In a perfect world war is supposed to be an action that one country takes after they have exhausted all other options. While the causes of war may vary, they are all similar because they are supposed to eliminate the world of some type of injustice. Kate Wilhelm, author of the story “The Village,” does not accept the notion that war is required for the greater good; she instead creates a story depicting a war that seemingly has no purpose. Tim O’Brien, author of the story “How to Tell a True War Story,” also believes that there is nothing good that can come out of war. Daniel Robinson’s critique, “Getting It Right: The Short Fiction Of Tim O’Brien,” analyzes “How to Tell a True War Story” in order to simplify O’Brien’s fiction into qualifications that make a war story true. “The Village” satisfies O’Brien and Robinson’s qualifications of what makes a war story true thus validating Wilhelm’s overall theme that war is immoral.
Wilhelm paints the image that war is filled with graphic and obscene events, which satisfies O’Brien and Robinson’s qualification that war stories are disgusting, in order to prove her argument that war has no morality. Wilhelm describes the obscene images of war when she states, “She scrambled to her feet and lurched forward to join the others in the street. She could taste blood and there was a stabbing pain in her jaw where the teeth had been broken by her fall” (Wilhelm 104). Wilhelm’s inclusion of these obscene details demonstrates her desire to prove that war has no morality by creating a scenario where ordinary Americans were being attacked. The prospect of Americans being involved in a war on American soil has not been a reality since the Civil War; the human toll that Wilhelm creates on Americans w...
... middle of paper ...
...op a war story based solely on facts supports the credibility of Wilhelm’s story, and thus supports her argument that war is immoral.
Wilhelm argues that war is immoral because of the horrendous acts that occur during war, the lack of a point to war, war stories are unbelievable, and war stories rely on perspective. She argues her theory through her fictional story, “The Village,” however her story is validated through both O’Brien and Robinson. Although O’Brien’s “How to Tell a True War Story” is also a work of fiction, it is dependent on the real life connections that Robinson draws from the story and real life events. Together O’Brien and Robinson create qualifications that serve as a guide to determining the credibility of war stories. Wilhelm’s story satisfies those qualifications and therefore it is obvious that her argument that war is immoral must be true.
Many times readers lose interest in stories that they feel are not authentic. In addition, readers feel that fictitious novels and stories are for children and lack depth. Tim O’ Brien maintains that keeping readers of fiction entertained is a most daunting task, “The problem with unsuccessful stories is usually simple: they are boring, a consequence of the failure of imagination- to vividly imagine and to vividly render extraordinary human events, or sequences of events, is the hard-lifting, heavy-duty, day-by-day, unending labor of a fiction writer” (Tim O’ Brien 623). Tim O’ Brien’s “How to Tell a True War Story” examines the correlation between the real experiences of war and the art of storytelling. In O’Brien’s attempt to bridge the gap between fiction and non-fiction the narrator of the story uses language and acts of violence that may be offensive to some. However some readers agree that Tim O" Brien's "How to Tell a True War Story" would lack authenticity and power without the use of crude language and violence.
King, Rosemary. "O'Brien's 'How to Tell a True War Story.'" The Explicator. 57.3 (1999): 182. Expanded Academic ASAP.
In conclusion, while books, photos, movies and other historical documentation can portray information or a message about wartime events, they will never be able to produce the feelings of those that were personally involved in wars have experienced. Yet, it is incorrect to criticize these writers. The information they reveal is still very important historical information. Even if a reader or viewer of this media cannot feel exactly the same emotions as those involved, they still often experience an emotional connection to the events being depicted. This is important, not only for the historical knowledge gained about wars, but also to understand the nature and futility of their occurrence.
Ghosh, Nibir. "War and the Pity of War: Joseph Heller's Catch-22." The IUP Journal of English Studies VII.2 (June 2012): 51-60. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.
Many war pieces express a distinct sense of truth, hatred, and anger that can be found in the style, tone, and imagery they possess. Incredible images are created in ones mind as war writings are read and heard. Works written by such writers as Siegfried Sassoon, Wilfred Owen, and Tim OBrien really reach out to the audience by way of the authors choice of words and images that they use in their writing. These talented writers create very touching and heart-felt images as they write about the true occurrences, problems, feelings and emotions that soldiers encountered throughout times of war. It is by way of these writers words that the bloody truth of war is heard, rather than the glorified victories heard which overlook the pain that soldiers went through.
Author Tim O’Brien in “How to Tell a True War Story” uses the physical and mental mindset of isolation in the Vietnam war to create a story with many literary devices that makes a captivating story. The author uses point of view, verbal irony, and the character Tim O’Brien to enhance his written experiences of the Vietnam War. This story teaches the reader that experiences that were lived by the reader can be altered by the mind to a certain extent, where they can be questioned as true or not. Perhaps at a sports game or in a heated situation such as a police chase or court case. Tim O’Brien’s experiences have captivated many readers, but are they true? Or just a product of insanity from war? Well, Tim O’Brien leaves that up to the reader to decide.
...suade the reader to think or feel a certain way but this in itself is another lie. Telling a true war story is about convincing someone of the inconvincible, to make them believe the unbelievable. That's why a series of half-truths and exaggerations are each a small part of the truth. The truth is an enigmatic cloud, a mystery; at its very core is truth. This truth can never be obtained, only hinted upon. The ideas that make up this cloud are each different yet circle a similar theme, which is the real truth. Some of these concepts may be at opposite ends and completely dissimilar but are each a part of the truth. Therefore each may be independently untrue, but the coalescence of these fabrications is in essence the only real truth.
In “How to Tell a True War Story” by Tim O’Brien, Orwell’s ideas are questioned and the competition between the truth and the underlying meaning of a story is discussed. O’Brien’s story depicts that the truth isn’t always a simple concept; and that not every piece of literature or story told can follow Orwell’s list of rules (Orwell 285). The story is told through an unnamed narrator as he re-encounters memories from his past as a soldier in the Vietnam War. With his recollection of past encounters, the narrator also offers us segments of didactic explanation about what a “true war story” is and the power it has on the human body (O’Brien 65). O’Brien uses fictional literature and the narration of past experiences to raise a question; to what extent should the lack of precision, under all circumstances, be allowed? In reality, no story is ever really truthful, and even if it is, we have no proof of it. The reader never feels secure in what they are being told. The reliability of the source, the author, and the narrator are always being questioned, but the importance of a story isn’t about the truth or the accuracy in which it is told, but about the “sunlight” it carries (O’Brien 81).
The deceitful interpretation presented in "How to tell a true war story", is an example of Historicism. Today, people hear about the vietnam war through family members, friends and veterans. When people tell war stories they try to make themselves seem victorious. It makes the person listening feel as if it was all in the good of the people by killing people. O'Brian somehow justifies a point in his book by stating, "A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encouraged virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain men from doing the things men have always done." In actual reality more harm was done than good. People were forced off of their lands to hide in safety and the economic consequence is fatal. To derive to the point, O' Brian is saying there is no real war story if the audience feels that killing people had made a big and better consequence. To look back upon the Vietnam war it brought Vietnam to it's knees. The Americans assisted someone who asked them not to interfere and in the end there was no winner. The Americans had nothing to gain by fighting this war. The title was a contridictary of how to tell a true war story.
King, Rosemary. "O'Brien's 'How to Tell a True War Story.'" The Explicator. 57.3 (1999): 182. Expanded Academic ASAP.
Like "The Lives of the Dead," it begins with a statement that the rest of the chapter throws into question. "The War wasn 't all terror and violence," the narrator tells us, "Sometimes things could almost get sweet" (31). What follows, however, is a series of vignettes that are anything but "sweet." When a Vietnamese boy with a plastic leg approaches an American soldier with a chocolate bar, the soldier reflects, "One leg, for Chrissake. Some poor fucker ran out of ammo" (31). When the same soldier steals his friend 's puppy, "strapped it to a Claymore antipersonnel mine and squeezed the firing device," he responds with an ironic affirmation of the initiation right of the conventional war story: "What 's everyone so upset about? ... I mean, Christ, I 'm just a boy" (37). Here, the novel renders ironic both the loss of innocence and the "reconsideration" that structure the traditional war story. The positive spin that underlies the war story as a genre emerges here only as a bankrupt fantasy. Thus in "How to Tell a True War Story," the narrator warns, "If a story seems moral, do not believe it. If at the end of a war story you feel uplifted, or if you feel that some small bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, then you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie" (68). Aimed
...r because it seems impossible to reconstruct an event from this objective point of view. Maybe the point of telling stories is not trying to recreate the reality of a past event, but it is the message that matters because that might be in the end the only thing that does not necessarily depend on single details of the story, but on the overall picture of an event. That is why to O’Brien another important component of a war story is the fact that a war story will never pin down the definite truth and that is why a true war story “never seems to end” (O’Brien, 425). O’Brien moves the reader from the short and simple statement “This is the truth” to the conclusion that, “In war you lose your sense of the definite, hence your sense of truth itself and therefore it’s safe to say that in a true war story nohting much is ever very true” (O’Brien, 428). These two statements frame the entire irony of the story, from its beginning to its end. Almost like the popular saying “A wise man admits that he knows nothing.”
Several stories into the novel, in the section, “How to tell a true war story”, O’Brien begins to warn readers of the lies and exaggerations that may occur when veterans tell war stories.
The truth to any war does not lie in the depths of storytelling but rather it’s embedded in every person involved. According to O’Brien, “A true war story does not depend on that kind of truth. Absolute occurrence is irrelevant. A thing may happen and be a total lie; another thing may not happen and be truer than the truth” (pg. 80). Truths of any war story in my own opinion cannot be fully conveyed or explained through the use of words. Any and all war stories provide specific or certain facts about war but each of them do not and cannot allow the audience to fully grasp the tru...
In Hedges' first chapter of the book titled, "The Myth of War," he talks about how the press often shows and romanticizes certain aspects of war. In war there is a mythic reality and a sensory reality. In sensory reality, we see events for what they are. In mythic reality, we see defeats as "signposts on the road to ultimate victory" (21), Chris Hedges brings up an intriguing point that the war we are most used to seeing and hearing about (mythic war )is a war completely different than the war the soldiers and journalists experience ( sensory war), a war that hides nothing. He states, "The myth of war is essential to justify the horrible sacrifices required in war, the destruction and death of innocents. It can be formed only by denying the reality of war, by turning the lies, the manipulation, the inhumanness of war into the heroic ideal" (26). Chris Hedges tries to get the point across that in war nothing is as it seems. Through his own experiences we are a...