Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Your Team Might Not Always be the Best
Since reading Slaughter' House-Five I have been thinking about what war can do to a person's mind. We hear stories about people with Post War Stress after being involved in a war. We always say how disgusting our enemy can be to kill that many people in that horrific way. Kurt Vonnegut, the author of Slaughter' House-Five, was a POW during WWII. He was held prisoner in the German city of Dresden. The city is best known for the controversial bombing during the later years of the war. Vonnegut first hand saw the horrific sights of war, not by an enemy, but by his our country. Not many people get to see two sides to war. What I mean is how one side reacts to certain events, and also how their enemies react. Kurt was able to see the reactions of Dresden's people after they found the bodies of their loved ones, or the stench of burning flesh. Kurt saw life changing views, but he also had his eyes stretched wide open. He was able to see that his own country is capable of such distruction, and mass murder. He could see in people's eyes what did we do to deserve this and he took a step back and really thought about all that was going on. He understood that even the most powerful and glorified country in the world was capable of doing such a disgusting and disgracful thing, the mass murder of innocent people. This is what I believe Kurt took from his experience, I could be totally wrong, but let me know what you think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I completely agree with you Sean. That is one of the things that I like about Slaughterhouse Five. Of course I want to read stories about great things that my country has done, but to ignore those times when we did wrong gives us a false perspective on things. If we only hear about times when America saved the day, we would have an elitist attitude, and think we are the best country. However, seeing both sides of our country is what helps us learn from our mistakes, so in turn, we can work towards being a better country.
I actually think you make a really good point here. Because he is present at the time of the attack, Vonnegut becomes witness to the destruction his own country is capable of doing. The aftermath of the bombing truly made him take a step back and look at war as a whole, not just from America's perspective. This neutral stance and Post War Syndrom is the basis for a lot of what happens in Slaughter House-Five.
From what we've been told about the bombing of Dresden, the mass murder was somewhat of an accident. Although I am not saying that the Allied Forces' actions were good, they were understandable. Also I agree with Paul that it is important for us to know both sides of a story in order to see the bigger picture and make our decisions/ideas based off of that larger picture.
Solid post Sean. I really like the point you raise about people getting to see two sides to a war. Vonnegut's unique experience definitely adds to the power of his story. I think his experience was almost so powerful-- because he saw two sides of the war-- that he had to describe what he had seen through the eyes of a fictional character. I think the many times Vonnegut claimed to have written an account about Dresden, as he describes in the first chapter, that the story may have been too much for him to share. good job.
I agree war (just like other extreme experiences) can be an eye opening. I believe that many people have misconceptions about war which can only be solved whether they actually partake in war or meet someone who has experienced it themselves. I also agree with Paul that seeing both sides of our country can provide our nation with much needed knowledge to learn from our mistakes.
It is very dangerous to believe that one man, country or idea is always right. Mistakes are present in all forms of life and one cannot ignore this reality. Mistakes are a part of life that we learn from and hopefully use to make better decisions in the future. Every war and battle has two sides that believe they are fighting for a just and worthy cause. It is important to understand these contrasting points of views. Right and wrong is not always black and white.
I totally disagree the USA is ALWAYS right. haha, no i'm jk. I think atrocities are committed on both sides. As bad as the bombing of Dresden was, it wasn't even close to the horror of the Holocaust. It seems like a scale. We commit and atrocity worth 5 atrocity points, and the enemy commits one worth 30. Same as now. We torture people for 3 atrocity points, and the terrorists we're torturing murder civilians in suicide bombings worth 20 atrocity points. (Ignore the crappy scaling)
Obviously Vonnegut sees what the horrors and atrocitities his country is capable of and doesn't look upon them with approving eyes. However, many historians (don't ask me who, I have my sources) have argued that in order to defeat an enemy the likes of Nazi Germany, you must become somewhat like them. I'm not so sure I agree with the argument but it is nonetheless an interesting one. That in order to conquer an enemy that performed the industrial massacre of millions upon millions of people you must yourself do something horrible. Dresden was something horrible but as far as it being necessary, I can't say I agree.
Vonnegut is placed in a very unique situation by his presense in Dresden. Therefore, we are fortunate that he decided to write a book that, while not chronicling his experiences, put them into perspective a little bit. The ability to see what your own country can do to enemies gave Vonnegut this unique insight, and therefore he has a very un-biased view of war.
Post a Comment