Voltaire: Free Or Trapped

The way that Candide is written is very different form Epictetus. In the previous book we read, you had straight to the point lectures. There was no story to it, and what the entire Handbook wanted was to get the message across. Entertainment was not a major factor. The author assumed that if someone was reading his book he wanted to learn and not entertain himself. I understand that learning can be very entertaining, but the type of entertainment I am referring to is the one you get in a novel. It used a few examples but there was no set story line. On the other hand the short part of Candide I have read, does have a story line. It is a great mix between teaching and entertainment. There is a teacher having conversations or sharing experiences with his student: “His tutor, Pangloss, was the recognized authority in the household on all maters of learning, and young Candide listened to his teaching with that unhesitating faith which marked his age and character” (19-20). The reader listens to this story and learns from what the teacher mentions. It is as if the student where the reader. From what I have read I can associate it with Ishmael.

A theme that has captivated me and that we have discussed in class is free will. Before I started this school year I had no special interest in the topic, but I now see it everywhere. Almost every text mentions it or something that can relate to it. I have heard many opinions about our purpose in life. Some I agree with and some I discard right away. Voltaire believes that “…everything was made for a purpose, it follows that everything is made for the best purpose” (20). This theory seems very interesting. It does not mention that someone is restricted to doing something in particular, but you can assume that if I was meant for something I have to do it. I wonder if you can do something that you are not meant to do? If “everything is made for the best purpose” then would a thief be doing what he was meant to do? As I read the book I hope to gain some more answers to what Voltaire believes about free will.

To Give Without Receiving

Today in class we were discussing how one shouldn’t take advice from others. The only good that this would do you is becoming like the rest of the crowd. It is every person’s unique personality and abilities that make the human race great. Epictetus does not believe in this principle. In fact, he rejects it so much that he wrote a handbook. The main problem I see in things like handbooks, is not that we will all end up the same, but that the person writing it cant apply what he is teaching. As life goes on we receive many different pieces of advice from many different sources. Weather you know it or not, each day we receive advice form the news, movies, radio, teachers, friends and many other things. The important thing is to be able to decide which one to apply in your life and which one to ignore. Some times people have ideas and decide that the world should know about what they are thinking. This is basic principle of writing. Epictetus had some ideas on how to live and the way you should react to different circumstances in life. The point that I am trying to make is that if you suggest something you should be able to do it.

In these final sections of The Handbook of Epictetus I found one of the hardest things to do: “…when someone else’s little slave boy breaks his cup we are to say, “Its one of those things that just happen.” Certainly then, when your own cup is broken you should be just the way you were when the other person’s was broken” (26). We are many times fast to judge others on their decisions when we hold no part in the problem. It is human nature to try to reach the top, and some feel that by lowering others they will stand out. The thing is, when they have the same problem, they would not treat it as they said you should treat it. This fits in perfectly with the topic of advice. You should be permitted to give out advice if you would use it. If a situation comes up where Epictetus has to make a choice like the ones he mentioned in his handbook but treats it differently, he is a liar. You must not pay attention to his teachings and continue on. I am not suggesting that you should not take advice, but that you must be careful whom you take it from.

Life: A Choice

Dear Mr. Frost,

As a fellow writer myself, I wanted to recognize your ability to demonstrate the options and the “TWO roads” (Frost)… people must choose from. This is mentioned in your poem The Road Not Taken. As I read the tile I could not understand your reasoning. Everybody takes a different road. Some might be similar but the single act of being born under different parents means a different road. Maybe you are referring to a broader road (good and evil). If so please clarify. It is very important to be able to recognize your objectives, and, based upon them select a path. If that path does not work out try the next one. In my teachings I many times mention death and how “Some things are up to us and some are not up to us (1, Epictetus).” This is an important distinction, which permits us to live peacefully. In my Handbook I mention a master who’s slave boy did a wrong thing. He can choose between hitting the boy or not. Life is filled with crossroads and choices, and deciding which ones to pay attention to and which ones not to is very important.

After doing a little close reading I realized that the character in your poem picked “…the one less traveled by” (Frost). This act proved to make a big difference but I would like to know if it was for the good or for the bad. The way in which your poem is written does not invite the reader to listen to what you are saying. If you simply read a piece of my writing you will notice how direct it is. There is little room for interpretation and my message gets across. This is harder to do in your poem and an inexperienced reader will not get your point. I suggest that you change your style and make it more universal. A great idea can be lost if it is told in the wrong way. And that is your case. Still, I admire your understanding of the choices in life. Many hope to get there some day.

Sincerely,

Epictetus

Against The Current

These past few days we have been discussing the possibilities of choice and of free will. I have heard several people’s conclusions and have come to draw my own. In life there is partial free will. You do not choose to be born a “slave boy” but you do choose between hitting him or not. This is clearly mentioned “And remember, you cannot demand an equal share if you did not do the same things, with a view to getting things that are not up to us” (25). This made me change my previous conclusion. If someone who works harder can get more, then we are not stuck into the positions we were born into. A beggar who works hard can advance through society and maybe, a few generations later his family will not be that of beggars. This symbolizes change, and that the desire to accomplish something is the only thing needed to accomplish it. It is obviously easier for some to do what they please, but through hard work everyone can pull through. Yes, it is true that we cannot choose our appearance or our abilities but if we do all that is possible with what we have failure cannot occur.

We can also see very close ties between letting go and free will. Someone who lets go obviously has free will, and the simple act of being alive, means that there is free will. As humans, it is in our nature to look forward to things. We look forward to things like a banquet and to things like having children. It is in the way that we form these expectations that we are able to go through life. I personally go through the whole week waiting for the weekend, only to get there and start again. Some might say that if this is done, life is pointless. We create problems in order to solve them, and spend our whole lives trying to find the answers to things that will not affect life in general. Is this Handbook suggesting that in order to obtain a utopia free will must be stopped? If we create the places that we are born into, then there has is total free will. A beggar and a wealthy man are both created by society. We choose to create everything that is here today. Are we defying nature’s rules?

An Endless Gap

The Handbook Of Epictetus has been a teacher to me about the basic knowledge and etiquette of life; something we can many times assume is natural. In my previous blog, Straight To The Point, I mentioned death and the devastating effects it has on people. Epictetus reminds the reader that it is part of the cycle of life and that on must learn to let it go. As I was reading I came upon many more comments on how to handle death: “Never say about anything “I have lost it,” but instead, “I have given it back.” Did your child die? It was given back. Did your wife die? She was given back” (11). The ideas that are proposed seemed a little harsh and detached for my taste but I believe that if you are able love someone so much you have to let them go. It is one of the most recurrent themes in the Handbook and I can see why. Love can be considered as one of the strongest and most radical feelings. You can go to extreme lengths for love, and to loose someone you love is devastating. Being a Handbook, Epictetus wants the reader to be wiser by the end of his teachings.

The reading of Epictetus is very different from that of Billy Pilgrim’s story. In order to get the real teachings and ideas in Slaughterhouse Five you had to look beyond the page. Some times it was through the Tralfamadorians, and their deranged idea of a human zoo, and other times it was the way Billy reacted to certain situations. The Handbook of Epictetus on the other hand is Straight To The Point. Some might consider it easier to read but you must also try to go deeper in order to understand. His teaches through examples: “Remember that what is insulting is not the person who abuses you or hits you, but the judgment about them that they are insulting” (20). These ideas are not to be taken so literally. He is not telling you what to do when someone hits you, but that the way you look at things makes a big difference. If I would have started reading about Billy’s story with a negative attitude it is likely that I would have not liked it. The differences in these two pieces of literature are great, and as I continue to notice them the gap between them grows.

Straight To The Point

The Handbook of Epictetus starts the reader off by going straight to the point: “Some things are up to us and some are not up to us” (1). It does not mention a character or a silly story but it lets the reader know what he needs to learn. This first sentence can summarize what human suffering is all about. As normal human beings we suffer about anything. If we were to accept that we cannot control everything we would live happier lives. It is human nature to assume that you can control and decide what happens with everything. This theory is wrong. As I continued reading I found out that “What upsets people is not things themselves but their judgment about things” (5). This is explaining our suffering in a single phrase. It is necessary to let go of things that we cannot keep. If we are able to follow this principle things will be better off. At this point in my writing I asked myself what life would be like if I had no affection for things that could disappear. It would be even worst than if I did get attached. The reader has a much greater job with the Handbook of Epictetus. He can not just read and assume that everything is literal. I discovered this when reading a little closer at what it was saying, and I realized that what the handbook meant was to know when to let go of things you love. A great example would be the death of a loved one. You must enjoy them while they are alive but let them go when they die.

Later on I made a comparison with a movie I watched recently in ethics. The movie was called Peaceful Warrior. It mentioned how what was important was not the result but the journey you took to get the result. You are not always responsible for what will happen to your life, but you are responsible about what you do with what is given to you. If you are able to accept this and focus on the present and not on the future you will do well for yourself. Without knowing it we pass on great opportunities for knowledge. If we are able to grasp everything that is given to us no one will have an excuse for failure.

End Or Beginning?

We have come to the end of the journey with Billy Pilgrim. At the end we recall everything that happened over time. As I mention time, I remember the way Vonnegut plays with time travel and the Tralfamadorians. These alien beings hold great importance to what the reader understands. They are looking at the world from a separate perspective and Vonnegut’s way of transmitting the message. The author had told the reader how the book ended, but I didn’t expect it to end so abruptly. There was no summing of the main ideas, or explaining of the rest of Billy’s life. All of this was already done throughout the book. We knew since far back who he was going to marry, when and how he was going to die and basically everything about his life. You suddenly read “Word War Two in Europe was over” (Vonnegut, Chapter 10) and as that happens the book is over. This final chapter has made me realize that Vonnegut not only plays with time travel in the book but also in the way you read the book. You are told events in a total random order, or what I believe is random. The end of the book is the middle of the story, and this realization has changed the way I will look back at it.

Vonnegut does not completely ignore the past (beginning of the book). He makes the reader remember some things, like the first chapter. He talks about his trip to Dresden with Ohare. It is as if the book had just started and we are in chapter two. Smells in the book have played a big role especially to inform the reader of who is talking. It is interesting how you can discover where something came from in the last chapter: “But then the bodies rotted and liquefied, and the stink was like roses and mustard gas.” (Vonnegut, Chapter 10) I believe that this is the first time that this distinctive smell appears. This technique makes the reader draw his or her own conclusions. They are not told the origin or the answer to things like “mustard gas”(Vonnegut) until the end. The journey with Billy Pilgrim has taught me a lot of things and I hope that I will be able to apply them into my life.

Analytic Essay

Thesis statement: What does Billy’s relationship with Monatana symbolize about human nature?

Why was Billy allowed to come back and Montana had to stay?

“Montana had been unconscious during her trip from Earth. The Tralfamadorians hadn't talked to her, hadn't shown themselves to her.” (Vonnegut)

“In time, Montana came to love and trust Billy Pilgrim.” (Vonnegut)

“What really became of Montana Wildhack?”

“He hadn't been missed, he said, because the Tralfamadorians had taken him through a time warp, so that he could be on Tralfamadore for years, and still be away from Earth for only a microsecond.” (Vonnegut)

Happiness Or Ignorance: A Thin Line

What is happiness? I was asked this question today by my ethics teacher. The first thing that came to my mind at that moment was that every person had a different measure of happiness. What might make me happy is different from what might make you happy. I then mentioned how happiness is simply being at peace. Having more time to think about it I realized that sometimes we create a false shelter, or happy place for ourselves. This is important as the Tralfamadorians mention: “Later on in life, the Tralfamadorians would advise Billy to concentrate on the happy moments of his life, and to ignore the unhappy ones-to stare only at pretty things as eternity failed to go by.” (Vonnegut, Chapter 9) If Billy started to stare into the pretty things in life he would achieve a fake happiness. Obviously it is great to look at the good things in life and enjoy what you can. That is when the line must be drawn. You have to decide whether to live a happy but separate life or try to achieve true and permanent happiness.

I personally believe in a balance. You have to be able to enjoy even the smallest things, but you can’t lose perspective. Through the Tralfamadorians Vonnegut tells the reader to enjoy life and not to listen to anything else. Vonnegut gives us a great example of what happens when someone does this: “though it may well be that they were too remote from the harsh realities of war to understand fully the appalling destructive power of air bombardment in the spring of 1945” (Vonnegut) These people were in their own world, focused on the positive, and didn’t think of the consequences their action may have. I then come to the conclusion that happiness is very close to ignorance. In order to live a completely happy life you must do it knowingly. Bill was able to choose and nobody can criticize his decision, happiness is what a person makes it.

From Past To Future

A few days ago, in my US history class, we mentioned how disease in the seventeenth century broke up as much families as divorcé does today. This shocked me since 50% of families were broken up. How is it that people think they love each other and a few years later end up hating each other? I thought of my future and asked myself how long I would last with my wife. I even asked myself, if by the time I grew up the institution of marriage would still exist. This is sad and scary. As I was reading about the great life of Billy Pilgrim, I came across the answer: “Billy flicked on the light. Robert was sitting on the toilet with his pajama bottoms around his ankles. He was wearing an electric guitar, slung around his neck on a strap.” (Vonnegut, Chapter 8) The answer is lack of attention or individualism. In this particular case Billy had no idea what his son liked and didn’t try to interact with him. His son feels that his parents will reject his love for the guitar and that is why he does it in hiding. What is it that changed over the years that made people so individualistic? It is probably Big Brother. Billy is living a lie and in this chapter he was hit with reality. He did whatever he wanted with no regard for others. The war made him cold and insensible. By finding his son in hiding reality was suddenly a part of his life. We can see more and more how the war has left such a big impact on his life that simple things disturb him. The singing of the men reminded him of the war and what this proves is that you will have to live with your mistakes for the rest of your life. I believe that I have come up with a reasonable answer to divorce: Individualism. If Billy does not pay attention to his son he will have the same memories as he did with the war. Maybe he wont be able to see a guitar or a child in the bathroom without remembering the past. The truth is that you have to be very careful with what you do to others and to yourself because it will last forever.

Ideas: A Choice

Holding back is something that has become very common in our world. People think things twice before doing them because of fear of how others might react. It is important to express oneself and at the same time receive a positive reaction. I understand that at times this can be hard but the question that arises is, if your comment will produce a negative reaction should you go ahead and say it or should you hold back. Billy’s answer to this question is clear Billy Pilgrim got onto a chartered airplane in Ilium twenty-five years after that. He knew it was going to crash but he didn’t want to make a fool of himself be saying so” (Vonnegut, Chapter 7). He would prefer to stay quiet than to allow other to mock him. The reason that some people do this is because they grew up doing this. It is another way of reflecting that your childhood has a very big impact on your life. In my opinion Billy had an easy choice, he could have saved lives if things would have gone his way, and the worst thing that could have happened is other people laughing at him.

Not all decisions are this easy. Many times you have the choice but none of them is a matter of life and death. What I believe you should do in doubt is say it. Don’t hold back because of what others have to say and be yourself. This might sound cliché, but sometimes I don’t pay attention to clichés with the excuse that they are clichés. This can be a good reminder that you have to pay attention to the simplest things and to follow your instincts. This is only my opinion and I hope it helps others gain self-confidence.

A Different Way Of Looking At Things

The ideas proposed by David Crystal caught my attention since not many people talk about the differences between many and a lot. I enjoyed reading his blog and found I interesting that he used texts such as “especially via the King James Bible, where we find many examples:” (David Crystal, On Many) He is a good writer that employees some of the tactics we used in class. He can describe something with very little words. The question he proposes “Does many actually refer to a different number from a lot of?” (David Crystal, On Many) both interest the reader and includes him in the issue. This is a great example of the power that Blogs have and the influence they have on the world. We are reading something from a respected author and have the chance on commenting and hoping for a response. If blogs didn’t exist this would make getting to him very hard.

The Freedom Of Fiction

As we have discussed in class these past few days, Slaughterhouse Five changes narrator and time constantly. Since the first chapters in the book I have wondered who Billy Pilgrim was. My theories ranged from Vonnegut, a war buddy who knew Vonnegut, an invented character, and somebody who told his story to Vonnegut. After reading and discussing some more I have come to one conclusion, which is that Billy is an invented character based on the author’s life. On my previous blog I mentioned how Billy and Vonnegut’s pasts had been almost identical and the only thing that separated them was the future. Billy is necessary to the story because it is a way for the author to tell his experience, but also transmit the impact it left on him. If it where his opinion it would have much less credibility, but if it is telling somebody else’s story people will pay more attention. His invention symbolizes freedom; people will not judge or investigate if what he is telling is the truth, if he simply acknowledges the story is based on an invented character. A great example would be his conversations with Lazzaro. If Vonnegut would say that Billy is hi reflection, then Lazzaro must have existed and somebody would look for him. Nobody will judge his answers to things like ““Anybody ever asks you what the sweetest thing in life is-” said Lazzaro, “its revenge.”” (Vonnegut, Chapter 6) Whatever Billy responds is acceptable. Some might say that Lazzaro is a person who dwells on the past but if the story is fake people will receive the message about revenge and not about the characters morals.

It is clear to me that Billy is not Vonnegut since he meets him “This was I. That was me. That was the author of this book. (Vonnegut, Chapter 5). There was also some discussion that said that the book Billy was writing was in fact the book we are reading now. This accusation can be denied since Vonnegut makes reference to his book saying “It begins like this: Listen: Billy Pilgrim has come unstuck in time. It ends like this: Poo-tee-weet?” (Vonnegut, Chapter 1) If Vonnegut says his book begins and ends in the same way that Slaughterhouse Five does then it is his book. I am not saying that my conclusion is perfect but we must definitely consider it.

More To Come

In class we had a very interesting discussion about who was Billy Pilgrim. We all shared our ideas and a few conclusions came up. I suggested that maybe Vonnegut was another soldier in the war that knew Billy. When reading chapter 5 I discovered the answer. When Billy was in the hospital he meets Vonnegut “That was I. That was me. That was the author of this book.” (Vonnegut, Chapter 5) As I read this I felt a shock run through my body. We would have had the answer to the discussion without having to think about it. His appearance in the book was so sudden and unexpected that I had to read that part several times. Why would Vonnegut enter the book and give himself such a secondary role? In order to understand this better I decided to look into his background. I found out that he had fought in WWII for the United States and was captured by the Germans. He was then sent to Dresden where he presence the bombing of the city. He was then sent to a underground meat locker called Slaughterhouse Five. In 1945 he was freed by the Red army and received a Purple Heart. This is a little part of Vonnegut’s life, which has helped me understand who the narrator is and why he is telling that story. He lived what Billy is going through and I can assume that in a short period of time Billy will presence the bombing of Dresden and be sent to a meat locker.

The question of Billy’s origins still remains. We already know that Vonnegut not only acts as the narrator but as a character. What then is Billy? What comes to my mind is that he is the part of Vonnegut that was invented to stress a point. He is the tool that enables the author to transmit the message onto the reader. This also explains why Vonnegut was only mentioned once. Billy will tell his story and Vonnegut will tell his. They are just two people who meet. The travel of Billy through time is something that the author could not include if this were his story. A lot has been answered in this chapter and there is still more to come.

How We Learn

At this point in the book Billy goes through something that is very rare. A sort of vision were he knows that the Tralfamadorians will abduct him. This reminds me of the movies were people travel in time in order to save someone and then have a agnorisis, they find out that by going back in time he was responsible for that persons death. It is as if the future already included anything you might do, and going back in time is just an event that will lead to what is inevitable. For the first time the reader understands what the aliens have to do in this story. The aliens are a way to communicate the obvious on earth. Since they come from the outside and look at us from the outside they see what we sometimes miss. When they mention, “Only on Earth is there any talk of free will.” (Slaughterhouse Five Chapter 4) I noticed that we take this for granted. We concentrate on how some people are denied their free will by others. An example is Billy in a WWII prisoner camp. Obviously we cannot ignore how others are treated but we must also notice that some do have a choice. If what the Tralfamadorians mentioned is true then the world isn’t as bad off as we believe.

This brings me to another conclusion and that is that the aliens are the main characters, and that Billy is just and example that proves their point. This is part of Vonnegut’s talent, he maintains the reader in a constant state of analysis. You will draw conclusions and hen draw some more before you come to one that is concrete. When the prisoners are in the showers Billy recalls a moment when he was a baby: “He was a baby who had just been bathed by his mother. Now his mother wrapped him in a towel, carried him into a rosy room that was filled with sunshine.” (Slaughterhouse Five Chapter 4) It is interesting to know the things we recall and what impacts us. For Billy the simple act of his mother bathing him remained in his head. This is a wake up call for me since it proves I have to be careful what I do since the things I least expect might stay in my head forever. Billy has been a great example for me and he has taught me many things by doing things wrong. Learning from mistakes is very effective, specially if they are not too severe.

A Time Of Hope

We continue on the journey through time and the life of Billy Pilgrim with such ease that we do not notice it. From one moment to the next he has advanced twenty years in time and dreaming or watching films of the war. Billy is stuck in the past. At the beginning of the book the author mentioned how you could not remain in the past, but clearly Billy did not take his advice. An example is his watching of the film forward and backwards: “Among the things Billy Pilgrim could not change were the past, the present, and the future.” (Slaughterhouse Five, Chapter 3) This is one of the most influential phrases in the entire book. An obsession can be seen in the character about the past and it is as if he would love to go back and change it. Maybe because of some mistakes we already know of or of one he is bound to make, but the fact is that Billy cannot change time. The mention that Billy does not control the future seems odd to me. I agree that he cannot change the past but why can he change the future?

Something that has surprised me throughout the book and continues to do so is Vonnegut’s mention of time. He mentions time as if trying to teach the reader that you are were you are. You cannot change what has happened and this is something that is very useful to me. When I make a mistake I dread about it for a while but what I have to do is let it go and concentrate on the future. A character that caught my attention was the hobo in the train with Billy. He is under terrible conditions and continues to mention: “I’ve been hungrier than this, the hobo told Billy. I been in worse places than this. This ain’t so bad.” (Slaughterhouse Five, Chapter 3) He does this repeatedly until he dies. What surprised me was his attitude. In a terrible condition there is no need for him to be talking positive. He has no one to cheer up but he still does it. This shows us determination in a person were you might not expect it. Vonnegut continues to intrigue and capture my attention as I read this wonderful book.

Something To Stop

Thomas Wiesner Ospina

Pre-AP English

September 1, 2009

Carelessness

Carelessness has become a trait that many people portray. It seems to be worse everyday and something must be done to make people aware of the damaging effects it has overall. When someone is careless, it is insulting to others’ effort. Imagine yourself as a teacher, you give your students some work and expect them to, not only do it well, but also, turn it in. A few days later, one person does not turn it in because he did not care to do it. With this action, he is telling you that he has so little respect for what you are trying to teach him, that he did something else. Obviously, there is a consequence for the student, but it still is demoralizing to the teacher.

Clearly carelessness can be seen as a synonym of negligence or mediocrity. When you are negligent, careless or mediocre, you are not giving yourself the chance to be the best that you can be. You give your body and your mind the option of doing nothing or very little, and therefore, in essence you allow yourself to fail. All, at some point must experience failure, but to fail because you are careless is really inexcusable. The experience of failure is essential to learning and growth, but the attitude with which you confront it, makes a big difference. It can either turn out to be a positive learning experience, just by showing you care, and want to know why you failed or you can just ignore it and fail again.

Mediocrity is contagious. If it is allowed, it permeates all those around you until no one realizes that everyone is being mediocre. Depending on others to pull you through or accepting the bare minimum standard is very common at certain levels and in specific groups. Many older people think that the old days were happier and that people were more responsible and hard working before, but this is not true. What is happening now is just another way to do things, which sometimes people do not understand. It is careless behavior that gives the young people a bad reputation. We must stop sending erroneous messages and tell the world that the future is going to be ok. The only way that this will happen is if young people become less careless and behave responsibly. Rashness makes your mind become lazy and you get used to doing less and accepting this as the norm.

I hate carelessness because it makes us all look bad. It groups us all into a mediocre mold and I certainly do not want to be labeled as careless in anything I do.

Literatures Seesaw

Vonnegut has a talent of playing with time that few others posses. He leads us through Billy’s life by going back and forth: “Billy is spastic in time, he has no control over where he is going next, and the trips aren’t necessarily fun” (Vonnegut, p.23). By doing this he is able to transmit to the reader a sense of what is going on what led that person to where he is today. Our experiences are what make us who we are. Billy’s experiences in WWII greatly influenced his personality and changed him. The good thing about his method is guesswork. Vonnegut keeps the reader curious and entertained as well as he gives him a lesson on his beliefs. Billy is a person who does not value life: “The soldiers’ blue eyes were filled with a bleary civilian curiosity as to why one American would try to murder another one so far from home, and why the victim should laugh.” (Slaughterhouse five) This makes him a very interesting person to hear about. We can see that Billy becomes very successful in the days to come, but what made him transform into this great person from the useless coward we must remain a mystery. When looking at older people I cant help but wonder what they used to look like and act like and in Slaughterhouse Five we are given that chance.

The author introduces many new ideas through themes that are uncommon: “It is just an illusion we have here on earth that one moment follows another one, like beads on a string, and that once a moment is gone it is gone for ever.” (Slaughterhouse five) To talk about the issue of time and at the same time change time gives me a greater understanding of what he means. The introduction of Billy’s abduction seemed a little far-fetched at the beginning but then I realized that it is a great way for a person to get his message across. People will pay attention to the alien abduction story and think he is crazy but still hear what he has to say. It is a book that makes you question what “Big Brother” has taught us for so long.