FSE #5

This post relates back to the first one about when I was first introduced to human trafficking. Today, rather than discussing the nature of the world, I'd like to focus rather on the nature of the individual humans. Like the world, we have also turned our head to the evils lurking around our planet. I though really hard about why my aunt hadn't helped the boy and also why I hadn't helped the boy. It wasn't because I did not want to help the boy, I simply didn't know any better and left. This reminds me of Macbeth because he too only does things that are told to him and he doesn't know any better. Macbeth isn't a free thinker, he's encased by Lady Macbeth and the weird sisters' words that force him to do what he's done. He knew that killing Duncan was a negative thing to do just as I had known turning my back on that child was bad, but he still did it because he was told by someone with more power than him to do it. Even the things that Macbeth does after having killed Duncan isn't part of his free will. Killing Banquo was all due to the influences that the weird sisters had on Macbeth; without them, he would never had turned on his best friend or his king. We can also see Macbeth also has a noble character as he feels guilt towards the murder of his king and is deprived of sleep ever since.

Sometimes our emotions get the better of our judgement, like with Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. Their conscious should have told them that killing Duncan was a bad idea, yet their emotions craved the power that would come with being king and queen and overwhelmed them. Just as Lady Macbeth's outer appearance was the opposite of her true intent, her judgement was also the opposite of her emotional drive and this is why Macbeth and her both are unable to sleep after this incident. This differences between our emotions, our own judgements, and our actions are all examples of how fair is foul and foul is fair is found in the text  as well as the real world.

FSE #4

As time progressed, humans evolved. And as we evolved, so did our sense of aesthetics. From the roman sculptures of Jupiter to the Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci, we've always been about the details of our works of art. That, however has been changing with the introduction of new minimalistic art styles like pop art and abstract art. These new art styles are very controversial since they are so far from the norm of what we are used to seeing as art. Paintings such as the Campbell's Soup Cans (which consisted of solely printed pictures of Campbell's soup) by Andy Warhol and White on White (which was simply white paper placed on top of white paper) by Kazimir Malevich have had a huge effect on the way we perceive art. This style of art however has suffered a huge amount of backlash as it does not appear as artistic to some. To me, art is supposed to be visually appeal and able to be understood by the viewer. Abstract art is an art form that I find so aesthetically unappealing as well as hard to decipher. Abstract art is like The Red Wheelbarrow of the artistic world. It is enjoyed by many while also being frowned upon by many. These paintings have an unappealing outwards appearance but are crowned by many as being the forerunners of the new era. Some of paintings show little to no creative talent and yet they appear in museums worldwide.


These pieces of art are not what many would call pretty of even good, but they still provoke many feelings among people. They are a good example of fair is foul and foul is fair because they are very unattractive on the outside, yet they have a very large emotional impact on many. They are the exact opposite of Lady Macbeth as she had a kind exterior and a cruel interior while these artworks have a ugly exterior and a very well though out deeper meaning. Unfortunately, the artistic community is split on the perceptions of these pieces of art. Some see them as a creative new method of emotional transfer, while others believe they are garbage  and nothing more than child's play.

FSE #3

Gambling is based on a system in which the casino will always have an advantage over the player, no matter how good or lucky they might be. The fictitious world of television and movie gambling doesn't occur in real life. It is impossible to make a living off of gambling. The player rarely comes out of the casino with the same amount of money they started with, and the chances that they walk out with more money then what they started with is even rarer. There are different standards between the movies and real life. In the movies and television, the gamblers try to earn money, while in real life, they try to stay afloat. This is the reason why casinos are located in these extravagant locations in high-rise buildings. They can maintain these buildings because they are making money, which they get from people losing. Casinos are not fair, the coin slots are rigged to ensure that you never win more than you put in, roulette wheel payouts are designed so that the player loses more money than they can gain. Another version of the casino is the lottery, where great rewards are paraded, yet so very few people actually win. One of my favorite quotes from a television series of mine was "I like the lottery. It's sort of like an idiot tax." which was even better since the speaker was the devil.

To me, there's a sort of duality to gambling. On one side of the spectrum, there's these glamorous and pristine casinos that offer luxuries and just seems to radiate fun and excitement, while on the other end, we have people who struggle with gambling addictions that drive them into poverty. And this whole theme of fair is foul and foul is fair fits perfectly with this topic because gambling is very deceptive. Gambling is like the real world's Lady Macbeth, with a smile on their faces and their hands in your wallets. Casinos never talk about how they're going to take your money but rather they talk about how much fun it is to be with your friends in their gambling areas. It has that shiny exterior that lures people in, while also hiding its intent to swindle people out of money. Gambling is not about how much money you can win, but rather how long you can stop yourself from losing your money.

FSE #2

Now lets take a step away from all the problems within the world and examine our everyday life in which this theme comes up. You may or may not notice that many, if not all of the student body will complain about any work or notice of a test no matter how little or easy it may be. Even I complain when I've been handed what seems like a months worth of homework in a single day. Yet after all the complaining, the work that seems impossible still gets completed. Tests are still written when the students are prepared, FSEs are handed in on time, and presentations are still presented the day they were due. What we always assume as students is that all the teachers are unfair and miraculously plan to have chunks of work planned around the same week or so to crush us when it simply is not true. So what if you happen to have 2-3 test on the same day? If students paid attention in class then studying before a test should not take 2-3 hours of your night. It's gotten to the point where in some classes of mine, even mentioning a quiz has almost become taboo for the teacher due to negative and hateful response of the student body. This may just be what I think but homework isn't as hard as everyone makes it out to be. The teachers are trying to be fair in their distribution of work so that we don't have to carry the weight of the world on our shoulders. There is even a calendar that teachers use to plan tests and such. Even when students miss a test or an important event, they are usually allowed to do a make up test.

What we occasionally perceive as foul might not be what it seems. School, it seems, is seen by many students as the bane of their lives, yet it is essential for our success and the teachers try their hardest to help us out. The foulest things as perceive through teenage eyes are often not what it seems. High school might seem hell on earth to some until we grow up and realize how wrong we actually were. Anyways, I realize that this is only what I see happen around me. This situation might be entirely different for those who enjoy their school life and always have a light load of homework. In the end, there will still be plenty of teenagers who hate school with a passion, and there will be for decades to come. But everyone has to reach a point in their lives where they turn back and were glad that they had gone through school.

Theme -----> Real Life

For my FSE, I chose to relate a memorable theme from Macbeth, fair is foul and foul is fair, as it relates very well to a period of my life. When I was very young, my parents and I had decided to take a family vacation back to my homeland China. We had spend most of our time with our family and friends, visiting the city and seeing the sights, which were very basic tourist-like things to do. Then came one day when my parents and I had decided to go shopping in this large mall filled with expensive foreign jewelery held in these glass showcases. Many of the price tags had larger numbers than I could've counted to. We had done lots of shopping until it was time to return home for supper. As we were exiting the front door, I saw a young boy, about 7 to 8 years old, sitting on the floor outside this industrial marvel of a building, crying out with a cup in his hand. It had astounded me at the time to witness such a deplorable sight and so I asked my aunt: "What is he doing there?" My aunt responded by saying: "He's a beggar, and he is in need of money." This made me feel sad since I knew that I had been showered by money from all my relatives as a "make up" present for all of my forgotten birthdays. I knew that I had been fortunate enough to be raised in much better conditions so I asked my aunt another question: "Can I go and give him some of my money?" To which my aunt responded to me with a sad tone: "You shouldn't. Those children are used by human traffickers who make money off of forcing them to beg." The feeling of wanting to help the poor child stayed with me for a long time. A few minutes later, I walked away with my aunt, never to see the child again.

This memory helped me better understand the way things where in life. The world had put on a mask of wealth and happiness while the bugs of greed and hate flourished in the darkness hidden underneath. It's hard to believe, with all the luxuries that we can afford today, a large portion of the world can barely survive. Those fortunate enough to avoid being born into poverty are often unaware of how dire the situation actually is. We see these high rise buildings built from the concrete and steel girders, yet in some places of the world, people still live in huts. This magnificent world that we see everyday isn't as picture perfect as it seems. What we've grown accustomed to, such as the television, schooling, or even running water, isn't fairly distributed around the world. This is why i chose the theme that I did, because the world isn't what it seems. To me, the theme fair is foul and foul is fair represents far more than just how Macbeth acted after murdering Duncan; it represents my perception of the earth and all the juxtaposing contrasts in it.

Black Sheep - John

After having listened to Black Sheep on youtube for an astronomical amount of times, the lyrics start to remind me more and more of Billy Pilgrim. Plus, the guitar solo is pretty amazing too.



Black sheep, come on
Black sheep, come on
Black sheep, come on


Hello again, friend of a friend, I knew you when
Our common goal was waiting for the world to end
Now that the truth is just a rule that you can bend
You crack the whip, shape-shift and trick the past again

I'll send you my love on a wire
Lift you up, everytime, everyone, ooo, pulls away, ooo
From you

Got balls of steel, got an automobile, for a minimum wage
Got real estate, I'm buying it all up in outerspace
Now that the truth is just a rule that you can bend
You crack the whip, shape-shift and trick, the past again

I'll send you my love on a wire
Lift you up, everytime, everyone, ooo, pulls a way, oo
Mechanical bull, the number one
You'll take a ride from anyone, everyone wants a ride, pulls away, oooh from you



A black sheep is commonly known as being a member of a group who is odd or disgraceful to the whole group. Billy himself is the black sheep as he is the only person that different from everyone else. He's the only one who lacks emotion and also he is able to travel through time. He can't feel normally like the other characters, such as his complete disregard for the death of his wife as well as the death of his father-in-law. Billy can also be seen as the disgrace of the group as depicted during his wartimes. Wearing his colorful clothes to the town of Dresden, he is made fun of by the doctor and many others. In a sense, all of the soldiers are the black sheep because as the soup lady says : "All the real soldiers are already dead." The ones who are left are the disgraces to the Americans because supposedly the only way to survive the war was by being cowardly.



The line : "Mechanical bull, the number one, You'll take a ride from anyone, everyone wants a ride" makes me think of how Billy is taken advantage of by everyone, having never made a friend, but rather being used to make others feel better. He is used by Valencia to make herself feel normal, since she is so obese that she couldn't possibly have a decent human relationship. With Billy around, it's basically a way for her to say to the world: "look, I can be one of you." But Valencia is not the only person who happens to be using Billy. Weary also uses Billy as a method of making himself feel superior to others. By comparison, Weary appears as a much more proficient and prepared soldier as opposed to Billy's weak and unarmed self. All the soldiers see Billy as the standard of the American troops and so use him to fuel their hate for America. Even their allies, the British troops frown upon seeing the American troops due to their weakness.

Things I'd change in Slaughterhouse five - John

To me, Slaughterhouse Five lacks the plot that would have made the book entertaining or simply bearable. Reading a book should be about experiencing a story that enthralls the reader while also relating a message. Though the messages are present within the text, the excitement needed to keep the readers engaged is severely lacking. To allow for a clear though to pass from the author to the reader, a strong plot is needed so that readers are interested in the text, and by extension the messages of the author. By adding suspense or even a climax, we could breath life back into this bland novel. An important part that i would add to the novel has to be an ending. Not a weak, unsatisfying and short ending, but a long and meaningful conclusion that makes you feel glad you've read the entire novel. It should have included something more substantial than just the end of the war, possibly something like what comes afterwards, like a short summary of what Billy plans to do, or even Vonnegut's final thoughts.

Another thing that I'd feel very inclined to change would be the order in which Billy's life events happen. Not anything substantial like rearranging everything into the right order, but just moving a few paragraphs so that Billy's stay in a single memory lasted longer and the readers could make sense of what was actually happening before being transported again to a different time. I know this might interfere with the theme of craziness, but it would be helpful for many readers to grasp the situation before Billy once again leaves for a different time.

Anyways, the novel is fine as it is now, all the changes that I would make would be small so that people will still perceive the novel in the same way.

Response to Zach - John

Wow, zach's blog has come a long way from when I first saw it a few weeks after we had initially started this project. I remember back when we had begun our third or fourth topic, i believe, when Zach had so little work done. But just 2 months and a lot of dedication later, Zach's blog has far surpassed any expectations that I've once held for it. Brimming with creativity and ideas, I feel glad to have read all of the posts that Zach has made. There's so much I'd like to discuss about your ideas, but i'll refrain from commenting on all of them, so i'll stick with the bare minimum of 3.

The first topic that piqued my interest is the one about censorship. Now on my blog, i had previously thought that censorship was a viable solution to certain problems, but now your post has made me think a little bit more about this certain topic. I now believe that censorship shouldn't be allowed in this day and age but back then, novels like Slaughterhouse probably were that bad. As you have said, we have become far more slack in our use of sexuality and language, which is why Slaughterhouse is not so controversial today, but who knows how they lived in the old days, maybe even mentioning the war led to suspicion. Maybe it's because of when Vonnegut wrote his book that it came under fire instead of what his book is about. And also, history books are much more factual than what Vonnegut wrote, which was opinion-based, so the depiction of soldiers and such vary and also lead to these types of book to be banned rather than history books.

The second topic that i liked was the first one about fate vs. free will. I've always been a believer of how nothing is ever predetermined. I agree with you completely on your life choices affect your future, and not fate. When you try harder, then you will succeed far more often. Effort should correlate with success in life while fate shouldn't. The belief in fate, in my opinion anyways, is very ridiculous. If you believed that moments in life are structured to happen a certain way, what motivation would you have to attempt anything? You wouldn't try to be successful because if you were destined to be successful, then it should happen, weather you try or not, which in my opinion, is the worst idea possible. Barrack Obama didn't become president by staying home and watching movies, he pushed himself to become a powerful and influential man.

Your post about Vonnegut's history is very interesting since I also think that Vonnegut defending the Germans very well through the novel. I couldn't agree more about how prevents this by giving the enemies a face, such as with the average citizens of Dresden or even the people who had arrested Billy and Weary. When I read the book, they did seem like average citizens and it made me question weather or not it was right to take their lives, even to end the war. Personally though, I think that the Germans were justified in trying to regain power during WWII (excluding the whole Holocaust thing), since they were just trying to rebuild their country. After the end of WWI, Germany was devastated, poor, and the ridicule of the world. A huge amount of debt was forced onto their shoulders and it was not fair. I also agree that assimilation and cultural conformity should be based on the will of the individual, but sometimes it's just not possible. Just imagine, how would a woodcutter be able to function properly in New York City? People have been forced to assimilate to be able to function in society. I'd love to see a world where everyone can live the way that they want to live, but assimilation does happen forcefully all the time, such as with the native people and even the crusades.

All in all, your blog was very enjoyable to read. Your writing style is very straightforward and i really like the ideas that you wrote about. I think that you put a lot of effort into this blog and it's a really good blog overall. Having now read your blog, I've become quite fearful for mine as it pales in comparison. Anyways, now I need to polish off my own blog.

Response Post

For my response post, I've decided to take a look at Aaron's Blog. While reading through his posts, I find that I get to see a completely different perspective at the novel. But, it's a humorous perspective that retains that severity of the concepts involved. Indeed, it embodies the positive nature that I think Vonnegut would wish everyone had. That, primarily, is what drew me in and kept me reading throughout.

Just a note to make, for whatever reason I read the blog from most recent to latest, so all of my thoughts actually start opposite from when Aaron wrote the posts.

Anyways, that's not to say that I didn't have some conflicting ideas with Aaron. For example, when he wrote:

There is some speculation on our favourite theme of Fate duking it out with Free Will. In SH5 we see the Tralfamadorians and their idea of Fate reigning supreme. But in 2BR02B,  people are able to call the number 2BR02B and book an appointment to die in a gas chamber (they do this when they want to volunteer to die in order to serve the future generations). Yayyy. Sounds a lot like Free Will to me if people have the choice to pick their deathday, not birthday.

I felt that the definition of fate and free will are a bit blurred. Fate is something that is set in stone and cannot be changed; it is something that no one knows. Meanwhile, life is when free will and choice occurs, which is what Aaron is referring to. I think this might've been what he was getting at, but it wasn't stated explicitly. I think often people mix up the terms fate and life in the sense that they define fate as your set of choices in life, while fate is actually the set of choices you are bound to make in life (thus setting it apart from life itself). People can pick how they want to live their lives, and in this case picking when to die, but their fate is forever unchangeable.

But immediately after, the subject of Vonnegut's dark humour was touched upon. Right away, I remembered in the first chapter of SH5 when I read "there must have been tons of human bone meal in the ground". I chuckled a bit since it seems such a grotesque picture to paint out of nowhere, and the true significance of the statement takes a while to get to you. As with Aaron, Vonnegut's creativity never ceases to make me chuckle.

Speaking of creativity, I enjoyed reading the blog post on parodies of famous novels. Larry Potter and Hermyknee Ranger are just two of a number of tidbits in the post that made me chuckle or smile. I think that fans of the subject matter would actually appreciate the humour as it is refreshing to see something you like presented in a different way, especially when it's amusing.

And now that we're on the topic of amusement, Aaron's warped narrative reminds me of all of the Failblog videos I've seen. Even though I know that sometimes the people in the videos must be getting hurt (to varying degrees), I can't stop laughing at the scenario that they've put themselves in. In that respect, I find that I'm not only similar to Vonnegut's style of humour but also Aaron's. I know that I've had my own veritable share of "fail" experiences. His last sentence in the warped narrative was a good way to end it off and really relate it back to Vonnegut's humour: If Aaron were in Charlie’s place, he would have died…

Aaron's post on censorship really had me agreeing with him. These days, people are surrounded by so many conflicting opinions that they really get lost in blaming someone for their misfortunes. Oftentimes, literature gets blamed for its negative effects. Ulga Hoffstadder, with her few sentences on Dr. Seuss' book, is a paragon for ignorance for everyone. Without commenting on her intelligence, I'll say that her failure to see the words beyond the words leaves me without words of my own. . .

Regardless, I very much enjoyed reading Aaron's blog. Aside from his humorous posts, you can still pick up a different perspective of things. Reading his blog, I really get a sense of connection and similarity between his words and my own. Maybe it was fate that made me post about Aaron's blog. No, wait. It WAS fate that made me post about Aaron's blog, but it was my choice in my life to do so. Now try and see what I mean by that.

Being Able to See the Future - Milan, OWA4

Would being able to see the future actually be beneficial? Would it give someone the chance to right a wrong that they commit before one even does it? Or are there "rules" to doing as such?

I don't believe that one would be able to see the future and change something to affect it. What would be the point of seeing the future if you could change it? Obviously, any change you intend to do after seeing the future would have already been taken into account when you saw it. Even if this were not true, changing events to try and alter events in the future could have a cascade effect of unprecedented proportions, thus irrevocably changing that future that you saw, thus rendering your whole purpose pointless (it could be that this entire process is some kind of paradox). This is, I believe, where the idea of fate comes from in SH5.

Billy in SH5 has the ability to see the future, but either chooses to be lax about it or he physically cannot change what he sees. Perhaps this is indeed a result of him knowing that upon seeing the future, he knows what his fate is. And since one cannot change fate, his future is set in stone. However, without knowing one's fate, one has no idea what can happen in life. Therefore, regardless of the fact that fate is existent, the choices one makes can still impact one's future. Of course, having said this, I do not speak for my own beliefs, but rather for what the novel attempts to bring across. Indeed, there are other messages tied in with this prevalent theme of fate and existentialism which develop the idea more. For now, however, the topic is on fate itself.

Life is different from fate. In life, one can choose everything and there is always an option to do something. Fate is set in stone. The two cannot, and must not, be confused for the debate on fate to continue. Thus, I believe that everyone has a set of events that is meant to happen to them. But, as I said earlier, these remain unknown until they occur, so it is still possible to live life choosing what you want to happen to you. But, as per the definition of fate, these were meant to happen. People are not meant to know their fate, but rather live their lives in the best way they can.

If I had the option to see my fate/future (however you want to call it), I would opt out of it. What is the point of living one's life if there is no sense of mystery? Life is all about making choices and living to experience the consequences. If these consequences are already known, then it's just a matter of living life until you die. That, in itself, is a truly depressing thought to even think about.

So, is knowing the future a choice that one could make? Perhaps, if you want to be martyr for other humans. But as an option for a person to do it for oneself, the consequences of doing such are unknown and potentially eternally depressing. Billy can perhaps be feeling the effects of constantly knowing his fate. With that in mind, perhaps Vonnegut simply wanted all of us to stop worrying so much about our futures and just live life as it is meant to be lived: without regret.

Kevin Carter and the Sudanese girl - John

This is the infamous photograph of the Sudanese girl, if anyone's read my post about my ideas on writing my own novel. It shows a starving girl crawling towards a feeding center while the vulture waits for the poor girl to die. Kevin Carter was infamous due to the fact that he had not done anything to help the girl, but instead waited the vulture to spread his wings and take the picture. After a while, Kevin Carter got impatient and simply took the picture without the vulture spreading it's wings. No one knows exactly what happened to the girl, weather she died of starvation or she crawled to salvation, but I pray for the latter option to have taken place.

This picture has nothing to do with Slaughterhouse but it does have to do with the blog post about our own ideas on novels.

Also, I would like to note that this is an enormous reason as to why I do not and will not ever believe in fate. It should not ever be the fate of some poor child to starve to death. No person should have the right to look at this image and say: "That was her fate." This is clearly not true as people such as Kevin Carter had the choice to stop what was happening. He had the ability to help but rather chose not to. World hunger is not a problem that's beyond the powers of human society. It is not fate that has led to millions of humans to die of starvation but rather apathy for those in need that have caused us to choose this world filled with pain and sorrow. Fate is no excuse for why things happen the way they do. Choices are what determine the outcome of a situation.

Why SH5 Should Never be Adapted into Film - Milan, OWA3

It has been tried before. The word on the street is that the movie doesn't perform as well as it could have what the novel intended. Is this coincidence? Or is it actually a result of the fact that the book was never written to be adapted into the forms that modern film take today?

The truth is, when Vonnegut finished writing SH5, his intention was not to create an entertaining novel, per se, but rather to make a point. His elimination of suspense throughout the story (by revealing events prematurely) and lack of character development in Billy (creating a character that cannot be sympathised with) results in a novel that lacks the fundamentals for a movie with which people can enjoy. Granted, it can be said that these forms of writing were employed in order to create more focus on the messages in the novel. However, the results of which create a novel that is not appealing to the general public.

Getting the themes and points of SH5 across in a movie as effectively as the novel (arguably) does, would involve changing the storyline in order to make Billy a relatable character. I believe that doing so takes away from what makes Vonnegut's book unique; it would take away the essence of the story in order to make it a Hollywood hit. If you turn an orange blue, it's no longer an orange.

But, if we were to assume that a film would not attempt to make the movie in the form of how many movies are made today (to make money), then it would be possible for the novel to be re-written for a screenplay. Indeed, doing so would be risking thousands of dollars on the notion that the movie would sell as well as the novel. Not doing so, I believe, would discredit the principles that the novel was written upon.

In addition, the movie can be loosely based upon SH5 in such a way that the fundamental themes are still represented. They can be shown in such a way that they are intriguing and encourage any watchers of the film to create their own opinions of the subject matter within the film. If they are interested enough, they may even delve into the novel itself when previously they may never have given the notion a passing thought. In this way, the novel can be used to slightly simplify the messages from SH5 to make them more appealing and thus draw more people in to the enlightenment that Vonnegut was hoping to achieve.

In short, SH5 cannot be taken lightly. Reformatting it into a movie that can make money on its own should not be the attempt of any film director: the novel, as it stands, is not made for such transformations. A direct screenplay of the novel would be possible, but would risk in the loss of thousands of dollars and man-hours from its creation. As I said above, a movie that is perhaps somewhat based on the themes from the novel may prove to be more plausible. Quite simply, Vonnegut's eye-opening piece literature should be given the same credit in its film adaptation. Anything less would result in the dishonour, not only to Vonnegut, but to all the readers of the novel who have taken from it as much as they could.

How Vonnegut's writing style annoys me - John

Anyone else feel that Vonnegut's gone of on way too many tangents in Slaughterhouse five? There seems to be an abundance of unneeded fluff in his writing. Things like Maggie, the stereotypical dumb blonde who seems to serve no purpose whatsoever in the novel or Vonnegut's descriptions of Kilgore Trout's novels and what happens in them. Is knowing if Jesus really died or his height before his death in Kilgore Trout's novel really going to change my understanding of the book? I have come to see Vonnegut's writing as what i'd like to call verbal diarrhea on a silver platter. The novel might have taken many years to write, but the fashion in which it is written appears to me as a non-stop stream of thoughts that have been slightly cleaned up in the end.Vonnegut's gone off on so many tangents that it has become difficult to tell which facts are actually important and which ones are just simply pointless (A.K.A. the reason why i will fail the content quiz).

Novels should provide a clear and understandable vision of what the author wants to show, but Slaughterhouse only comes off as a jumble of madness. This writing style is suppose to represent the distorted mayhem of war the message is so incomprehensible that few will ever relate it to war. It wasn't even until this matter came up in class that I even considered that there was a reason behind the madness. The messages that other people seem to get from the novel just doesn't come to me. I didn't see the relation between war and the distortion, and this may be due to my lack of knowledge on war, but the relation between these 2 weren't so clear. If an important message is to be given through a novel, it should be crystal clear to see within the book or many readers will not catch what could be the most significant part of the book.

"The Prestige" and How its Plot Matches Up with Slaughterhouse-Five - Milan, OWA2

 Slaughterhouse-Five is unique in its various facets and the messages that it attempts to shed light on in order to enlighten readers is truly a unique experience. However, that is not to say that it cannot be relatable to any other piece of art in the sense of its chaotic and non-linear storyline progression. The movie "The Prestige", with its alluring plot of magicians and their rivalries is more than meets the eye, literally. It's an excellent film that compares with Slaughterhouse-Five in some fashion, but goes completely the other way in others.

The movie begins with no sense of direction as Christopher Nolan spins a concoction of events in an attempt to primarily draw in the audience. At the same time, he creates an atmosphere of mystery. Soon, the film begins jumping through scenes in various timelines as it warps between different events. Much like Billy Pilgrim's time traveling, the movie does indeed do the same thing. The two main characters (for each are each others antagonist), Angier and Borden, host their own magic shows in an attempt to outdo the other and make their claim to fame, so to speak. Over the course of the movie, one slowly begins to piece everything together until the film's culmination; its final enlightenment.

This movie instantly reminded me of SH5 with this kind of plot. However, there are some stark contrasts between the two, primarily being that The Prestige ends with a clear-cut cliffhanger (leaving one to think a little), while Slaugterhouse-Five's ending leaves a reader with a completely open-ended finale and no way to discern with complete confidence what the author intended. In a way, this matches up with the novel's existentialist themes (among other messages).

But, the similarities for the most part end there. Whether or not there is some kind of internal message within The Prestige is up for debate as it's a movie made for entertainment. SH5 definately has messages hidden whose discovery falls on the individual reader. And while Billy is not a character one can relate to, Angier is definately the character that is portrayed to be more likable in the movie. Character development is also present in The Prestige, while in SH5 it's completely absent in Billy. Speaking of characters, SH5 is completely absent of any love interest while The Prestige has a number of them. In addition to these lovers, the people in The Prestige have well-defined goals while Billy has none. All of these factors make watchers feel sympathetic to The Prestige, while Billy is simply used as an eyehole to look at society. In this respect, the two pieces of art are completely different.

It is true that in each case the character contributes in either bringing across the message or being the main proponent in progressing the storyline. I feel that in both cases the character choices were justified as they achieve (what I believe to be) their intended goals, whether it be their own or the author's. Both The Prestige and SH5 are similar, yet they are different. Indeed, quite like apples and oranges, they are both fruit; yet they both have different tastes, colours, and textures that set them apart. That is, in the end, what makes any one thing different from anything else and enjoyable in its own way.

Banning Books, Right or Wrong? - John

Books that give rise to controversy are often banned, sometimes to silence the message of the author but also sometimes to maintain the order of society. SH5 belongs in the latter group, as it caused people within the American society to rise and revolt. The novel portrays the Americans as a weak and pitiful while in reality, not all of their soldiers acted as such. This caused the american people to detest the book because it didn't reflect their point of view on the war. It certainly isn't right to ban a book because it contains the opinions of the author, especially one as influential as this one, but the people who have read it might not feel the same way that Vonnegut felt about the war. American soldiers might not feel happy about how Vonnegut had portrayed them, weak and intolerable, like Billy and Weary, while the English and German were depicted as being far better. This might be a cause as to why the banning took place, because soldiers and supporters of them alike had strong feelings for why they fought and the novel did not reflect this.

Picture this, a mother of 3 boys watches her sons grow up and become wonderful men. They all decide to help their nation and take part in the war. She watches them leave proudly as they march towards the battlefield. 3 months pass and a soldier arrives at the door. The soldier brings with him the sad news of how her sons have perished, fighting bravely for the country they hold so dear. Now if this mother had read this book about the American troops, would she not also feel offended by Vonnegut's words?

Vonnegut's writing certainly isn't for all readers, and this is why it leads to events such as book banning. Although book banning should not be happening, it is the only method for the American population to express how they felt about the book. They country that they had established was being insulted and so they bared their fangs with prejudice against the novel. A novel shouldn't ever be stopped from being read, but when its message is used to harm others, then events such as book banning becomes commonplace.

My Masterpiece - John

If i had the patience to actually sit down and write something outside of the realm of schoolwork, it would definitely have to be something along the lines of a dark and twisted tale about the dirty underside of society. A good example of such would be like the novel Next by Michael Crichton. Next is about the dark underbelly of the glamorous high-tech Biotech industry, about how people go to extreme measures to make money, how dysfunctional and broken the legal system is, and about the evils of the world in general. This novel is the basis for why I'd even consider writing a book because there's no much else that's influenced me like this novel. Unlike Vonnegut, I couldn't possibly write a novel based on my personal experiences simply because my life is boring. If this novel ever came to fruition, it would an action-packed thrill ride unlike anything you've ever read.

So to start off, there would be no main characters since i feel that it's too hard to explore a huge topic with just a single character. There wouldn't be some heroic, righteous protagonist that expunges the evil from the world. This is simply because it doesn't happen. There would be a few good guys that struggle with making the right decision, a few ne'er do wells that try to make their mark on the world, and many unoriginal and uncreative stock characters. This is just my personal preference since having many characters means i could focus on many different struggles and problems with each character instead of having one main character undergo all of it. One person could be involved in an underground gambling scheme, while someone else is involved in the high-tech manufacturing industry. Having all of these qualities and diversity is too much for a single character so it is better to have a variety of different kinds of people with different personalities and traits.

The novel would take place a few years in the future, where a gene, AKR83, has been discovered to be a viable cure for cancer, due to it's ability to manipulate stem cells into a much more aggressive form of an omnipotent white blood cell that would specifically targets abnormal cells that haven't undergone apoptosis. This gene, however has been licensed by three major institutes in the United States and no further research can be done until the licensing disagreement has been sorted out. The world would be on edge due to the United States withholding what could be the most important discovery to this day over such a trivial issue as to who holds the rights to the gene when millions are dying. The great debate for the patent has led to espionage and skirmishes, until the United States can take no more and establishes an ally system with all those who want a part of the cure against those who refuse or even cannot pay the massive royalty fees that come with the cure. The world will wage war on itself and what would once have been a cure to mankind's greatest problem will lead to its ultimate downfall.

The ideas that i'd like to share revolve around society's greed. In a sense, the way that the companies wouldn't share the information is like how the world's not willing to share it wealth evenly. Our society consists of only a few rich countries, while large parts of the world struggle with getting the bare necessities. There shouldn't be anything like a third-world country at the same time as there are obesity epidemics. Events like Kevin Carter's famous Sudanese girl and vulture should not ever happen. This also applies to more than just food. School is also a luxury that not everyone in the world has, yet there are people who don't even care about a proper education. The world needs to change so that there is equality for all and those less fortune should be helped, even if they live outside of your country. Another message that needs to be shared is about patents. A patent should not passed on anything that exists naturally and yet genes, which have been around since the beginning of life, are patented and this allows the companies who own the patents to make millions of dollar for anything that requires the gene, like research. Allowing a patent for genes is like allowing a patent for gravity, which is simply ridiculous. We should not be able to own anything that is inside other people's body. Also, I absolutely detest the idea that readers need to dig to unsolve the message in books, which is why I would specifically have a section in the end where I reveal the messages because it's just simpler this way. With novels like Slaughterhouse five, sometimes the message is hidden so deep that some readers might not notice it.

Not ENTIRELY True. . . - Milan, WA5

Should the opportunity occur, I would write a novel with historical references. A good example of something already done would be the Da Vinci Code, where historical links are interpreted in a fictional fashion and a plot line forms based off of characters that are involved with it. Whether the novel would be placed in a fictional point in the past, present, or future would depend on the context upon which I'm writing. In fact, I might decide to incorporate all three opportunities to form a novel that spans over many generations. Thus having said that, I would indeed want to write a series.

However, there is no good novel without a primary message that is both relatable to the real world and something that can be observed with a critical eye. That being said, a possible topic would be revolving around secret societies such as the Masons or the Templar. However, these are traditionally cliche themes for a historical fiction novel to be based off of.

Perhaps something of more novelty would lie along the lines of an international organization that has existed for the entirety of man's presence of Earth. Similar to the movie The Adjustment Bureau, my made-up organization was made to keep the life of man in check. Instead of having an all-knowing chairman such as in the Adjustment Bureau, the members of the organization would, do, and will forever strive to keep from a single group of people from conquering the world.

Through ever-present monitoring and infiltration, the organization, aptly named Novi (from the Latin "know"), seeks to topple nations that they have deemed to be too powerful. The history goes back to the Egyptian Empire, to the Roman Empire, to the Mongolian Empire, and even to America's independence, were all a result of the plans of the Novi members. For example, Rome's collapse may partially be attributed to its greedy conquest of land. However, members of Novi know that the collapse was entirely attributable to a series of contributions of members that ranged from influencing military generals to changing public opinions.

Indeed, one doesn't not voluntarily choose to be a part of the completely secret organization. In my novel, members of the organization are first born as humans with exceptional abilities. One such ability is to sense the presence of other humans with the same abilities. As Novi relies on these extremely rare traits, they can track down potential new members fairly quickly to keep an eye on them. Some humans choose to ignore their abilities as simply heightened senses. However, those that begin experimenting are quickly isolated. At some point in their early lives, a 'tragic' accident occurs in which the child is spirited away. Perhaps they are lost in a crowd and kidnapped, or become stranded in a forest, they are never seen again.

The novels would take place over hundreds of years. As not every single period in human history can possibly be covered, I would pick certain time-frames to be the subject for the storyline. But for further clarification, the organization does not seek to single-handedly topple whole countries. Rather, they seek to influence the collapse of these countries/empires. As such, the collapse of the Roman Empire or the gradual decline of the British Empire would be possible to explain (military influences for the Romans and public opinion changes for the British). For example, the leader of a social movement for independence from Britain may in my novel be a successor to a leader who mysteriously disappears during a campaign. All following independence movements and independence recognitions would be a result of worldwide efforts to diminish the Empire.

Character perspectives would range from first-person to third-person. While the the majority of the storylines would take place in the third-person, occasional bursts of first-person would occur as Novi members tap into one of their abilities: to see the memories of their ancestors.

Obviously, a theme here would be to never trust what you see or read unless you are absolutely sure it is right (with the only way of doing so being that one was actually there). The last novel may strike a chord with the notion that Novi may become dormant in the future as the human race catches up to its staggering progress and begins to settle for world peace, reiterating the fact that even though hope is for the most part a desperate feeling, its continued presence results in a positive state of mind; in essence, something is better than nothing. Numerous other occasions of drama and romance would occur, with Novi members becoming tied up with the human feelings they are supposed to ignore in order to accomplish their respective goals. With the ability to see memories of the past, notions of "What if?" would be prevalent throughout the series, thus adding to the fictional aspect of the series and inspiring thought-provoking events throughout.

Ultimately, the series would not only provide the entertainment values that a series needs in order to continue its lifespan, but it would also possess messages that become more and more visible as the story progresses towards its inspiring culmination. Given that it is based party off of history, an immense amount of research would have to be done to ensure that the boundaries of the novel are not too far-fetched and that they remain within the confines of possibility (no aliens, for example).

Should the opportunity occur in which I would be able to sit down with enough free time to commit to the series' commencement and ultimate completion, I would take it. The journey would, of course, be satisfying as I learn a great deal of history and improvise 'my own'. But the end result of creating a timeless legacy would, I believe, be something worth experiencing, regardless of how grueling the journey is.

Memento, the opposite of Slaughterhouse Five - John

Memento, possibly one of the greatest movies made to date. It retells the story of Leonard, a man who's lost the ability to hold onto any short term memory, only being able to recall distant memories of a better time, when his wife was still alive. Leonard struggles everyday with his memory problems and he can only move forward, not knowing what's happened in his recent past. While Billy has the ability to know everything about every point in time in his own life, Leonard is able to revisit distant memories in his past and since he's only remembering them and not actually reliving them, they are not always true. Leonard can only move forward, and he barely has any knowledge of the past, while Billy can move to any time he wants. There are also a lot more than just their relation to time.

Memento also has a very non-linear story, but as opposed to Slaughterhouse, the most climactic scene remains at the end of the story. It gives away very little of the story and you must follow it through to understand exactly what happens. Although it does start with the ending, the whole process leading up to it isn't revealed so there is still a sense of mystery. The ending of Memento made the whole experience feel satisfying and fulfilling to watch to the end, while Slaughterhouse only trails off on what is to be an endless story. There's just a better feeling from an ending that feels like it's concluding a story and making the entire film worth watching rather than one that's been spoiled and predictable. It's as if someone tells you the ending of a really good movie that you haven't seen. Every part that's suppose to be suspenseful or climactic wouldn't matter anymore because you already know how things will turn out. The novel might also lose the attention of the reader if it isn't interesting which doesn't help in the slightest of getting the author's messages across.

There's also the difference in their characters. Billy is a static character that has no goal in the novel other than to basically narrate what  goes on around him. He doesn't take chances and only follows the path that's been set for him. Leonard is not like Billy. Leonard is a dynamic character that changes as the story progresses and is crucial for the story to move forward. To me, Billy justs seems to take away from the all the ideas that Vonnegut tries to give and sometimes i read without actually paying attention since the story doesn't seem interesting enough. Leonard, on the other hand, is so adventurous and his story is interesting that i am captivated by it and i want to continue to watch it.

Anyways, everything stated here is just my opinion, you're welcome to disagree.

Beginning, Middle, and End - Milan, WA4

People say that life is a series of events that follow a certain sequence of events: with a beginning, a middle, and an end. Perhaps it is, but it's almost certainly more likely that it isn't. Just as morals were created by humans, it is not unlikely that humans also created the concept of time. Not only is it an easier way of understanding it, but it is also a useful way of structuring our lives to meet some unknown (and perhaps predetermined) goal.
If it, on the offchance that our beliefs are in fact not far from the truth, is true the life can be looked at as a simple timeline of events, then here is a plausible perspective from which one can observe this often-overlooked phenomenon. . .

As the ground began to blur outside, the group of people sat still in their seats. Occasionally, someone would open their mouths in an effort to rid themselves of the growing pressure in their heads. Slowly, the distance between the ground and the people grew, until at some point everyone was angled to the ground and heading towards some distant point in the heavens. The plane straightened itself out as it set a new course towards a predetermined destination off in the far distance. Unfortunately, the jubilance of the situation was lost on a man who had recently lost his mother to what was supposedly natural causes. So it goes. He had, in his grief, neglected to equalize the pressure in his head and soon fell into a state of emptiness.

The man remembered a time where he was on an amusing contraption popularized in the 20th century. The chain hoisted him, along with a group of other people, on an incline towards a steep fall. For others, this steep fall would cause a loss of control. However, the entire path was already set and the way through it could not be changed. As the man neared the top of the incline, his nerves began to build until finally he could no longer wait. At that moment, he fell over and his body felt as if it was floating in thin air. Fortunately, he was held by a harness to prevent this feeling of weightlessness from resulting in death. As the path then once again turned into an incline, the man felt as if he was being pushed through the floor of his seat by an invisible force. A turn, a corkscrew, another turn, a loop, and the man found himself not in pain from the numerous jolts and bumps along the way, but in complete excitement and awe from his experience. The path, however, was being covered in slower and slower paces. The man could see darkness ahead, yet he was not entering with anxiety or fear or regret in his mind. He allowed the shadows to envelop his body and the very corners of his mind.

The ground was visible through a misty and translucent layer of clouds. Time seemed to take an eternity as, gradually, it was so close that one could almost jump out and land without being hurt. Once again, that familiar pressure was encroaching on the man's mind, but he pushed it away for just a few moments. He called his wife to tell her that everything is fine. As the plane came to a stop and the staircase was lowered, the man took his hand-luggage with the memorabilia he'd gathered from his trip and walked to the front of the airplane. Just before he stepped out in the light outside, he smiled. So it goes.

Slipping through time - John

It's 5 p.m. and i'm rushing to finish all of the chores that weren't supposed to be started for another few hours. Why, you may ask? The hell-spawn day known as report card day had arrived; the day that had been solely created to shatter all the youthful dreams of the young and aspiring doctors, astronauts, engineers. It was on this very day that reality had taken me by the head and shaken me awake. It said to me: "John, you're a grown up now. You can now be held accountable for all of your actions." Reality wasn't kind. My first step into high school had been leading me downwards and as time progressed, the lower i had sunk. Lessons started out monotonous and boring but as months passed, the equations and explanations written on the board turned into hieroglyphs. Then came the fateful day, as report cards were distributed out i saw simple numbers recognizable by anyone. 45, it said, was your mark in math. Despair, fear, anxiety, any bad emotion you can think of, all flooded into my body. The wait had been unbearable, the span of time between my arrival at the house and the arrival of my parents seemed like a decade. I racked my mind for solutions to this problem, an escape route, a method of softening the blow, anything to save my life. My brain responded by telling me the same thing that reality was saying: "You are responsible for this. Deal with it."

And then it happened, all the anxiety, fear, doubt dissolved as one emotion stayed behind. Adrenaline. it was adrenaline that told me it was a good idea to follow my friends on a bus to nowhere in the middle of the night when i should have been at home. Adrenaline blocked out reason and pushed me forward. The night was young, and my friends and I were going on an adventure. The bus eventually came to a stop at Hooters, a restaurant that would be closed down years later due to their unsavory back room deals. For the time being thought, we were happy. My adrenaline started to lose its grasp of my mind as it spoke the first logical sentence of the entire night: "what now? you're awfully far from home. How will you explain this to mom and dad?" Once we left the restaurant at roughly 10:30, the rigorous journey had begun. A walk to the closest of our houses would take more than an hour, and no one had the energy to make it. We pushed through the doors of the restaurant and embraced the cool evening breeze. Have you ever had that feeling where you just wanted to get up and move? It's as if you've been stationary for far too long and you had to check if your legs could even take you to where you need to go. I felt like it. So my friends and i just started running, not knowing the exact location of where we were heading but we knew if we headed in a straight line, we'd reach a destination. Adrenaline rushed through my system again, surging through every part of my body as if it were blood. And then everything fades back to black.

I stretch my arms and prepare to resume writing my English project. I can't even remember how many times I've opened this very same document, only to turn away from lack of motivation. The short burst of energy that had onced possesed me dissipated once i saw the screen. Words hadn't appeared, couldn't appear, won't appear. My mind was drawing a blank. It's as if the Neuralyzer from Men in Black was embedded into this page and a simple glance at the screen wipes the mind of and budding ideas. There wasn't much that came to me as i though of more to write about so i returned to surfing the inernet once again. The clock read 6:27, meaning that more than 2 hours had passed without a fraction of a word appearing on the page. Frustration, anger, desperation, my mind furious at the though of having to continue with the endless stream of assessments. The emotions finally become too much to handle and i force any and all thoughs onto the page. Finally, it's come to and end. The torturous task of writing any more ends with the last of this sentence.

Re: Billy Pilgrim, as boring as they come. - Milan, OWA1

Just acting as the 'devil's advocate', the novel isn't necessarily about Billy Pilgrim: it's about life around him. Billy Pilgrim is merely used as a point of view from which one can view society. As such, the novel becomes a story of the people and experiences that Billy sees, not about the character of Billy Pilgrim. It could indeed be said that everything around Billy becomes the characters in the novel; human society and its various facets become characters, while the Tralfamadorians are another character that they represent collectively.

It's impossible to sympathize with Billy (at least in the way that he's presented), because what he thinks and feels are not similar to most of people's personalities. Unlike, say, Napoleon or Snowball from Animal Farm he does not possess any qualities that draw others to him. Quite the contrary, he attempts to distance himself from others whenever he is given the best of chances.

I believe, as I said earlier, that Billy Pilgrim is used as a channel through which readers can observe human society in comparison with the Tralfamadorians (who represent an alternative to our 'popular' way of thinking). Therefore, Billy is in no place to attempt to try to change either society but merely to present us, the readers, with a viable alternative. As this is the ultimate goal of the novel, there can be no more important aspect of the story than Billy for without his unique way of looking in from the outside, it would be much more difficult to escape the pressures of society and thus be able to compare what we have and don't have.

However, there is one aspect in which Billy is used as an example for a reader: his opinion of fate and how he deals with it. Billy knows exactly what's going to happen to him in the future, but he doesn't have the mindset of making it as enjoyable as possible. Humans are the only species on Earth that can foresee possible events far in the future yet also do nothing about it (or be slow to react to it). We are, most commonly, content with what we have and not under pressure to change unless we find it immediately necessary. I believe that the message that is being attempted to be relayed by Vonnegut in his writing of Billy is not to casually accept events as he does, but rather to cherish our time alive and make the most of it. This ties directly into the Tralfamadorian beliefs of focusing on the good in lieu of the bad in life. Billy fails to do so even when he has the opportunity to do so, and we should all take care not to follow in his footsteps, however different they may be from our current way of thinking.

Billy Pilgrim, as boring as they come. - John

I absolutely detest Billy Pilgrim. Every novel to this point has been enjoyable and even exciting, until we've have to read about the melancholy of Pilgrim. I truly believe that you cannot have a great story if there is an absence of a great character to propel it forward. Great characters grow, learn, and most importantly, we can relate and sympathize with these characters, but Billy is only palatable at best. From the rule-bound 1984 to the drug-driven Brave New World, we are offered great characters that are smart, strong and dedicated to their cause. There is a great difference between characters like Bernard and Winston and characters like Billy. You see, Bernard and Winston are event-making while Billy is only eventful. What this means is that Bernard and Winston both set out with a goal in mind as they both try to improve their world. We, as humans, find this noble and is why we appreciate characters as such. Billy, on the other hand is as boring as they come, emotionless and dead inside, and yet this novel is only tolerable since the story that revolves around Billy is interesting.

Bernard and Winston both attempted to change their worlds. Winston tried to expose the government for what it really is and Bernard tried to shake up society with the appearance of John. Although they hadn`t succeeded, they at least attempted  to make a difference and it is was makes their stories so great. Billy, however, is the exact opposite of these men. He is of no great importance and it is only by chance that he obtains the role of the main character in the novel. Bernard and Winston both set out to make an event while Billy allows the events to happen around him.

Billy has no goals in life, which causes him to just wander around aimlessly through time. This is because he already knows exactly what happens in the future, so he has nothing to look forward to, and thus leaving him lifeless. When one's left to believe that destiny is predetermined and any attempt to change is has already been foreseen, one would undoubtedly become dull as well since nothing can be done to change the future. This is what has happened to Billy and is why he never does anything out of the ordinary or try to change anything because he believes that it is fate. This makes Billy unlikeable by the audience because he never tries to do anything different. All in all, Billy could have had some improvements to his character like emotions that would have made him more bearable as a person.

Re: Banning Books, Right or Wrong? - Milan, WA3

I find it ironic that Americans find it necessary to overglorify war. In the process, they ignore the negative effects of war. This does, in fact, match the Tralfamadorian view of focusing on the positive aspects of life. However, back at home Americans are almost encouraged to be pessimistic in their pursuit of prosperity and happiness. Of course this book doesn't reflect their views of war, because the average citizen's view on war is that it can be used for positive end results; the end justifies the means. However, the soldiers are aware of their experiences and realize the true hell that war proves itself to be time and time again. These soldiers in turn attempt to forget as much as possible their traumatizing experiences in order to move on with their lives. But in the process they begin to convince themselves that it was all worth it, and when something contradictory approaches them they feel offended that someone can even propose that the deaths of thousands of soldiers have been for nothing. So it goes.

Mothers may also feel offended because they are told their sons were killed bravely and partiotically fighting for their native country; all families are told exactly the same thing. But fathers who participated in WWI would be the most stricken by such news: they know what terrible atrocities their sons must have seen before they died; they never had the chance to see the truly beautiful moments of life.

Americans never truly grasp the significance of war, and with all likelihood they most likely never will. At home they are encouraged to forget about their tragic experiences, move on, and discontinue their reminiscing. Consequently, they once again conform to the majority in their glorification of war and, for the lower class, their everlasting struggle for prosperity. Do these weak-minded people have the right to even call out against others' opinions when they are ignorant of the facts? Or do they instead have the right to know the truth and choose whether to focus on the good or bad?

Only fate will tell.

But banning a book on account that it contradicts your beliefs is ludicrous. Furthermore, should you be ignorant to the validity of said beliefs, then you've more or less lost your 'right' to an opinion. Vonnegut stands to make a point with his novel, and that point does not include insulting those who choose to fight wars and those who choose to support them. Rather, his message aims to alter peoples' mindsets regarding the root of all wars: and that is people believe that wars are a necessary method to achieve whatever change they believe. Perhaps the means do indeed justify the end, but instead of promoting wars to change the bad in society people should promote social movements to improve the good.

However, this kind of thinking results in a system where the people are empowered to make a change. The only organizations that have the power to change the 'bad' are governments, and without this power governments would lose their iron grip over the populace. In some countries, this kind of thinking has begun to prevail (such as in Canada, where the people decided not to become a military superpower after World War II). But the majority of other countries, unfortunately, do not share our collective way of thinking, and this is who Vonnegut was targeting the message to.

If there would be anything to criticize in Vonnegut's novel it would be the subliminal insistence that the current society is wrong. Even though the Germans in the time period are humanized, they are still known to be monsters by readers that have learned anything about history in the past century. Americans instead take the sharp end of the spear, and their society is almost said to represent all of the developed countries in the world. Clearly, this cannot be true, as the non-developed countries do not share these 'bad' opinions as they have not yet been influenced by more powerful nations. To this day there are wars in the third-world nations of the world where people struggle over their beliefs.

Anyways, the main point here is that Vonnegut's novel deserves to be read by everyone. It is within their entitlements as human beings to have a choice as to how they want to live their lives. If other opinions are blocked out, people are denied the opportunity of living their life to how they see best. In the end, that is a matter which must be considered before thought-provoking novels such as Slaughterhouse-Five are denied from the eyes of readers.

Re: In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue... - Milan, WA2

 This quote focuses on the benefits that came about as a result of discovering the Americas. However, the negatives must be forgotten because if they are not, we will always dwell on the past and create even more suffering in the future. Regardless of how unjust the past may be, it happened because it was meant to happen and because people wanted it that way. It cannot be changed.

If the entire world focused on the negative aspects of life, where would we be? Wars and suffering would be rampant because people, in all their anger of the flaws of the world, would constantly be fighting to change it. On the contrary, if people ignored the truths and improved the positive, then there would be much less suffering as people would be striving to improve the 'good' rather than fighting to change the bad. Through improving the good, the negatives will naturally dissipate.

Take the prison system, for example. Those fighting to focus on the bad and change it, would improve security on the prisons and encourage the imprisonment of criminals. This would solve, in part, the problem of crime. On the other hand, those improving the positive would focus on improving the legislation surrounding crimes, and thus limit it that way. Consequently, less crimes commited means less people in prison. So in both ways, the end result is achieved. However, instead of focusing on the negative one can alternately focus on the positive, achieve the same result, but limit the suffering of the people involved in the entire endeavour.

As you've said, history is indeed written by the victor. In most cases, the brutal truths are either lightly skimmed over or ignored completely. Why? If people were to fully understand the horrors of war, there would be massive upheavals in society; the balance of power would be disrupted, and due to the loss of societal stability more fighting could, and most likely would, erupt.

It is rarely the case where these brutal truths are exposed. When they are, in the case of WikiLeaks, an astonishing amount of controversy is caused. Now, sometimes this controversy is good because it enlightens the populace and gives them a better chance of keeping their 'freedoms'. In this case, it can be said that there's a grey area between focusing on the positive over the negative, and it's up to fate to decide what happens.

There will always be pain and suffering in the world, for that is the way of life and that is how all of our fates are intertwined. Whichever road you decide to travel on, there will always be someone on a better path and someone on a less fortunate route. Whatever we do, we do it because we think it will help us achieve some predetermined goal. We should make our choices so that our lives are the most fulfilling and absent of regret. Tralfamadorians do not tamper with fate because they understand that rather than the end justifying the means, the means is a part of the end. The beginning is the beginning of the end, while the end is a new beginning. Both are unchangeable.

In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue... - John

This year is often remembered as the one where the British colonies first discovered North America, land that they would take for themselves and force the indigenous population out of. Kurt Vonnegut is right in stating that this was the year in which pirates robbed, cheated, and killed those who wished to live full and prosperous lives. It is not a year to remember for the brave and noble actions of the first explorers, but a year to mourn the loss and destruction of a once great group of people.

There's a well-known saying that's been accredited by Winston Churchill: History is written by the victors. This saying has been held to be true throughout history. Those who lose don't have the power to oppose those that win, so anything the winner declares will be stated as true and righteous. In this case, we are meant to see only the good as dictated by the conquerers, which is in this case the foreign pirates. We are also told so little and sometimes even nothing about the evils done to accomplish these goals, but simply ignoring the unsatisfactory truths will not yield a brighter future. By making those who are ignorant of the cruel injustices see the brighter side of things, they belittle the crimes that they committed to accomplish such goals. This is what is meant through the quote, as the children are meant to remember the year as a glorious year, where British colonies were first established, and not of the overtaking of the Natives' land.

This can also be seen clearly in the novel SH5, where the bombing of Dresden was suppose to be remembered as simply the means to an end, yet Vonnegut urges us to remember the people that had once lived in this town. This is why he describes the town in such a normal state, to show people that those fought in wars are not evil humans, but regular people. They live normals lives, toiling from day to day, like many people of the world. The bombing of Dresden is seen as a tragic event that had to have happened to ensure that the Germans surrendered, but through Billy's eyes, we can see that this is not the case. The young girls who lived in Dresden had done nothing wrong, but as Professor Rumford stated: "it had to be done". News of this bombing was also withheld until years into the future, where the impact of such news has been greatly diminished. This is an unjust act of violence and it should never have been committed and any and all future events as such shouldn't be grazed over as this event has been.

The quote demonstrates how people will try to forget the negatives through focusing on the positives, yet this is certainly not the proper method of handling the situation. By focusing on the positives, you do not eliminate the negatives. There will still be pain and suffering in the world even if you try to avoid them. The tralfamadorians focus solely on the positive side of life and ignore the bad things that do happen, yet if they themselves tried to stop unwanted events from occurring, they could have saved the engineer from testing the new fuel. It is not a good idea to leave the bad events as they are but to help correct them, since leaving bad things as they are will not change them for the better.

Re: Billy's Time Travelling Dilemma - Milan, WA1

 Here's a perspective from what I think Vonnegut would say from Billy's perspective regarding his time traveling:

This is Pilgrim here. I read your blog through a special friend of mine who recorded it on microfilm and translated it back to me. I have to say, I enjoyed reading your insights into my thoughts. However, I have a few gripes with your thought process. Why jump so quickly to 'illegal' substances simply because your Earthling mind fails to grasp the entire story? My time traveling isn't an incredible feat, but rather it is a method of me focusing less on the bad moments of life and instead taking it all in as one experience (with more emphasis on the good parts, of course). As you know, I was indeed abducted by the Tralfamadorians who shared with me their insights on Earthling society. They call us the great explainers, and this time I will fulfill the namesake that with which we have been labeled.

Why should I want to change my fate? That in itself is impossible, because fate is unyielding; it is something forever frozen in time, like bugs in amber. Moments in the future are meant to occur simply because the moment is structured that way. Your free will only depends on the context in which you are speaking. For example, in the case of destiny, there is no free will for destiny has already taken into account all of the choices you will make. However, your destiny collides with other events in life and even other people, which leads us to believe that we have a choice in our future. Should you instead ignore the fact the fate is already decided, then you obviously believe that you have a choice in how you want to live. While this may be true from that perspective, fate has already taken all of your choices and change of hearts into mind when it was created. These are things that everyone must accept and understand before they can even begin to fathom the values that the Tralfamadorians follow and uphold.

Furthermore, people are meant to die because we are all destined to pass away at a predetermined time that we do not know until it has passed. People will pass away all the time, so why bother thinking about such a depressing topic? It is better to remember the times that those people were alive rather than when they are gone. War is a result of the fact that humans dwell on the past, and more specifically negative things in the past, and want to change the future. If we accepted that the future is already predetermined and that it cannot be changed, than we would save ourselves the suffering of fighting for it and instead lend ourselves the massive benefit of enjoying our lives the way they are now and instead focus in improving them. If there are no negative thoughts in everyone's mind, it is impossible for war to occur because it is a direct result of people wishing to fight one another over the change of something detrimental in their lives.

So, my friend, whoever you are, know that I'm a human being as you are. But the difference between you and I lies in the ideals that we cherish and live towards fulfilling. You live believing that your ideals are things that have to be fought for, and in doing so the end justifies the means; I live believing our ideals must be deserved and fought for without the mindset of killing others before they can come to fruition.

Billy's Time Travelling Dilemma - John

Oh Mr. Pilgrim, how do you accomplish this incredible feat known as time travelling? Is it really a divine gift allowing you to move through time, or is it merely just your imagination, taxed from the stress of war? With the possibility of travelling through time, I honestly don't understand why you haven't tried changing your life. You had the ability to right all the wrongs with your life, having seen everything an endless amount of times, yet you idly walk through your time travelling moments, not even trying to alter things for the better. Why wouldn't you stop Weary from bullying you or not board the airplane you knew would end the life of your father-in-law? My understanding of this has led me to believe that you can't control what happens, because it isn't a case of time-travelling.

Another possibility is shell-shock, a word used to describe the physiological trauma caused by the horrors of war. This option also seems improbable because let's be honest, what misfortunes have you seen in war? Casually strolling through while your comrades die at your side, not even armed or prepared to fight the enemy? Have you pondered the gruesome feelings that others experience in war times? Is there not a time where you felt disgust at the sight of death and decay that lies around you? I doubt so, with your monotonous way of living.

This leads us to my theory. Your so called "time-travelling" is induced by a powerful hallucinogen, allowing you to supposedly see the past as well as the future. I've racked my brain for any other possible methods of how you do what you do but this comes to me as the only possible logical answer. And we all know that you're no stranger to drugs either; remember the giraffes? Now wasn't that a drug-induced hallucination? What other explanation is there for the deranged visions that you perceive? with all this talk of tralfamadorians and such. Who would honestly believe your stories of such dubious creatures? The moments where you lose track of time and lose all the feelings in your body. Hasn't it happened before, such as when you nearly froze yourself to death without being able to feel or even notice that your daughter was outside your doorsteps. Hallucinogens dull the senses and leave you in this monotonous state. So pick your poison, Mr. Pilgrim, your adventures await.