“While he examined the boy’s eyes, Billy told him matter-of-factly about his adventures on Tralfamadore, assured the fatherless boy that his father was very much alive still in moments the boy would see again and again.
“Isn’t that comforting?” Billy asked.
And somewhere in there, the boy’s mother went out and told the receptionist that Billy was evidently going crazy. Billy was taken home. His daughter asked him again, “Father, Father, Father— what are we going to do with you?” (172)
Billy, refreshled and inspired by his “wet dream about Montana Wildhack,” has decided to return to work and preach the “Tralfamadorian” gospel of the “fourth dimension” to an unsuspecting war widow and her son. As Billy “examined the boy’s eyes,” he attempts to adjust his sight by offering the boy a perspective of time in which his father is still alive. For Billy, the things we see are what we will always see, which is why he has taken it upon himself to inform the “boy that his father was very much alive still in the moments the boy would see again and again”. Unfortunately, the boy’s mother and Billy’s daughter are unable to appreciate his “Amor fati” (love of fate) that he describes as being a “comforting” alternative to the dull surprise offered by mortality and they conclude that he must be “going crazy”. In a final display of life as repetition, the passage concludes with his daughter asking Billy “—again, Father, Father, Father— what are we going to do with you?” Thus, the emphasis upon the importance of vision and time becomes apparent as Billy attempts to share the insights that resulted in his being “unstuck”.
How does fragmenting the narrative into non-linear parcels of time, enhance the effectiveness of the novels antiwar message? Are Billy’s deconstructed views of his experiences capable conveying the absolute absurdity of wars to todays reader?
“Isn’t that comforting?” Billy asked.
And somewhere in there, the boy’s mother went out and told the receptionist that Billy was evidently going crazy. Billy was taken home. His daughter asked him again, “Father, Father, Father— what are we going to do with you?” (172)
Billy, refreshled and inspired by his “wet dream about Montana Wildhack,” has decided to return to work and preach the “Tralfamadorian” gospel of the “fourth dimension” to an unsuspecting war widow and her son. As Billy “examined the boy’s eyes,” he attempts to adjust his sight by offering the boy a perspective of time in which his father is still alive. For Billy, the things we see are what we will always see, which is why he has taken it upon himself to inform the “boy that his father was very much alive still in the moments the boy would see again and again”. Unfortunately, the boy’s mother and Billy’s daughter are unable to appreciate his “Amor fati” (love of fate) that he describes as being a “comforting” alternative to the dull surprise offered by mortality and they conclude that he must be “going crazy”. In a final display of life as repetition, the passage concludes with his daughter asking Billy “—again, Father, Father, Father— what are we going to do with you?” Thus, the emphasis upon the importance of vision and time becomes apparent as Billy attempts to share the insights that resulted in his being “unstuck”.
How does fragmenting the narrative into non-linear parcels of time, enhance the effectiveness of the novels antiwar message? Are Billy’s deconstructed views of his experiences capable conveying the absolute absurdity of wars to todays reader?
No comments:
Post a Comment