Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

There are some other threads about Slaughterhouse-Five, but none of those really seem to have a general discussion of the book as the main goal--one deals with whether or not the book should or will be canonized, which is sort of irrelevant in my mind (as in, who cares, let's talk about the book regardless).

I've read SH-5 twice, and just finished the second reading. Simply put, I like Vonnegut's writing, and SH-5 has me laughing out loud frequently, which is a rare reaction for any book to elicit from me. What I love most about SH-5 is it's easy readability--it's like an accessible version of Pynchon. I like the multiple story-threads in the book, and particularly how the reader is never sure if Billy Pilgrim really does time travel and visit aliens or if he's just crazy (the latter of which I'm inclined to lean to).

Those are just my general thoughts. I'll let some of our more discerning and insightful members share their thoughts, if they want to.

[Desolation]

The writing and story were a little bit underwhelming to me, but I found the fatalist philosophy presented in the book to be incredibly thought provoking. It's one of those books that I initially thought that I disliked, but it grew on me the more I thought about it in the weeks after I read it.

That there is no free-will, that every moment is a culmination of every moment beforehand, that everything happens in the only way that it could possibly happen...I find that aspect of the book illuminating and dead-on.

[Brett Cottrell]

Good book. I have to say, though, that I like Galapagos, Slapstick and Cat's Cradle bettter. They all have as a common theme the absurdity of the human condition, and the absurdity of our denial of that fact. Slaughterhouse Five constrains that theme, partly, to a theater of war. All well and good, but the other books unleash Vonnegut's imagination. But it's a minor difference, I suppose. I like them all.

[jake21221]

I've read most of Vonnegut's stuff, yet I've never read Slaughterhouse 5. Will have to fix this soon seeing as it's supposed to be his best book and he's one of my favourite authors.

[chrisvia]

Slaughterhouse-Five is one of those books that really grabbed my attention. I remember thinking that I would start into it one night and finish it the next day. But it captivated me and I read it that night sans breaks (not that that isn't easy to do; it is a short book). Like you, Mutatis, I loved the form, the shape of the novel. It was also remarkable how humorously Vonnegut can present such harrowing events (in this case the bombing of Dresden; war, in general). My everlasting takeaway from this read is the phrase "so it goes." Vonnegut inserts this statement whenever something dies, even--if I remember correctly--when a plant does. This simple, casual, truthful phrase sums up the tone of the novel. Great book!

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Yes, he uses "So it goes" in the same form no matter if he's talking about the deaths of thousands, or like you said, a plant. I never considered what the meant really, but I think it reinforces the utter meaningless he's trying to get across when it comes to death.

I'm curious, what do you guys think about Billy Pilgrim's travels to Tralfamadore? Did it really happen, or was Billy just nuts. Also, and not at all the same question, what do you think Vonnegut intended us to think?

[chrisvia]

Yeah, the phrase seems to imply a "meh" at the loss of life.

Your last question kind of reminds me of the big debate over whether James's figures in Turn of the Screw are real or not. I haven't read Slaughterhouse-Five in a while, but I remember thinking, This guy has flipped from all the devastation his mind has ingested! I feel like Vonnegut intended us to think that everyone gets screwed in war.

[JuniperWoolf]

When I read Slaughterhouse Five it was the first time that I had ever heard of Dresden. I have no idea why the hell they didn't teach us about it in school, but it annoyed me that I didn't know anything about it. I really should have.

Regarding the space travel thing, I think Vonnegut intended it to be one of those questions that people would have differing opinions about afterwards. I think that he deliberately left it uncertain. Personally, I favor the "he was crazy" side, but I have a friend who likes to think the opposite.

[chrisvia]

Another way I've thought of it is from a psychological adaptation perspective: to be crazy is to be sane in extreme situations.

[tscherff]

By making billy a time traveler and visitor of tralfamadore, a planet where all time is present, he makes the firebombing forever there, a constant symbol of the nature of man and of war