The more I read Tim O'Brien's book "The Things They Carried", the more I am reminded of our summer reading "Fire and Forget". Was it because they both have an eccentricity on war? Was it because they were both an anthology of short stories? Although those observations are both true, I soon realized it wasn't just those things: it was the variety of style. It occurred to me that every short story I've read in Tim O'Brien's collection of short stories had a different style of writing - some in first person, others in third; some told stories, others commented on those stories. Like a face in various distinct curvy mirrors, his style of writing would take different shapes: in one story he would talk about a certain person's war experience, the next he would scope out into a different time and area to explain the previous story. This happens for many pairs of stories, such as "Speaking of Courage" and "Notes" - he would talk about Norman Bowker's personal experience in that time and place that it happened in the first story, then talk about Norman Bowker's life post-war and his connection to it. This also happens between the stories "The Things They Carried" and "Love" - he would talk about Jimmy Cross and his company's experience in the war, again at that time and place, in the first story, then would scope out and talk about the conversation Jimmy Cross had with her friend, years after and in the U.S. Notice how the first story was told in 3rd person, omniscient and the second was in first person, non-omniscient.
I was amazed by this; the variety in the book "Fire and Forget" is completely understandable, as it was written from veterans from all over the country; but for one author to have that many styles, and talk in that many different personalities? If my prediction that every story will have a unique writing style, there would be 22 different styles - a diverse collection indeed.
This brings up different questions: what did O'Brien feel when writing these stories? How many are made up, and how many are reflecting events that happened to him? Or many happened to his friends? Then again this refers to the idea of Fabula and Sjuzet: who cares if it happened or not: the Fabula is already lost, and Sjuzet is the only thing that remains, and any form of Sjuzet is distorted in some kind of way. What is important is that O'Brien get's his point across, and in this case it is more of a feeling than a moral, the feeling of being in a soldier's shoes.
Although this post has little to do with war, I decided to take a break from such brutality and found out something very different about the author himself and thought I should share it with you guys.
The distinctive styles that Tim O'Brien has are really interesting and I think that it is this diversity that makes the book a good read. My favorite part is when he writes in the 'meta'. It is like getting to read the authors commentary on the previous story, even though both may be 'made up'. They also serve to remind us that this is not a book about Vietnam, rather it is a story of an author writing about Vietnam, a small yet significant difference.
ReplyDeleteThe variety of styles definitely makes the book as a whole more interesting. Also, its a great point to start a discussion because we know that the author put a story at a specific place with a certain style for a purpose. Nothing in The Things They Carried is placed there randomly, and every story style has a reason for it. For me personally, this provided a deeper experience while reading, as I tried to understand why the author placed this story here and formed the structure this way instead of just accepting it the way it is. Sometimes this style of writing/storytelling left me frustrated, as it left me wanting more of a certain style and story. Nevertheless, it is a very diverse collection of stories as you said, and this provides a very fascinating book.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree. Yes, both stories are centered on war, but there does seem to be something else connecting the two books. Maybe it's because O'Brien has a series of short stories not always told from one perspective? Just like Fire and Forget has many authors? Either way, I think what connects the two books is not that they are writing about war, but about the humanness that comes along with it.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about this the other day! I find it interesting that Tim O'Brien can be the voice for so many stories and character that all seem so unique. I think part of this is that very few books have Tim O'Briens style of having many stories from many different perspectives so it's not something we're used to . Also though each story still has a Tim O'Brien like voice to it. How does he retain his voice, and yet change it at the same time. These stories are all very much the style of Tim O'Brien and i'm sure we could find literary similarities, but like you mentioned they all seem so unique.
ReplyDeleteLike those who commented before me, I'm with you on this one, Anthony. Reading a story from one perspective and then immediately experiencing it through someone else's eyes, or better yet, an analysis of that same story in what feels like "real time" is both jarring and fascinating. The transitions between such massive leaps of narrative style are truly well executed in this collection of short stories. All I can do is sit back and admire O'Brien's sublime writing ability.
ReplyDeleteLike those who commented before me, I'm with you on this one, Anthony. Reading a story from one perspective and then immediately experiencing it through someone else's eyes, or better yet, an analysis of that same story in what feels like "real time" is both jarring and fascinating. The transitions between such massive leaps of narrative style are truly well executed in this collection of short stories. All I can do is sit back and admire O'Brien's sublime writing ability.
ReplyDeleteYour post brings up an extremely interesting point, one that had gone unnoticed by me before. The varying perspectives are not only present, but extremely well done, with each providing unique perspectives on often the same basic premises. As for Fire and Forget, its good to remember I believe most of the writers were present at the same workshop, with the same editors later on in the process. This likely homogenized the writing to a degree.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. O'Brien changing up the different ways each story is told really gives us different perspectives, allowing us to get as much of an all around view as we can as readers. I feel like if he didn't change up the narration for each story, this collection of stories would soon start to feel repetitive and not be as fun to read. O'Brien really pulled all these stories off amazingly well.
ReplyDeleteThe wartime setting and content of O'Brien's stories is undeniably crucial to the book's significance and interest, and there's lots to talk about simply in terms of his depiction of the soldiers' experiences. But for me, too, the book is also equally interesting as an exploration of what it means to be a writer, and a writer of fiction specifically, and one who is writing fiction about stuff that really matters in the world (as, I'd say, everyone on our syllabus is doing). This is precisely why I wanted to start with this collection (and, of course, it bounces off "Fire and Forget" in all kinds of interesting ways, too)--it provokes some complicated and I'd say necessary contemplation of what fiction is and what we expect to get out of it, as writers and as readers.
ReplyDelete