.jpg)
According to the chapter of the same title from O'Brien's book, what are some elements that are necessary to tell "a true war story"? Do you still believe that the stories he tells in this chapter are literally true? Or does he take some "authorial license" with them, like he has with other stories in this book? Please post a 100-word comment on my page, and make sure you read other students' responses.
14 comments:
To tell a real true story about war is to get information from someone that was in one and if u have been in war. Most of the time people might lie that they've been in the war. You need to fine a real resourse to make true stories. I do beileve in the stories in the book. They sound real. I cant think of something else. He takes authorial license to write these stories.
Some elements of hoe to tell a true war story are, there has to be a crazy place where the war is taking place, there also has to be violence, and most importantly guns and weapons of mass destuction. In a way i do think they are true but not that much because i relly think that theres something missing but i dont know what it is and i would probaly not figure it out for a while. He does take something from other storys but he makes them somewhat better.
I think that he probably use some things in the story that were not true about what happend in real life he probably used them to bring more readers to read the book or the story
By.Ruben Sanchez
The Things They Carried described soldiers carried lots of items. They included both tangible and intangible items. Those tangible items included maps, letters, cigarettes, ear plugs, and medical supplies, etc, which were stuffs that we used in our normal life. Other than that, soldiers carried with intangible items which were memories and their personal histories. The tangible items were common stuff that we recognized already, it pulled the story closer to the real world. And those intangible items showed different people’s hard lives, feelings, during the war; it seen what you have seen in the war. In addition, The Things They Carried described different people’s perspective of the war, and the dead people alive and told their own stories and opinions of the war. The story connected the past to the future. It made a good connection to nowadays, and it made the war story truly. Moreover, O’Brien always immediately questioned and denied before we were suspiciously to ask for an answer. The author is telling a war story through different angles and visions. The above tools attracted readers’ attention and believed in what the author told about the story. I would believe in parts of the story he tells; I would also figure out the things that he tells in his own perspective.
To tell a true war story a person not only has to mention the good things that make you shout for joy but they also have to mention the bad things the terrifying acts of horror that occur during battle. From story to story he provides full description to the things that “happened”; the way people acted under pressure or how they acted to relieve pain or whatnot. His stories seem highly unlikely to occur, but that doesn’t mean they wont, I you were to read the part where the soldiers trap a water buffalo and Rat offers it some food and the buffalo rejects it and then Rat begins to DESTROY it … it seems that this is o untrue that no human being is capable of doing such monstrosity but u got to keep in mind that Rat has face the true horrors of war and has had his best friend taken away from him and that is a lot of stress for a kid to hold on to… I guess he had to relieve himself of it (although it does seem to be in a cruel way). It’s just how O’Brien brilliantly states it “A true war story, if truly told, makes the stomach believe.” I seriously believed every story that he told because it just seemed right but then again after O’Brien’s repetition of the “this is true” it makes you think if it even is true at all, and it probably signifies that it’s not. So it makes me come to a conclusion that his stories are 40% true and for that rest 60% he takes authorial license to them, and makes some improvements to them although it can be regarded as true because it is “what seemed to happen.”
To tell a true war story you have to mention everything that makes it true. Even if it is a sad ending or a tragic story. Not making anything up just to try to make the story sound more interesting or enjoyable.
TO TELL A TRUE WAR STORY I THINK THERE HAS TO BE A LOT OF DETAIL AND EXPLANATION OF EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS AT WAR. I DONT KNOW HOW IT FEELS TO BE AT WAR SO ITS KIND OF HARD TO BELIEVE WHETHER OR NOT ITS TRUE.I THINK THAT SOME PARTS OF THIS CHAPTER COULD BE TRUE BECAUSE IN THE BEGINNING HE SAYS ITS TRUE BUT THEN I STOP AND THINK WOW THEN THAT MEANS THE REST OF THE CHAPTERS ARE JUST MADE UP.IT MIGHT BE THAT SOME PARTS ARE TRUE BUT ALL NOT. A TRUE WAR STORY HAS TO CONVINCE ME THAT ITS TRUE.
CHEENA
I think that the story in some part is not really true. To write this story the author need to get a lot of information and sometimes the people have differents versions. Or he get information of some docoments and then he write the story to get more readers. But in the other part the story can be tru because he describe the story of the life of soldiers. This story can be controversial because some people can belive in this story on some person don't.
I think that O’Brien is a bit wired, sometimes I feel like I truly understand the story but in at that moment I am believing everything is true but then when I really come to think out of the story I remember that no, its not all true, this story carries a false things and has some sort of twist or maybe even truth. Who knows but I am so out her to figure it out. I mean he says that a true war story doesn't have a moral but every story has a moral. Also he says that a true war story wont say its true, but then that would mean that mostly all his stories are lies not only because they mention there true but because they have morals, so he’s been lying and if he has then why believe anything he say. Too mush to think of; well I think the best answer will come as we read along.
The elements necessary to tell a true war story are that they dant hav a moral (because war has no moral) and they never have a happy ending (because war does not have a happy ending). So far, many of O'Brien's stories fit this criteria, but i still question the authenticity of some of them. I'm sure that he has used some form of authoial license on all of his stories. I believe all writers do that.
Some elements that are necessary to tell a true war story are sad, unbelieveable, horrid, endings. According to O'Briens "true war story" advice, the true war stories sometimes sound unreal because some soldiers tell their version of what seem to happen from what actually happend. The fake war stories are the ones that have a moral, or a happy ending.
But I think O'Brien is tricky. In this "How to Tell a True War Story" chapter, he says "it's true",so either the rest of the chapter stories are false, or this spacific chapter really happened as it is told.
-anabelie
The elements to tell a true war story are sad, vivid, horrid endings. Some of the stories of this chapter might be somewhat true. Soldiers might of told their version of what they saw. It might not all be exact, but I think these versions shows us how it could of happened, close to what actually happened. Thoug, for the stories of other chapters, I wonder if they are all lies. If O'Brien hadn't mention this chapter, I would of think the whole book is true, or based on facts. Now I think that some of this book is false, and he wrote phony stories to entertain the audience.
-anabel
Some times it's hard to tell if its a true war story. A true War story provides you not only with the writers feelings but also with violence. A true war story always ends without a happy ending, even though if they win the war. This is because of the reason of friends been killed. In this case I know this story is made up with different points of views because he says that a true war story doesn’t have a moral and I disagree, a true war story does have morals. I believe and I am positive that he used authorial license on all of his stories. This story sounds all realistic but I then remember it’s a science fiction book (this is not a true war story).
To tell a true war story, the story teller must talk about everything that happened, the good things and the bad things. If they only mention the good things, then the whole truth wouldn't be told. To make the story truthful, the person must also not give a biased opinion to the story or it might steer the audience the wrong way. I think that the stories that O'Brien tells in this chapter are not entirely true. I think that he tells partially the truth and then build on the truth with an extent of fiction so the story would become more interesting to the readers.
Post a Comment