This was a great class.

I MISS THIS CLASS!
Except Cedric.

Love, Ryan

This is Nothing

In the latest letter we read, there is a more in-depth detailing of the relationship between Oskar's grandmother and grandfather. Distinct pages also separate this story from that between Thomas and Anna. At the end of the letter Thomas notes how he is leaving, but not out of selfishness. Then, why does he leave?
It is a bit unclear what he means by "I can't live, I've tried and I can't" (135). He does note that Oskar's grandma has chosen to live and succeeded. What is the difference between these two characters?

While Thomas writes in his book and cannot say a thing, Oskar's grandma is the opposite. Everything she puts in the typewriter comes out blank. Though in actuality that is Thomas's fault because he had pulled out the ribbon for typing, she does not even realize she is typing blank pages. This may be Nothing to someone outside looking at it, but it is Something to her who had typed what she wanted to type. The distinction between Nothing and Something is, I think, based on perspective in this letter. I also think that their personal tragedies have led them to question life. It is no longer just a period of time, but one made up of rules that must be followed because they are right. The two make up what seems to be ridiculous rules on how to live in their home, but I think they are trying to create safe havens to protect themselves from outside influences.

What is the distinction between Nothing and Something, and how is it important?

Tongue Talk

I have a few thoughts on the meaning of the necklace of tongues. I suppose I'll just talk about them here, as there's a good chance I'll be off on some of them anyway.

First, perhaps most obviously, the necklace epitomizes the horror of war. Cutting someone's tongue out is pretty vicious.

With this of course, the tongue could represent Mary Anne's transformation - or more universally, the loss of innocence/dehumanization war brings to all its participants. The tongue exemplifies how drastically Mary Anne has changed; it symbolizes her complete embracement of the culture of war and Vietnam. She has been consumed by Nam just as war is apt to swallow any of us (see what I did there?). Indeed, Mary Anne is just of many striking examples O'Brien offers of how war makes affects people dramatically and makes them do things they would otherwise not (like kill others and cut out tongues).

The tongues could also represent silence. Tongues, of course, are necessary for speech. The idea of silence - the war stories that, for one reason or another, are never told - is a major theme in O'Brien's novel.

(I apologize for the subpar title, but it was either that or the infinitely lamer "Tongue Twister")

edit: I believe this was the assignment. We were supposed to blog about tonight's reading as well?
edit 2: Incidentally, the necklace of tongues reminded me of this. Just like this parasite does to fish, the war has consumed the novel's characters and became an consuming, permanently attached parasitic part of them.

Story Telling

We just read the dentist, and have been asked to determine the role of the storyteller throughout the book.

I think the role of the storyteller is to blend fact and fiction, and to make the responses and outcomes of the stories completely up to the reader.  O'Brien himself tells the reader that without having been to war, you probably won't get the intended meaning out of every story.  This, along with the fact that he often contradicts himself, makes me believe that the storyteller's role is to give us an idea of the story, but not tell us how we should interpret it.

How to tell a true war story = how to make your stomach turn

For starters, this chapter was the most difficult chapter for me to read, to say the least. While there were some of the most profound and beautiful paragraphs and sentences, there were also some of the most gut-wrenching, brutal, and just upsetting ones as well. When O' Brien told the story of how Rat Kiley just kept shooting the baby buffalo with the sole intention to hurt it and not kill it, I couldn't even read it. I had to flip the page and read the next paragraph following the break.. the images that O' Brien crafted to start forming in my head were so graphic and violent that I reached a stopping point- it was that hard to believe.

So, after reading this chapter, I think I felt the way O' Brien wanted me to feel. His words affected me, and his story affected me. He conjured images of war in my mind- images that were so real and so explicit that I couldn't believe it. He says, on page 78, "True war stories do not generalize. They do not indulge in abstraction or analysis. For example: War is hell. As a moral declaration the old truism seems perfectly true, and yet because it abstracts, because it generalizes, I can't believe it with my stomach. Nothing turns inside. It comes down to gut instinct. A true war story, if truly told, makes the stomach believe."

At this point in the novel, O' Brien got his story across. For that reason, of all his definitions and explanations of a true war story, the quote above resonates, for me, as the most truthful and the most accurate definition of a true war story. He wrote what cannot be told, and spoke what cannot be spoken. He made me question the validity of his story and his words, he made the implausible and the surreal seem ordinary and REAL. And he told me a true war story. 

So how can you tell a true war story? By one that makes your stomach turn, your head spin, your eyes bulge, and your thoughts freeze? By one that questions your beliefs? By one that leaves you wondering, questioning, or wanting more? By one that teaches you something new? What is it for you?

-

I believe this was the assignment - something about hyphens or what not.

I think it would be a little presumptuous to say that the hyphen in this context is a strictly American phenomenon, but it is probably safe to say that a hyphen next to "American" is more common than with other nationalities. This is unsurprising; the United States is a nation built by immigrants, a cultural melting pot. While other nations may be defined by a common background and ethnicity, the American identity and nation is defined by the multitude of ethnicities and nationalities that share in it.

The hyphenated identity shows that people are able to come to the United States and become American while still retaining their heritage (as opposed to having to lose a core part of themselves).

On an related note, there was a question today in class about how we identify ourselves. Personally, I do not feel particularly attached to my religion, ethnicity, or nationality. To me, they really should not matter. But I guess if I had to define myself along religious/ethnic/national lines, I'm a Filipino agnostic-leaning Catholic who happens to be an American national.

Sorry if this was a little rambling.

Social Status

After the assigned reading, do you think Lily's position in the social circle changed?  If so, by how much/to where?