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)