John Wade
“…It wasn’t just the war that made him what he was. That’s too easy. It was everything – his whole nature…” – Eleanor K. Wade
IS THIS AN ADEQUATE EXPLANATION FOR WHAT HAPPENS TO JOHN WADE?
John Wade left America a human being, yet came back a human killer. His months in Vietnam were filled with bloodshed and human atrocity, and from this, no man could feasibly return the same person. Yet beneath what John endured throughout the war, he suffered many unkindness’ and tragedies that shaped him into adulthood. It was not only the war that made John Wade, but it was John Wade’s existence; his whole life that made him who he was.
John Wade craved love, admiration and affection. All his life, all he wanted was to be loved, and his father’s constant taunting hurt him immensely. In going to the war, John fulfilled his dream to become a figure who was both admired and respected. He was not a strong, macho man, who thrived upon violence and bloodshed, yet he was young and ambitious. Wade saw the war as a way of gaining ‘hero’ status in order to reach his lifelong ambitions of reaching the U.S Senate. When the revelations about his acts in the war were made, John Wade lost everything that he had fought so hard to build for himself. In this superficial way, one may argue that it was the war that ultimately led to who John Wade became at the end of the novel, yet many other factors involving his life before the war must be examined.
It was John Wade’s childhood an...
As he immerses his audience into combat with the soldiers, Shaara demonstrates the more emotional aspects of war by highlighting the personal lives of the men fighting. For example, when Shaara reveals the pasts of James Longstreet and Lewis Armistead’s, I started to picture them as the men that they were and not as soldiers out for blood. After suffering a devastating loss of three of his children to fever, Longstreet is tossed into battle. In Armistead’s case, he not only suffered the loss of his wife, but also of a friend fighting on the Union side, General Winfield Scott Hancock. Shaara saves his readers a front row seat to the inner turmoil of General Chamberlain regarding his hindering duty as a soldier clashes with his duty to family as he strived to serve the Union as well as protec...
about the war and his lack of place in his old society. The war becomes
...y crying not knowing what to do then he turned and peered back to the Minnesota shore line. “It was as real as anything I would ever feel. I saw my parents calling to me from the far shoreline. I saw my brother and sister, all the townsfolk, the mayor and the entire Chamber of Commerce and all my old teachers and girlfriends and high school buddies. Like some weird sporting event: everybody screaming from the sidelines, rooting me on” (58). This is when he knew he could not turn his back on his beloved country. All the wrong he felt the draft was he could not cross the border to flee from anything or anyone. This whole situation describes the rest of his life, but mainly his years in the Vietnam War. He would have to make decisions, decisions that would be hard but would have to do for the ones he loved.
John Garcia’s sense of the absurdity of the war is particularly keen. It is first evident to him in a request to board a battleship with fires near the ammunition. He refuses, but escapes punishment because of his role in rescuing people from the water. This same value for human life and knowledge of the futility with which it was often lost in the war pervades his story. He recounts a man being killed by friendly fire after lighting a cigarette, the death of his girlfriend from American artillery shells fired at planes, and the Japanese woman and child he shot in the pacific. John is eager to fight in the war at first, taking a cut in wages and even petitioning the president to be allowed to serve. This patriotism is replaced by a sense of guilt and fear once he must actually kill people. He thinks he committed murder when he shot the Japanese woman and child, and is haunted by the grief of the families of the soldiers he kills. He says he drank because it was the only way he could overcome the guilt and kill someone. Once the war was over he no longer needed alcohol and stopped drinking, but a permanent change in his view of himself and warfare is evident. He is still continually troubled in his dreams by the woman and child he shot, and while he was initially eager to join the war, he refused to use violence as a policeman afterwards and thinks that if countries are going to war they ought to send the politicians to fight.
...Suzy. Remote Weaponry: The Ethical Implications. Vol. 25. N.A.: Society For Applied Philosophy, 2008. Web. 17 Apr. 2014. .
imperialism, ethnocentrism, and sexism. Conflict in the commentary is deliberately deceptive, “the objective of The Things They Carried, like other Vietnam War narratives, is not to open a traumatic event to multiple, vying interpretations, but rather to consolidate a satisfying mythic meta-narrative of American sin and redemption" (Clarke 135). The book underscores contending viewpoints which taken separately would be assumed on reliable. The contending viewpoints produce contending truths. Therefore there is no single narrative that is solely about depravity and evil or about salvation (Clarke 135).
Later in the book, he again reflects on the war. He catalogs the proofs that he has been given — injured and half-starved countrymen — but persists in his existential doubt. He notes, “So we knew a war existed; we had to believe that, just as we had to believe that the name for the sort of life we had led for the last three years was hardship and suffering. Yet we had no proof of it. In fact, we had even less than no proof; we had had thrust into our faces the very shabby and unavoidable obverse of proof…” (94). Because he has not seen the battles, he has difficulty acknowledging the reality of war.
When people think of the military, they often think about the time they spend over in another country, hoping they make it back alive. No one has ever considered the possibility that they may have died inside. Soldiers are reborn through war, often seeing through the eyes of someone else. In “Soldier’s home” by Ernest Hemingway, the author illustrates how a person who has been through war can change dramatically if enough time has passed. This story tells of a man named Harold (nick name: Krebs) who joined the marines and has finally come back after two years. Krebs is a lost man who feels it’s too complicated to adjust to the normal way of living and is pressured by his parents.
The “Man I Killed” takes us into the Vietnam War and tell us about a soldiers first time of killing another individual. The author describes a Viet Cong soldier that he has killed, using vivid, physical detail with clear descriptions of the dead mans’ fatal wounds. O'Brien envisions the biography of this man and envisions the individual history of the dead Vietnamese soldier starting with his birthplace moving through his life, and finished with him enrolling in the Vietnamese Army. O'Brien also describes some of the dead soldiers’ hopes and dreams. The author uses this history in an attempt to make the dead man more realistic to the reader
Wallace Terry has collected a wide range of stories told by twenty black Vietnam veterans. The stories are varied based on each experience; from the horrific to the heart breaking and to the glorified image of Vietnam depicted by Hollywood. Wallace Terry does not insinuate his opinion into any of the stories so that the audience can feel as if they are having a conversation with the Vietnam Veteran himself. Terry introduces the purpose of the book by stating, “ Among the 20 men who portray their war and postwar experiences in this book. I sought a representative cross section of the black combat force.”(p. XV) Although the stories in this book were not told in any specific order, many themes became prominent throughout the novel such as religion, social, and health.
Instead of focusing on crime prevention, restoration focuses on repairing the harm done to the victim and the community. Along with restoring property and personal injuries, restoration is meant to bring back some kind of security. Legislators and victims want to know that justice has been done. Van Ness and Strong (1997: 8-9) suggested three core principles for the nature of restorative justice. First, Justice requires the healing of victims, offenders, and communities injured by the crime. Also, they should be permitted to stay involved in the justice process in a timely manner. Lastly, the government should be responsible for preserving a just order and the community should be responsible for establishing peace. The victims family in a murder case can have a since of relief when the offender is sentenced to the death penalty. They can know that justice has been done and will have a sense of security knowing the offender cannot harm anyone else again. The family can now mourn over there loss more
The Vietnam War was a controversial conflict that plagued the United States for many years. The loss of life caused by the war was devastating. For those who came back alive, their lives were profoundly changed. The impact the war had on servicemen would affect them for the rest of their lives; each soldier may have only played one small part in the war, but the war played a huge part in their lives. They went in feeling one way, and came home feeling completely different. In the book Vietnam Perkasie, W.D. Ehrhart describes his change from a proud young American Marine to a man filled with immense confusion, anger, and guilt over the atrocities he witnessed and participated in during the war.
After reviewing the article titles given for this first assignment, I believe they indicate that Sociology, generally speaking, is not only a study of diversity or commonality in traits among people; it is also a science about factors in a person’s life and how these factors culminate responses. Interestingly enough, its topics of concern seem to be directly determined by current and common events of the world. Through the invention and expansion of new ideas, popular trends and fashions through time, Sociology adapts to responsibly to service the very subjects of interest it studies; for, even the slightest change of a person’s daily experience can have an insurmountable impact on attitude, personal growth, family dynamics and basic group behavior.
Usually when someone is murdered, people expect the murderer to feel culpable. This though, is not the case in war. When in war, a soldier is taught that the enemy deserves to die, for no other reason than that they are the nation’s enemy. When Tim O’Brien kills a man during the Vietnam War, he is shocked that the man is not the buff, wicked, and terrifying enemy he was expecting. This realization overwhelms him in guilt. O’Brien’s guilt has him so fixated on the life of his victim that his own presence in the story—as protagonist and narrator—fades to the black. Since he doesn’t use the first person to explain his guilt and confusion, he negotiates his feelings by operating in fantasy—by imagining an entire life for his victim, from his boyhood and his family to his feeling about the war and about the Americans. In The Man I Killed, Tim O’Brien explores the truth of The Vietnam War by vividly describing the dead body and the imagined life of the man he has killed to question the morality of killing in a war that seems to have no point to him.
Earnest Hemmingway once said "Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime." (Ernest Hemingway: A Literary Reference) War is a gruesome and tragic thing and affects people differently. Both Vonnegut and Hemmingway discus this idea in their novels A Farewell to Arms and Slaughterhouse Five. Both of the novels deal not only with war stories but other genres, be it a science fiction story in Vonnegut’s case or a love story in Hemingway’s. Despite all the similarities there are also very big differences in the depiction of war and the way the two characters cope with their shocking and different experiences. It is the way someone deals with these tragedies that is the true story. This essay will evaluate how the main characters in both novels deal with their experiences in different ways.