Alien Abduction Time!

I already know. This is already my second (!) post that involves Pixar movies. (The first explained how Roland Weary was similar to Sid from Toy Story.) I am aware of this fact, and I do not care. Pixar is amazingly animated and I think it's really funny. The video I linked to is a short Pixar film titled Lifted that was featured before (I believe) Pixar's Wall-E, but maybe it was before Ratatouille. I can't remember, but it doesn't matter. The video is about an alien abduction, and when I read page 76 of Slaughterhouse-Five, this is seriously the first thing I thought of. Although I don't think the original video included that soundtrack (I don't think Pixar wanted their videos to be easily available on YouTube or something, so someone must have had to edit it due to copyright limitations), the video still has the same meaning. I think it's quite hilarious personally, but maybe other people think otherwise.
Anyways, as I mentioned earlier, I thought of this video when I read page 76. Specifically, when I read the quote, "Billy's will was paralyzed by a zap gun aimed at him from one of the portholes. It became imperative that he take hold of the bottom rung of the sinuous ladder, which he did. The rung was electrified, so that Billy's hands locked onto it hard. He was hauled into the airlock, and machinery closed the bottom door," I immediately thought of this video.
Okay, so maybe the video doesn't exactly match up with the passage. However, I still thought of this video because each describes exactly what I picture when I think of an alien abduction. Both involve a human entirely against his will being lifted into a porthole of a spaceship through some sort of glowing light or "zap gun". Somehow, both Vonnegut and Pixar know exactly what I picture in terms of an alien abduction. Perhaps Pixar was attempting to make the two aliens in Lifted resemble Tralfamadorians. After all, both are green! I doubt this is the case, but I still find it interesting.
I think the main purpose of Vonnegut's quote from page 76 is to evoke an image of an alien abduction where Billy's brain is no longer able to function, and he is thrust onto the spaceship without a choice. I also think that Billy's abduction may come into play later in the novel. Perhaps this brain take-over by the Tralfamadorians will explain why Billy's mind travels throughout time. Then again, perhaps not. (After proof-reading this, I guess I really like saying the word perhaps, and I really love Pixar movies.)

I Wonder What Will Happen Next...

In Chapter 4, Vonnegut begins to hint at what would later happen to Billy on Tralfamadore. On page 77, Vonnegut foreshadows Billy's future with the quote, "The hold of the saucer was crammed with other stolen merchandise, which would be used to furnish Billy's artificial habitat in a zoo on Tralfamadore."
Hmm, I wonder what will happen next... Perhaps Billy will be placed in a zoo on Tralfamadore. However, since the Tralfamadorians are not typical beings, the zoo probably won't be a typical zoo. I mean, if they are furnishing his home with other random stolen merchandise from Earth, he probably will be living with a bunch of mix-matched items that he has no idea what to do with. Although, my guess is that he will live like a regular human while the Tralfamadorian zoo go-ers stare and wonder how strange a race we truly are. They will probably laugh at the stupidity of Billy while he wonders what to do with himself.
That's just my guess anyways. With all the other material that has happened so far in Slaughterhouse-Five, it certainly wouldn't surprise me if Vonnegut went that route. However, Vonnegut foreshadowed the zoo for a reason. Perhaps he wants the reader to think that Billy will be a typical zoo animal, but that will not actually be the case. Perhaps he wants the reader to imagine Billy living like a zebra while the Tralfamadorians watch behind the glass and eat cotton candy. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. My mind is just running with possibilities of what will happen to Billy in the zoo. Vonnegut included the zoo to encourage the reader to develop possibilities, and I am now extremely anxious to find out just what will happen. Good job, Vonnegut. Now I have to read to find out.

King Croesus

In Chapter 3, Vonnegut continues his excellent allusions, anecdotes, diction, etc. On page 61, though, he takes his mastery one step further. He is able to mix an allusion with a simile at the same time. How is this possible? Because he's Vonnegut, that's why.
The quote I'm referring to is found in the middle of page 61, when Vonnegut refers to the rich life of Billy Pilgrim. The quote is, "[Billy] was rich as Croesus, something he had never expected to be, not in a million years." My first reaction after reading this sentence was, "Who is Croesus??? And why did Vonnegut refer to him? That's a nice simile though."
Consequently, I turned to Wikipedia. Wikipedia also describes Croesus' life as a very rich one, lived in extreme luxury as he ruled as King of Lydia of ancient Greece. He is credited with producing the circulation of the first gold coins in history. He is also famous for forming an alliance with Sparta during the Greek struggle against Persian onslaught. (I also learned that his name is not pronounced "crow-sus" and instead "cree-sus". It certainly still looks like Crow-sus to me, so that's what I'll call him from now on.)
Obviously, Vonnegut had a purpose in naming Crow-sus while describing Pilgrim's optometric riches. Netting $60 grand a year must have something to do with it. He also owned a share of a Holiday Inn and 3 Tastee-Freeze stands. But how is that comprable to a King of Lydia? The answer is that it's just a simile, so it doesn't have to be entirely accurate, but make a point that, in this case, Billy is much richer than he ever imagined an optometrist could be. Billy is living a life of luxury, and he is similar to Crow-sus because they both exceeded the typical living standards of other people in their respective cities and times.
So, with Vonnegut's epic allusion/simile combo of referencing Crow-sus, he is able to enthrall the reader with a connection to the ancient past. He also gives further explanation to just how extremely luxurious Billy's life was becoming.

Toto, We're Not in Wyoming Anymore

While reading chapter 3 of Slaughterhouse-Five, I noticed something quite interesting on pages 66 and 67. When Vonnegut briefly introduces a new character, Wild Bob, he attempts to characterize him as a stereotypical "Average Joe" from Wyoming. The best way that Vonnegut is able to characterize Wild Bob is with his dialect.
I felt that the best example of Wild Bob's dialect was on page 67 when he says, "'God be with you, boys!' he said, and that echoed and echoed. And then he said, 'If you're ever in Cody, Wyoming, just ask for Wild Bob!'"
Now, I may be alone when I say this, but I don't think, if I am ever on my deathbed, that one of the things I would say would be, "God be with you." I would hope I would have the strength and courage to do so, but I'm not positive that this phrase will come to my head. To me, this shows a great deal about Wild Bob. Clearly, Wild Bob is extremely grounded in his faith because he had the presence of mind to ask God's blessing upon these troops while struggling for his life with pneumonia.
To be honest, I have to admit that before reading this chapter, I did not really think at all about the state of Wyoming. The only reason I really know anything about the state is from 5th grade geography, when I learned that it's a rectangular shape and its capital is Cheyenne. (Although, to be fair, Wyoming probably thinks the same about Indiana, so I guess we're even steven.)I did not even know if there was a stereotype existed about the citizens. Therefore I was really taken aback when I read Vonnegut's generalization of the Wyoming-ans (Wyominites? Wyominians? Wyomingers? Whatever it is...) as a bit of a typical "Wild Wild West" citizen. What do I mean when I say that? Gosh, I wish I knew. The people aren't uneducated, but they have a slang of leaving out verbs in sentences- example: "'You one of my boys?'" (66). The people embrace the "cowboy" lifestyle- example: the University of Wyoming's mascot is the Cowboys. And, most importantly, the people are very friendly and center the lives around God's will- a perfect example is found in the quote from page 67: "'God be with you... just ask for Wild Bob!'"
Yes, I am aware of the stereotypes I just made about all Wyoming-ans. I know they aren't all like that, and would be offended if they were reading this. However, Wild Bob fits each of these stereotypes perfectly; for example, Wild Bob looks forward to barbecuing a whole steer when he returns home, even though he is dying.
So, I guess the question is: what is Vonnegut's purpose in the quote from page 67? I think Vonnegut included the character of Wild Bob as a way of generalizing all Wyoming-ans to continue the satire of SH-5, and also because he likes to attempt to reproduce the dialect from Wyoming and add some more humor to his book.
Wild Bob, "God be with you." Rest in peace.

From Gory to... Toy Story?

While reading Chapter Two of Slaughterhouse-Five, I had a sudden realization of a movie connection. I was able to connect a character of this book to a character of Toy Story. Yes, as foreshadowed by the picture above, I am connecting the life of Roland Weary to Sid Phillips, the toy bully.
 For example, on page 35, Vonnegut begins explaining the young life of Weary to begin to characterize him. The quote is, "It made Weary sick to be ditched. When Weary was ditched, he would find somebody who was even more unpopular than himself, and he would horse around with that person for a while, pretending to be friendly. And then he would find some pretext for beating the sh*t out of him."
This quote provides a reason for the motivation behind Weary's actions as a cruel, bullish person. Because Weary was unpopular as a child (due to his horrific, unavoidable aroma of bacon), he had to take out his anger on someone else. Weary was never satisfied with anyone's friendship, and he took out his grudge on innocent classmates. Consequently, from then on, Weary began to love torturing others in the most gruesome ways possible. (Exhibit A: the "triangular blade" he possesses would cause a wound to never close up. Yikes!)
And with his horrifying love of torturing others, he is very similar to Sid Phillips. Yes, I know, Sid was not necessarily a torturer of humans, but the point is still valid. Sid loved torturing toys, and he would not stop with a simple way of torture; instead, Sid opted for torture devices like "The Big One," to cause the largest explosion. Other examples of Sid Phillips' torture include performing a "double bypass brain transplant" surgery between his sister's Janie Doll and a pterodactyl, and he also took a magnifying glass to burn Woody's head. Clearly, this is one pretty messed up kid.
Weary and Sid have one main thing in common: a knack for painful torture. But Sid Phillips also had a reason for being so nasty: he must have been kicked out of summer camp. (I know this based on Hamm's comment of "They must have kicked him out of summer camp early this year.") Sid must have been angry because of the camp (or maybe just because he's an insane young psychopath) to take out his anger on his toys. In this way, he shares a bond with Roland Weary because each of the two takes out his anger on others and enjoy torturing with the most possible pain upon their victims. The two are each bullies, and I think there is a direct connection between them.

Sweating Bullets

A picture of Billy, "the filthy flamingo"

In Chapter 2, Vonnegut begins telling his "failure" of a story about Billy Pilgrim. Somewhere at about the midpoint, Pilgrim escapes a near-death situation in which he and the "Three Musketeers" are shot at by a marksman from across the street.
Vonnegut, being the great writer that he is, describes the situation on page 33 as, "The third bullet was for the filthy flamingo (Billy), who stopped dead center in the road when the lethal bee buzzed past his ear."
That is a superb example of the excellent diction of Vonnegut. First of all, he refers to Billy again as "the filthy flamingo" as a way for the reader to recall back to a few sentences prior. If he hasn't already hooked the reader's attention with his word choice of "filthy flamingo" (which he probably has), he is about to with his use of "the lethal bee buzzed past his ear." This amazing diction by Vonnegut reels in the reader to perfection. Hook, line, and sinker.
When I read "the lethal bee buzzed past his ear", I immediately had an image come to my head of a bullet whizzing just past his head while Billy's eyes instantly become approximately 7.829473% larger than their usual size. I then could hear a bee's distinct buzzing noise to culminate in an image of epic proportions. (I also had a sudden craving for Honey Nut Cheerios.) I had a picture in my head of what was going on along with a lingering "bzzzzzzz" in my ear. Vonnegut has produced an image appealing to the reader's senses of both sight and sound (and maybe a little to taste) at the same time with just one little choice of words.
If Vonnegut was a typical writer, he might have just said, "Billy narrowly escaped a bullet flying past his head." Yeah, but Vonnegut is no typical writer. His diction is clearly something worth noting and has been present throughout Chapters 1 and 2. Vonnegut's word choice is one-of-a-kind, much like a filthy flamingo. (I couldn't even find a picture on a Google search of "filthy flamingo")
Now that my blog is done, I am going to go feast on a divine bowl of Honey Nut Cheerios, and maybe a Three Musketeers bar while I'm at it. So it goes.

Curse You, Google Translate

Posted above is a picture of the Frauenkirche (Church of Our Lady) in Dresden, Germany. Kurt Vonnegut briefly alludes to this magnificent church in Chapter 1 of SH-5.  However, when I read through the paragraph he mentions it, I skipped over it.
While in the O'Hare household, Vonnegut finds Dresden, History, Stage and Gallery by Mary Endell. On page 18, Vonnegut quotes Goethe's response to finding ruins in Dresden: "Von der Kuppel der Frauenkirche sah ich diese leidigen Trummer zwischen die schone stadtische Ordnung hineingesat; da ruhmte mir der Kuster die Kunst des Baumeisters, welcher Kirche und Kuppel auf einen so unerwunschten Fall schon eingerichtet und bombenfest erbaut hatte. Der gute Sakristan deutete mir alsdann auf Ruinen nach allen Seiten und sagte bedenklich lakonisch: Das hat der Feind gethan!" Is it Gibberish? No, not quite. Could I say it five times fast? No, and I hope I never have to.
Like most non-German students, when I read this passage, I rolled my eyes and skipped over it, while praying he would define the words for me I was curious to learn the meaning of these words, but unable to do so by myself. So, I naturally (and unsuccessfully) turned to Google Translate for help. (Note: do not use Google Translate for such a long passage because it is less helpful that way)  When I eventually discovered the meaning, this is what I found: "From the dome of the Church of our Lady I saw this loathsome rubble amongst the beautiful urban orderliness; whilst the verger boasted to me about the art of the master builder who built this church and the dome to withstand such an undesired event by making it bomb-proof. The good verger then pointed to all the ruins around us and said, reflectively and laconically; 'It was the enemy who did that!'"
After reading the translation, I was able to discover Vonnegut's purpose in alluding to such an extensive quote from Endell's book. If he wanted, couldn't he have left out Goethe's quote in his own book? The answer is, no. Goethe's quote emphasizes the devastation caused in Dresden, but proves the beauty of the Frauenkirche was built to last forever. The quote also proves that Vonnegut was seemingly dedicated to writing  his "Dresden book" yet unable to do so. Vonnegut tried hard to write an entire book about Dresden, yet something in him was just not quite capable of doing so. This first chapter emphasizes the struggles Vonnegut encountered while trying to write this book, and this quote is a perfect example of his dedication.
As for me, I remain angry with Google Translate for making me go through so much trouble to find the correct translation. If Google Translate ever again makes me do extra summer work, I will say: "Das hat der Feind gethan!"

Anecdote

Well, here goes nothing. This is my first real blog post about Slaughterhouse-Five.
Before I start, I must say, I already like this book. Vonnegut's writing style totally crushes Charles Dickens' style by a landslide. I guess I'm trying to say that A Tale of Two Cities was nothing more than a real snore of a book and it was just too hard to understand what Dickens was saying. Slaughterhouse-Five, on the other hand, is completely easy to follow because Vonnegut's voice is heard throughout and it's very relatable to the present, especially the words he uses because they are actually used by people. (Unlike Dickens' "Those who had been greedy with the staves of the cask, had acquired a tigerish smear about the mouth; and one tall joker so besmirched..." in T2C for example, this book acutally makes sense! Also, note to self: look up the meaning of the word besmirched.)
Okay, now I think I'll actually start talking about this blog post. Maybe I went on a little segue in that little paragraph above, but I guess after reading a chapter of Vonnegut, one begins to imitate his anecdotes throughout Chapter One. (See what I did there?) As I said, Vonnegut seems to love to throw a boatload of short stories around in this opening chapter in order to piece the whole book together. One example of an anecdote is found on page 10 when Vonnegut says, "I happened to tell a University of Chicago professor at a coktail party about the raid as I had seen it, about the book I would write. He was a member of a thing called The Committee on Social Thought. And he told me about the concentration camps, and about how the Germans had made soap and candles out of the fat of dead Jews and so on. All I could say was, 'I know. I know. I know.'" Vonnegut uses this anecdote to explain examples of how it was "worse in the war" and also how the war made those who experienced the trauma first-hand seem "tougher" and know that things weren't quite as bad as they might seem. And, most importantly, the quote serves as an example of the many tangents Vonnegut would later use throughout the chapter.
Vonnegut's use of anecdotes also brings a much lighter and happy tone throughout the book as the reader is able to see Vonnegut's personal style shine throughout the text.
Well, that's my blog post about Chapter One. I hope I did this right. If I later read this one day and think, "Wow, what a great blog I wrote. I think I let my voice truly be heard in this post", then I guess I will have done my job. If not, well, I guess I still have more work to do this summer.

I am live on blogger!