Slaughterhuse-Five- Religious References

"If you think that death is a terrible thing, then you have not understood a word I've said." (142)

So, I may be taking a long shot here, but I've noticed a few similarites between Billy Pilgrim and Jesus Christ. Whether intentional or not, the author makes several references to Catholicism that I perceived as comparing the two. First, shown in the quote, Billy is urging the people he's speaking to to not view death as a terrible thing. This is much like Jesus, who teaches us that heaven, a place of joy and greatness, awaits after death. So both focus on the positive aspects of life since death is not lasting. Another part of that example that could be significant is that Billy, making a speech at a baseball field, is foretelling his death, his murder actually, concocted by Paul Lazzaro, which would be Judas.

Secondly, a quote from pg. 197 says, "Billy cried very little, though he often saw things worth crying about, and in that respect, at least, he resembled the Christ...." I must say I found it extremely ironic that Billy was crying over horses and not about any number of the gruesome stories he told in the novel. The example here is that Jesus did not cry at birth, which babies usually do. I'm not sure why that's significant, but it's a similarity between the two.

Lastly, even Billy's physical appearance, obviously awkward, is similar to that of Jesus' demeanor. He was an awkward match for war since he did not want to fight, nor was he ready to do it. Jesus shares the same kind quality. That, combined with the fact that Billy keeps wearing an "azure toga and silver shoes" (196) which (this is reeeeally a stretch) almost portrays him as a royal figure, leading the other soldiers, giving another comparison of Pilgrim and the Prince of Peace.

Slaughterhouse-Five- 1986 Prompt

"I, Billy Pilgrim, the tape begins, will die, have died, and always will die on February thirteenth, 1976." (pg. 141)

The 1986 prompt roughly says, "choose a novel an show how the author's manipulation of time contributes to the effectiveness of the work as a whole." Considering Slaughterhouse-Five is nothing but time travel, I thought this prompt was perfect. First, Billy's time-travel, real or fictional, adds an interesting perspective to the story. It allows the reader to be omniscient, unlike the characters. It also gives the reader many different viewpoints of Billy's life. I'm not sure what significance this has on plot, since it was hard to discover exactly what the plot was, thanks to the jumbled order of events. One thing that contributes to the effectiveness, though, is that it portrays Billy as an all-knowing character, automatically elevating his status in the readers' eyes. On the other hand, Billy's reputation is constantly diminished by his army buddies. Another thing it does is create suspense since the reader knows what events are upcoming, but they don't know the circumstances. So I'm not really sure how manipulation of plot helps the effectiveness of the work, but it certainly makes for an interesting story.

Slaughterhouse-Five- Theme

"The window reflected the news. It was about power and sports and anger and death." (pg. 200)

I think this quote perfectly sums up the theme of the novel, that modern society trivializes and glorifies blood and war. I think the author was particularly upset that we are not told accurate information, and the information that we are told is often in order for someone to make a profit. Towards the end of the book, Billy sees a shop advertising things about vicious competition, greed, and death. This obvious display of desensitization shows the reader that the author feels that war is not portrayed as the grim, personal "massacre" it is.

I know several authors have also written about this flaw in society. Some comment on it while others try and inspire a change. So far, similar works are "The Lottery," the poem we read early on this year, and probably a very popular example, the "Hunger Games" trilogy. Having only read the first one, I can still say they are based on a competition of ill-equipped soldiers (sort of like Billy) who fight to the death for no reason but to survive. This savage competition mirrors the unhealthy attitude of our media seen in Vonnegut's novel: glorifying war on TV, in video games, or movies.


May the odds be ever in your favor. And if they're not, so it goes.

                         

Slaughterhouse-Five- Time-Travel/Reality?

"It was about an Earthling man and woman who were kidnapped by extra-terrestrials. They were put on display in a zoo on a planet called Zircon212." (pg. 201)

This blog is mainly aimed towards clearing up the ending of the book. The quote, the plot from one of Trout's books, describes what Billy says he experiences throughout this book. My question is: which book is true? I'm assuming they didn't have the same story because that's just too much of a coincidence. So, was the time-travel throughout the novel just Billy experiencing memories? Or was it just hallucinations caused by the plane crash in Vermont? Either way, I'm still not set on the whole time-travel concept. I think it would be a really interesting concept to go back to any moment and be able to focus on the good instead of the bad. I also think that the Tralfamadorians' view of death as powerless is a good way to look at things. If death were momentary, no one would worry about death because they could always choose to redirect their thoughts. Or, that would give people an excuse to not fear consequences of their actions. As of now, I still don't understand the concept- if others were involved, how long it lasted, etc. I guess I'll just have to wait to be abducted by aliens.

Slaughterhouse-Five- Repetition

"There wasn't a sound inside the emaciated chest cavity. The Son of God was dead as a doornail. So it goes." (pg.203)

Probably the biggest example of repetition in this book is "So it goes." This phrase, inspired by the Tralfamadorians, sums up Billy's adopted view that since there is no time, death is only a momentary instance. And since this is the case, death is rendered powerless in this book. I'm not sure if that adds or detracts from the anti-war theme. On one hand, it shows that people today often lessen the impact of death with the argument that it occurs so often. On the other hand, it is saying that death is not a big deal, so this could work for both sides of the war argument.

Anyhoo, I picked this quote because it's a really interesting thought. When reading the book and seeing all of the "so it goes" basically every other page, I could see how death was desensitizing people, the exact point of the author. However, this scenario from Trout's book puts into perspective just how bluntk, redundant, and plain Vonnegut portrays death. So the author makes his argument doubly effective when he gives the ultimate example of decency and kindness dying as well as using these phrases to reinforce war's causing death to be mundane.

Slaughterhouse-Five

Kurt Vonnegut is almost as blunt as Glozell. Enjoy.

Slaughterhouse-Five- Opinion #2/ Tone

"A whole city gets burned down, and thousands and thousands of people are killed. And then this one American foot soldier is arrested in the ruins for taking a teapot. And he's given a regular trial, and then he's shot by a firing squad." (pg. 5)

This quote from early on in the novel is a perfect example of why I like this book. It's straight-forward, grim but sickeningly captivating, and easy to understand. As opposed to other works that practically write in another language, this novel is actually believable. The tone is one of the best parts about this novel. The author's participation in the military gives him an obvious bias but he makes his point clearly: war is massacre. The tone, therefor, comes from his negative personal experiences and his opinions on how to avoid future ones. The tone is also laced with dark humor and a bit of irony to the point where it's hard to tell which it is. For example, the author tells this story, a gruesome one at that, as a fictional one he will put in his book. Since it's so specific, I'm not sure if it was a story of his life or about one of his friends or simply false. Any way you slice it, Vonnegut's blunt, sarcastic, and eerie tone makes for a grim but believable and intriguing story.

Slaughterhouse-Five- Opinion #1/Abstract

"This was when Billy first came unstuck in time....And then Billy swung back into life again, going backwards until he was in pre-birth." (pg. 43)

Ok, so despite all the graphic, blunt imagery in this book, along with grim humor and vulgarity, I still really enjoy this book. A few things I don't understand are concerned with the book's abstract themes. The biggest one is time travel. First, the novel starts with Vonnegut telling HIS story about writing a book. Then, he reads us the actual book he wrote, telling BILLY'S story. So far, so good. Billy's story, however often talks about coming stuck and unstuck in time. I can see how time seems to go fast or slow, but stuck and unstuck makes practically no sense to me. And then in this quote, it talks about going back in time. Is this actual time travel, or does he just feel like it is?

Anyways, the other aspect that is just not as believable and real as others in the book is the fact that Billy thinks he was abducted by aliens. Did that actually happen? I think that would be interesting for him since they see 4D and he's an optometrist, but I can't decide if he's serious or a lunatic. Oh, well, here's a clip from Back to the Future. Totally relatable.

Slaughterhouse-Five- Characterization

"Billy was preposterous- six feet and three inches tall, with a chest and shoulders like a box of kitchen matches." (pg. 33)

This quote shows characterization of Billy, the eye doctor turned alien abductee turned soldier. I think this quote is a little bit ironic, too, because in addition to pointing out his bony features and awkwardness, the setting, the middle of a war, is even more out of place. This is direct characterization since it says that he is preposterous. It is also indirect because it uses his physical features to imply his awkward nature, especially on a battlefield. Another quote, from the same page, that I find humorous is Billy's reaction to nearly getting shot. "Billy stood there politely, giving the marksman another chance." (pg. 33) This quote shows how, along with his gigantic stature (see what I did there?), his "polite" demeanor proves him as ill-equipped for fighting a war. I'm not sure, but that quote could also show the anti-war theme. Billy was too polite, considered a good quality, which contrasts with his effectiveness in war, something the author rebukes as an evil thing. So at least Billy almost getting shot and awkwardly standing in the middle of the range of fire helped us readers learn a lesson. :)

OH, YES HE DID.

Slaughterhouse-Five- Style

"Celine was a brave French soldier in the First World War- until his skull was cracked." (pg.21)

This blog analyzes Vonnegut's style throughout the novel. His writing style is very sarcastic with a touch of dark humor, which is why I am really enjoying this book, even though it gets graphic at times. First, the author's style is influenced by the narrator's experience in war, adding to the desensitized tone. For example, in this quote, the author perfectly describes a heroic person, but then bluntly describes his death completely disregarding senstivity. The author's excuse, however, is that he was involved in a brutal war, a "massacre," which creates a lack of a sense of sensitivity and feeling. In a way, this helps the author's anti-war argument. The quote shows that by going through war, a person's sense of feeling is diminished which explains the blatant and graphic imagery. Another phrase the narrator uses is "and so on" or "so it goes." These phrases also show how the speaker is so used to death that it doesn't affect him anymore. The argument he uses is that the time a person spends dying is nothing compared to all the time they spent happy, so that logic itself is acceptable. The fact that he claims he learned it from the Tralfamadorians is a bit sketchy....

Slaughterhouse-Five- Theme

"I have told my sons that they are not under any circumstances to take part in massacres," (pg.19)

The literary term for this blog is theme, which can be seen very early on in this book. This book, as stated on the back cover, is an anti-war book. This quote depicts Kurt Vonnegut's theme that war is bad and should be stopped. First, the author doesn't even use the word war here. By using the word massacre he is implying that war is an unnecessary killing of large numbers of people, regardless of the outcome. This opinion of the author is evident throughout the book, both present and past time frames. Also in this quote is the father's insistance on his sons not joining the army-once again, not "join the military," but to "take part in massacres." His command that no one in his family should take part in war shows a couple key things: the fact that he fought in a war and is saying this shows that it was not a pleasant or rewarding experience, and that Vonnegut's aim of this book is to promote a totally anti-war philosophy.

YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN

I think this was the sound Walton heard when he was writing to his sister...totes creeps.

Frankenstein-Opinion/Was it worth it?

"You seek for knowledge and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardetly hope that the gratification of your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you, as mine has been." -pg. 13

This quote, all the way back from the letters at the beginning of the book, summarizes my biggest question at the end of the novel: was it worth it? or What did we learn from this? This question is aimed at Victor/Walton in regards to their purusit of never-before-seen knowledge. In aswering this, one must consider all the consequences of their actions and how the conditions are presently. SO, because of Victor's ambition, he created a monster, which nurtured by hate, grew to be malicious and bloodthirsty. This led to the extermination of practically everyone Victor knew. First, Caroline died attending to Elizabeth, William was murdered, Justine unjustly executed, Clerval strangled, Elizabeth murdered, as well as the passing of Victor's father, leaving Ernest with a majority of his family erased. The consequences of Walton's actions are far less severe: a near-mutiny and braving the harsh weather at the North pole. If anything, Walton learned from Victor's dreadful story and stopped his. Ironically, Victor told Walton to finish his efforts- to kill the monster- which conflicts with him telling Walton to leave the North pole.

So, the greatest advancement I see is the reanimation of non-living parts into a living, breathing being. This discovery, however, was lost because Victor, the discoverer, regreted it and died before revealing its secrets, and the creation itself, intended to burn himself with all of the other papers of the experiment. For Walton's sake, I would say the story was worth it, and even if it didn't teach a great lesson, it told a great thriller.

Frankenstein-Opinion/UUU.

"Oh Frankenstein! generous and self-devoted being! what does it avail that I no ask thee to pardon me?" -pg. 163

This opinion blog is in response to the question, "Wy has the creature come to see Victor?" According to the text, the creature came to Victor to apologize for all his misdeeds. It seem he repented at the last minute and rushed to confess and admit fault. Never heard that one before... Anyways, it's probably obvious that I do not agree with the monster's actions-past, present, and future, and I'll tell you why.

PAST: First, the monster tries to be gentle, which doesn't work, so he burns down the DeLacey's cottage. Then, he expects people to judge him on personality even though he is a monster (in which case, judgemental people are also at fault, but he could've handled the situation better). When that doesn't work, he tries to force friendship onto William, which doens't work out, so he kills him. Then more killing, and psychological torture. It seems as though his response for not getting what he wanted (which he might not have deserved) was to either burn a house down, threaten people, or just go on a killing spree.

PRESENT: He comes to Victor, after he's led him to a cold and desolate place to fight him (a fight which, let's be honest, is not even close). He is still sneaking onto the boat creepily rather than reasoning with humans.

FUTURE: The monster, out of guilt, plans to burn himself, so no one can see how to create another monster. Instead of doing better things and redeeming himself-maybe trying to make a female for himself, he decides to just go commit suicide.

My point is, although the monster's words may have been sincere, he was too late in admitting fault. There's not a whole lot of redemption in apologizes to bodies.

Frankenstein-Ch. 2-24/Suspense/Foreshadowing

"I shall be with you on your wdding-night" -pg. 141

This quote, repeated several times throughout these chapters, is one of my favorites because it is open for interpretation. That also means it is psychologically tormenting Victor and also creates suspense through its foreshadowing. First of all, (this is gonna sound dark) I love how the creature is taunting Victor which causes him to agonize over this quote. The fact that the creature is getting inside Victor's head is cruel and amusing at the same time, as well as ironic since the creature is attacking Victor with his own creation, himself. Anyhoo, this quote obviously creates suspense because the reader knows the creature will follow through on his promise and that something, probably something bad-  no wedding gift :( "I BROUGHT A TOASTER"- will happen, and we don't know what. We just know the monster is now out for blood and revenge, and will stop at nothing to make Victor miserable, which always makes for a good story. Lastly, this is foreshadowing because something terrible does happen on his wedding night, Elizabeth's murder.

Side note- I think it's brilliant that Victor was like, "Stay here, Elizabeth, by yourself, all alone, with a bloodthirsty monster coming to get you....while I go check on things outside." For a genius scientist who created life from a bunch of dead peoples' parts, he doesn't seem to have a whole lot of common sense.

Frankenstein- Ch. 18-21/ Mirroring Creation/Death Scenes

"I thought with a sensation of madness on my promise of creating another like to him, and trembling with passion, tore to pieces the thing on which I was engaged. The wretch saw me destroy the creature...and withdrew....Several hours passed...and the wretch whom I dreaded appeared." -pg.121-122

This quote, on top of being really creepy, something I didn't expect from such a popular story, shows tons of parallelism between the destruction scene and the earlier creation scene. First, once the creature has seen Victor destroy his lady friend, breaking their agreement, he flees. (This I don't understand: you're so angry someone has broken your promise, your only chance at hope and happiness, so you run away. I guess he was just blowing off steam...Also, I'm still confused as to what the creature does during that time period-killing Clerval, perhaps?) Anyways, just like the first scene, Victor retires to his room and comes back several hours later. And after that, the creature reappears, just like he did the first time. Both times Victor retreats out of fear, but at least he has a good reason to run away this time.

Also something that I noticed (probably not right) was that the first time, Victor ran away from the monster. But the second time, the monster was the first one to leave, and then later return. I saw this as a shift in "masters" or that it signifies that the creature is the one "calling the shots" now, and Victor is pretty much forced to do what he says. I am at least happy that Victor didn't go through with making a female monster. If he had done that, there could have been so many things that could go wrong. I guess the monster will just have to live without a lady friend to call his own. Poor sasquatsch. :'(

Frankenstein- Ch.13-17/ Characterization/Irony

"Felix had accidentally been present at the trial; his horror and indignation were uncontrollable when he heard the decision of the court. He made, at that moment, a solemn vow to deliver him and then looked around for the means." -pg. 87

This quote regards Felix's feelings towards Safie's father's unjust imprisonment. This shows his characterization because it reveals Felix to be a compassionate, selfless person, in contrast to Safie's father. Risking his own life to free a stranger led to his love, Safie, who embodied similar qualities. This also gives us insight on why Felix was so unhappy. This creates sympathy in the reader for him, until later...

Another characterization of Felix, however, shows his dark side. When the creature had finally summoned the courage to talk to the father, Felix saw this apparent danger and started beating the monster with a stick. This indirect characterization shows that Felix also prejudges and is quick to act without thinking-obviously, since his father was okay while in the monster's presence, the monster wasn't really a threat. From this point, the audience is probably rooting for the monster, since he was innocent. That is, until, he burns down the cottage. So now the reader is rooting for no one.

YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN

Gotta love Cloris Leachman

Abby Normal - the Creature's brain

Frankenstein- First Half/Realism

"Abhorred monster! fiend that thou art! the tortures of hell are too mild a vengeance for thy crimes. Wretched devil! you reproach me with your creation; come on, then, that I may extinguish the spark which I so negligently bestowed." -Victor Frankenstein (pg. 68)

So, for my other opinion blog, I'm talking about how realistic/probable this story is. First of all, creating a life from different corpses is absurd, but there are huge questions that arise because of the lack of simple logic. This quote is a perfect example of three things I don't understand in the book:

1. "for thy crimes" = the monster's bloodlust and criminal activity condemns him to a fate worse than hell. Victor hasn't even seen the monster for two years! How does he know the monster is a criminal? The only evidence of the monster murdering William is that he was seen as the scene of the crime, which could be suspicious or a coincidence. Either way, Victor is basing his critical judgement of the creature solely on his first encounter with the "demon."

2. "you reproach me with your creation;" Victor was the one who made the creature; he is responsible. That's like blaming a kid coming to school late because the parent slept in. He blindly accuses the monster of vicious crimes just because of his appearance, and even if he did commit crimes, it was Victor's nurturing-or lack thereof- that conquered over the creature's good nature.

3. "come on, then, that I may extinguish the spark which I so negligently bestowed." = Come here so I can kill you. Lastly, what does Victor thinks he is going up against? He created a gigantic, hideous monster from different dead body parts in a slaughter house, only to see that the creature is as intelligent, if not moreso, and he wants to fight him? ARE YOU CRAZY?! How did he not realize that this thing he was making was going to be huge? I guess he didn't expect to succeed in his experiments, or else he would have thought of what to do with a sasquatch. The present situation is a fight of a huge beast versus a suicidal, emaciated scientist. Who do you think is going to win that fight? Y'know, the monster might be the more intellectually advanced being after all....

Frankenstein- Ch. 6-8/ Who Dunnit?/Characterization

"She nursed Madame Frankenstein, my aunt, in her last illness, with the greatest affection and care....She was warmly attached to the child who is now dead, and acted towards him like a most affectionate mother." -Elizabeth Frankenstein (pg. 56)

This quote depicts Elizabeth speaking to Justine Moritz's innocence. It also shows a great deal of characterization. Specifically, this is indirect characterization because Elizabeth doesn't come right out and say Justine is innocent, but she gives evidence through Justine's actions that she wasn't a harmful person, let alone William's killer. Another defence that Justine was unjustly convicted and killed was that "surprise, horror, and misery were strongly expressed" when she was at her trial. I haven't read ahead, so I'm not sure if she was actually the murderer, but according to these accounts, I think Justine was innocent.

The only other suspect mentioned was the creature, because he was spotted (granted, only by Victor) at the scene of William's murder. This is suspicious, and not likely a coincidence. As far as motive, I see none, and even if there were a motive, how would the monster be able to frame Justine and go after a certain target that just happened to be Victor's brother. Because the monster's nature is good, I don't see him as a killer either. Either way, all will soon be revealed. I can't wait much longer!

Frankenstein- Ch. 1-5/The Creation

"I had worked hard for nearly two years, for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body. For his I had deprived myself of rest and health. I had desired it with an ardour that far exceeded moderation; but now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart." -Victor Frankenstein (pg. 35)

This quote describing the first moments of Victor's reaction to his creation show a great irony. First, Victor had spent two years wasting away, working sleeplessly to create life, to do something that was considered honorable and never been done before. After all this toil, he finally reaches his goal. The irony comes in as Victor is disgusted and terrified by his own creation. The irony is simply that ardent work and study should bring pleasure while Victor's labor brought him nothing but horror.

Another irony and maybe paradox (I'm not sure) is that Victor believes, from its first breath, that the creation is evil and wants to kill him. From reading ahead, we know this is not the case, and because the creature was inherently good, his behavior was caused by others' hatred of him. The possible paradox is that the creature is first shown as so disgusting (Victor can't even stay in the same room with him) with yellow-ish eyes, "gigantic stature" from different corpses, and "grin-wrinkled cheeks," is actually a kind and intelligent individual. Even though the creature recognizes itself as a monster, there is little hope that society will not react in the same fashion as Victor.

Frankenstein- Letters/Foreshadowing

"You seek for knowledge and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardently hope that the gratification o your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you, as mine has been." -Victor Frankenstein (pg. 13)

First of all, I think this is one of my favorite books I've read. I'm not really into horror movies since I'm a whimp, but this book makes it both interestingly terrifying and tolerable. It's definitely boring, which is a big problem with reading for me. Anyhoo, my literary term for the Letters section is foreshadowing, one thing that adds to suspense and honestly, a bit of confusion. In this quote, Victor is telling Robert Walton that his ambition for learning may lead to devastation, just like his did. This comment not only reveals that Frankenstein's quest for creating life was a success, but that it had a bad outcome. Obviously, his creation has "stung" him, so that begs the question, "Who, what, where, why, and how" did this to Victor. This foreshadows the story of what happened in between the creature's creation and present time.

Another instance of foreshadowing that creates suspense is when the men on Robert's ship see "the shape of a man," implying its freakish nature, driving a dogsled. This seemingly random event raises so many questions- most of them still unanswered. What we do know is that Victor is desperately chasing the monstrosity he created and is getting beaten.

Frankenstein- Ch. 9-12/Irony

"I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel, whom thou drivest from joy for no misdeed. Everywhere I see bliss, from which I alone am irrevocably excluded. I was benevolent and good; misery made me a fiend." -the Creature (pg. 69)

I take many things from this quote from the Creature (I've found the book easier to read by calling him Sasquatch). The first thing is that Sasquatch is nothing like Victor believed. The presumably bloodthirsty and inherently evil monster is actually gentle and inherently good, despite everyone else's initial beliefs, creating the irony that the monster is in many ways the opposite of what he seems.

Besides contradicting the view that the monster is evil, this quote also debunks the idea that the monster, made by human will, would be inferior to humans intellectually. The monster is actually shown as an intellectual equal through his fast learning and eloquent speech. Another example of the monster's intelligence is the allusion he makes- while his creator, Victor, should love his creation, like God loved Adam, Victor punishes him and calls him names like "devil" and "demon." This creates sympathy for the Sasquatch's character, I think, because it shows he was and is judged merely by appearance, not his "gentle demeanor" or urge to be accepted in society. It sort of assigns blame or a demeaning side to Victor, basically making him a hypocrite.

First, Victor created Sasquatch, so whatever it does reflects Victor. In addition to that is the fact that from the moment of life, Victor was terrified of the monster and, while he didn't abandon the monster, he didn't go out to search for it. This brings to my mind the analogy of, per say, a parent who is out late every night and pays little to no attention to their child. How is the monster guilty of the crimes he commits (if he even commits a crime, which I don't think he did) if his only family dismisses him, calls his names, and tries to kill him? Because he is really inherently good, and is nurtured to behave badly, I am rooting for Team Sasquatch.