The Things They Carried - p.131-148/ 149-154/ 155-170

So here's what I've been thinking...

Now that the Big Read has had its public kick-off, I've had the priviledge of listening to and talking with more veterans in the context of TTTC. What's been interesting has been the way all these veterans, who saw action in different wars, still relate to the stories in TTTC. These men and women find their stories in the book. In point of fact, they find their stories in each other, too.

The other night, I watched three veterans nod as they listened to Gary tell about the way he came to be a recon corpsman (he enlisted with the Navy and was in the medical/ hospital corps then was attached to the Marines). They knew his story even though it wasn't their's. I see this repeated over and over again. They know the stories, they know the truth in TTTC lodged as it may be in fiction, and regardless embellishments. In fact, accuracy seems irrelevant.  They know the truths that lie at the heart of the war story.

Now, this is beginning to make sense. I know other people's stories, too. I have experiences which have almost uncanny similarities to points in the stories of others. Teachers definitely have those stories and truths no matter how they are wrapped up with facts and fictions. We know them.

However, I still struggle, as an outsider, with the truths. Apparently carrying souveniers, such as the thumb or the neclace of ears has a truth to it; such souveniers were and are common. The waterbuffalo story has a truth to it, I am told, though it is more likely to have been a person. Somehow, this seems plausible now. And, if this is so, was it written to be more palatable? Or was it written so that it could be told?

On p.152 TO writes, " By telling stories, you objectify your own experience. You separate it from yourself. You pin down certain truths. You make up others. You start sometimes with an incident that truly happened, like the night in the shit field, and you carry it forward by inventing incidents that did not in fact occur but that nonetheless help to clarify and explain."
He adds, in referring to 'Speaking of Courage', that "(t)he emotional core came directly from Bowerker's letter: the simple need to talk."
And then, on p. 153, he notes, " - I was afraid to speak directly, afraid to remember."

When you read 'In the Field' it seems clear. The fear of remembering. It seems clear that to remember we must invent a way to make it plausible and palatable not even so much for others, but for ourselves.  And as I watch, as I listen to the veterans talk about TTTC and tell their own stories... they can get only just so far. At least at that moment.

My questions: How much factual information do we need to understand the truth? How would knowing the 'facts' about TO's service help or hinder one's understanding the book? How does our search for the truth enhance our experience of the text and understanding of the plot?

p.s. Gary will be joining our class for a discussion of the book on Thursday, March 24.

The Things They Carried - p. 117-136 (36)

So here's what I've been thinking...symbols are huge in our lives. We've been talking about sign systems and transmediation, and some of the signs that we recognize and use are symbols. Transmediation is about recasting our understandings into metaphor. In other words, we could each take our reaction to the text, consider what that might be in terms of a metaphor, and then recast it.

For example, I'm struggling with the fact-fiction dichotomy. It's as if I were the rope in a tug of war, wondering as I read, which side is pulling harder. So my metaphor is tug of war. I am going to recast this into dance (which you can't see right now - luckily for you), but you could probably imagine.... a gentle ballet movement, arms outstretched, turning into a vicious snapping of my body in different directions.... The recasting isn't very hard to understand at all since I've given you my metaphor ahead. Yet, you might still understand the metaphor were I to perform for you without telling you.... you might not have the specific understanding of fact and fiction tugging... but who knows? You certainly understand the underlying meaning of a tug of war as metaphoric representation of my feelings.

I'd like you to work with the symbols in this section of the story. Take one of them, such as stockings, and identify what you believe it is a metaphor for - in this case - comfort and protection. Once you have the metaphor, then recast it.

Henry Dobbin's girl friends nylons - symbol of comfort and protection - I would choose performance/ sculpture and ask two people to work with me while I 'sculped' them into a smaller person being hugged by a larger person, both with eyes closed and gentle, soft smiles on their faces.

Use the Six Points of Departure to help you.