The Things They Carried.

wveah, Literature is open to interpretation. It is not science. I am sure you can make a well reasoned argument to substantiate your point.

There is no doubt that this story transcends war. We all carry intense emotions that can never be put down.
 
You are right there. Perhaps some of those feeling were present for some but maybe on a more personal level rather than the soldiers as a group. For the most part, we who served in that war were the children of the generation that won World war ll and saved the freedom of the then free world. Those were big boots to fill. It was even worse when it became apparent that the freedom of the world was not an issue in that war. Making the fat cats fatter was the issue of that war. The credibility of the government really became a big issue. Then and now its not the solider who should be questioned.

Those whom served however can hold their head high as they did all that was ask of them by their country. I guess I should say, that they did all they were allowed to do.:mad:

If the point of his writing was to make people think then I believe he made his point.
 
We each have our own perspective of history. Some of us who were there, some from reading writings of those who were there, and some from what they were taught in schools and colleges since that time.

I am well reminded of the tale of the blind men who examined an elephant and thus presented their conclusions about the beast.

John Godfrey Saxe's ( 1816-1887) version of the famous Indian legend,

It was six men of Indostan,
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

The First approach'd the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, -"Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear,
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"

The Third approach'd the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," -quoth he- "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee:
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," -quoth he,-
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said- "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Then, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," -quoth he,- "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

MORAL,

So, oft in theologic wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean;
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!


The above version of Saxe's poem was published in 1878 in Linton's "Poetry of America" and can be found via Google Book Search. It is the oldest and hence best version I am aware of.


Further study on the subject might include such diverse writings as "A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam" by Neil Sheehan.

(review here) http://brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/533/Bright Shini.htm

And "Battle Ready" by Tom Clancey and Generat Tony Zinni (former commander in chief of CENTCOM).

(review here)
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0604/0604battleready.htm

There are literally hundreds of books about this period in history written from all perspectives from government players down to the common soldier. Perspectives changed from time passed, as well as where one's feet were planted at the time.

Codger
 
Of course it is open to interpretation. The poit I was trying to make was that I have not fought in war, and am therefore unable to to fully empathize with those who have. it does not reduce my respect for those that have, however.
 
Midwest Ninja said:
Of course it is open to interpretation. The poit I was trying to make was that I have not fought in war, and am therefore unable to to fully empathize with those who have. it does not reduce my respect for those that have, however.
Click to expand...

Please do not think that I am thumping on anyone here. I certainly am not. And I have certain respect for other opinions and perspectives, even those I disagree with. I am pretty sure that my own perspective is not the only correct one, if it is indeed correct at all. I'm still not sure what part of the elephant's anatomy I haver ahold of. And I am not sure I want to know!

Codger
 
Well others besides you seemed to be getting the wrong impression, so I was simply clrifying my ideas (it helps when you can't spell eh?) No problems. :)
 
The unexamined life is not worth living.
~Socrates

There are far more questions than answers and this is what I enjoy in life. Certainty is for other people.

I truly believe in that statement. It is the people who KNOW that scare me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top