” (Riley 1974


p.454). If there is no-one to take the blame for the bad


happenings in the book, it can only mean that the villain is God


Himself (”or Herself or Itself or Whatever” – from Vonnegut’s


Hocus Pocus, 1990). God Almighty had to be the one who put us


into the amber, who had created us the way we are.


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, (Vonnegut 1969 p.164).


Another theme of the novel is that there is no such thing


as a soldier. There is only a man, but never a soldier. A soldier


is not a human being any more. Vonnegut expresses this most


obviously in this extract from the time when Billy was imprisoned


in Dresden:


When the three fools found the communal kitchen,


whose main job was to make lunch for workers in the


slaughterhouse, everybody had gone home but one woman


who had been waiting for them impatiently. She was a war


widow. So it goes. She had her hat and coat on. She


wanted to go home, too, even though there wasn’t anybody


there. Her white gloves were laid out side by side on


the zinc counter top.


She had two big cans of soup for the Americans.


It was simmering over low fires on the gas range. She


had stacks of loaves of black bread, too.


She asked Gluck if he wasn’t awfully young to be


in the army. He admitted that he was.


She asked Edgar Derby if he wasn’t awfully old to


be in the army. He said he was.


She asked Billy Pilgrim what he was supposed to


be. Billy said he didn’t know. He was just trying to


keep warm.


‘All the real soldiers are dead,’ she said. It


was true. So it goes, (Vonnegut 1969 p.159).


Stanley Schatt said: “Vonnegut opposes any institution, be it


scientific, religious, or political, that dehumanizes man and


considers him a mere number and not a human being,” (Riley 1973


p.348) and I think that this attitude shows up in many other


books by Kurt Vonnegut (Player Piano, Hocus Pocus etc.)


Another obvious theme of the book is that death is


inevitable and that no matter who dies, life still goes on. The


phrase “So it goes” recurs one hundred and six times: it appears


everytime anybody dies in the novel, and sustains the circular


quality of the book. It enables the book, and thus Vonnegut’s


narration, to go on. It must have been hard writing a book about


such an experience and it probably helped the author to look upon


death through the eyes of Tralfamadorians:


When a Tralfamadorian sees a corpse, all he


thinks is that the dead person is in bad condition in


the particular moment, but that the same person is just


fine in plenty of other moments. Now, when I myself hear


that somebody is dead, I simply shrug and say what the


Tralfamadorians say about dead people, which is ‘So it


goes,’ (ibid p.27).


The Main Message of the novel


As you noticed, the book has different messages; everybody


may see something else as its main meaning. I think that Vonnegut


wanted to tell us, the readers, that no matter what happens, we


should retain our humanity. We should not let anybody or anything


reign upon our personalities, be it a god, be it a politician or


anybody else. We should be ourselves – human and humane beings.


I looked through the Gideon Bible in my motel


room for tales of great destruction. The sun was risen


upon the Earth when Lot entered into Zo-ar, I read. Then


the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone


and fire from Lord out of Heaven; and He overthrew those


cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of


the cities, and that which greaw upon the ground.


So it goes.


Those were vile people in both those cities, as


is well known. The world was better off without them.


And Lot’s wife, of course, was told not to look


back where all those people and their homes had been.


But she did look back, and I love her for that, because


it was so human.


So she was turned to a pillar of salt. So it


goes, (Vonnegut 1969 p.21-22).


References:


Brifonski and Mendelson (Editors); Contemporary Literary Criticism vol.8


Detroit: 1978; Gale Research Co


Riley, Carolyn (Editor); Contemporary Literary Criticism vol.1


Detroit: 1973; Gale Research Co


Riley, Carolyn and Barbara Harte (Editors); Contemporary Literary Criticism vol.2


Detroit: 1974; Gale Research Co


Vonnegut, Kurt Jr.; Slaughterhouse-Five; or Children’s Crusade, A Duty Dance with Death


New York: 1971; Dell Publishing


336

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: Slaughterhouse 5 Themes Essay Research Paper The

Слов:1994
Символов:12852
Размер:25.10 Кб.