The Things They Carried #3

1. Wes Hamilton not knowing the real names of the men that he served with is representive of the alter personality that is created during war because he only knows their nicknames. When they were all over seas they bonded, my grandpa said that these men become your family. Wes said in the Marines you were not accepted until you were given a nickname. I think that this is because you don't know if you can rely on someone until they have done something in combat that has made them earn a nickname. I think that it might be the soldier's way of making their situation less serious, this way they do not have to reveal much about themselves. I think that the characters in The Things They Carried know each other on a more personal level. They actually know each others real names. Norman and Tim actually stayed in contact after the war. Norman wrote Tim the letter that inspired "Speaking of Courage". I do not think that this is a rare occurrence, I think how well you get to know someone is based on how much they are willing to share with you, therefore it varies based on the person or people.


2. I think that Tim O'Brien is conveying that it is not a bad thing for women to serve. However, I think that he was trying to make a point of saying that women might be more prone to the "great change" that a soldier undergoes. When Mary Anne showed up she was described as being " an attractive girl. Too wide in the shoulders , maybe, but she had terrific legs, a bubbly personality, and a happy smile" (95). O'Brien described her as basically the typical All American girl, but after being there for a short amount of time she started changing. All of a sudden she was disappearing in the middle of the night to go on missions with the Greenies "and then one morning, all alone, Mary Anne walked off into the mountains and did not come back" (115). Women are strong beings but I think O'Brien was saying that they would've been more affected by the war than the men would.


3. I think that Tim O'Brien is being honest to a degree about what happened in his time in Vietnam. I think that he is telling the readers what it was like but at the same time he is kind of shielding us against all the horrors of war. He says in the book that when his daughter asked him if he had killed anyone he told her of course not. In the book he only tells us about one man that he actually killed. I am sure that as a soldier he had killed more than just the one man, but he doesn't go that far into detail. He wants us to believe him, but at the same time he is sensoring his experience.
I think that the advantage to having a memoir that falls in between true and false is that it leaves a little more to the imagination. O'Brien says many times that a lot of war stories are lies. They have been edited to make them more believable. Not everyone wants to read about guts and gore, and O'Brien's novel isn't to gory...but that makes you wonder if that is what really happens or not. I think that it is more pleasing to the reader to be able to say either "no that didn't happen" or totally believe what the author has written. You don't have to know whether or not something is totally true to appreciate the message behind it.

• Do you think that Mary Anne is symbolic of the extreme change that some soldiers go through?
• How would you have reacted if you had been in Bowker's situation the night that Kiowa died?
• Would you have volunteered for the war or would you have taken your chances with the draft? Why?
• Do you think that the novel is believable?
• Did you expect Norman's suicide?