O' Brien's intention in writing "The Things They Carry" is to make the reader know and understand what he and the soldiers felt emotionally through language and imagery. He wrote about how the individual soldiers were mentally and emotionally affected by the burden of war, who's minds were still at home, unfit to fight loyaly and readily, and prematurely gave themselves to the war no matter how intelligent or appropriate. O' Brien believes "if you support the war, if you think it's worth the price, that's fine, but you have to put your own precious fluids on the line" (O' Brien 40). He also makes a political statement with the difficult position he is forced into by the draft in "On The Rainy River". Another statement he's making is the emotional trauma and desensitization of the once stable and socially fit soldiers, who, after the war, can only remember uninteresting and seemingly pointless stories and clean an M-60. This point is made every time he states his age: 43, and writing stories that remind him of time passage, and guarantee immortality. He gives war stories (and slice-of-life stories) validity in saying that they needn't have a moral, an explanation, or make logical sense in order to make perfect sense in their emotional truth. In addition, O' Brien tries to connect with the reader in an effort to redeem himself and the "faceless responsibility and faceless grief" (O' Brien 172).
Persuasive article. Why didn't O'Brien just make a movie?
ReplyDeletePlease elaborate on the "political statement" part of your arguement.
ReplyDeleteThe political statement being that soldiers are being drafted to fight for the chubby white men of the government and their beliefs, not giving a damn about how many lives are lost unrightfully. Also just the fact, that I mentioned, that soldiers return from war unprepared and unwelcome or supported, and often, mentally screwed up. 'Tis unjust.
ReplyDeleteAnd although I agree, a movie with no moral or point would never make it to theaters.