FIRST DRAFT FINISHED

Hello

That is all.

Consistencies in Vonnegut's Writing

I'm just making this so I can keep track of some of the consistent features in Vonnegut's writing.

Humor: From genuinely funny things to tragic incidents (such as the bombing of Dresden), Vonnegut can find humor in any moment of life.

Tangents: One thing I've noticed in all three of the books that I've read is that Vonnegut constantly changes topic. In Slaughterhouse-Five it comes in the form of different times, in A Man Without a Country, it is in his changes of subject matter fueled by the same idea, and in God Bless you, Dr. Kevorkian, it is in new interviews. To me, it seems like his mind moves faster than his hands, so he just goes with it and writes all over the place (although quite a bit more eloquently).

Analogies: The most convincing and controversial arguments that Vonnegut makes (about war, natural resources, and human life itself) are often told in terms of other things. This both makes the matters easier to understand and adds some emotional appeal, as the analogy contains connotations of its own.

Incorporation of Message into Text: Basically, as I found with both Slaughterhouse-Five and A Man Without a Country, Vonnegut doesn't just make a message that can be taken from what words are said or what actions are done, but just the idea of the book, its organization, its style become incorporated into the idea. I went over this in an earlier blog when I talked about how all of Slaughterhouse-Five is written like a Tralfamadorian book. Here are 2 passages that show one of the messages in A Man Without a Country:

Here is a lesson in creative writing. First rule: Don't use semicolons. They are transvestite hermaphrodites representing absolutely nothing. All they do is show you've been to college." (23)

And there, I've just used a semi-colon, which at the outset I told you never to use. It is to make a point that I did it. The point is: Rules only take us so far, even good rules." (132)

I find it incredibly inspiring when messages become integrated so thoroughly that the presentation itself is part of the message. A great example of this was a play we saw at Drama Fest last year called Removing the Glove. It made an allegory between being homosexual and being left handed. Long story short, in the end, there was no real resolution, no real conclusion, but that was the beauty of it because in such an ordeal, there really hasn't been any sort of resolution.

(I may update with some more ideas as I continue analyzing his writing)

God Bless You, Dr. Kevorkian: A 50 Minute Speed Read

God Bless You, Dr. Kevorkian is a simple 78 page book that I decided to pick up yesterday just to have a better understanding of Vonnegut's writing style and how he approaches content.

For those who don't know who Dr. Kevorkian is: here you go

For those who don't know who Dr. Kevorkian is, but don't feel like browsing his Wikipedia article, he is a man who supports death-by-choice (assisted suicide) in the cases of terminal patients.

The premise of the book is that Kurt Vonnegut has himself nearly killed hundreds of times by Dr. Kevorkian so he can go towards the Pearly Gates, but not in them, and interview people up in heaven. Each interview only consists of a few questions, and never quite reaches what the reader wants it to. The interviewees (is that a word?) range from everyday heroes and villains to Hitler, Shakespeare, and Isaac Newton.

Overall, I thought the book was kind of neat. I suppose it's probably one of those things that's better in theory to tell your friends about at a social gathering than to have them read on their own and discuss (like the movie Idiocracy, for example). It didn't really waste any of my time, as I read most of it after my Precalulus midterm, but I'm not sure how much it will really help with my research project.

I feel like sharing this quote from the Shakespeare interview:

"I asked him if he had love affairs with men as well as women, knowing how eager my WNYC audience was to have this matter settled. His answer, however, celebrated affection between animals of any sort:

'We were as twinn'd lambs that did frisk in the sun, and bleat the one at the other: what we chang'd was innocence for innocence.' By changed he meant exchanged: 'What we exchanged was innocence for innocence.' That has to be the softest core pornography I ever heard."

Psychopathic Personalities

"Some people are born deaf, some are born blind or whatever, and this book is about congenitally defective human beings of a sort that is making this whole country and many other parts of the planet go completely haywire nowadays. These were people born with consciences, and suddenly they are taking charge of everything."

I don't even know where to begin with this. Vonnegut just has such a way of making analogies. He words things in a way that really reaches out to me. He could be saying something that I fundamentally disagree with, but he would say it with such strength and determination and confidence that I would have no choice but to love and respect the man.

And when I grow old, I hope to be like Vonnegut. I hope to reach a point before I die when I have created my own unique life philosophy: unwavering, solid, and uniquely mine. I hope that I can stop for a moment, take a look around the world, and simply say, "this is how things are."

A Man Without a Country: A Retrospect

Yeah, I've already finished A Man Without a Country. Sorry about that. >_>

I had time to read this past week, but no time to really stop and analyze. I just wrote down nice quotes on an index card. So now that I'm analyzing some of Vonnegut's nonfiction, I really like the way he thinks.

One thing I've been noticing in his pieces is that he has a way of expressing ideas in totally different ways. My personal favorite example, as you can see in my 2nd blog post, is that he has an entire essay explaining how fossil fuels are like a drug. We, as humans, are horribly addicted to them, and it's far too late to help, but soon we'll be forced to go cold turkey.

In another essay, he describes himself as a Luddite (someone who hates new technology). While I personally love technology and computers, he creates such a lovely description of him delivering a piece of writing that I want to agree with him. THE POWER OF PATHOS OWNS US ALL. While he could have just typed it and emailed it, Vonnegut describes, rather memoir-like, how he typed it, printed it out, marked it up with pencil, went to the convenience store to buy an envelope, talked to the man there, and so on and so forth. It really shows the journey of everyday life when you go out and live it, and, being a socialist and a humanist, I think that's definitely something Vonnegut believed strongly in.

I think it's great too, but I haven't had much time in recent years to go out and live my life because of school work, so for now, I'll just have to take Vonnegut's word for it.

Oh the irony.

New Post coming...eventually.

I apologize for not updating so long (even though no one ever checks my blog and no one seems to be updating their blogs either). You know what, I'm going to pretend I have an avid reader, and his name is Thomas.

So I apologize for taking so long for my updates, Thomas. I've been really bogged down with all of my regular AP English work this week, as well as all of the last-minute work that my other teachers are trying to assign. This has just been a pretty terrible week for me as a whole, so this weekend, expect something about A Man Without a Country.



On a positive and totally unrelated tangent, the Forensics Team's performance of V for Vendetta won 4th place out of 9 Multiple groups at the Newton South tournament last Saturday. Yay!