Lost In Time

Any moment in time does not choose to come to life, rather, that moment is always occurring somewhere in someone’s world. We see this idea of time in Vonnegut’s novel, Slaughter-House-Five, through structure, character changes, and Vonnegut’s own interjections (specifically at the beginning and end of the novel). Vonnegut even goes as far to suggest the idea that “All moments, past, present, and future, always have existed, always will exist.” (pg. 27) While this revolutionary idea of universal time seems very out of the ordinary to most of us, it is essential to the effect of Billy Pilgrim’s character and Vonnegut’s cathartic process as a writer. I will use my own experiences as an example…
I recently wrote an essay where I tried to connect two completely independent moments, separated by at least ten years, in my life. I thought I could justify the reason for suddenly finding a brain lesion in my head now by suggesting that it was my fault ten years ago when I pulled a basketball trophy – which was stuck on top a piece of already-chewed gum -- from the top of a book shelve. The corner of the trophy landed on my head. It turns out the lesion on my brain was congenital, and completely unrelated. This was my way of collapsing these two unrelated events onto one common cause.
Using my story as a sort of explanation, the audience can see how Vonnegut’s story makes use of this notion of time. While many of Billy Pilgrim’s experiences may have felt like they were encountered linearly at some point in his life, Vonnegut presents Billy’s struggles through very discombobulating story telling. The structure in Slaughterhouse has an advantage because of the connections that can be made between discontinuous moments in time. The possible justifications for moments that have no similarities at the times they were experienced can easily be stretched to fit the eyes of the beholder. Vonnegut’s stretching and rearranging of time allows him to suggest certain reasoning to the reader and to himself. I think this is pretty cool considering that I think all of us have moments in our lives we wish to explain but cannot do so otherwise. Pulling experiences together may be the best explanations we can get.

I learned about “time” used in Slaughterhouse through a Podcast on iTunes by Radio Lab called “Beyond Time.” It was a biology assignment.

Spreading Like A Stain

There was this “one moment of emptiness in all the battle, as if in that spot the end had come and there were not enough men left now to fill the earth, that final death was beginning there and spreading like a stain.” (224 Killer Angels)

When the narrator of The Killer Angels says this line amidst a Confederate surge against the Union, the audience is joined by the thoughts of Chamberlain in battle. While Chamberlain does not actually say this line [above], it feels as if it is something he would say. Michael Shaara presents us with a philosophical description of the war. He obviously intends for his thought to be the thought of Chamberlain’s character. I also believe this is how Shaara and Chamberlain surmise the war.
In this excerpt, I feel that Chamberlain recognizes what this war has done to the country. In that empty spot in the line of men, “the end had come and there were not enough men left now to fill the earth.” While Chamberlain appears to envy and enjoy the life of a soldier, we see his philosophical, teaching side shine through his character. It is through Chamberlain and Shaara’s view of this single skirmish that they synthesize their opinions about the war. The battle and the war seems meaningful but pointless at the same time. Why? Well in the end, the war will spread “like a stain” and there will be no one left, no purpose, and no foundation to build upon, even if one side does win. Immediately, Chamberlain identifies what could become of the Union and the Confederacy, although he does not share it to the audience out of a lingering fear.
Simultaneous thoughts of plugging his brother to fill the hole and thoughts of the end of a nation cloud Chamberlain’s mind and put him at a crossroads. Even though Shaara sculpts the problem as being about Chamberlain brother, I really feel that Chamberlain’s issue is with the total fall of the nation and complete destruction for both sides. The war wasn’t deemed absolutely necessary, but when the fighting began, the fate of all the men seemed sealed. The nation was going to fail. Chamberlain and Shaara’s realization, however, appears to come too late in the story. At this point in the story, Chamberlain, the Union, and the Confederacy were all at the point of no return for salvaging the country. It is interesting that Shaara chooses to insert an aspect of reason in the middle of this battle, and it really sheds light to Chamberlain’s motives and the possible outcome of the Civil War.
This is my interpretation of what Shaara says to the audience and what I think he purposefully links to Chamberlain’s rooted character. What do you guys think about this?

War Is Not Inherent

My mind is still in the process of healing so try and stick with me on this. I hope this makes sense…

I have come to believe that it is not an inherent part of human nature to naturally want to fight wars. People are not openly looking to fight wars. There is cause, generally. I feel that resorting to fighting is not the way it used to be. It seems that war was a concept developed throughout time. Now, to many people, it may seem inherent as part of human nature, and sometimes inevitable. Yes, the notion of war is a major part of our culture and is introduced to us at an age when our parents can no longer shield us. Even though some wars should be fought, we can still lower the prominence of war in our culture. It is precisely the display of war in education, movies, music, and photojournalism that brings us to understanding what a war can be like. However, this does not charge humans as inherently evil beings.

I am not suggesting that we are not sometimes evil, or that history should not be taught in order to further shelter our minds from destruction. But, perhaps the best method to stop war from being a reality and solely making it a possibility or cause for concern is by creating alternative, peaceful ways to advance and succeed as a society or country. I think with proper limitations on the study of wars, people alive today can reduce the chance of war in the future with the removal of “war chatter” from cultures worldwide. I think we have only given the image that war is inevitable and inherent in our nature because we so often and readily fight them.