Sign in with Facebook
Bram's Reviews > Slaughterhouse-Five
Slaughterhouse-Five
by
by
This novel has a pretty basic and consistent structure: a few paragraphs of humorous (I think) writing that has the presumed purpose of loosening you up before you get to the sucker-punch paragraph that contains something disturbing/death-related followed by "so it goes." And if the "so it goes" wasn't there to remind you that this is the part where death happens, Vonnegut hammers the point home by relaying it an inhumanly cool, dry, and nonchalant manner. How coy and provocative. Maybe Vonnegut could have helped the reader along a little more with a footnote: "See what I did there? By having my narrator relate stories of war and death in an apathetic manner, I made you really think about these issues. Didn't I? Huh? Huh?" Yes, we get it, Kurt.
Part way through reading this book, I was sharing my disappointment with a friend who mentioned that Vonnegut, like the narrator, had actually witnessed the Dresden bombings. This apologia left me momentarily chastened as I considered the sobering impetus for the story. Then I mentally slapped myself for even considering that sympathy could cover for the stylistic bludgeoning that Vonnegut inflicted. I suppose there was a well thought out reason for making the prose stuttering and choppy, but I can't imagine what that would actually be (nor would I care to). Interestingly enough, Vonnegut may have been aware of this stylistic shortcoming: speaking of Billy's favorite obscure sci-fi author, he writes that "Trout's prose is frightful. Only his ideas are good." Kilgore Trout and his writing apparently feature in other Vonnegut books, and a Washington Post reviewer in the mid 70s contended that "Trout's prose is at least as good as Vonnegut's." Exactly.
And were the philosophical musings on time and fate, revealed primarily through unimaginative and silly sci-fi ramblings, supposed to be novel or even vaguely interesting? It's like he took Tolstoy's ruminations on fate and free will in War and Peace and then removed all the complexities and internal dissonance.
In the second half of the story, I did find myself mildly interested in what was happening. Perhaps I became accustomed to the writing or the pain just dulled after a while. Regardless, this book crossed the overrated line so egregiously that I can't muster a second star. Heavy-handed, prosaic, unfunny. So it goes.
Part way through reading this book, I was sharing my disappointment with a friend who mentioned that Vonnegut, like the narrator, had actually witnessed the Dresden bombings. This apologia left me momentarily chastened as I considered the sobering impetus for the story. Then I mentally slapped myself for even considering that sympathy could cover for the stylistic bludgeoning that Vonnegut inflicted. I suppose there was a well thought out reason for making the prose stuttering and choppy, but I can't imagine what that would actually be (nor would I care to). Interestingly enough, Vonnegut may have been aware of this stylistic shortcoming: speaking of Billy's favorite obscure sci-fi author, he writes that "Trout's prose is frightful. Only his ideas are good." Kilgore Trout and his writing apparently feature in other Vonnegut books, and a Washington Post reviewer in the mid 70s contended that "Trout's prose is at least as good as Vonnegut's." Exactly.
And were the philosophical musings on time and fate, revealed primarily through unimaginative and silly sci-fi ramblings, supposed to be novel or even vaguely interesting? It's like he took Tolstoy's ruminations on fate and free will in War and Peace and then removed all the complexities and internal dissonance.
In the second half of the story, I did find myself mildly interested in what was happening. Perhaps I became accustomed to the writing or the pain just dulled after a while. Regardless, this book crossed the overrated line so egregiously that I can't muster a second star. Heavy-handed, prosaic, unfunny. So it goes.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Slaughterhouse-Five.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Started Reading
March 10, 2009
–
Finished Reading
January 26, 2010
– Shelved
January 26, 2010
– Shelved as:
2009
Comments Showing 1-30 of 30 (30 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
David
(new)
Jan 26, 2010 01:57PM
Put up the review for this bitch, Wisp!
reply
|
flag
It should be here shortly but it's not worth the wait. I didn't even know how to italicize back in March.
I didn't even know how to italicize back in March. Ahhhh... were we ever that young?
Chris: My an idiot or his an idiot or our an idiot?
Despite its length, this book was easily the most painful reading experience of my life. Surpasses The Master and Margarita as the most overrated book I've read. It seems like most of my friends read this long ago and liked/loved it, but I'd actually be really interested to see someone read and review this now (particularly if they've never read it). I'm looking at you, Kowalski.
Meh. I've had this book forever, but it never sounds appealing to me... I've always imagined that it's a lot like Catch-22 in some way -- which I started and won't ever be tempted to finish. (Why do people love that book so much?)
David -- I was just making a subtle reference to the great Weinman-Harp death cage fight from last week. See my post #9 in that thread.
They oughta put you in a cage on Tralfamadore with a porno star for company. It'd teach you a lesson - agreed, I'm not quite sure what it would be.Okay, this book isn't nearly as good as Cat's Cradle or Mother Night, but still, one star...!
Chris wrote: "David -- I was just making a subtle reference to the great Weinman-Harp death cage fight from last week. See my post #9 in that thread."
I know. I was trying to make a not-so-subtle response...
You know and remember everything. I don't why I doubted you. I'm an idiot.
Well, I honestly don't think this book has any good qualities. The humor is kind of Pynchonian, but it's quite possibly even more jejune and lacks TP's good prose. The prose style in Slaughterhouse-Five is the worst I've read in a published book. It's everything that scares me about Hemingway, but worse. The "So it goes" gimmick is transparent and grating. The crude combining of humor and death/war is facile and anti-enlightening and once you realize the 'trick', it just feels insultingly obvious and cheap. If there's something positive to take away from this book, I'll need to be reminded of it.
Yeah but tell us how you feel, Wisp.'Jejune.' Love that word. (Woody Allen riffs on that word in one of his films, but I can't remember which one right now... Maybe Love and Death?)
Edit* Found it! Love and Death. Thanks, wikipedia!
Sonja (Diane Keaton): "That is incredibly jejune."
Boris (Woody Allen): "That's jejune? You have the temerity to say that I'm talking to you out of jejunosity? I am one of the most june people in all of the Russias!" - Woody Allen, Love And Death
Is that the Russian one?
Bram wrote: "Is that the Russian one? "Yep. It's mostly a parody of Tolstoy, with some Ingmar Bergman parody thrown in for good measure.
D. wrote: "Geez, Bram. Snort much glue lately?"
I actually wrote this review 10 months ago, but it was deleted accidentally by Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ. Long story. But yeah, back in early '09, lots of illicit substances.
JB: I'll definitely give Vonnegut one more shot. Cat's Cradle it is.
I'm not sure how my review gets deleted while Bruenning goes around posting visual monstrosities, but that's the way it goes I guess.
Jejune? Gesundheit.
I love teaching this book, maybe more than I actually love it. (And I'm with Manny and Jon on the greatness of Cat's Cradle, and very fond of Breakfast of Champions, all on my own.)
I'll throw out one measly little defense: sure, this book lacks internal dissonance, and complexities, but the book is trying to enact, not just assert, the shallow brutal asinine pointless vulgarity of war. That whole prologue--Vonnegut pondering how many times he's started this novel, wondering over how to tell a story that won't in any way glorify or beautify the experience, won't even in a depiction of Horror become some sublime aesthetic experience... well, I think he found the way. He turned it into an obvious, repetitive, often garishly stupid, childish, fantastic, horrifying, occasionally dull, foregone conclusion. Like war.
I'm not sure how my review gets deleted while Bruenning goes around posting visual monstrosities, but that's the way it goes I guess. (Seriously. How is it that Jon's pussy hasn't been flagged and removed yet when I've had many far less offensive -- or at least less revolting -- pictures removed within twenty-four hours, tops.)
Mike wrote: "Jejune? Gesundheit.
I love teaching this book, maybe more than I actually love it. (And I'm with Manny and Jon on the greatness of Cat's Cradle, and very fond of Breakfast of Champions, all on ..."
This actually makes complete sense to me. And if that's what he set out to do, I think he may have succeeded. Aesthetically though, it's anathema to me. And I guess I just wanted more thematically than 'war is bad and makes no sense'. And the aliens didn't really work for me. As I said elsewhere, I was reading Proust at the time, which probably wasn't a great mix either.
Jon wrote: "I'm not sure how my review gets deleted while Bruenning goes around posting visual monstrosities, but that's the way it goes I guess.Are you talking about my reviews or les fluers du mal?
And.
Ho..."
Your reviews aren't visual monstrosities, Bruenning.
Apparently there's been some review spamming, and one of the Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ interns accidentally deleted this along with the spammed ones. I guess it's not a good sign that this review resembles spam.
I still haven't read word one of Vonnegut. He's one of those authors that I fear (intuitively, vaguely) that my window for enjoying may've passed a decade or so ago. All my friends loved him in high school. For some reason I never got around to his work. I think that I'll still check him out eventually. I've been told that Cat's Cradle might be a good place to start.
Ouch -- I like Vonnegut, altho yeah, this book wasn't all that. A lot of people like Cat's Cradle, but I found most of it unbearably twee. For my money his best books are Mother Night and God Bless You, Mr Rosewater, which are more satiric. Mother Night especially is really good. (Then again I'm the only person I know who likes Breakfast of Champions, heh.)
Elizabeth wrote: "I liked Catch-22. The absurdity of it appealed to me as an earnest teenager."Yeah, I agree -- I think Catch-22 is at once more realistic and more absurd. No Tralfmadorians.
I loved the film adaptation of Mother Night. I hear it was pretty accurate (Vonnegut has a brief cameo after all).
Mike wrote: "Jejune? Gesundheit.
I love teaching this book, maybe more than I actually love it. (And I'm with Manny and Jon on the greatness of Cat's Cradle, and very fond of Breakfast of Champions, all on ..."
Really interesting comment! War would be all those things, I'd think.
And Bram, an excellent review. I liked Cat's Cradle and Welcome to the Monkey House along with Slaughterhouse-Five, but it's been years; perhaps I'd view his writing differently now. I remember getting tired of the way Vonnegut's books all started to refer to each other and feel re-cycled.
Moira wrote: "Elizabeth wrote: "I liked Catch-22. The absurdity of it appealed to me as an earnest teenager."Yeah, I agree -- I think Catch-22 is at once more realistic and more absurd. No Tralfmadorians.
"
Ditto to both comments. I remember liking Catch-22 a great deal.
While I actually like Slaughterhouse-5, your review is how I respond to the vast bulk of the Vonnegut so I am highly sympathetic to it.
So it goes is used for different things throughout, sometimes humor, sometimes tragedy, sometimes to for emphasis. Was even used when some said, "The great American Novel is dead, so it goes." And the version I read has an into from Vonnegut, where he talks about Dresden and how he wrote this book. So it gave a good understanding of what he is doing.
that dull sentence structure was there for a reason. vonnegut emphasizes the bleakness of war, of death, of everything. so it goes
thanks for this. I also was quite disappointed. it painted cartoon images in my mind, and the constant shifting disrupted the build for me. It's one of those books people revere even if they haven't read it. as for the above comment - if i want the bleakness of war, i'll go to non-fiction. disliking a classic is an interesting experience, and raises questions.
