Sign in with Facebook
Simeon Stoychev's Reviews > Slaughterhouse-Five
Slaughterhouse-Five
by
by
There are some terrible reviews of SH5 floating around Goodreads, but one particularly odious sentiment is that Slaughterhouse-Five isn't anti-war.
This is usually based on the following quote.
For context, Mr. Rumfoord is an old military historian described as "hateful and cruel" who wants to see weaklings like Billy exterminated.
On Tralfamadore, Billy was introduced to the revelation that all things happen exactly as they do, and that they will always happen that way, and that they will never happen any other way. Meaning, time is all at once. The aliens, incidentally, admit to destroying the universe in a comical accident fated far into the future, and they're very sorry, but so it goes. <- passive acceptance
The entire story up to this point has been about Billy, buffeted like a powerless pathetic leaf in a storm, pushed this way and that by forces entirely outside his tiny purview. He lays catatonically in a hospital bed after the plane crash and the death of his wife, and all the time traveling back and forth from Dresden where toddlers and families and old grannies and anti-war civilians were burned alive in a carefully organized inferno (so it goes), and Billy is about ready to agree to absolutely anything.
It can't be prevented. It can't be helped.
You're powerless, after a while. What hope have we, or anyone caught in the middle of a war, or even the poor soldiers who are nothing but pawns and children (hence the children's crusade), to influence these gigantic, global events?
Therefore, Billy agrees with the hateful, the cruel Mr. Rumfoord, who is revising his military history of WWII, having previously forgotten to mention the Dresden bombing. Women and children, not evaporated instantly, but melted slowly by chemicals and liquid flame, their leftovers, according to Billy, lying in the street like blackened logs, or in piles of families who died together in their homes.
Incidentally, how can anything be pro-war? What kind of incoherent pro-suffering ideology is that? Is there a book that touches on the subject of war and is not against it?
We don't support wars, though we are sometimes forced to accept them.
This is usually based on the following quote.
"It had to be done," Rumfoord told Billy, speaking of the destruction of Dresden.
"I know," said Billy.
"That's war."
"I know. I'm not complaining"
"It must have been hell on the ground."
"It was," said Billy Pilgrim.
"Pity the men who had to do it."
"I do."
"You must have had mixed feelings, there on the ground."
"It was all right," said Billy. "Everything is all right, and everybody has to do exactly what he does. I learned that on Tralfamadore."
For context, Mr. Rumfoord is an old military historian described as "hateful and cruel" who wants to see weaklings like Billy exterminated.
On Tralfamadore, Billy was introduced to the revelation that all things happen exactly as they do, and that they will always happen that way, and that they will never happen any other way. Meaning, time is all at once. The aliens, incidentally, admit to destroying the universe in a comical accident fated far into the future, and they're very sorry, but so it goes. <- passive acceptance
The entire story up to this point has been about Billy, buffeted like a powerless pathetic leaf in a storm, pushed this way and that by forces entirely outside his tiny purview. He lays catatonically in a hospital bed after the plane crash and the death of his wife, and all the time traveling back and forth from Dresden where toddlers and families and old grannies and anti-war civilians were burned alive in a carefully organized inferno (so it goes), and Billy is about ready to agree to absolutely anything.
It can't be prevented. It can't be helped.
You're powerless, after a while. What hope have we, or anyone caught in the middle of a war, or even the poor soldiers who are nothing but pawns and children (hence the children's crusade), to influence these gigantic, global events?
Therefore, Billy agrees with the hateful, the cruel Mr. Rumfoord, who is revising his military history of WWII, having previously forgotten to mention the Dresden bombing. Women and children, not evaporated instantly, but melted slowly by chemicals and liquid flame, their leftovers, according to Billy, lying in the street like blackened logs, or in piles of families who died together in their homes.
Incidentally, how can anything be pro-war? What kind of incoherent pro-suffering ideology is that? Is there a book that touches on the subject of war and is not against it?
We don't support wars, though we are sometimes forced to accept them.
1747 likes · Like
∙
flag
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Slaughterhouse-Five.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
August 21, 2010
– Shelved
June 15, 2012
–
Started Reading
June 16, 2012
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-41 of 41 (41 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Simeon
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Jun 22, 2012 12:20AM
How long has it been? I was getting around to reading SH5 for ages before I finally had the chance.
reply
|
flag
The idea that Pilgrim's conversation with the Air Force historian represents agreement on his part with the official version of things is ridiculous. The book has no message and no center. Pilgrim is a shattered and fragmented individual. All the book says is "I'm here. I survived." The very book's existence is a demand for recognition of suffering that has been left out of the official versions of history. That's what Rumford's acknowledgment of Pilgrim's existence means. What he says after that sounds like excuses. Pilgrim's nonresponses ironize and contextualize Rumford's small reasons. From the standpoint of the cosmos, Billy's perspective, the view of a dead man, we are all just dust.
Perrystroika wrote: "From the standpoint of the cosmos, Billy's perspective, the view of a dead man, we are all just dust."Really well said. I completely agree.
This was an amazing review! I hate it when people say that Vonnegut "trivialized" the war when in fact, its the complete opposite.
Well put. It's annoying when people mistake Billy's resignation to Dresden as a tacit admittance by Vonnegut himself that war is so terrible that we should look away. The Tralfamarodian ethos isn't meant to be a positive one
have only recently discovered that one of the most depressing things that one can do is to go to the page of a book you love and filter the reviews by one-star to see the absolute drivel that falls out of your computer screen. Thanks for getting it.
I read Slaughterhouse Five this week and I'm a bit annoyed that I'd been put off trying it by the war/sci-fi themes. I'm even more glad I didn't read that other review beforehand - I was baffled by how wrong it was. Thanks for this!
Paul wrote: "I read Slaughterhouse Five this week and I'm a bit annoyed that I'd been put off trying it by the war/sci-fi themes. I'm even more glad I didn't read that other review beforehand - I was baffled by..."Awesome :D
there are a lot of books that are pro-war. like, stories about brave men who go to Vietnam to kill the bad guy are pkind of pro war. but pro-war ideologies have largely deminished since World war 1 ande after
I'm slightly confused by your review...you say "Incidentally, how can anything be pro-war or anti-war? Because being anti-war is a bit like being anti-conflict, anti-death, and anti-suffering. Is there a book that's pro these things? Is there a book that touches on the subject of war and is not against it?"When I read this book I didn't feel like it was anti-war, and I view being anti-war as a bit of a naive concept in general for the very reasons you stated. I felt like it was showing the harsh realities of war, and was definitely not painting it with a heroic brush but overall I got the sense that the Tralfamadorian philosophy does hold true, things happen and you are powerless to stop them. 'So it goes' might not be a positive mantra but doesn't it hold true, people die whether there is a war going on or not.
"Do you know what I say to people when I hear they're writing anti-war books? . . . I say, 'Why don't you write an anti-glacier book instead?'"
If this book is pro war, then so is 1984, and all quit on the Western Front. Some not too bright people don't get irony at all.
The one thing that every misses about the former general is he probably sent men to their deaths flying bombing raids. Dresden was covered up by the allies just like coventry was covered up. It's after the fact that historians have to deal with and explain how using civilians is a time honored and horrific tactic in war. The pilot of the the Hiroshima bombing to his death said it was a necessary to drop the bomb.
Kinda like the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.... The books more realistic then you think
Kinda like the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.... The books more realistic then you think
Simeon, I think in light of today, of what we see on TV, of beheadings, of what we now know about WW2, in light of Desert Storm and 9/11, we've unfortunately been desensitized. Some reader's may not feel as reader's felt in 1969. I can understand why some reader's might not feel the "antiwar" themes. And isn't that sad? We are now so jaded by beheadings that some can't see an antiwar message? That's horrible.
Albeit I agree with this review, the Dresden bombings were much less severe than the atomic bombings with a confirmed death toll of 25k(supported by a research conducted by the Dresden city council in 2010) whilst the death toll of the atomic bombings on Hiroshima was a conservative estimate of 150k.
Everything Vonnegut writes is satire.
Rumfoord's comments seemed clearly defensive on his part. And Billy just does his "so it goes" in different wording in response.
Vonnegut was there. This is his story, and of course Billy Pilgrim's. It's a great book, and bravely tells the truth about what happens in a War. I like the philosophy and humor, and this was the first most people had heard about the fire bombing of the city of Dresden. So it goes.
A brilliant piece of writing which intimately describes the effects of war individually, collectively and culturally on all who partake or are victims of war. Billy's remote semi catatonic dissociation and derealisation through extraterrestrial and time travel gives the reader insight into the minds defences and PTSD symptoms that occur through exposure to horror and the constant threat of death and annihilation. The narrator, Vonnegut "so it goes" , the experienced onlooker and participant who cannot believe in God, but merely concedes with a helpless shrug of his shoulders and simple statement, that life is temporary and there is little to hope for when human beings are running the show. We never seem to learn...This book is as relevant today as it ever was... so it goes.
You asked, "Is there a book that touches on the subject of war and is not against it?" I think Julius Caesar wrote one.
Of course a book can be anti-war or pro-war. That is just the name given to pacifism and those who jump to solving the worlds problems with force. That is like saying people who are pro-life are the only ones that care about life. There are many people and authors out there who advocate for war as a necessary evil while many others that deem it as a barbarian hangover from when we lived in caves and beat people with rocks when we didn’t get exactly what we wanted.
Good insight Simeon. War is anti human for it kills humans. The politics is where it should be won and lost.
Not an anti-war book.
Whoever thinks this book is pro-war based on this quote has serious reading issues.
I just assumed Vonnegut is a determinist.To say it is not an anti-war book is to fundamentally misunderstand his satire and one of the major themes of the book.
Is anyone really " innocent "
To add to your argument against those who argue this book isn’t anti-war, disassociation is a common coping mechanism for trauma or PTSD survivors as a means to deflect emotional or mental overwhelm from extreme situations or experiences. The “so it goes” phase that appear so frequently in the book was a clear indication of that for me.
The fact that anyone can think that he meant he was glad the bombing happened by that sentence is insane, I thought the intent was clear by the context of the moment.
And so it goes… back to the library, couldn’t get into it!
Your review was certainly thought provoking, considering the many comments you received. I loved War and Peace as an anti-war statement. I haven't decided if I should read this book, having never read anything by the author.
Beautifully written, Simeon. I don't know if this book is anti- or pro-war, if there is such a thing, but I do know the feeling this book imparted to me, and it definitely leans anti-.
I felt the helplessness of the protagonist, which also highlighted the pointlessness of it all as well. Also, often the author said that the point of the war (and horrific actions like Hiroshima and Dresden) was to speed up the end of the war, as if it were a race and the only point is to finish. This seems fairly anti-war to me. If the point is just to end, then why even begin in the first place?
I learned of the bombing of Dresden bc of this book and that’s shameful. I didn’t read it in high school. I was in my mid 20s and Dresden had never been mentioned in any history class I took through college. Someone above mentioned Billy’s attitude as likely being dissociation due to PTSD and that’s exactly how I see it too. I don’t think PTSD was widely known about or even remotely understood when this was written, but it’s obvious that’s what is being described knowing what we do today about it. I can’t count how many times I’ve read SH5 now, but it’s been at least a year since the last reading so it’s about time for another.
I read a book about the fire bombing of Dresden near the end of WW2. It wasn't necessary, was punitive. We firebombed a ring around the city and the fire was pulled into the vacuum inside the circle. I can see why it was done because we were starting to understand more about Nazi atrocities.
I’m now reading Slaughterhouse 5 for the third time. Like Allie, it was the first time I ever heard of the bombing of Dresden. I guess the vaporizing of thousands is more acceptable than just burning to death. I heard Mr Vonnegut speak 30 years ago and remember him saying that no one should ever be bombed. It also comes up in his book “Fates Worse Than Death”. It’s another book of his that I’ve read several times when attempting to make sense of this crazy world. “And so it goes”.
I've heard some people say recently that Vonneguts work doesn't age well. Your review goes against that narrative.I grew up an hour northeast of Indy, which is Kurt's hometown. I still have not read much of his stuff. It's been so long since I read Slaughterhouse Five that I really should reread it. I remember mostly his describing the German Army and their twisted crosses. Had never heard it put that way. A very powerful vision.
“So it goes”. It’s not a great book. 3 stars because he was likely trying to cope with PTSD.
WE DONT SUPPORT WARS THOUGH WE ARE SOMETIMES FORCED TO ACCEPT THEM
