Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
War stories creative writing
Why was the u.s involved in vietnam
Impacts of WW2 on American society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: War stories creative writing
Imagine you had to fight a war you didn’t understand and didn’t support. You would have to put your job, education, relationships, and dreams on pause to risk your life for a war. In the scenario that you would try to avoid draft, you would face humiliation and isolation from those around you, including loved ones. You would be seen as a coward and a traitor. This is what many young men faced when the Vietnam war started, many civilians didn’t know the reason for the war and many opposed the war. However, the people with power made the decision to fight the war, their reason being to fight communism. Tim O’Brien argues those who are for the war should fight in the war. Those who want war should fight in it, however, if there aren’t enough soldiers to fight, every civilian of age should fight for …show more content…
This is repeated throughout the book, but we are introduced to this rule in the first chapter of “ The Things They Carried” by Tim O’Brien on page 13. After finding the burnt remains of a young enemy soldier, Mitchell Sanders , a soldier who is part of Tim’s unit, gifts Henry Dobbins the thumb of the burnt body. Mitchell states that there is a definite moral, then proceeds to kick the dead boy’s head away. After the process, Henry says “ I don’t see no moral.” This shows what war can do to soldiers, it can desynthesize violence. Secondly, on the seventh chapter named “ How to Tell a True War Story,” O’Brien explains how many fake stories end up in triumph and have some kind of moral. On page 68, he states, “If at the end of a war story you feel uplifted, or if you feel that some small bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, then you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie.” This shows how the after effects of war aren’t as joyful, this also mentions how there isn’t any rectitude that is kept after the war. This is because in war you are supposed to kill your enemy. It doesn’t
...r because it seems impossible to reconstruct an event from this objective point of view. Maybe the point of telling stories is not trying to recreate the reality of a past event, but it is the message that matters because that might be in the end the only thing that does not necessarily depend on single details of the story, but on the overall picture of an event. That is why to O’Brien another important component of a war story is the fact that a war story will never pin down the definite truth and that is why a true war story “never seems to end” (O’Brien, 425). O’Brien moves the reader from the short and simple statement “This is the truth” to the conclusion that, “In war you lose your sense of the definite, hence your sense of truth itself and therefore it’s safe to say that in a true war story nohting much is ever very true” (O’Brien, 428). These two statements frame the entire irony of the story, from its beginning to its end. Almost like the popular saying “A wise man admits that he knows nothing.”
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
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.
Tim O’Brien finds himself staring at his draft notice on June 17, 1968. He was confused and flustered. O’Brien does not know how or why he got selected for the draft. All he knew was that he was above the war itself, “A million things all at once—I was too good for this war. Too smart, too compassionate, to everything. It couldn’t happen” (41). He was also demented on the fact that he, a war hater, was being drafted. He felt if anyone were to be drafted it should be the people who supported the war. “If you support a war, if you think it’s worth the price, that’s fine, but you have to put your own precious fluids on the line” (42). His draft notice was when he first carried his thought of embarrassment. He instantly thought if he does not support the war he should not have to go to war. The only way not to go to war was to flee the country so the draft council could not find him. He had a moral split. “I feared the war, yes, but I also feared exile” (44). This quote is so true in young adults, not only then, but also now. Peer pressure, the thought of being embarrassed if we do not do something, pushes many young adults to do things they do not want to such as pushing Tim O’Brien to enter the draft. The thought of being judged ...
Tim O'Brien's The Things they Carried put both my logic and emotions to great test. As it is a novel composed of war stories, one may automatically assume that reading The Things They Carried would be an enlightening endeavor, and an educational experience. However, I never thought that a book could captivate me the way that the stories in this novel have.
The things they carried, by Tim O'Brien. "Oh man, you fuckin' trashed the fucker. You scrambled his sorry self, look at that, you did, you laid him out like fuckin' Shredded Wheat." I chose to start off my essay with this particular extract from the book because I think that it very much represents the story in itself. Azar said this, after Tim (supposedly) killed a Vietnamese soldier with a hand grenade. It shows that in times of war, how callous men can become. However, callousness varies, whether they choose to be apathetic, like Tim shows us after his grenade episode.
The deceitful interpretation presented in "How to tell a true war story", is an example of Historicism. Today, people hear about the vietnam war through family members, friends and veterans. When people tell war stories they try to make themselves seem victorious. It makes the person listening feel as if it was all in the good of the people by killing people. O'Brian somehow justifies a point in his book by stating, "A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encouraged virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain men from doing the things men have always done." In actual reality more harm was done than good. People were forced off of their lands to hide in safety and the economic consequence is fatal. To derive to the point, O' Brian is saying there is no real war story if the audience feels that killing people had made a big and better consequence. To look back upon the Vietnam war it brought Vietnam to it's knees. The Americans assisted someone who asked them not to interfere and in the end there was no winner. The Americans had nothing to gain by fighting this war. The title was a contridictary of how to tell a true war story.
...ace. During the Vietnam War, soldiers had no choice of whether or not to go to war. Refusing the draft could lead to prison time, 2,000 men were detained in prison for refusing the draft and those were only the ones who got caught out of the 200,000 that protested against the draft (Tindall 1353).
In the novel The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brien the author tells about his experiences in the Vietnam war by telling various war stories. The quote, "It has been said of war that it is a world where the past has a strong grip on the present, where machines seemed sometimes to have more will power than me, where nice boys (girls) were attracted to them, where bodies ruptured and burned and stand, where the evil thing trying to kill you could look disconnecting human and where except in your imagination it was impossible to be heroic." relates to each of his stories.
When O'Brien says that a true war story is not about war he means that a war story is not about death, fighting or war, it is about the soldiers grim experiences. O’Brien writes “A true war story in never about war… It's about love and memory. It's about sorrow” (62). The quote demonstrates that O'Brien's definition of a war story does not describe what happens but it describes the feelings and emotions that were felt because of what happened. A true war story does not focus on what happened but it should focus on the pain that the soldiers felt.
In Tim O’Brien’s novel, The Things They Carried, numerous themes are illustrated by the author. Through the portrayal of a number of characters, Tim O’Brien suggests that to adapt to Vietnam is not always more difficult than to revert back to the lives they once knew. Correspondingly the theme of change is omnipresent throughout the novel, specifically in the depiction of numerous characters.
Many people in the 1960s and early 1970s did not understand why the United States was involved in the Vietnam War. Therefore, they had no desire to be a part of it. The Selective Service System, which was used to conduct the draft, had aspirations of directing people into areas where they were most needed during wartime. However, people took advantage of the draft system’s deferment policies to avoid going to war. Others refused induction or simply did not register. There were also people who left the country to escape the draft. The Vietnam War proved to be an event that many Americans did not agree with, and as a result, citizens took action to elude the draft entirely or to beat the draft system.
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.
I didn’t really expect anything one way or another from Tim O’Brian’s view of what a war story is. I grew up watching the World War II movies on the weekend TV, they had a good guy (Allies) vs. bad guy (Axis) feel to them. The Allied soldiers fought honorably and the Axis not so much. Later in the Eighties and Nineties, I watched the Vietnam movies and some TV shows that portrayed a different message. That the good guys were capable of doing bad things and Vice versa. So I guess if I were to expect anything from Tim O’Brian It would be the later viewpoint of no absolute good, and the toll of physical and emotional struggle.
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