Not Explicitly

I have to accept that I actually got excited with these two chapters. I understood how, listening to Radio Lab, reading Slaughterhouse-Fie and reading the Handbook of Epictetus were all connected, only by these two chapters, and part from the previous one. Even learning satire and the characteristics is involved and wrapped together with Candide. Pangloss is Epictetus, the tutor of Candide that is Billy Pilgrim, or Kurt Vonnegut, the concepts of Pangloss are Radio Lab’s experiments on free will, and it all involves satire. For example, “During treatment, Pangloss lost only an eye and an ear.” (pg. 31) This quotation can be interpreted in many ways. It can be satire, it is using hyperbole by the fact that Pangloss had “lost only”, as if loosing an eye and an ear were nothing important of relevant, when it actually is. If it is analyzed as Epictetus would, then he is just letting his fate flow, it is not up to him what he looses or what he doesn’t,
I think both ways are right. “On the voyage Pangloss explained to him how all was designed for the best.” (pg. 31) As I stated before, Pangloss is the representation of Epictetus, maybe not explicitly, but theoretically, yes. He believes that if he lets nature destiny lead him to where he is supposed to be, not manipulating the things that are not up to him, then “it is all design for the best”. The book itself states a question that was tried to answer by experiments in Radio Lab, such as how the brain works in specific situations, dividing it up into rational and emotional sides of the brain. “Then you don’t believe in Free Will, sir?’ said the officer.”(pg. 35) Pangloss doesn’t, he believes that free will is dependable of Absolute Necessity. Does Epictetus agree on that? It might. Epictetus says that what is up to is what we can change, and therefore we are not supposed to be worrying about the things that are not up to us, so we cannot choose from those that are not up to us, because if we do, we would be miserable. Is Free Will dependable of Absolute Necessity? It probably is.

Connections

“At the court martial he was graciously permitted to choose between being flogged thirty-six times by the whole regiment or having twelve bullets in his brain.” (pg. 24) What would you choose?
I asked my mother, she said that she would prefer being flogged thirty-six times, and asked her why, she said that she just had to go through a lot of pain and then there was hope of living, of life, and that was all it mattered. I asked my dad, he said that he would also choose the flogging, I asked him why, he said because he would not give up so easily. No matter what were the odds for him to survive, he would not give up in one decision of ending the suffering or bearing more suffering for later be alive. I asked myself, and surprisingly I think I would have preferred to be shot. I asked myself why, and I think that I prefer death than humiliation, with the whipping the whole regiment would enjoy my suffering while I cried and tried to behave under the pain. I would prefer to die. My way of thought surprised me, I am not a person that gives up so easily, I usually go as far as I can to get what I want, but I would give up if it comes to war.

By the third chapter of Candide I realized that it is a novel of war, there was a portrait of a war that had just ended that reminded me of Slaughterhouse-Five, I realized that Candide was indeed an antiwar book as well. There was a kind of much more subtle mocking than in Slaughterhouse-Five, but there is, “Bugles, fifes, oboes, drums, and salvoes of artillery produced such a harmony as hell itself could not rival.” (pg. 25) It is a piece of satire! It is a hyperbole, and an absurdity for Voltaire to talk about the “beauty and brilliance” of the war setting. At first sight it appears as though he actually believes so, but he doesn’t, this quote made me understand that he was not serious: “Finally, the bayonet provided ‘sufficient reason’ for the death of several thousands.” (pg. 25) Voltaire does not think that there is such thing as enough reason to kill thousands of people, if he did, he would not have used the tone he did, or the quotations. My statement is reinforced by the way the “theater of war” was described so obscene, in page 26, “Whichever way he looked, the ground was strewn with the legs, arms, and brains of dead villagers.”

I not only connected what I read from Candide with Slaughterhouse-Five, but with Epictetus. Candide was taught the theory of cause and effect by the brilliant tutor Pangloss, and he tells the only man that takes care of him in the village what his tutor had taught him, “…he told me that all is for the best in this world of ours,” (pg. 27) The Handbook of Epictetus states that, nature does not bring anything wrong, that everything that is naturally occurring that is not up to us is good, never bad. Just like Candide says. At least he had that clear.

No Man Like Him

Oh my God! Can there be a more amazing person, sorry, Baron, on Earth? He is such an exemplary man! He is in charge of the village Westphalia, as completed his duty succesfully. He had such fine judgment, oh! I wish I could be like him! So modest was he, that he bragged about his incredible mansion that “had a door and several windows” (pg. 19). In Westphalia, he had so much respect and was so influencial that everybody laughed at his jokes, how could they not? His son, whom has very much like himself, had a tutor, whom I would have love to have! Pangloss was his name. he proved that “there is no effect without a cause”, can you believe it? That means that for example, you cannot laugh if there is nothing that makes you laugh, for instance Baron Thunder-ten-Tronckh’s jokes.

The Baron was so nice that he was taking care of Candide a very simple lad that was not even his son! But without hesitation he took care of him, even though he was the son of a “worthy gentleman” (pg. 19) that just didn’t appear. Pangloss states that legs are to for breeches to be used and that’s why he wears them, along with Candide. I cannot find another reason for the intention of legs but to wear breeches, or noses than to have spectacles, no for smelling whatsoever, but for spectacles! The Baron didn’t hesitate a second that Pangloss was the best tutor for his son. Oh! And the baroness daughter! Lady Cunegonde was so fine, so well educated that fell for a kiss of Candide, the young simple lad. But ofcorse she was also interested in science! She found amazing that legs were intended to wear breeches, that triggered her to learn and learn more about cause and effect, and how when she drops her handkerchief at the precise moment she might end up kissing and touching with the characteristic Candide.

Do Not Swallow It All

Epictetus is trying to encourage avoiding mistakes. It is a guide to be tranquil, to live as the best way possible, to not get frustrated, isn’t it? If you are not supposed to be a football player, no matter how much you want it to be, you will not be. I agree that one has to analyze what it takes to do or be whatever you want to be. I committed that mistake, I thought I could be a ballet dancer starting to dance at 14 years old, turns out I started too late and I don’t have the muscles to be one, as Epictetus says, “But consider what leads up to it and what follows it, and undertake the action in the light of that.” (Section 29), what leads to be a ballet dancer building the muscles according to it, training almost everyday, having an specific weight, I don’t have that. Therefore, I cannot be one. I consider myself a “child” as Epictetus describes it, “who play wrestlers on time, gladiators another time, blow trumpets another time, then act a play.” (Section 29) I want to be a good student, read books, sing, dance, run, do Pilates, go to the gym, and be good at every single thing. Epictetus says I shouldn’t, I say I love to.

Yet, I don’t agree with some of the advices. Epictetus is wrong that one should care the same about other’s loses than in our own. How can we? If a beloved one, a part of our life dies it hurts us much more than it will hurt someone else. There is no way to change that feeling. “But when one’s own dies, immediately it is, “Alas! Poor me!” But we should have remembered how we feel when we hear of the same thing about others” (Section 26) There is no point of comparison. I know that when it comes to a cup we should not give much importance or different importance if its our cup or someone else’s… but not a love one, is not the same. Epictetus cannot compare a thing to a someone, is not the same and it will not be. I have learned not to believe everything I read. Even though Epictetus might be based on thorough studies and might be effective if well practiced, I do not take it all for granted.

Frost's Letter

Mr. Frost,

If I may, let me tell you that you are mistaken. You say that what the future might be, you can see it and take the best decision because id up to you. Well, sorry to put it down for you, but it is not up to you. You have analyzed two ways to go, your destiny and have not accepted what is to come naturally. I think that you have to be ready for anything, yet not decide it. You have to say to yourself when something goes not according to planned, “I want to take a bath and to keep my choices in accord with nature.” (Section 4) When two option where proposed to you in your aging time, you “I took the one less traveled by,” (Robert Frost, the Road Not Taken, 19.) interfering with what is not up to you! How could you? If you had just taken the decision that naturally was going to be, then you would not be miserable and not have to “be telling this with a sigh,” (The Road Not Taken, 17.) But with a smile and felt “freedom and happiness,” (Section 1) of not averring a road that might not be the appropriate for you Mr. Frost.

I say you have to learn that you are not the one that takes the decision of your life, “Remember that you are an actor in a play, which is as the playwright wants it to be: short if he wants it short, long if he wants it long.” (Section 17)Since you are not the playwright then why are you choosing which way to go, analyzing both roads, “and looked down one as far as I could” (4). If I were to teach you what is it that you are supposed to do to not be miserable and upset, I would have taken the road more traveled. The road that naturally appeals to be traveled and therefore is more traveled. I assure you Mr. Frost that if you listen to my advices, your poems would be different along with your life. “And that has made all the difference” (20)

Sincerely,

Epictetus

Got It?

Unfortunately death is something that we might never the accustomed to, even though it is our judgments that are dreadful, death creates sadness, loneliness and sorrow. Sadly, there are not many people that follow the teachings of the Handbook of Epictetus, nor of the many other philosophical books, and do grief when there is death. The loss of a loved one is one of the most painful sensations. No matter how much we know about life and how it should be lived. Section 21 states that, “ Let death and exile and everything that is terrible appear before your eyes every day, especially death; and you will never have anything contemptible in your thoughts or crave anything excessively.” There is no way to avoid death or exile. Something that you can do is try not to avoid it. I think that is way Epictetus is trying to day with this section, death will happen, just try not to avoid it because you can’t and if you don’t try to avoid then when it comes it does not hit you that hard.

When pain happens to you, we usually ask ourselves, “why me?” and question “why not him? Or her?” There is no point of argument. Everybody has a different director of their own play. Epictetus says that, “you cannot demand an equal shade if you did not do the same things, with a view to getting things that are not up to us.” (Section 25) Everybody has something that is up to them, and that is not up to us, what is up to is what we can change, we cannot change what is up to them. JA! Got that? The point is, that there is no reason why to compare yourself to someone else, because their things are theirs because they pay for them, you haven’t. When suffering comes knocking on your door is because that is the way it is supposed to be, and it hasn’t knocked on others door because it might knock later for something else, “If they are bad, do not be angry that you did not get them.” (Section 25)

Be Carried Away

Appearance is a very controversial thing. Billions of dollars are spent for appearance, physical appearance, marketing appearance, money appearance, etc. We were raised to buy appearance. Specially be carried away by it. In the industry, most of the budget is used in selling appearance, the marketing industry is one of the biggest industries and they specialize in appearance. Make up! Being skinny, buying nice cloths, hair cuts, it is al about learning how to sell your appearance. And even though we are told a million times that it is what’s inside that counts and not the outside, we keep on buying make up and judging appearances. Epictetus Handbook, in sections 16, 18, 19 and 20 says, “do not be carried away by the appearance.” I think it is a very strong statement. When you buy something, even though you want it, you are buying its appearance, what you see, what you get through your eyes. As Epictetus says, if you do, you are not be free. You have to know what are the things that are up to you, appearances are not. “Most importantly, therefore, try not to be carried away by appearance, since if you once gain time and delay you will control yourself more easily.” (Section 20) How can you gain time and delay? The only way is by letting things flow, as I stated in the previous blog. If I can learn as much as I want form this Handbook, I will at least try not to get carried away, but try, as the cliché says, look in the insight and control myself more easily.

Naturally

WOW.

I have a real interest in Handbooks like this. Last year I read Confucius, and the Tao Te Ching, and even though I had trouble understanding completely what was it that was tried to be transmitted, I did enjoy it. I need people or books (in this case) to remind me that life cannot be seen by one perspective, that there is infinite ways to act, to think, to feel, to see and that my job is to find the right way.

The way I understood it, every section has an idea that links to the following section and the previous one. Section 4 talks about not getting annoyed by stupid things. I think that section was directed to me, I need to learn to say as Epictetus says to, “Oh, well, I wanted not only this but also to keep my choices in accord with nature, and I cannot do that if I am annoyed with things that happen.” (Section 4) I hate that things don’t go accordingly to planned. But again, I need to understand that it is not of my own to control that, “But if you think that only what is your is yours, and that what is not yours is, …, not your own, then no one will ever coerce you.” (Section 1) What it mine and what is not mine? How can I determine that? Epictetus suggests that things like our opinion, or decisions or dreams are up to us, but that our body and reputation are not up to us. Which, I have to disagree. It depends on us (is up to us) if we are considered a disciplined person or an honest person or a liar, we decide if our character is one way or another, no one else determines that, among other statements I disagree with.

As I pointed out, letting things flow by nature takes a big effort from me. “Do not seek to have events happen as you want them to, but instead want them to happen as they do happen,” (Section 8) I have always been taught to seek for events to happen as I wish them to happen: the score on a test, the future of my life or the outcome of am effort. If I can’t wait for them to happen was I want to, then maybe just act without giving too much though about it, “Make use only of impulse and its contrary rejection,” (Section 2)

Why So It Goes?

Kurt Vonnegurt attitude towards the people that die in his book has a sense of being.

Based on the Tralfamadorians, the person doesn’t die, just the corpse.
(pg. 27)

He himself is not afraid of death and sees it as a n upcoming event. (pg.143)

Some examples of his attitude (pg.101)

God Grant Me

I know that of all the events that end the last two last chapters, the silver chain around Montana Wildhack’s neck is not the most important thing. Nonetheless, it is to me. The prayer or quotation that is written in the necklace, has been very important to me. Throughout a long time it has helped me and my family. It is known to be the prayer for the addicts. In AA (alcoholic Anonymous), the quote is prayed in the beginning and sometimes end of every session.

“God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom always to tell the difference.” (pg.209)

I can read this citation over and over again, and every time I read, it has an effect in me. Every line has a very strong meaning. I wonder why Vonnegut chose this phrase to be mentioned twice in his novel. (pg. 60 and 209) I guess that it helped him to overcome the post war shock as well, they way it helped me. In terms of war, having the serenity to accept that he cannot change might make him admit that he alone cannot change the conflicts and actions that some nations make. Redundantly Slaughterhouse-Five is an anti-war book, therefore he is somehow fighting war (having the courage to accept the things he can) by writing this book, but recognizing that even though it is pathetic, it still fought, and he fought it. When Vonnegut mocks war with pieces of satire and science fiction he has the wisdom to tell the difference.

As in what the book leaves to me, a very different view of what a war book might be (or in this case and anti-war). Vonnegut transmits his thoughts of war very clearly, the way he talks about it and the tone and attitude that he attributes to his accounts, not only makes me get a different perspective of the bombing in Dresden and war itself but enjoy the book.

He Is Eventually Killed

“There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations, because most of the people in it are so sick and so much the listless playthings of enormous forces.” (pg.164). The only character of the story is himself, Billy Pilgrim. Vonnegut talks a lot about “poor old Derby”, he is very shocked that he was killed by a series of shooting. He talks about him like if he were a much loved person in his life. As he himself says, he is one of the only real characters of his story, besides himself. Derby reminds me of the father in La Vita e Bella he was also killed shot many time against a wall. Guido (the father) was also the only one trying to be a character; he was inventing a story for his son not to be discouraged by the horrid environment of war, and he was the protagonist of the story. This also happens during World War II. He is eventually killed, as is Derby.

As we discussed, the way Vonnegut has organized the events and the way he talks about the bombing is not as expected. How can the song of a foursome be described and given more importance to than the actual bombing of Dresden. A big part of the chapter is Billy’s reaction to the quartet singing. “Billy thought hard about the effect the quartet had on him, and then found an association with an experience he had had long ago.” (pg. 177) Slaughterhouse-Five is a novel that reflects how traumatized was Kurt by the war. Everything that is happening has a connection to the effect war had on him. The a description of the bombing and the people dying and what happens to him in war is not at all the point of the book. Kurt simply wants to show us how what is war, the consequences not the actual war. If what he wanted to do was write a book on everyday at war, with full description and tragedy memories, he would have done that. He didn’t.

Maybe Satire

While reading chapter Six, i was aware to find satire. I agree with you (Mr. Tangen), satire needs skill. To be able to write something that somebody else, stranger to you, understands the humor and sense of it or even laugh, takes talent.

“She asked Gluck if he wasn’t awfully young to be in the army. He admitted that he was.
She asked Edgar Derby if he wasn’t awfully old to be in the army. He said he was.
She asked Billy Pilgrim what he was supposed to be. Billy said he didn’t know. He was just trying to keep warm.” (pg 159)

The third time that the phrase “She asked” is repeated made me giggle and the fact that she asked what Billy was “supposed” to be made me laugh. Billy responds ironically, she does not ask him what he was doing but what he was supposed to be. That is funny too. Hyperbole is used with the word “awfully”, it is not very exaggerated but it gives a little too much emphasis. It is targeted to war, to the absurdity of the soldiers.

Many

I've done many things today. I am very tired because of doing many things. I had to read many words. I had many classes at school. I ate many strawberries this afternoon. I had many arguments today. I have many things to do. I appreciate many people, among them, Mr. Tangen. My eyes have closed many times while writing this. I am going to sleep, after many manys.

Wacked

There were 3 things that caught my mind.

1. Lazzaro killing a dog, and his conception of revenge.
2. Billy dying.
3. The Slaughterhouse-Five.

Starting by the third thing that caught my mind, I did not know what slaughterhouse ment: “–noun, plural -hous⋅es, A building or place where animals are butchered for food; abattoir.”(dictionary.com) It is quite a shocking description, having into consideration that “Now it was going to serve as a home away form home for one hundred American prisoners of war.” (pg. 152) Since it is the title of the book it makes it even more emphasized. This “home”, without a doubt had a lot of importance to Vonnegurt live as a soldier, besides the war itself. From my poor German, Schlacht means battle and hof means something like yard or playground. Literally Schlachthof means battlefield or battle yard. It gives a lot to say. So It Goes.

How come Billy dies? How could he die if it is himself that is writing the book. Unless he expects to die from a murder lead by Lazzaro, what happened confused me. “Vonnegut died on April 11, 2007, in Manhattan, following a fall at his Manhattan home several weeks earlier which resulted in irreversible brain injuries” (Wikipedia), he evidently didn’t die by being killed. Why would he write that Billy died? What effect was he expecting from the reader? In my case, I read the paragraph about three times to reassure that I was reading what was written. It made me think, analyze, Billy didn’t die, at least not in the book. “…, and it is time for me to be dead for a little while-and then live again.” (pg. 143) In real life you can’t: Die and live again, travel through time, or be abducted by Tralfamadorians. Kurt was traumatized. So It Goes.


I cant believe someone can tell the story of how he killed a dog in the most torturous way I’ve ever heard and enjoy it. While I pictured the poor innocent dog eating the steak with blades inside and cutting all his insides I got goose bumps or horror. Lazzaro enjoyed it. “Anybody ever asks you what the sweetest thing in life is-“said Lazzaro, “it’s revenge.” (pg. 139) I can’t agree less with him. Revenge is immature and evil. I do accept that id someone hurts you, you feel so mad at that person that you want him to feel the same. But to the point that you actually enjoy killing somebody because he/she bite you, or touched you, its insane. Lazzaro was insane. So It Goes.

Hyper Author

Here I am once again, absolutely exhausted, after a very long day and I am assigned to read Chapter 5 of Slaughterhouse-Five. I thought I would not take long, but it happened to be the longest chapter up till now. I finally finished it and realized that it was not only long, but very hard to keep up with. Kurt, or I should say, Billy, is a very hyper author. In 50 pages, he took me (as the reader) to more than 5 places with a transition of a sentence. “Moments after that, the saucer entered a time warp, and Billy was flung back into his childhood.” (Pg. 88) That is just an example of the whole chapter pattern. Why would Kurt need to jump around so much? Maybe he found it boring to be talking about the same topic for more that a page or two without variation. It is very paradox. This book should be a “pillar of salt”, a memorial of Kurt Vonnegut and his experience in the bombing of Dresden. We discussed in class the reason why Kurt adheres a science fiction tale (Tralfamadore) to a true-story base novel. I think that he himself was way to overwhelmed by his anecdotes that he wouldn’t write about it in such a dense way without any breaks, such as jumping around in time or inventing part of the book.

“He groped for the light, realized as he felt the rough walls that had traveled back to 1944, to the prison hospital again.” (pg. 123) Billy has, evidently, gone through a lot of situations. The mare situations make the novel mysterious because not all the situations are deeply of completely explained, just breezed through. It makes me eager to know more about the prison hospital and before I know it I am back to Billy’s honeymoon with “baby fat” Valencia. It is astonishing how Kurt remembers his history so very well detailed, he knew that the walls of the prison hospital were “rough” and that he was scared of falling of the Canyon and peed if his father touched him. But as the jumping around is for a reason, the details can be exaggerated or invented, and so on.

Dear Mr. Pilgim,

I suspect that you have serious mental issues. You are not pleased to stay at one topic at a time, or at one place at time. Your issues have gone so far that you have even made up stories about being kidnapped by Tralfamadorians. But I get it you have been through a lot and being in a war, as an American prisoner is not easy. IT is not easy either to be trapped in a boxcar for a very long time, were the conditions were like this: “It was black in the car and black outside the car, which seemed to be going about two miles an hour.” (pg. 77) and you had to take turns lying down or standing up, but in your case you could not liw down and sleep, because “You yell. You kick” (pg.78) I feel sorry for you. Also witnessing the death of one of your only “friends” in war, Roland Weary. And the death of the hobo, who was the one who encourage you not to complain because there were things far worse.

What really concerns me is that you do believe that the Tralfamadorians took you, How can you be so sure? Haven’t you considered the idea that you might have been affected by the fact that you were a prisoner for a long time in Germany? I think that’s the problem. You have been psychologically traumatized so much that you do think that Tralfamadore exists and you, in fact, have been kidnapped. I hope you realize that such things are not true, those kinds of stories are not possible. Nonetheless, I hope in our next meeting you tell me more about your time at Dresden as a prisoner and I might understand you better Mr. Pilgrim, I believe you have a very complex mind to figure out.

Sincerely,
Mariana Sanz de Santamaria

So It Still Goes

There is one thing about war that amazes me. It’s a fight against the same team. For a long time we have divided us into all kinds of races, nationalities, ethnics and a various of other sub groups and we don’t see or realize (or agnorisis) that we are all effectively the same, as the cliché constantly says. They are (we are) human beings fighting against human beings. I am not saying that wars have not a reason, they do and they are fought because we are driven into that in all kinds of ways, yet we are fighting each other. The same way we need to clean our planet and take care of it, by watching out for global warming, recycling, etc. It’s for humanity’s sake. Humanity’s sake also involves not killing each other, not diminishing each other, not disrespecting each other.

“Human beings in there were took turns standing or lying down. The legs of those who stood were like fence posts driven into a warm, squirming, farting, sighing earth.” (pg. 70) That’s infamy, and yet it’s nothing like what others have lived through. Some of the anecdotes of other’s suffering make me shiver, I don’t really like either reading descriptions of death not seeing them, and I feel as though my blood pressure drops. “There was another long silence, with the colonel dying and dying, drowning where he stood.” (pg. 66) I picture the colonel in agony, and I think to myself, he was just like me, a human.

So It Goes.

So It Goes

Chapter Three has been a very, very strange chapter. It jumped form time to time, to different issues, characters, situations and stories. As I understood Billy Pilgrim is the protagonist of Slaughterhouse Five, if I’m wrong he is just part of the story. The perfect description of the chapter is stated at the beginning of it “He has walked through a door in 1955 and come out another one in 1942. he has gone back through that door to find himself in 1963.” (pg 23)That’s exactly what happens in the chapter. Vonnegut connects one decade with the other without previous announcement, so a close attention is needed not to get lost while writing.

What definitely caught my attention about this chapter is the story of Tralfamadore. “He said that he had been kidnapped by the Tralfamadorians on the night of his daughter’s wedding. He hadn’t been missed, he said, because Tralfamadorians had taken him through a time warp, so that he could be on Tralfamadore for years, and still be away from Earth for only a microsecond.” (pg. 26) I read this quote about three times. I remembered Narnia, the Lion the Witch and The Wardrobe, how the four siblings could be in Narnia for years and come back to Earth like if no time had passed. What caught my attention was how off the topic this Tralfamadore “trip” from the Dresden war destruction account. It does make it a little less personal and less credible; it even makes it as it were science fiction.

“So it goes” The phrase had caught my eye since chapter one, I had underlined all the times that it was written because it was odd that many paragraphs ended with “so it goes.” I finally understood that it had to do with the mystery of Tralfamadore “Now, when I myself hear that somebody is dead, I simply shrug and say what the Tralfamadorians say about dead people, which is ‘So it goes.’” (pg 27) The quote relates the science fiction of Tralfamadore with the life story of Billy in war, which is the main basis of the book: war. “So it goes” give me the sense of giving up, for me is similar to “whatever”, there is nothing you can do about it. He died, so what? So it goes.