Wounded Soldiers
In “Ambush,” Tim O’Brien conveys a sense of regret and uncertainty as he attempts to justify his actions of killing an enemy soldier in Vietnam. (MS 7) While serving in the Vietnam War, O’Brien sees an enemy soldier approaching. His military training prompts O’Brien to throw a grenade, killing the soldier instantly. The reoccurring memory of killing the soldier haunts O’Brien for years. Throughout his essay, O’Brien uses the literary elements imagery, tone, and irony to portray his sense of regret and uncertainty. (MS 2)
First, O’Brien uses imagery that portrays the trauma that lead to his regret and uncertainty. Through his narrative, O’Brien reflects on his time back in Vietnam and how the memory of killing a soldier causes
…show more content…
In his narrative, O’Brien expresses regret and uncertainty through a sad tone. As the enemy approached him, O’Brien watches him; he was in no danger because of the enemy soldier however, O’Brien threw the grenade instinctively leaving him in complete shock: “There were no thought about killing. The grenade was to make him go away--just evaporate-- and I leaned back and felt my mind go empty and then felt it fill up again. I had already thrown the grenade before telling myself to throw it.” This passage portrays his sense of uncertainty by explaining his unclear thoughts going through his head. Instead of doing what was morally correct, he acted out of instinct. Watching the traumatic event of the soldier dying, leaves O’Brien with an uncertain feeling if he had done the right thing leaving him with the feeling of grief. Another example of his sad tone is when he explains his imagination of the soldier living: “It was not a matter of live or die. There was no real peril. Almost certainly the young man would have passed by. And it will always be that way.” This passage leads O’Brien with a sense of regret because he knew if he would have not thrown the grenade the soldier would have passed, with no harm done. Throughout O’Brien’s narrative he effectively uses tone to appeal to the emotions of
“Chunks of my own history flashed by.”(O’Brien 55) Instead of actually sinking into the river, he figuratively sinks into a “wave” of his past, which describes many people in his life. “ I saw a seven-year-old boy in a white cowboy hat and a Lone Ranger mask… I saw a sixteen-year-old kid decked out for his first prom, looking spiffy in a white tux and a black bow tie, his hair cut short and flat, his shoes freshly polished.” (O’Brien 55) O’Brien begins to see himself through memorable moments in his life. A moment after he begins to enter into a giant hallucination, “I saw my parents...my brother and sister, all the townsfolk, the mayor and the entire Chamber of Commerce and all my old buddies. Like some outlandish sporting event:... A squad of cheerleaders did cartwheels along the banks of the Rainy River....A marching band played fight songs. All my aunts and uncles...a nine-year-old girl named Linda…little kids without arms or legs...they were all whooping and chanting and urging me toward one shore or the other.”(O’Brien 55-56) O’Brien sees these people, and gives him more pressure to whether or not he should join the war or escape the draft. The intense hallucination, which even made him see children without limbs, placed a huge weight on his decision. The feeling of shame projected from these people pressured O’Brien to join the war. “All those
O’Brien looks back into his past, to the time when he was called to serve in the Vietnam War. O’Brien’s initial
In this chapter, O’Brien contrasts the lost innocence of a young Vietnamese girl who dances in grief for her slaughtered family with that of scarred, traumatized soldiers, using unique rhetorical devices
O Brien 's point of view is an accurate one as he himself because he is a Vietnam veteran. The title of the short story is meaningful because it describes each soldier’s personality and how he handles conflict within the mind and outside of the body during times of strife. The title fits the life as a soldier perfectly because it shows the reality that war is more than just strategy and attacking of forces. O’Brien narrates the story from two points of view: as the author and the view of the characters. His style keeps the reader informed on both the background of things and the story itself at the same
The author, Tim O'Brien, is writing about an experience of a tour in the Vietnam conflict. This short story deals with inner conflicts of some individual soldiers and how they chose to deal with the realities of the Vietnam conflict, each in their own individual way as men, as soldiers.
O’Brien’s choice of diction creates an angry tone that clearly mirrors how he felt after he was shot. He expresses anger at Bobby Jorgenson and frustration that he cannot be on the move with the rest of his platoon while he recovers from his injury. Jorgenson’s terrible job of treating O’Brien’s wound leaves a lasting effect on him because he cannot rest until he gets his revenge on the young medic. It is natural for one to feel upset after someone fails to come to one’s aid in a time of need. This can lead to one feeling resentful and distrustful for long periods of time after the event took
He states that as a soldier, there is so much to soak in from war scenes that it all becomes a muddled mess. Therefore, the story of the moment can be different from each soldier’s perspective due to the parts where each man puts in his own ideas. This leads to some speculation as to whether or not O’Brien’s stories are true or false.
"War is hell . . . war is mystery terror and adventure and courage and discovery and despair and . . . war is nasty (80)." When it all happened it was not like "a movie you aren't a hero and all you can do is whimper and wait (211)." O'Brien and the rest of the solders were just ordinary people thrust into extraordinary situations. They needed to tell blatant lies" to "bring the body and soul back together (239)." They needed to eliminate the reality of death. As ordinary people they were not capable of dealing with the engulfing realities of death and war therefore they needed to create coping skills. O'Brien approaches the loss of his childhood friend, Linda, in the same way he approaches the loss of his comrades in the war as this is the only way he knows how to deal with death. A skill he learned, and needed, in the Vietnam War.
O’Brien’s unique verisimilitude writing style fills the novel with deep meaning and emotion. Analyzing the novel through a psychological lens only adds to its allure. Understanding why characters act the way they do helps bring this novel to life. The reader begins to empathize with the characters. Every day, the soldiers’ lives hang in the balance. How these soldiers react to life-threatening situations will inspire the reader. Life has an expiration date. Reading about people who are held captive by their minds and who die in the name of war, will inspire the reader to live everyday as if they are currently in the
After an event of large magnitude, it still began to take its toll on the protagonist as they often “carried all the emotional baggage of men who might die” during the war (O’Brien 1187). The travesties that occurred with the brutality of war did not subside and began to affect those involved in a deeply emotional way. The multitude of disastrous happenings influenced the narrator to develop a psychological handicap to death by being “afraid of dying” although being “even more afraid to show it” (O’Brien 1187). The burden caused by the war creates fear inside the protagonist’s mind, yet if he were to display his sense of distress it would cause a deeper fear for those around him, thus making the thought of exposing the fear even more frightening. The emotional battle taking place in the psyche of the narrator is directly repressed by the war.
Throughout the novel, Tim O’Brien illustrates the extreme changes that the soldiers went through. Tim O’Brien makes it apparent that although Vietnam stole the life of millions through the death, but also through the part of the person that died in the war. For Tim O’Brien, Rat Kiley, Mary Anne and Norman Bowker, Vietnam altered their being and changed what the world knew them as, into what the world could not understand.
They were essential in showing the key parts in O’Brien’s life that lead to the turning points which lead to the creation of this novel and his ability to be at peace with what had happened in Vietnam. He finally accepted what had happened and embraced it instead of avoiding it. Works Cited Novel O'Brien, Tim.
Life can bring unexpected events that individuals might not be prepared to confront. This was the case of O’Brien in the story, “On the Rainy River” from the book The Things They Carried. As an author and character O’Brien describes his experiences about the Vietnam War. In the story, he faces the conflict of whether he should or should not go to war after being drafted. He could not imagine how tough fighting must be, without knowing how to fight, and the reason for such a war. In addition, O’Brien is terrified of the idea of leaving his family, friends and everything he loves behind. He decides to run away from his responsibility with the society. However, a feeling of shame and embarrassment makes him go to war. O’Brien considers himself a coward for doing something he does not agree with; on the other hand, thinking about the outcome of his decision makes him a brave man. Therefore, an individual that considers the consequences of his acts is nobler than a war hero.
Behind every war there is supposed to be a moral—some reason for fighting. Unfortunately, this is often not the case. O’Brien relays to the readers the truth of the Vietnam War through the graphic descriptions of the man that he killed. After killing the man O’Brien was supposed to feel relief, even victory, but instead he feels grief of killing a man that was not what he had expected. O’Brien is supposed to be the winner, but ends up feeling like the loser. Ironically, the moral or lesson in The Things They Carried is that there is no morality in war. War is vague and illogical because it forces humans into extreme situations that have no obvious solutions.
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