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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
After reading How To Tell a True War Story, I definitely began to think more about what O'Brien's purpose as our "storyteller" really is. In my opinion, O'Brien isn't such a reliable narrator, or storyteller, because he seems to constantly contradict himself and many of the things he says confuse me. I agree with Charlie that O'Brien serves more as a guide than a teacher throughout the war story because he never tells us whether we should believe him or not. Basically, his purpose is to tell us all that he knows and remembers of his experiences in Vietnam, and then it's up to us as readers to decide whether we believe his stories or not. The only burden O'Brien has is to pass on his memories.
I don't believe that O'Brien has any real need to tell stories; It's simply an excuse to talk about his experiences.
If he says that we won't understand him fully, having not been involved in the war, then WHAT'S THE POINT?
His role as narrator seems to be a coincidental one. He wants to tell stories to get them off his back, and he sees an opprotunity. This inserts him as the storyteller through a "right place, right time" situation.
More than being a guide, I believe that O'Brien appears to be more of a teacher, and the entire novel is one big lesson on storytelling. He shows his true colors in "How to tell a True War Story" by actually instructing the reader on how to do it, while incorporating examples into the text. But more than that one chapter, we see that The Things They Carried holds a lesson on how to tell a true war story, and it is embedded in very specific ways to manipulate our senses and to eventually tell our own "war stories" like him.
I agree with what both of you said- rebecca and charlie- in that the role of a true storyteller (O'Brien) is not to tell us a story for the sake of getting a story across to the reader; He tells a story- out of a burden to pass on his memories, like you said rebecca- but he also tells a story keep his experiences- and his memories- alive. And I think that because his stories are SO difficult to tell, it's almost impossible to translate the emotions into mere words..So yes, O'Brien is sometimes an unreliable narrator and a big storyteller- but when he can tell a story/put it into words without having to say or speak anything- that means something. And in the end, without his storytelling and his way of filling in gaps of memory with made-up, believable details, his story can't be told, and can't affect the person he's telling his story to.
I believe Charlie brings up an interesting point. O'Brien has been telling us these stories while also contradicting himself, which could be a signal that not all the stories are true. However, there is no doubt in my mind that majority, if not all, of the stories are based off of fact, and not just made up. I think that the memories are just too vivid to be able to make something like this up. As for the storyteller, I believe it is just a way to allow the author to communicate with the reader. He is obviously trying to tell the reader something by writing this book, except he chooses to write it through storytelling. In addition, I believe that the storytelling aspect of the book makes it much easier to remember because it is broken down story by story for the reader, as opposed to being one continuous story.
I think the theme of storytelling is an outlet for O'Brian. Much like Becca said, he has so many memories that he constantly carries around with him, and it is a burden for him. Thus, storytelling is almost like the easy way out for O'Brian in the sense that he does not have to bottle up all these emotions and stories inside; he can let them out in this form. I think this also relates to the theme of courage through out the novel and O'Brian's departure to war. He says that he was a coward for going to war, indicating that he was taking the easy way out, and was perhaps being brave for his country, but not brave for himself. I think storytelling is the same in that many probably think he is courageous for telling all these stories that are so hard to recall, but in reality he is being a coward because he needs to take the easy way out and release them, not keep them bottled in for himself.
ryan-- although i agree and am pretty sure obrien even admitted it earlier that he writes the stories down as a form of relief for himself, i think he also tells his stories because they keep on happening for him over and over again and never stop reoccuring in his mind.
and there definitely is a point. while i think he wants us to believe everything he says - hes proven to be pretty brilliant so far, so he is probably intentionally an unreliable narrator - thus allowing his reader to form his/her own opinions on war and his personal experiences.
i think the role of the storyteller is to try to convey the emotions that the listener can never truly grasp - the silence, the longing. the love. the friendships. the memory.
I agree with you guys that he is very unreliable because we never know if he is telling the truth or not. I think it is up to the reader to decide whether or not they want to believe the stories. I think the role of the story teller is to tell it and then it is up to the reader to understand it and believe it or not.
While I agree that O'Brien's contradicting style leaves the interpretation up to the reader, I also feel that it relates to life in general. Life is full of contradicting beliefs, people, and experiences and this is seen in his war stories. Therefore, I believe that although he contradicts himself, O'Brien tells the stories truthfully to the best of his ability. Not only does storytelling act as a stress release for him, but also it serves as a way to pass down lessons and ideas from generation to generation. From the beginning of time, storytelling has been the main device to pass on information. O'Brien simply continues this tradition.
I believe that O'Brien mixes factual and false information together to help explain the point that these small details are not really important. The facts are sort of blurred not only because of the suddeness of the moment, such as the confusion from when Curt Lemon stepped on the artillery trap, but because war itself is full of the unknown. Each day brings something new, maybe unexpected, and the soldier does not necessarily need to know the truth. The soldier is just required to live up to his or her duty. O'Brien's storytelling from his memories in the war simply gives us a basis from which to look at the war.
I think that Charlie brings up an important point when he mentions that O'Brien says we will not be able to understand the full meaning of the war stories since we have not been to war. I think that this makes it unfair for us to assume were correct based on our speculation of whether or not O'Brien's statements are fact, fiction or somewhere in between.
Well yeah guys, some of you guys I disagree with, but no need to mention names ;). While reading Elizabeth's post (I think), I remembered Sherwood Anderson's story "Hands." Constantly throughout the book, he's repeating that we need a poet to describe what happened. This story is sort of this tragedy which I don't think even Tim O'Brien understands. He sort of wants to leave this open out in the open for interpretation that way he might understand what happens when someone retells this story with the true emotions and umph needed to make it truly impact someone.
Also, just reading this book reminds me of this really really old television series. The show (whose name i do not want to disclose, though it is not Korean) was about War and the despair it creates. The Things They Carried reminded me of this with storytelling too. We sort of have this story which you can't really explain. You have the crazy man on the TV who lost his sense of identity due to war and believes he was a Godsend sent to rush the self-destruction of mankind. I sort of see the same thing with Tim O'Brien where he's just recounting these stories, unable to really explain why this happened or what could have been done to prevent it. Now that I think back, I think there was a sort of despair and futility throughout the book.
He can't make the book make coherent sense and he can't really say who was wrong and who was the savior, he just sees death and destruction in this storytelling.
The theme of storytelling is just supposed to be the laying out of these ideas for the future. Hopefully one day, the poet will come in order to make sense of this book and events and will recount it in such a way that man will realize and understand what it is that happened. Until then, we have out lone man picking at bread crumbs like a priest doing his silent works, or we have the crazy man created out of out faults and despair.
Although O'Brien is an unreliable narrator, that is the whole point of telling a war story. In times of war, everything gets confusing and it becomes hard to tell what's real and what isn't. In parts where we question whether or not O'Brien is being truthful, this is because, as O'Brien says "it's difficult to separate what happened from what seemed to happen." Certain situations can be so life changing that when repeated in the mind things get flipped and changed around. As Nikki said, O'Brien tells the stories to the best of his ability and really, that's all we can ask for.
I agree that O'Brien as the storyteller has the role to just tell the story and have the reader react to it or ignore it. I think the overall intention as the storyteller is to create an emotion of some sort that will affect the reader in some shape or form. The storyteller does not give the reader a specific feeling but rather have them feel or express something as a reaction to the story. Anna, I definitely agree that stories based on truth can be flipped through storytelling especially during a time of war. I think this is a key aspect why the reader interprets most of the war stories and O'Brien looks for the perspective of the reader since he tends to be unreliable in most occasions. Even though most are opposed to an unreliable narrator, its beneficial to the reader because they can be involved by making assumptions and opinions based on fact or fiction.
I agree that O’Brien uses the theme of storytelling not to teach but because these memories keep playing in his head and the only thing to do is to tell them.
He doesn't tell us what to believe because he doesn't know himself. That is his point about war, there is no clear right and wrong, it is full of contradictions, and it is not moral.
I agree with Elizabeth in that tim o'brien is most likely being unreliable on purpose so the reader can feel however they decide to.
I also think that his role is to make the reader feel. His goal is to trigger some emotional response in the reader. He tells the story the best way he can and shares his own feelings, in order to achieve this effect.
I agree with Sweetwood, I feel like the reason that O' Brien is even telling these stories in the first place is so that he has somewhere to put them rather than in the back of his mind. It seems like they are just replaying over in his head and needs someone to vent to (the reader).
Also will there be a point on any of these blogs where someone will contradict someone else. There is so much agreeing going on. ( I know its hypocritical that I'm a part of it too, but still like c'mon).
Anyway I think what the O' Brien is really trying to say about the theme of storytelling is that there are always two sides to a story, and he shows that by being contradictory and vague because it amplifies that idea. In the case of this novel the two sides are what O' Brien sees and what the reader sees and i think that that is what was ultimately aiming for.
in my opinion obrien is a perfect storyteller for this novel. this is because although, like rebecca says he contradicts himself, he does leave room for the reader to intrepret situations their own way. this also is somewhat of a documentative book so the story telling style is different than what we are used to which could be why alot of us dnt trust obrien
The role of a story teller is basically the same role as any artist; they give you the material, but as for interpreting it or using it, is all up to the reader. For example, in The things they Carried, O'Brien tells the reader of these different stories about love, hate, dsigust and all the crazy adventures that the soldiers had. Then, the reader chooses whether or not to believe the story and whether or not to remember the story and pass it on. The point of a story teller is to actually tell the story in hopes of passingthe story on.
OK, so I kind of disagree with some things that have been said here... Ryan, I think there definitely IS a point. As I think Anna said, he's trying to establish the nonesense of war. (Sort of like Catch-22, by the way, but I won't get into that). More than just paradoxes, though, I think storytelling is the idea of something being "passed on." It's not just the "burden" from the "things they carried" and such, but also the idea of life. By passing on these stories, these men still live. They are kind of immortal that way, which is sort of like the whole Beloved situation with the rememories. The stories don't have to be entirely true or, in fact, true at all. They just have to create memories so the men live on in our minds. So maybe a true war story is only completely true in the fact that it gives us a snapshot of these people as they once were, and then what they became. It's just a small glimpse. O'Brien doesn't tell us EVERY story about the war. He probably wouldn't ever be able to sit down and tell every moment play-by-play. He chose to tell these certain bits for a reason. They are vivid and lasting and they show a certain humanity.
Post a Comment