I think Tim O'Brien chose to display the topic of My Lai accurately in order to convey a sense of legitimacy to his audience. Because O'Brien presents Calley as a monster by portraying his actions of ordering Charlie Company to commit the horrors of My Lai. O'Brien focuses on how Calley mutilated the bodies of Vietnamese women and children., Tim O'Brien pulls parts of William Calley's court-marshall interview. O'Brien copies the questions and responses from the trial exactly, however, he changes a few words, adding or deleting the information presented to the reader, and in making historical events accurate, he convinces the audience that the rest of the book has valid content whereas it might not. Tim O'Brien was historically accurate in most aspects in his novel "In the Lake of the Woods" and the trial of William …show more content…
Calley, but included details of his own.
Many of the quotes from the evidence chapters from the trial of William Calley are quotes from the actual trial. The significances of these similarities in the text and the actual testimonies of the men in the Charlie Company is to show that Tim O'Brien used actual quotes from the trial to portray the brutality and mindlessness of what these men did in My Lai. O’Brien also may have used these actual quotes to explain how scarred these men were after My Lai and why John Wade's PTSD may be so severe. Tim O’Brien’s novel In the Lake of the Woods perpetually references the aforementioned atrocities that blemish American history. Within the chapters titled ‘Evidence’, scattered amongst the evidence accumulated for the fictional investigation into Kathy Wade’s disappearance, quotations from characters both authentic and fake exhibit the catalogue of concealed violence embedded in
American history. Quotations reference the brutality in the battles of Lexington and Concord where the colonists were “as deplorable as the Indians for scalping and cutting the dead men’s auditory perceivers and nasal perceivers off” (262). Further references contained in the Evidence chapters regarding the Native Americans reiterate the words “exterminate” (260) and verbalize of the “horrible carnage” that characterised America’s expansion. The evidence chapters withal contain extracts, both fictional and authentic, from the soldiers who were court marshalled for their role in the My Lai Massacre. The chilling and candid quotations verbalize of the “brutal degeneracy” (261) of war but simultaneously endeavor to justify the violence, gainsay any responsibility, or simply gainsay any recollection of it; numerous references to revenge, retribution and essentiality are scattered amongst the quotations. O’Brien’s inclusion of authentic quotations from war veterans along with fictional quotations from fictional characters regarding Kathy and John Wade’s disappearance prompts the reader to associate their disappearance with authentic acts of concealed violence and his refusal to draw a conclusive answer regarding the couple’s disappearance sanctions the reader to experience the frustration felt because of the perpetual relationship between atrocity and concealment. By implementing the discourse of concealment and exploring the nature of truth O’Brien closes the gap between the mythologised ideology of America and the actuality of its history of violence. In the Lake of the Woods equates the fictional disappearance of Kathy to the real disappearance of America’s history of atrocious violence and by refusing to provide a conclusive answer regarding Kathy’s disappearance the novel ultimately allows the reader to decide whether or not to participate in this plausible deniability or to confront the intolerable and “impossible” truth.
550 - 8 p.m. _________. ___. ___. In the Lake of the Woods. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1994.
Ultimate freedom is an odyssey everyone, at least once in their lifetime, tries to conquer. Chris McCandless did everything in his power to try and capture that freedom he was searching for. He ultimately gave up his own life during that quest. Did he find what he was searching for? We may never know. Very many people have diverse opinions on this character. Chris McCandless was not selfish. He was a young, well-educated boy. His parents handed him everything on a silver platter; he wanted to prove not only to himself but to everyone else he could do things on his own. His possessions did not define who he was as a person. He thought towards everyone else he was just another brick in the wall, a pretty rich boy, and that did not “fly” with him. He had to prove his worth.
An artwork will consist of different elements that artists bring together to create different forms of art from paintings, sculptures, movies and more. These elements make up what a viewer sees and to help them understand. In the painting Twilight in the Wilderness created by Frederic Edwin Church in 1860 on page 106, a landscape depicting a sun setting behind rows of mountains is seen. In this painting, Church used specific elements to draw the viewer’s attention directly to the middle of the painting that consisted of the sun. Church primarily uses contrast to attract attention, but it is the different aspects of contrast that he uses that makes the painting come together. In Twilight in the Wilderness, Church uses color, rhythm, and focal
What O’Brien sees as the purpose of the storytelling, and fictionalizing his experiences in Vietnam, can be seen through the “style” of his writing. It’s more than just a collection of stories. It’s a way for him to let go and start a new beginning. It is labeled “fiction” to make the story seem more engaging and to bring up the question, “Did this really happen?”
Kelman, Herbert C., Hamilton, V. Lee. “The My Lai Massacre: A Military Crime of Obedience”. Writing & Reading for ACP Composition. Ed. Thomas E. Leahey and Christine R. Farris. New York: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2009. 266-277. Print.
The incident is described by social psychologist Herbert C. Kelman and sociologist V. Lee Hamilton in the article “The My Lai Massacre: a Crime of Obedience.” Lt. William Calley, charged with 102 killings, claims to have followed orders from his superiors, only accomplishing his duty, which is also a theme throughout the movie, A Few Good Men. After presented with a request from William Santiago, a marine on his base, to be transferred, Jessup refuses. The film depicts, through Colonel Jessup's authority, the refusal to obey a reasonable request as well as the pride one possesses when fulfilling his duty and baring superiority.
The book I chose to read is called, Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder by: Richard Louv. I chose this book for a few different reasons. One reason I chose this book was because I’ m highly interested in the whole concept of the book and feel very passionate about its reasoning. I also thought it would be a great read to guide me towards a topic for my main project at the end of the Lemelson program. On the plus side, I “read” this book through audible, which enabled me to listed to the book on my drive to and from work everyday. I commonly do this because of my forty-five minute commute from Truckee to Spanish Springs.
People often have nicknames to describe details about themselves. Nicknames are not self-created but given to the person from friends or even comrades. In “Into The Lake Of The Woods” By Tim O' Brian, this is the case with John Wade, a former soldier that was nicknamed “Sorcerer”. John Wade is named Sorcerer because of use of magic in his youth and how the men is his squad would feel protected because of his magical powers. As Sorcerer is Wade's alter ego, it seems that it goes on to cost him dearly later in his life. Wade eventually ends up becoming governor of Minnesota and tries to run for U.S Senate. He loses in a landslide victory to his opponent as evidence of the My Lai incident is uncovered. His actions as Sorcerer start to make his life for the worse. It is seen later that Wade's wife, Kathy, is missing and Wade is soon suspected as he remains calm and not involved in the search party. O’Brien does not make it clear on how it Kathy's disappearance occurs but it is clear what happens. Sorcerer arrives again in John Wade as he pulls one final magic trick: to make Kathy disappear....forever.
On March 16, 1968, in the Quang Ngai region of Vietnam, specifically My Lai, the United States military was involved in an appalling slaughter of approximately 500 Vietnamese civilians. There are numerous arguments as to why this incident even had the capacity to occur. Although some of the arguments seem valid, can one really make excuses for the slaughter of innocent people? The company that was responsible for the My Lai incident was the Charlie Company and throughout the company there were many different accounts of what happened that reprehensible day. Therefore there are a few contradictions about what had occurred, such as what the commanding officers exact instructions for the soldiers were. Even with these contradictions the results are obvious. The question that must be posed is whether these results make the American soldiers involved that day “guilty”. There is the fact that the environment of the Vietnam War made it very confusing to the soldiers exactly who the enemy was, as well as providing a pent up frustration due to the inability to even engage in real combat with the enemy. If this is the case though, why did some soldiers with the same frustrations refuse the orders and sit out on the action, why did some cry while firing, and why then did one man go so far as to place himself between the Vietnamese and the firing soldiers? If these men who did not see the sense in killing innocents were right with their actions, then how come the ones who did partake were all found not guilty in court? The questions can keep going back and forth on this issue, but first what happened that day must be examined.
Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried has readers and critics alike scratching their heads with wonder about the meaning of “story-truth” and “happening-truth.” Although, he served in the Vietnam War from 1968 until 1970, he fabricates the events of the war throughout The Things They Carried. At the same time, he insists that the truth lies at the heart of the emotion in the story, an idea that many readers question. Furthermore, it is pointless for the reader to attempt to sort through the stories and differentiate between the “story-truth” and “happening-truth,” because it is nearly impossible. This tactic is one of O’Brien’s more ingenious writing methods. He does not want the reader to know the difference between the two because in his opinion that fact is irrelevant. O’Brien obviously thinks outside the box and has everyone questioning reality. However, this fact is truly ironic, because the point is not to care what type of “truth” it is, but to instead feel the raw beauty of the emotion and to accept it as the truth. While trying to define “story-truth” and “happening-truth,” a couple chapters in particular focus on the idea of truth, “How to Tell a True War Story,” “The Man I Killed” and “Good Form.” O’Brien believes that the most important thing for a reader is to experience the emotion of the story, be it “story-truth” or “happening-truth,” as long as the real emotion is conveyed and understood by the reader, then it is as true as it could possibly be.
The book From the Deep Woods to Civilization is the story of Charles Eastman's journey from school and college to his careers in public service and as a medical practitioner. The book takes place from the 1870s to the early 1900s and portrays an important time in Native American history. An essential theme relates to how Eastman struggles with his identity in the way of having influences from two different cultures. Throughout the book, Eastman's identity shifts from being very different from his traditions, to being more in tune with his Dakota side.
In society there is a longing for a story to have a nice and neat happy ending. Broadway and the theater originally would give this to their audience, especially in America. Give the audience what the want! They want happy endings that mirror their own values and interpretations of how the world should be and at the end of it should be, “and they all lived happily ever after.” The fairy tale ending is something society hopes, dreams, and strives for since we could listen to our parents read us fairy tales with these sweet stories of finding true love and having to fight the odds to be the Prince or Princess you deserve to be. With Into the Woods, Lapine and Sondheim sought out to explore what could go wrong with “happily ever after.” Effectively leaving the audience with the adage, “be careful what you ask for…”
O’Brien uses the depiction of the setting as a technique to further present Tim’s guilty feelings. On page 128, there is a vivid illustration of the scenery surrounding the deceased Vietcong soldier.
...nd innocent villagers of My Lai, it was a time when American’s questioned their own as being “bad guys” or “good guys”. Were America’s tortuous and cruel acts to be considered patriotic or dishonorable? Some Americans, with bitter feelings for all the American lives lost in the Vietnam War, gave credit to Lieutenant Calley for leading troops in participating in such an atrocious event. History shows that there is still much debate on some facts of the massacre and many stories and opinions, although we will never know the facts exactly, what we do know is that America will never forget this tragic event, it will be talked about in American History for many years to come, and the Vietminh hearts will always fill with sadness when they think of the many lives that were lost on that tragic day in history, their minds will always have unspeakable memories of that day.
This allows the reader to see what takes place rather than what is perceived. O’Brien’s main objective is to expose the subjectivity that lies within truth. To point out a specific contradiction within truth, he uses war to highlight this difference. He writes, “The truths are contradictory. It can be argued, for instance, that war is grotesque. But in truth war is also beauty” (77). The truth has two different meanings and it all depends on who is interpreting it. One person may think one truth and another person can see the complete opposite. To go along with this ambiguity within truth he states, “Almost everything is true. Almost nothing is true” (77). He once again shows that truth is up for interpretation. There is not a single, universal truth, however, there are many variations of it. As previously mentioned, O’Brien claims that he honestly admit that he has both never killed a man and has in fact killed somebody. Here he is stating that there can be completely different answers that all seem to be the truthful. Whether or not O’Brien killed someone, he felt like he did, but could answer that he didn’t. It is this discrepancy that proves that it is all relative. When it comes to telling the story it becomes “difficult difficult to separate what happened from what seemed to happen,” (67). This is what causes the subjectivity, the unknowingness of the situation. Since