Leo Tolstoy once said, “There is only one thing, and only one thing, in which it is granted to you to be free in life, all else being beyond your power: that is to recognize and profess the truth (Vethuizen 19). Although there is a great deal out of our control, understanding and speaking the truth is one that is entirely in control of each other. Expressing the truth is something that most humans feel the need to confess and express. Truth is the accurate depiction of events as they happened. In Tim O’Brien’s “How to Tell a True War Story,” the narrator throughout the story goes through the different steps on how to tell a “true” war story. Throughout the story, he continuously finds difficulty in how war stories are told and because of that …show more content…
struggle, he tries to inform the audiences of the real “truth” in war stories. In this essay, I will explore the aspects of truth and storytelling as they relate to Tim O’Brien’s “How to Tell a True War Story”. The truth can be a crucial aspect to any storytelling found whether the story is spoken or read. In “How to Tell a True War Story,” the narrator is very particular about wanting the truth about war to be found even if the stories used are not at the surface the truth of what actually happened. Scholar, A.G. Vethuizen defines truth as “the truth is an accurate description of things” (Vethuizen 20). However, the narrator in “How to Tell a True War Story” is certain that accuracy is not as essential to finding the “real” truth, and that war stories should be taken with caution on whether or not they are believed as truth. The narrator contradicts himself throughout the story when he claims he wants the listeners of his stories to believe him, but insists that they be cautious in believing such a story, “In many cases a true war story cannot be believed. If you believe it, be skeptical…often the crazy stuff is true and the normal stuff isn’t because the normal stuff is necessary to make you believe the truly incredible craziness” (O’Brien 176). This is why even when he is claiming that you should believe him, but you should watch out for the other storytellers, he is doing exactly what he is warning the audience about here. He wants the audience believe his version of the truth, rather than exactly what happened. The “real” truth that the narrator seems to want the readers to understand is that the truth does not have to be factual and can be rather subjective. Vethuizen remarks, “The truth is not only empirical, but subject to reflection and taking a certain position on what can be regarded as true” (Vethuizen 21). Not all truths are the ones that should be believe at face value. Even the narrator warns the readers to be skeptical of believing war stories. The narrator goes through the story, explaining that not all war stories should be believed as the truth, but does not want the readers to have that same skepticism with his story. Even with the skeptical nature of war stories, there is a difficulty in actually telling what is happening versus what appeared to happen. Vethuizen explains the difficulties in truth telling are found when trying to find out the actuality of events when Vethuizen writes, “Finding the truth is the challenge. The question that always remains is whether the truth we perceive is always “true” in all circumstances (Vethuizen 19-20). As the narrator suggested, there are changes to these war stories as memories get jumbled and disoriented. Often times, these truths could have been the actual events that occurred, but they have been warped into versions of the same story until it is not accurate depiction anymore. The narrator does admit the fragmentation of memory and how the mind fills in the blanks of what appears to be happening rather than what actually did. The narrator describes, “In any war story, but especially a true one, it’s difficult to separate what happened from what seemed to happen. What seems to happen becomes its own happening and has to be told that way” (O’Brien 176). Just as the quote suggests, the believed truth from the fragmented memories and the pieces put together is the story that is told and becomes the “truth”. Even with manipulation of the details of the stories, not all of these details are even true to begin with. It changes how each of these stories depict the honest truth to the truth that they believe. As Vethuizen had suggested, the narrator experiences this array of memories of when Lemon dies. At first, he presents this story as the absolute fact of what happened, but as the story continues on, the readers are able to acquire the fact that the narrator did not actually see everything and filled in the details. The narrator describes this when he says, “When a guy dies, like Lemon, you look away and then look back for a moment and then look away again. The pictures get jumbled; you tend to miss a lot (O’Brien 176). But the narrator’s acceptance to the mixed memories, he still continues to tell the story of Lemon’s death. The exact details are not as crucial to him, as he is far more focused on still telling the “real” truth rather than let his jumbled memories stop the story. The jumbled memories and the acceptance of the fictional side of some war stories does not deter the narrator and other characters like Sanders to keep trying to tell the stories of their own experiences as well as their fellow soldiers.
They have this need to keep on telling the story, desperately trying to unravel the “real” truth to their audience. Vethuzien insists that the people affected by tragedy often feel the need to express their stories in a means to revealing the truth, whether the facts happened exactly as they describe or not. Vethuizen writes, “Victims, relatives and others maintain a shadowy understanding of the meaning of truth and the purpose of telling it, with a strong sense that speaking “truth” matters to refute certain things that did not happen, or to assert things that definitely did happen” (Vethuizen 25-26). This is even apparent to the narrator as he has experienced a great deal of tragedy from his time in war and has that same need to rely his story to others. The narrator says, “You can tell a true war story if you just keep on telling it” (O’Brien 183). Because to the narrator, the story is true if it is continuously told and as long as it continues to be told, the story lives on, as does the experience that he has endured. The effects of tragedy and violence influences the need to tell your story to as many people as you can, and the narrator of “How to Tell a True War Story” is no different as he has the need that Ventunizen describes victims of great violence
do.
Capturing the realities of war is not everyone's cup of tea. One has to be feel the emotions that inspire vivid imagery in words. True war stories can be written based off of true events that have occurred and bring out emotions in the poets who witness them. Brian Turner, author of 2000 lbs, stated in an interview that while in Iraq, he felt “very isolated from the relevance of what felt like a prior life”(poemoftheweek.com). Its seems like a split from life at home to a warzone with conflicting feelings. He began capturing his experiences of the war in the form of poetry. Brian Turner turned his Iraq war experience and his masters degree in literature and poetry into an opportunity to oppose the resolution of conflict through war. Tim O’Brien is a Vietnam Warr veteran who struggled with PTSD and Turner’s opinions in his story, “2000 lbs,” share similarities with “How To Tell A True War Story”. Turner’s poem 2000 lbs describes a suicide
Each day that we live our lives we are faced with the opportunity to believe and tell many stories and dramatizations. As a young child in Hebrew School you were taught that the world was created in six days and on the seventh day God rested. In a Christian home you were told about Saint Nick. On a juvenile level, stories serve a purpose to teach something and to give hope. As adults we continue to tell stories to ease the pain of a subject or to get us through a hard time. A mother that has lost a son in a tragic accident will never be told by the doctor that her son died in pain, but the doctor might say he died peacefully. Tim O'Brien uses storytelling in his book to teach lessons from the war, and to have us understand about the baggage that he and his fellow men had to carry.
When the quote says “that part of the story is my own” it must mean O’Brien had taken some true details from personal stories. Could O’Brien taken true information but tried to throw the readers off to keep some privacy for the men the stories were based off? Some of the stories present within the book are completely out of the water. How could O’Brien imagine those ideas up without a base of what actually happened? I believe O’Brien switched the names of the soldiers but kept the stories. If he did the name switching it could emphasize on how the reader could focus on the ideas and situations, not the people. O’Brien would showcase how these situations can affect everyone. Another challenging aspect for me is if the stories are partly true why not honor those written about. Do the soldiers feel shame reading about their failures? O’Brien wrote his novel upon the hopes of helping his PTSD and it could have helped the veterans read and receive help. Along with help the vets it could supply the vets with the honor they
For young people, the Vietnam War is a thing of the past and they can
O'Brien, Tim. "How to Tell a True War Story." Writing as Re-Vision. Eds. Beth Alvarado and Barbara Cully. Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster Custom Publishing, 1996. 550-8.
An interesting combination of recalled events and editorial commentary, the story is not set up like a traditional short story. One of the most interesting, and perhaps troubling, aspects of the construction of “How to Tell a True War Story” is O’Brien’s choice to create a fictional, first-person narrator who might just as well be the author himself. Because “How to Tell a True War Story” is told from a first-person perspective and O’Brien is an actual Vietnam veteran, a certain authenticity to this story is added. He, as the “expert” of war leads the reader through the story. Since O’Brien has experienced the actual war from a soldier’s point of view, he should be able to present the truth about war...
To write a true war story that causes the readers to feel the way the author felt during the war, one must utilize happening-truth as well as story-truth. The chapter “Good Form” begins with Tim O’Brien telling the audience that he’s forty-three years old, and he was once a soldier in the Vietnam War. He continues by informing the readers that everything else within The Things They Carried is made up, but immediately after this declaration he tells the readers that even that statement is false. As the chapter continues O’Brien further describes the difference between happening-truth and story-truth and why he chooses to utilize story-truth throughout the novel. He utilizes logical, ethical, and emotional appeals throughout the novel to demonstrate the importance of each type of truth. By focusing on the use of emotional appeals, O’Brien highlights the differences between story-truth and happening-truth and how story-truth can be more important and truer than the happening-truth.
King, Rosemary. "O'Brien's 'How to Tell a True War Story.'" The Explicator. 57.3 (1999): 182. Expanded Academic ASAP.
Several stories into the novel, in the section, “How to tell a true war story”, O’Brien begins to warn readers of the lies and exaggerations that may occur when veterans tell war stories.
The truth to any war does not lie in the depths of storytelling but rather it’s embedded in every person involved. According to O’Brien, “A true war story does not depend on that kind of truth. Absolute occurrence is irrelevant. A thing may happen and be a total lie; another thing may not happen and be truer than the truth” (pg. 80). Truths of any war story in my own opinion cannot be fully conveyed or explained through the use of words. Any and all war stories provide specific or certain facts about war but each of them do not and cannot allow the audience to fully grasp the tru...
The truth behind stories is not always what happened, with each person’s perspective is where their truth lies. At the beginning of the novel, you start to think that it is going to be the same old war stories you read in the past, but it changes direction early. It is not about how the hero saves the day, but how each experience is different and how it stays with you. From his story about Martha, to how he killed a man, each one is so different, but has its own meaning that makes people who have not been in war, understand what it is like. Tim O’Brien can tell a fake story and make you believe it with no doubt in your mind.
According to the Indian Times, madness is the rule in warfare (Hebert). The madness causes a person to struggle with experiences while in the war. In “How to Tell a True War Story”, the madness of the war caused the soldiers to react to certain situations within the environment differently. Tim O’Brien’s goal with the story “How to Tell a True War Story” is to shed light on the madness the soldiers face while in the war. Tim O’Brien tells the true story of Rat experiences of the war changing his life.
O’Brien gives the reader an example of a true war story when he tells of the soldier that jumped on a grenade to save his friends however the grenade took all their lives away. On page 61, O'Brien states that this is a true war story that never happened. This is a true war story because it fits his criteria about how a war story should be but the story never actually happens. This is a true war story because it is sad because shows loss despite the soldier’s effort to save his
King, Rosemary. "O'Brien's 'How to Tell a True War Story.'" The Explicator. 57.3 (1999): 182. Expanded Academic ASAP.
In much of The Things They Carried, stories are retold time and time again. One reason for this is the idea of keeping a story’s story-truth alive. In “Good Form,” O’Brien differentiates what he calls story-truth from happening-truth. Story-truth seems to give us a better understanding of O’Brien’s sentiment in a particular story even though the story itself may not be true at all. On the other hand, happening-truth is what actually happened in the story, but may not contain as much emotional authenticity as story-truth. According to O’Brien, story-truth is therefore truer than happening-truth. Relating back to storytelling, O’Brien retells stories continuously to maintain their sentiment and emotional value. Without this continuous repetition, this sentiment fades away and the emotional value of the story is lost.