CharlesBoyd and karenmarie's Challenge
Talk I'll Read Yours if You'll Read Mine
This group has been archived. Find out more.
Join LibraryThing to post.
2CharlesBoyd
I should finish Slaughterhouse Five tonight or tomorrow. Then I'll write the review. I'm not sure if I want to read other reviews or critical commentary first or wait until after.
3CharlesBoyd
I finished Slaughterhouse Five this afternoon. Will try to have a full review up by Monday evening, maybe sooner.
Just an advance idea of my take on the novel: I can't say it's a great novel dispite its reputation, nor can I say it's horrible. What I can say--which may be worse than saying it's horrible--is that it's "okay."
Just an advance idea of my take on the novel: I can't say it's a great novel dispite its reputation, nor can I say it's horrible. What I can say--which may be worse than saying it's horrible--is that it's "okay."
4inkspot
Slaughterhouse Five was my third Vonnegut and my least favourite of the three. Perhaps I need to give it another chance, or perhaps it's because I'm not a big fan of novels about war but I much preferred Breakfast of Champions and The Sirens of Titan.
5CharlesBoyd
I posted my review of Slaughterhouse-Five. It's available on my profile page and I'm pasting it here as well. There may be some minor spoilers, but nothing that I'd expect would ruin the novel for anyone who hasn't yet read it.
Feel free to tell me I'm an idiot if you disagree with my opinion. :-)
REVIEW OF SLAUGHTERHOUSE-FIVE
On page 208 of Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, the narrator says “There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations…” Those are precisely the reasons that, for me, the novel is not one of the 100 greatest novels of the last century as some critics have claimed. Many of the characters who inhabit the novel are quirky, budding characters like Roland Weary, the anti-tank gunner who both bullied and saved Billy Pilgrim (the stand-in for Vonnegut whose real-life experiences have been fictionalized) after the Battle of the Bulge in World War II Germany. Vonnegut never brings Weary to life, nor “poor Edgar Derby” who was tried and shot for plundering a teapot from the ruins of Dresden. Valencia, whom Pilgrim married after the war, was the most interesting character, a woman always with a candy bar in her hand or mouth, who thought Pilgrim the greatest man ever in part because she never thought anyone would marry her. When your protagonist is the least interesting, least compelling character in your novel, you’ve got a problem keeping this reader.
So it goes.
Billy Pilgrim believed that he bounced around in time from his birth to his death experiencing all of his life and death many times over. He also believed he’d been abducted by aliens from the planet Tralfamadore. Yet, again for this reader, Billy personally is a rather boring person.
Why a writer would create a novel with World War II as its primary focus with “almost no dramatic confrontation” is beyond me. Such a novel has little going for it.
So it goes.
I almost wonder if Vonnegut, like Billy Pilgrim, bounced back in forth in time, ending up in the 1980’s long before he wrote Slaughterhouse-Five. If he got a sneak preview of MTV that would explain the quick cuts from short scene to short scene. The longest scenes in this novel would be brief scenes in most other novels. The reader doesn’t have a chance to sink into the story, to bond with any of the characters, to experience what they experience.
There’s no sense of place. Vonnegut gives the reader very few descriptions of anywhere. We’re floating above the story, not sure what is below us. I’m a reader who doesn’t need much description, in fact many novels give too much for me like The Big Sky by A.B Guthrie, Jr. His descriptions are wonderful, prose poetry, but there’s just too much of them. Still, I do need some description.
So it goes.
The first 28 pages of Slaughterhouse-Five are the musings of the narrator, supposedly a fictional character, Vonnegut in reality, about how he came to write the novel and how he felt about it. I’d have preferred an author’s note afterwards with a straightforward account directly from Vonnegut.
On the book’s cover: The Boston Globe called it “…hilarious.” I found it amusing at times. The New York Times called it “…delightful.” I feel if you want delightful read Dandelion Wine or almost anything by Ray Bradbury. It was also called sad. If you want sad in a book about World War II, read The Execution of Private Slovik by William Bradford Huie, a true account of the first soldier to be executed by the U.S. Army since the Civil War. (This book is mentioned in Slaughterhouse-Five.)
So it goes.
Vonnegut is lucky he died before I read this novel because about the 275th time I read “So it goes.” I would have hired Paul Lazzaro from the novel, who threatened to have all his enemies killed after the war, to kill Vonnegut.
Did I like anything about it? The writing was clear, the tone was amusing, and I learned that, according to Vonnegut, American firebombing of Dresden devastated that city more than the atom bomb devastated Hiroshima.
So it goes.
Would I recommend Slaughterhouse-Five? Oddly, I would. It is considered an American classic by an important American writer. It’s a quick read. And it’s inoffensive.
Imagine, a war novel inoffensive.
So it goes.
Feel free to tell me I'm an idiot if you disagree with my opinion. :-)
REVIEW OF SLAUGHTERHOUSE-FIVE
On page 208 of Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, the narrator says “There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations…” Those are precisely the reasons that, for me, the novel is not one of the 100 greatest novels of the last century as some critics have claimed. Many of the characters who inhabit the novel are quirky, budding characters like Roland Weary, the anti-tank gunner who both bullied and saved Billy Pilgrim (the stand-in for Vonnegut whose real-life experiences have been fictionalized) after the Battle of the Bulge in World War II Germany. Vonnegut never brings Weary to life, nor “poor Edgar Derby” who was tried and shot for plundering a teapot from the ruins of Dresden. Valencia, whom Pilgrim married after the war, was the most interesting character, a woman always with a candy bar in her hand or mouth, who thought Pilgrim the greatest man ever in part because she never thought anyone would marry her. When your protagonist is the least interesting, least compelling character in your novel, you’ve got a problem keeping this reader.
So it goes.
Billy Pilgrim believed that he bounced around in time from his birth to his death experiencing all of his life and death many times over. He also believed he’d been abducted by aliens from the planet Tralfamadore. Yet, again for this reader, Billy personally is a rather boring person.
Why a writer would create a novel with World War II as its primary focus with “almost no dramatic confrontation” is beyond me. Such a novel has little going for it.
So it goes.
I almost wonder if Vonnegut, like Billy Pilgrim, bounced back in forth in time, ending up in the 1980’s long before he wrote Slaughterhouse-Five. If he got a sneak preview of MTV that would explain the quick cuts from short scene to short scene. The longest scenes in this novel would be brief scenes in most other novels. The reader doesn’t have a chance to sink into the story, to bond with any of the characters, to experience what they experience.
There’s no sense of place. Vonnegut gives the reader very few descriptions of anywhere. We’re floating above the story, not sure what is below us. I’m a reader who doesn’t need much description, in fact many novels give too much for me like The Big Sky by A.B Guthrie, Jr. His descriptions are wonderful, prose poetry, but there’s just too much of them. Still, I do need some description.
So it goes.
The first 28 pages of Slaughterhouse-Five are the musings of the narrator, supposedly a fictional character, Vonnegut in reality, about how he came to write the novel and how he felt about it. I’d have preferred an author’s note afterwards with a straightforward account directly from Vonnegut.
On the book’s cover: The Boston Globe called it “…hilarious.” I found it amusing at times. The New York Times called it “…delightful.” I feel if you want delightful read Dandelion Wine or almost anything by Ray Bradbury. It was also called sad. If you want sad in a book about World War II, read The Execution of Private Slovik by William Bradford Huie, a true account of the first soldier to be executed by the U.S. Army since the Civil War. (This book is mentioned in Slaughterhouse-Five.)
So it goes.
Vonnegut is lucky he died before I read this novel because about the 275th time I read “So it goes.” I would have hired Paul Lazzaro from the novel, who threatened to have all his enemies killed after the war, to kill Vonnegut.
Did I like anything about it? The writing was clear, the tone was amusing, and I learned that, according to Vonnegut, American firebombing of Dresden devastated that city more than the atom bomb devastated Hiroshima.
So it goes.
Would I recommend Slaughterhouse-Five? Oddly, I would. It is considered an American classic by an important American writer. It’s a quick read. And it’s inoffensive.
Imagine, a war novel inoffensive.
So it goes.
6karenmarie
Ah, ha!
You had the exact same reaction to Slaughterhouse that I did to Rapture. Here's what you said after my review of Rapture:
It never occurred to me that anyone could find it worth reading, but not be particularly fond of it.
We had the same reaction, although I do think I actually liked Rapture more than you liked Slaughterhouse.
I'm re-reading Slaughterhouse right now. I'm on page 77. It brings back all the anti-war feelings I had about Vietnam. It's also the first book I read about time travel, I think, and time travel is one of my favorite plot devices.
I think the characters are kept deliberately ... not two-dimensional exactly... abbreviated perhaps..... because they're symbols and metaphors. The whole book to me was a large dose of irony and the true crazy nature of reality.
It wouldn't surprise me a bit if Tralfamadorians were real.
You had the exact same reaction to Slaughterhouse that I did to Rapture. Here's what you said after my review of Rapture:
It never occurred to me that anyone could find it worth reading, but not be particularly fond of it.
We had the same reaction, although I do think I actually liked Rapture more than you liked Slaughterhouse.
I'm re-reading Slaughterhouse right now. I'm on page 77. It brings back all the anti-war feelings I had about Vietnam. It's also the first book I read about time travel, I think, and time travel is one of my favorite plot devices.
I think the characters are kept deliberately ... not two-dimensional exactly... abbreviated perhaps..... because they're symbols and metaphors. The whole book to me was a large dose of irony and the true crazy nature of reality.
It wouldn't surprise me a bit if Tralfamadorians were real.
7rainpebble
karenmarie;
I had not idea (not having read the book) that Slaughterhouse-Five had any time travel involved within it's pages. That is also one of my favorite little book tweeks. "Veddy intheristing". *in my best Colonel Klink voice"
belva
I had not idea (not having read the book) that Slaughterhouse-Five had any time travel involved within it's pages. That is also one of my favorite little book tweeks. "Veddy intheristing". *in my best Colonel Klink voice"
belva
8karenmarie
The thing about time travel in Slaughterhouse is that Billy's whole life is time travel. I just finished reading the bit where he had just made love to his wife on their honeymoon, slipped back to 1944 in the PoW camp for a few minutes, then came back to bed. It's not like most novels with time travel.
You should read it, nannybebette.
You should read it, nannybebette.
9ajsomerset
The book continually refers to time travel, and aliens, but I'd suggest there is no actual time travel, and no actual aliens. Billy Pilgrim isn't really unstuck in time; he's unstuck in Billy Pilgrim's mind.
The Tralfamadorians are real, but they're no aliens. They come not from Tralfmador but from Histor; thus their ability to see all time at once, to focus on one particular time on demand, and their desire to study Billy as some kind of zoo animal. Also, their resigned world view. So it goes.
The Tralfamadorians are real, but they're no aliens. They come not from Tralfmador but from Histor; thus their ability to see all time at once, to focus on one particular time on demand, and their desire to study Billy as some kind of zoo animal. Also, their resigned world view. So it goes.
10karenmarie
Well, I re-finished Slaughterhouse at lunchtime. It has stood the test of time with me. I still love it.
It's funny, though. I saw the movie and don't remember too much about it, but remember one of the scenes very specifically - when Billy's wife Valencia is driving to the hospital to see him. As I was re-reading that part, which is very short in the book, I remembered the very long scene in the movie.
Charles - your first sentence is: On page 208 of Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, the narrator says “There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations…” . You didn't finish the quote, because he explains WHY:
"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. One of the main effects of war, after all, is that people are discouraged from being characters."
I disagree with you that Vonnegut didn't bring Weary or Poor Old Derby to life - I thought he was brilliant in his minimalist descriptions of them and their lives.
I can't resist, although I've resisted throughout this entire thread......
So it goes.
It's funny, though. I saw the movie and don't remember too much about it, but remember one of the scenes very specifically - when Billy's wife Valencia is driving to the hospital to see him. As I was re-reading that part, which is very short in the book, I remembered the very long scene in the movie.
Charles - your first sentence is: On page 208 of Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five, the narrator says “There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations…” . You didn't finish the quote, because he explains WHY:
"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. One of the main effects of war, after all, is that people are discouraged from being characters."
I disagree with you that Vonnegut didn't bring Weary or Poor Old Derby to life - I thought he was brilliant in his minimalist descriptions of them and their lives.
I can't resist, although I've resisted throughout this entire thread......
So it goes.
11CharlesBoyd
ajsomerset >9 ajsomerset:
I totally agree with your comment: "The book continually refers to time travel, and aliens, but I'd suggest there is no actual time travel, and no actual aliens. {Billy Pilgrim isn't really unstuck in time; he's unstuck in Billy Pilgrim's mind."} I'm jealous. I wish I'd written the part I put in { } This is why I find it bizarre that the library copy I have labeled Slaughterhouse-Five SCI-FI. It would be interesting to know what Vonnasut intended.
I too find time travel a facinating subject in a novel.
Karenmarie > 10 You are right that Vonnegut explained why "There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations..." and what he says is probably true about some real people in such situations, though some real people actually find themselves, in a sense, in war. Think of Joshua (?) Chamberlain at Gettysburg. In any case life doesn't have to have dramatic confrontations, but fiction struggles if it doesn't, even if the confrontations are only relationships between "normal" people.
You write that the characters are "symbols and metaphors." That's fine if you like that, but I like to read about characters who seem like real people, especially real people who are unique, even a bit larger than life.
So, based on my take on Slaughterhouse-Five, what other Vonnegut novel might I like more?
You told nannybebette that she really should read Slaughterhouse-Five, that's cool, but then she has to read The Rapture of Canaan too. Sort of a double challenge for you nannybebette.
I totally agree with your comment: "The book continually refers to time travel, and aliens, but I'd suggest there is no actual time travel, and no actual aliens. {Billy Pilgrim isn't really unstuck in time; he's unstuck in Billy Pilgrim's mind."} I'm jealous. I wish I'd written the part I put in { } This is why I find it bizarre that the library copy I have labeled Slaughterhouse-Five SCI-FI. It would be interesting to know what Vonnasut intended.
I too find time travel a facinating subject in a novel.
Karenmarie > 10 You are right that Vonnegut explained why "There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations..." and what he says is probably true about some real people in such situations, though some real people actually find themselves, in a sense, in war. Think of Joshua (?) Chamberlain at Gettysburg. In any case life doesn't have to have dramatic confrontations, but fiction struggles if it doesn't, even if the confrontations are only relationships between "normal" people.
You write that the characters are "symbols and metaphors." That's fine if you like that, but I like to read about characters who seem like real people, especially real people who are unique, even a bit larger than life.
So, based on my take on Slaughterhouse-Five, what other Vonnegut novel might I like more?
You told nannybebette that she really should read Slaughterhouse-Five, that's cool, but then she has to read The Rapture of Canaan too. Sort of a double challenge for you nannybebette.
12rainpebble
Oh no you don't Charles!
The girls already have me reading vampire and science fiction genres which I would not normally touch with a 92 foot pole; either one of them. They are starting me off HARD!~!
I always thought Slaughterhouse-Five was a war novel, but listening to you all talk about it, it sounds as if it were Sci Fi to me now.
belva
The girls already have me reading vampire and science fiction genres which I would not normally touch with a 92 foot pole; either one of them. They are starting me off HARD!~!
I always thought Slaughterhouse-Five was a war novel, but listening to you all talk about it, it sounds as if it were Sci Fi to me now.
belva
13ajsomerset
Vonnegut makes use of things borrowed from Sci Fi to communicate what can't be communicated through ordinary means.
One of the keys to Slaughterhouse Five, to me, is a comment made by Fred Doucette in his recent memoir, Empty Casing, which covers his struggle with post-traumatic stress disorder arising from his service in Bosnia. In describing his reaction to his first intrusive flashback -- a memory so vivid that he lost contact with his surroundings -- he says, "I wander aimlessly around the downtown streets, trying to rationalize not so much what I experienced, but why. The only thing I know for certain is that I will tell no one. Only crazy people can travel into the past."
Billy Pilgrim isn't travelling in time; he's suffering from intrusive flashback experiences. His experience of his own death also corresponds to a PTSD symptom, as is his sense that he's surrounded by aliens who don't make sense.
So no, it's not sci fi. Vonnegut isn't concerned with the possibility of time travel or the culture of an imagined alien race. He's not really concerned with the consequences of time travel, either. He's concerned with making sense of war experience and the obscene arithmetic of history.
One of the keys to Slaughterhouse Five, to me, is a comment made by Fred Doucette in his recent memoir, Empty Casing, which covers his struggle with post-traumatic stress disorder arising from his service in Bosnia. In describing his reaction to his first intrusive flashback -- a memory so vivid that he lost contact with his surroundings -- he says, "I wander aimlessly around the downtown streets, trying to rationalize not so much what I experienced, but why. The only thing I know for certain is that I will tell no one. Only crazy people can travel into the past."
Billy Pilgrim isn't travelling in time; he's suffering from intrusive flashback experiences. His experience of his own death also corresponds to a PTSD symptom, as is his sense that he's surrounded by aliens who don't make sense.
So no, it's not sci fi. Vonnegut isn't concerned with the possibility of time travel or the culture of an imagined alien race. He's not really concerned with the consequences of time travel, either. He's concerned with making sense of war experience and the obscene arithmetic of history.
14London_StJ
>12 rainpebble: Just think - if you can make it through our challenges then you can make it through anything!
15rainpebble
Ah Luxx,
you are giving me courage my girl.
I am looking forward to the next one though.
As soon as I have finished The Player of the Games for my challenge with inkspot, I will be ready for another. I have challenged Ruth, but have not heard anything yet and I don't know her likes and dislikes so we shall see what happens. I did like Carmilla, surprisingly. And I am enjoying this read as well, though I know it is way over my head I am struggling to keep my brain in it.
Y'all have a great weekend.
Thank you for the positive words Luxx. It does help.
belva
you are giving me courage my girl.
I am looking forward to the next one though.
As soon as I have finished The Player of the Games for my challenge with inkspot, I will be ready for another. I have challenged Ruth, but have not heard anything yet and I don't know her likes and dislikes so we shall see what happens. I did like Carmilla, surprisingly. And I am enjoying this read as well, though I know it is way over my head I am struggling to keep my brain in it.
Y'all have a great weekend.
Thank you for the positive words Luxx. It does help.
belva
16womansheart
> Is WH falling down on the job? My goodness ... I'll have to give her a nudge, Belva. Wherever could that woman be? and what could she possibly be doing? tee hee.
I will agree to spend some time thinking about what I would NEVER read. It's kind of hard to put my attention on that, because I don't like spending time on something I don't enjoy reading, eating, or chilling/hanging with. People fall into that category, too. Sometimes.
Blue Monday for Ruthie? I guess so.
I will agree to spend some time thinking about what I would NEVER read. It's kind of hard to put my attention on that, because I don't like spending time on something I don't enjoy reading, eating, or chilling/hanging with. People fall into that category, too. Sometimes.
Blue Monday for Ruthie? I guess so.
