Sunday 17 April 2011
Agreeing with Tareq all the way
I would like to start off by saying that Tareq's blog is an excellent source of ideas. It is very inciteful, entertaining and very descriptive. If you would like to check it out, here is the link:
http://slaughterhouse511.blogspot.com/
I would like to start commenting on your post about the organization of the novel. I agree with you 100%. If time travel had taken a hike, it wouldn't be a story, it would be just a book with words in the wrong order; the time travel aspect puts all the pieces of the puzzle together. To focus on the tricky parts of the novel in which everything could potentially become Billy's imagination, you could check out my very first post. It focuses on the alternate options as to how he time travels. It also comes into relation with why Vonnegut uses the time traveling as the main plot. I hope it can help your understanding. As well, I totally believe that the war aspect allows a contrast of good and bad moments in which you should focus more on the good moments. This hidden messaging is another reason why it would be so hard to create a film about the transgressions of Billy, which brings me to your next post.
Nobody could remake such a novel into a physical film. It would be too confusing. Sure, the trailer would intrigue most people as most trailers don't focus enough on the plot argot people won't understand what that plot is, but they go see it because it is intriguing. And writing it down on paper is pretty much the only way to truly understand the plot of this story, as you are able to re-read certain ideas. Exactly. And symbolism and subliminal messaging are very prominent in the novel, so much that you couldn't perceive it all from a movie. It's a visual aid, for god's sake. I would say a mistake is the perfect word for it all.
The last post I will comment on is the one that is truly similar to a post of mine. This is the comparison between the personalities of Billy Pilgrim and Forrest Gump. Forrest Gump is one of my favorite movies, an instant classic! The fact that you haven't seen it until recently is a crime! Just kidding. The content of your comparison is spot on. Luck and innocence are the main traits between them, even though they do live completely separate lives. I also noticed how harmless these two are. This is until they are told to kill, which could be prevalent in the war scene. Which could mean that they are also very loyal. Forrest obtains the record for putting together a lethal weapon despite his 75 IQ, and his only reason for doing it so quickly is because he was told to do it. Forrest prevails while Billy scrapes by while the world dumps on him. As I said in my post about these two, I completely agree that the only difference is their attitude. After researching that Vonnegut is an atheist, I learned that the reasons as to why Billy is dumped on by his superiors is because Vonnegut doesn't believe in fate. He believes that free will is what makes your future which is why Billy is depressed then and now. Forrest on the other hand is mostly happy with his life because fate gives him a break and allows luck to build him up.
Overall, I believe that all of your posts are thorough and persuasive. That is, everyone has their own opinions. And so ends my blog.
So it goes.
http://slaughterhouse511.blogspot.com/
I would like to start commenting on your post about the organization of the novel. I agree with you 100%. If time travel had taken a hike, it wouldn't be a story, it would be just a book with words in the wrong order; the time travel aspect puts all the pieces of the puzzle together. To focus on the tricky parts of the novel in which everything could potentially become Billy's imagination, you could check out my very first post. It focuses on the alternate options as to how he time travels. It also comes into relation with why Vonnegut uses the time traveling as the main plot. I hope it can help your understanding. As well, I totally believe that the war aspect allows a contrast of good and bad moments in which you should focus more on the good moments. This hidden messaging is another reason why it would be so hard to create a film about the transgressions of Billy, which brings me to your next post.
Nobody could remake such a novel into a physical film. It would be too confusing. Sure, the trailer would intrigue most people as most trailers don't focus enough on the plot argot people won't understand what that plot is, but they go see it because it is intriguing. And writing it down on paper is pretty much the only way to truly understand the plot of this story, as you are able to re-read certain ideas. Exactly. And symbolism and subliminal messaging are very prominent in the novel, so much that you couldn't perceive it all from a movie. It's a visual aid, for god's sake. I would say a mistake is the perfect word for it all.
The last post I will comment on is the one that is truly similar to a post of mine. This is the comparison between the personalities of Billy Pilgrim and Forrest Gump. Forrest Gump is one of my favorite movies, an instant classic! The fact that you haven't seen it until recently is a crime! Just kidding. The content of your comparison is spot on. Luck and innocence are the main traits between them, even though they do live completely separate lives. I also noticed how harmless these two are. This is until they are told to kill, which could be prevalent in the war scene. Which could mean that they are also very loyal. Forrest obtains the record for putting together a lethal weapon despite his 75 IQ, and his only reason for doing it so quickly is because he was told to do it. Forrest prevails while Billy scrapes by while the world dumps on him. As I said in my post about these two, I completely agree that the only difference is their attitude. After researching that Vonnegut is an atheist, I learned that the reasons as to why Billy is dumped on by his superiors is because Vonnegut doesn't believe in fate. He believes that free will is what makes your future which is why Billy is depressed then and now. Forrest on the other hand is mostly happy with his life because fate gives him a break and allows luck to build him up.
Overall, I believe that all of your posts are thorough and persuasive. That is, everyone has their own opinions. And so ends my blog.
So it goes.
Billy Pilgrim=Forrest Gump
I know multiple people may have touched upon this subject, but it is a very relatable topic, so you can't hog all the good ideas.
Innocence. If described in one word, Billy Pilgrim is innocent. If described in one word, Forrest Gump is innocent. Harmless, loyal, innocent. That's 3 words that describe both of these fellows. I could go on all day. Billy Pilgrim is Forrest Gump. Or should I say that Forrest Gump is Billy Pilgrim.
They share the same personality. They both do not know what lies ahead, yet they plan their lives out so well. Nobody knows what lies ahead. Life is a mystery. Oh no, I'm rambling, broke rule number 2. Anyway, they both begin to use luck to fulfill their life. In different ways, however. Billy uses luck just to scrape by. He goes with the flow and marries a fat daughter of a rich optometrist. Forrest, on the other hand, uses luck to obtain a gold star in every category. He becomes a millionaire with shrimp sales, obtains a scholarship to college for running quickly despite his IQ of 75, and obtains the Medal of Honor for his transgressions in Vietnam.
They both do exactly what they are told, but they get different results. Billy gets dumped on by his superiors and Forrest moves on to excel in his next task. They both are definitely loyal, but for different rewards. For Billy, its just to live his life, while Forrest does it because he is told to. Even ask him, you'll get the same response. As well, neither will ever hurt a fly, unless you tell them to.
Their personalities are so similar, but, and I definitely agree with Tareq on this one, their attitudes are completely different. In my eyes, Billy is definitely depressed, and because Vonnegut writes his character as though free will controls the future, Billy gets a crappy life. Forrest on the other hand is fairly happy with his life because fate gives him a happy life, he has luck on his side.
This is Chris the Butcher signing off.
So it goes.
Innocence. If described in one word, Billy Pilgrim is innocent. If described in one word, Forrest Gump is innocent. Harmless, loyal, innocent. That's 3 words that describe both of these fellows. I could go on all day. Billy Pilgrim is Forrest Gump. Or should I say that Forrest Gump is Billy Pilgrim.
They share the same personality. They both do not know what lies ahead, yet they plan their lives out so well. Nobody knows what lies ahead. Life is a mystery. Oh no, I'm rambling, broke rule number 2. Anyway, they both begin to use luck to fulfill their life. In different ways, however. Billy uses luck just to scrape by. He goes with the flow and marries a fat daughter of a rich optometrist. Forrest, on the other hand, uses luck to obtain a gold star in every category. He becomes a millionaire with shrimp sales, obtains a scholarship to college for running quickly despite his IQ of 75, and obtains the Medal of Honor for his transgressions in Vietnam.
They both do exactly what they are told, but they get different results. Billy gets dumped on by his superiors and Forrest moves on to excel in his next task. They both are definitely loyal, but for different rewards. For Billy, its just to live his life, while Forrest does it because he is told to. Even ask him, you'll get the same response. As well, neither will ever hurt a fly, unless you tell them to.
Their personalities are so similar, but, and I definitely agree with Tareq on this one, their attitudes are completely different. In my eyes, Billy is definitely depressed, and because Vonnegut writes his character as though free will controls the future, Billy gets a crappy life. Forrest on the other hand is fairly happy with his life because fate gives him a happy life, he has luck on his side.
This is Chris the Butcher signing off.
So it goes.
Vonnegut's Seven Principles to Writing a Confusing Novel
- Find a subject you care about.
- Do not ramble, though.
- Keep it simple.
- Have the guts to cut.
- Sound like yourself.
- Say what you mean to say.
- Pity the readers.
- Find a subject you care about and put it into the most complex form of writing so that barely anyone can decipher the subject
- Keep switching from plot to plot as if nothing happens
- Create 40 plots
- Have the guts to cut (thank god for this principle)
- Sound like yourself ( I'll give him this one)
- Say what will confuse people
- Make the plot so confusing that you will have to feel sorry for the readers for picking up the book
The last perception is a joke. Vonnegut states that "our audience requires us to be sympathetic and patient teachers, ever willing to simplify and clarify--whereas we would rather soar high above the crowd, singing like nightingales. That is the bad news." So the real explanation is to feel sorry for the reader because they are less informed about the subject that you wrote about. Yes, I do believe that this principle applies very well to the novel.
So it goes.
Feature Film. Good or Bad? No idea.
We all saw the trailer for SH5 in class. Some people thought they would see the movie only based on the trailer and some say they wouldn't. Now what is my opinion? I gotta say, I'm on the fence here. I do agree with most of my classmates on the basis that the trailer was crappy as hell. It was either a fan-made trailer, or the professional trailer maker person at the company was on more cocaine than Huxley. But the trailer worked.
By worked I mean it was effective. Yah it sucked but I'm a guy. We are intrigued by watching war and blood and killing, but were not psychopaths. Who in the right mind could get a good picture of the plot of the novel from a movie trailer. Absolutely nobody. There is more common sense in a pencil than the people who would try to reenact this novel. You are in so many places at once, you have to read the paragraph 3 times over just to understand the present year.
I guess I am sort of bias, well everybody is. We all read the novel and we could make out more of the plot out of the trailer than someone who hasn't read the book. For someone who hasn't read the book, it would look even better. "Ooooo....war, yet futuristic, yet calm, yet....", and on and on they would go until their breath dies out, so it goes, and then they finish with, "Intriguing." They don't know how things will turn out. No one does You can't judge a book by its cover.
When I first saw the Clash of the Titans trailer, (below), I thought it would be a godly movie, pun intended. I honestly thought that the trailer was the best trailer I've ever seen. And I was right. But it was the most disappointing movie I have ever seen. It wasn't the worst movie I've ever seen, but I had so much hope that this would be amazing....and it wasn't. You'll see what I mean. Most effective trailer ever.
Back to SH5. Only because I read the book, there is a chance that I wouldn't see it because I know nobody could physically pull this off. If I hadn't read the book, I would. Like I said, the trailer worked. I would like to see what Vonnegut's opinion on the movie would have been.
So it goes.
By worked I mean it was effective. Yah it sucked but I'm a guy. We are intrigued by watching war and blood and killing, but were not psychopaths. Who in the right mind could get a good picture of the plot of the novel from a movie trailer. Absolutely nobody. There is more common sense in a pencil than the people who would try to reenact this novel. You are in so many places at once, you have to read the paragraph 3 times over just to understand the present year.
I guess I am sort of bias, well everybody is. We all read the novel and we could make out more of the plot out of the trailer than someone who hasn't read the book. For someone who hasn't read the book, it would look even better. "Ooooo....war, yet futuristic, yet calm, yet....", and on and on they would go until their breath dies out, so it goes, and then they finish with, "Intriguing." They don't know how things will turn out. No one does You can't judge a book by its cover.
When I first saw the Clash of the Titans trailer, (below), I thought it would be a godly movie, pun intended. I honestly thought that the trailer was the best trailer I've ever seen. And I was right. But it was the most disappointing movie I have ever seen. It wasn't the worst movie I've ever seen, but I had so much hope that this would be amazing....and it wasn't. You'll see what I mean. Most effective trailer ever.
Back to SH5. Only because I read the book, there is a chance that I wouldn't see it because I know nobody could physically pull this off. If I hadn't read the book, I would. Like I said, the trailer worked. I would like to see what Vonnegut's opinion on the movie would have been.
So it goes.
Could Tralfamadore ever be real?
Peace is an illegitimate term. It is in our human nature to fight. Whether the fighting is for a privilege, a right, or even freedom. Whether it is for a good cause or a bad cause. Or it could be to fight for peace. Whatever the case, fighting will never stop, and worldwide peace will never occur. Vonnegut understands this. But are Tralfamadorians human? Maybe. Physically, no. But is Vonnegut trying to tell us that Earth should be Tralfamadore. Tralfamadore fought for years, and then stopped. Their world is at peace. How? Unexplained.
Now, why do I come across this as a blog topic? My answer: the Mirror of Erised. Confused yet? For all you Harry Potter fans this should be treat. When Harry first discovers this mirror, he's sees his parents. He sees his parents that have been dead for 10 years. Dumbledore tells him that the happiest man in the world would look into this mirror and see nothing but himself. Harry replies, "It shows us want we want, whatever we want.". "Yes, and no. It shows us nothing more or less than than the deepest and most desperate desires of our hearts." If Vonnegut looked into this mirror, he would see a world at peace. But just as Harry does, he knows that this is an unachievable feat. Harry will never see his parents alive again and Vonnegut will never see the world at peace.
This is why I believe that Vonnegut chose to perceive Tralfamadore as the mirror. The comparison as to what someone, in this case Vonnegut, desires to have or to be. Tralfamadore is what is desired but is what is not to be. To be or not to be? That is the question. lol. But that truly is the question.
It is too bad that Earth will be destroyed before peace could ever be close to being achieved.
So it goes.
Now, why do I come across this as a blog topic? My answer: the Mirror of Erised. Confused yet? For all you Harry Potter fans this should be treat. When Harry first discovers this mirror, he's sees his parents. He sees his parents that have been dead for 10 years. Dumbledore tells him that the happiest man in the world would look into this mirror and see nothing but himself. Harry replies, "It shows us want we want, whatever we want.". "Yes, and no. It shows us nothing more or less than than the deepest and most desperate desires of our hearts." If Vonnegut looked into this mirror, he would see a world at peace. But just as Harry does, he knows that this is an unachievable feat. Harry will never see his parents alive again and Vonnegut will never see the world at peace.
This is why I believe that Vonnegut chose to perceive Tralfamadore as the mirror. The comparison as to what someone, in this case Vonnegut, desires to have or to be. Tralfamadore is what is desired but is what is not to be. To be or not to be? That is the question. lol. But that truly is the question.
It is too bad that Earth will be destroyed before peace could ever be close to being achieved.
So it goes.
Fantasy: My One Love ;)
Ahhhh...fantasy! Thou art a heartful hero! Pitted against its heartless arch enemy: Fact and Satire! Who will strive to fulfill the goal of luring the reader into its written clutches? Post your opinion on who you believe will win the fitting duel. This is narrator, signing off!
Fantasy, fantasy, fantasy. Oh how I love you so. If there wasnt fiction to guide me from the reality, I would be the same boring self. Fantasy drifts me on a magic carpet ride to anywhere I want. If I was to write a novel, I would want my plot farthest from reality than I can get. I'm not saying that reality is a terrible place, it just gets boring. I'm getting bored just blogging about it. My childhood was wrapped around the premise of the Harry Potter and Eragon series. I love the fictional universes where anything is possible. Satirical novels that we read this year take place in a fictional universe, but are very close-minded. They create very good settings and plot at the beginning but then drift nowhere. Some to little character development, if you take away 1984's horrible ending. It pretty much stays the same throughout. That is not what my novel's are about. SH5 does a better job of being outside of the box but it seems too real for me. Ya know, besides the unstuck in time part.
My novel would have, of course, the hero, the villain, and the damsel in distress; twists and turns that keep the reader focused and a bit of comedy. Humor is definitely needed in an action packed novel. Not so much as Rush Hour, but an adequate amount to keep it serious. I'm thinking off the top of my head, but a good setting for the novel would be medieval. Yeah, ya can't go wrong with the middle ages. Gypsies, dragons and knights, O MY! The plot would be difficult to decipher at the moment, but I was thinking maybe the son of the king taken by the villain of some sort, and trained to fight on the villain's command to take over the kingdom, but at the same time, trying to regain his own sanity.
Again, it is hard to think of something for a plot in a minimal amount of time (and with so many paths to take), and it might change substantially, but all I'm saying is that if your writing a novel that will lure your readers into wanting more on every page, write a fantasy novel. Pshhhh, fact, give me a break!
And so fantasy has conquered the mighty fact and satire!
So it goes.
Fantasy, fantasy, fantasy. Oh how I love you so. If there wasnt fiction to guide me from the reality, I would be the same boring self. Fantasy drifts me on a magic carpet ride to anywhere I want. If I was to write a novel, I would want my plot farthest from reality than I can get. I'm not saying that reality is a terrible place, it just gets boring. I'm getting bored just blogging about it. My childhood was wrapped around the premise of the Harry Potter and Eragon series. I love the fictional universes where anything is possible. Satirical novels that we read this year take place in a fictional universe, but are very close-minded. They create very good settings and plot at the beginning but then drift nowhere. Some to little character development, if you take away 1984's horrible ending. It pretty much stays the same throughout. That is not what my novel's are about. SH5 does a better job of being outside of the box but it seems too real for me. Ya know, besides the unstuck in time part.
My novel would have, of course, the hero, the villain, and the damsel in distress; twists and turns that keep the reader focused and a bit of comedy. Humor is definitely needed in an action packed novel. Not so much as Rush Hour, but an adequate amount to keep it serious. I'm thinking off the top of my head, but a good setting for the novel would be medieval. Yeah, ya can't go wrong with the middle ages. Gypsies, dragons and knights, O MY! The plot would be difficult to decipher at the moment, but I was thinking maybe the son of the king taken by the villain of some sort, and trained to fight on the villain's command to take over the kingdom, but at the same time, trying to regain his own sanity.
Again, it is hard to think of something for a plot in a minimal amount of time (and with so many paths to take), and it might change substantially, but all I'm saying is that if your writing a novel that will lure your readers into wanting more on every page, write a fantasy novel. Pshhhh, fact, give me a break!
And so fantasy has conquered the mighty fact and satire!
So it goes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)