AGENDA:
View Soldier's Sweetheart
Respond to the following questions in a blog post.
Chapter 17: “In the Field”
1.
Briefly summarize the plot and style of the story. Is this story more of
a “true” war story than the account in the chapter “Speaking of
Courage”?
2. What point of view is used to narrate “In the Field”?
3. Why is the young man not identified in the story? What is the character’s purpose in the narrative?
4. In “In The Field,” O'Brien
writes, “When a man died, there had to be blame.” What does this mandate
do to the men of O'Brien's company? Are they justified in thinking
themselves at fault? How do they cope with their own feelings of
culpability? Consider all of the characters.
5. What, in the end, is the significance of the shit field story (or stories)?
Chapter 18: “Good Form”
1.
In “Good Form,” O'Brien casts doubt on the veracity of the entire novel.
Why does he do so? Does it make you more or less interested in the
novel? Does it increase or decrease your understanding? What is the
difference between “happening-truth” and “story-truth?”
James and Justice
ReplyDelete1) The story is not meant to be more true rather than to discuss the emotions that took place in the war.
2) Third person narrator, making it (oddly) less personal.
3) The young man was not identified because he asked to remain anonymous. His purpose was to help relay the story and emotion of the war.
4) Most of the men feel relief knowing they aren't to blame for the death, but still feel that they contributed to the death. They deal with this through vices (i.e., drugs and drinking)
5) Kiowa's death represented lost friends and the destruction of anything worth caring about.
1) It conveys the confusion of war and how nothing is ever quite what it seems. It decreases understanding, but that's the purpose of it.
Chapter 17:
ReplyDelete1. The plot of chapter 17 is telling the reader more about kiowa’s death. The style of the story is very down and semi-dark. O’Brien uses his feeling of guilt and sadness about his partner’s death to help up feel what he felt.
2. Third person point of view is used to narrate “In The Field’.
3. He’s not identified because he wasn’t real. He was used to tell the story of Kiowa.
4. When it comes to the death of a soldier you’re fighting alongside with, soldiers think about how that could’ve been them and they feel as if they could’ve done something to stop it.
5. The significance is to justify what happened to Kiowa.
Chapter 18:
1. He does so to help us as readers have an understanding of what soldiers go through whether those stories were true or not. It makes me more interested in the novel. The difference between “happening-truth” and “story-truth” is one is actually what happened in real life at that moment and story-truth is fabricated in some ways to help the reader understand or pull them in.
CHAPTER 17
ReplyDelete1) Jimmy Cross and his team are looking for Kiowa's body. Everyone is thinking about who's to blame, especially cross the unidentified man. This is the account of "Speaking of Courage" because you get t know how it feels to be present
2)"In the Field" is told in 3rd person, not in O'Brien's view. We get to know what everyone is thinking and not just see the story through one person's point of view.
3) The young man isn't identified so he can be kept a mystery and have the reader guessing since that is what O'Brien does, it is assumed that the man is O'Brien himself. The character's purpose is to help Cross figure out two the blame belongs to.
4)All of the men that are with Cross think that he is at fault since he made them camp out in dangerous territory. At first O'Brien doesn't blame himself but then he does because he did send his men out there. The unidentified man blames him self. Norman Bowker says that it's no ones fault and everyone's.
5) The significance of the story is that Kiowa's death affected and changed everyone.
CHAPTER 18
1) O'Brien tells facts about him and he also says that all the stories are made up. It makes me less interested because the stores aren't real and O'Brien didn't actually go through the events, the stories are still interesting. It increases my understanding because all though the stories aren't actually true they are true because that is what war was like. This is known as story-truth. Happening truth is when the events did actually happen in real life.
1. The style is very fantastical I believe it to be a "true" story opposed to actuality.
ReplyDelete2. 3rd
3. to de-demonize as see an actuality of how the killing could have been of anyone .
4. Because they all don't know how many people they killed or if they even did they all blame themselves for the the deaths of all who died. They cope by trying to reconnect to the outside world and find ways to exert their anger and grief or by desensitizing themselves.
5. The effects f kiowas death effected everyone and the storys show that effect of his death.
1. it makes the reader start to think about the actuality vs the made up things and how they aren't very different in the first place keeping the reader interested.
17
ReplyDelete1. A squad that includes a soldier named Jimmy Cross are looking for Kiowa's body, who died the previous night from an explosion due to the light from a flashlight giving away his position. I would say that this counts as a true war story seeing as how it fits the criteria and doesn't necessarily even have an ending in the first place.
2. Unlike every other chapter in the book, this chapter is in 3rd person. Doing it like this allows the reader to get everyone's perspective for once.
3. I think that the young man isn't identified so that it is more difficult to place blame for Kiowa's death. After all, there's nor real satisfaction in blaming someone whose identity you don't even know.
4. The entire company thinks that Cross is at fault since he's the one that put Kiowa in that position in the first place. I would say that their feelings are understandable, but not justified. It's not like they personally sent Kiowa out there.
5. It addresses the feelings of guilt and grief that had not been previously touched on in the book.
18
1. He does so to further push the theme of reality and fiction intertwining that is present throughout the entirety of the book. It doesn't really do much for my understanding of the novel since I think I got the point relatively quickly, since it's so prevalent in most chapters. Happening truth is what literally happened while story truth is the truth contained within the story of what happened.
ReplyDeleteChapter 17:
1. O'Brien uses the feelings that the soldiers went through in this death situation. Many of them didn't like to deal with these situations.
2. The story is told in third person point of view to show the reader what each soldier was doing and to connect them all. It doesn't favor any character over the other, so it just connects them in their feelings.
3. The young man in the story is not identified because he was probably of those story-truth types of characters. O'Brien probably added him, so that Kiowa's story seemed more realistic, but the character wasn't.
4. When a man dies, the soldiers mindest is placed on the position that if they could've done something, they had to do it to save them. They also think about how it would've been if they were in the hurt person's place because they would want someone to go and help them. They live in a brotherly relationship, were they would do anything to save the other soldier. If they can't they feel remorse about not saving the soldier in time.
5. The significance of the story is to explain Kiowa's death story and the remorse that the soldiers felt for not being able to do anything.
Chapter 18:
1. A story-truth is something that he makes up because the author wants the author to feel what he felt as a soldier. He feels that a story-truth is truer than a happening-truth. This makes the story more interesting because you start wondering which story is actually true and if he is writing this because there is something that he thought about or felt while writing it. It increases my understanding because you can see that many times when he saw a dead body he felt guilty and probably he made up stories saying that he never killed anyone, but he used the story-truth to hide those facts and tell the happening-truth without him feeling grief or pity for something that he did.
IN THE FIELD
ReplyDelete1.It's basically a story of what happened to Kiowa and what the other soldiers feel about his death. They all blame themselves even if they did nothing, especially Tim because he believes it was his fault for even setting up there. I believe it is as much of a war story as "Speaking of Courage" because they both have the same element of story truth in where the effects of death are described.
2.The author uses a third point of view because he's describing what every character feels and first point of view wouldn't have captured it the same way. Even though it's in third point of view, the author manages to get into all the characters heads to describe their guilt.
3.The young man is only present and his feelings are described because he feels the most guilt that he had something to do with Kiowa's death.
4. When someone dies, especially in war, reasons have to be given for their death as well as who was at fault. All the characters felt at fault especially the young boy because he believes his flashlight caused the explosion leading to Kiowa's death. I do think all the characters are justified in thinking they're at fault because in war, no matter what happens everyone feels at death. O'Brien feels he should have known about the field and even though the orders came from above, he blames himself.
5. The significance of the story is to see who is put at blame. O'Brien is thinking about what to write to Kiowa's father, particularly who is at blame for what happened. He thinks about who should be blamed, him or who gave him the orders. Maybe even the land or god.
GOOD FORM
1.Although the author was a soldier at the same time and place the characters are, he explains how none of that happened to him and it's all just "story-truth". He describes the honest answers he can give based on either "story-truth" or "happening-truth".
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. Briefly summarize the plot and style of the story. Is this story more of a “true” war story than the account in the chapter “Speaking of Courage”?
ReplyDeleteIt’s just a reflection of Kiowa. They reminisce the good times with him and how good of a person he was. Jimmy cross felt at fault because he was the one who set up there. O'brien just explains Jimmy Cross’ regrets of where he set up and showing how idiotic Cross felt because he felt that it was his fault. He felt that it was wrong to set up there, when there was other safer spots. This is more of a true war story because it shows how sympathetic Cross is about Kiowa’s death. Throughout the story, you can tell that he is truly sorry. From blaming himself to mentally writing a letter to Kiowa’s father to show how sorry he is. This is more of a true war story because the pain of losing someone wasn’t also mixed with the thought of a silver star. Cross in “Speaking of courage” showed how someone who truly cares is really hurt after they lose someone.
2. What point of view is used to narrate “In the Field”?
It’s O'brien's pov.
3. Why is the young man not identified in the story? What is the character’s purpose in the narrative?
The young man was probably identified to show how other people reacted to Kiowa’s death. The unnamed soldier wasn’t all that worried about Kiowa as he was about the picture he lost.
4. In “In The Field,” O'Brien writes, “When a man died, there had to be blame.” What does this mandate do to the men of O'Brien's company? Are they justified in thinking themselves at fault? How do they cope with their own feelings of culpability? Consider all of the characters.
This makes the men blame each other, because it’s such a tragic event that blaming someone is easier than no one being at fault. Cross is the Lieutenant and he was the one who set them down there, so for him to not be at fault seems wild to some. It comes to the point where they blame everyone.
5. What, in the end, is the significance of the shit field story (or stories)?
It’s as if the story started off as the loss of Kiowa and turned into the growth of many characters. Azar went from very childish to more mature and Kiowa’s death made Cross review his role as a leader and how he never wanted to be in that position. Losing Kiowa made many soldiers change their actions and reflect on who they were.
Chapter 18: “Good Form”
1. In “Good Form,” O'Brien casts doubt on the veracity of the entire novel. Why does he do so? Does it make you more or less interested in the novel? Does it increase or decrease your understanding? What is the difference between “happening-truth” and “story-truth?”
O'brien exposes his truthness in this story because he wants people to feel the same way he did when he was a soldier and saw people die. He explains that most of the story is invented. He says that the purpose for this is that he wants his readers to know that “story-truth is truer sometimes than happening-truth. He basically made up stories for some of the things he missed in the war because he never looked. “I can look at things I never looked at.”
Chapter 17
ReplyDelete1. A squad looks for Kiowa's body and the soldiers contemplate their fault in the death. I would say this counts as a true war story because it tells of death and guilt which are both very true and real things in war.
2. Third person with a narrator.
3. Keeping the young man anonymous adds to the mystery of Kiowa's death and war overall. There is no reason to identify the young man because he would just be another person to place blame on when really you can't blame any single person for his death.
4. It's natural for people to seek blame in death and in the situation of the soldiers because they are fighting along side each other if one of them dies they of course blame themselves. They'll regret what they did or didn't do and feel guilty for a death that they did not cause. For the most part these men didn't deal with these emotions they just let them take over.
5. Kiowa's death was an example of the guilt the soldiers placed on themselves and what loosing someone you care about in that extreme of an environment does to you.
Chapter 18
1. War isn't black and white and isn't clean cut. Truth varies between who you ask as everyone is going to have a different perspective. The "happening-truth" is very hard to come across because of this. The "story-truth" on the other hand is the partially fictitious version that mixed reality with details that though didn't happen, help the reader understand.
ReplyDeleteChapter 17:
1. This story discusses the emotions of war and how the soldiers had dealt with this. As well with how they deal with death and where to place to blame, or rather who.
2. The point of view used to narrate “In the Field” is third person.
3. The young man is not identified in the story because this is the characters purpose. The character was used to develop the plot further and the emotions that come with death.
4. Naturally, they all blame themselves. Although they may not directly be held responsible but feel they contributed and could have done something to change that. For these reason they carry guilt and regret.
5. The significance in the end is how death and war has affected these group of people and where there regrets may lie. As well as the story of Kiowa and how this death changed the soldiers.
Chapter 18:
1. The doubt makes you question it yourself, but rather than losing interest I gained it. I gained interest because I found myself left with many questions I wanted to be answered. Therefore, it decreased the knowledge that helped me understand and left me unsure. With “happening truth” it’s authentic while “story truth” takes that and twists it in a way that will entertain the reader and develop their understanding.
Chapter 17:
ReplyDelete1. "In the Field" is about the soldiers thinking back on Kiowa and how things were when he was with them. O'Brien talks about the feelings the soldiers had during the war.
2. The point of view of the story is in third person.
3. Not identifying the young man in the story makes adds more to the magic realism; the story isn't all nonfiction. This person was added to the story to add more emotion and develop the story a bit more.
4. The soldiers blame each other for what happened. They're dealing with death, which is never easy to deal with. They feel like they are to blamed, and that they could've done something to avoid the death of Kiowa.
5. The significance of the end of the story is that the tragic events that happen affect all of the soldiers and after something happens, them as a person change.
Chapter 18:
1. O'Brien discusses the "happening truth" and the "story truth." The doubt in the story makes the reader think more about what is actually happening. It makes the reader more intrigued in the story.
1.Chapter 17 talks about Kiowa’s death. The style of the story seems to be very gloomy and it uses a little bit of magical realism.
ReplyDelete2.“In the field” is narrated in the third person point of view.
3.I think that the man isn’t identified because he really doesn’t exist or maybe they just wanted someone to blame.
4.All of the men are trying to pin Kiowa’s death on someone that isn’t them. They refuse to take the blame, but in some way they all feel bad about the fact that they might have promoted his death. They cope with the help of drinking and isolation.
5.The significance of the story is just to show what affect Kiowa’s death had on all the soldiers and how the soldiers truly felt about it.