[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 53 KB, 600x400, kv.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7258384 No.7258384 [Reply] [Original]

Just finished Slaughterhouse-5 and I've got mixed opinions. Yeah it was funny in parts but I couldn't help but feel it was just all round a bit childish.

What are you thoughts /lit/?

>> No.7258396

>>7258384

Definitely agreed, though I'd say childlike rather than childish. There's beauty in that.

How old are you? It seems to me that Vonnegut is pretty polarizing, with some people absolutely adoring him, and others considering him way too naive and entry-level. Most who adore him read him in their teens, most who do not, read him later.

>> No.7258398

I remember reading it in middle school and I enjoyed it quite a bit. If you liked it, op, you'll probably like Pynchon.

>> No.7258399

>>7258384
He's an author for edgy teenagers, there isn't much to get fam.

>> No.7258403

>>7258384
Same.

I still liked it enough to read more of his stuff though. It's not the greatest thing ever but as far as light reading goes it's fine.

>> No.7258406

>>7258384
Vonnegut had a shit war, can you imagine being sent near the end of the war as part of an inexperienced division and then being caught right in the middle of a major offensive and captured in your first action?

>> No.7258420

>>7258384
If you're looking for an atypical take on WWII with more depth I'd recommend The Cannibal by John Hawkes.

>> No.7258422

Slaughterhouse 5 may take a re-read in a few years to truly understand or see it's value.

It's a bigger book than most are willing to acknowledge.

Because Vonnegut is easy reading, just pick up random books of his from time to time. After a few books, if you feel the same, you can drop it.

Personally I know how you feel, OP, but Vonnegut is one of my favorite authors simply for the fact that his dialogue is smart, funny, and natural.

>> No.7258450

>>7258384
It's got heavy science fiction themes to it, so it Automatically isn't going to please much people here, I think it gets recommended and talked about it a lot because it will be an avenue to science fiction, it had the themes of science fiction while still having the critical acclaim that alot of people are after

>> No.7258478

>>7258450
He technically wrote sci-fi but the sci-fi aspects of his books aren't the focus so much as the backdrop. His writing just had pulpy tendencies in general.

>> No.7258501

I'm a huge fan of Vonnegut. All of his works are easy and the majority are a bit childlike (I don't think Mother Night is like that), but they're still pretty smart and interesting reads. He isn't very complex, but he doesn't have to be. Making something difficult does not automatically make it good. Vonnegut does smart and simple very well, in my opinion. He's my go to for an easy read.

>> No.7258517

>>7258396
Not OP, read him recently, am 21. Read Cat's cradle. It's like a trash version of Valis that tried too hard to be witty and funny.

>> No.7258528

>>7258517
Valis was a trash version of Valis though.

>> No.7258565

>>7258399

He's really not particularly edgy. Quite the opposite, actually. Simplicity and warmth characterize much of his work. You're thinking of Palahniuk.

>>7258517

Too late then, probably. I read Vonnegut at 15-16 and adored him.

>> No.7258640

>>7258384
You've got to read Vonnegut at an early age to get what he's trying to convey, and that's whimsical innocence set against a brooding and slightly anxious backdrop; those feelings are always mirrored as a teenager and that's why people can feel such empathy for an author. Not to mention, Slaughterhouse-5 is one of the most saddest books if you take the opinion that Vonnegut suffered serious PTSD from Dresden and used the novel as a failed means of dealing with that.

>> No.7258681

>>7258640

OP here. Sorry I completely forgot about this thread. I was not aware of Vonnegut's back story which I guess is what frames the books significance.

I'll give him this: before I started the novel I had absolutely no clue about what happened in Dresden and it sounds truly awful.

>> No.7258780

>>7258640
Nah. You can read him at any age and "get it" on the emotional level you're talking about. You just have to not be an uptight prick.

>> No.7258956

>>7258681
>>7258681
Yeah, Vonnegut's backstory is very important to the novel, it acquires a very meta-reading and you realize how desperately Vonnegut wanted to be like Jesus or the aliens: able to detach from all the horrible events he's witness but still focus on the positives. In the end, and the beginning, he is always human, always a "pillar of salt" because he cannot help but look back, be fascinated with the destruction, and is so mortally flawed that he will never tweet with the birds and merge back into the routine apathy of his universe, owing, really, to the trauma he saw. Which is why his book is a failure, he's incapable of translating the horrors of Dresden, and he's incapable of leaving them. The entire thing is a tragedy.

>>7258780
Perhaps you're right, but there's something about the natural psyche of a young adult that meshes so well with Vonnegut, in my opinion.

>> No.7259996

>>7258384
One of the best American novels of all time, and probably the most profound book about war ever written. Because it tells us the biggest truth about war, that there is no way to do it justice, and there is no to accurately describe the horrors of war.. and on top of that, it also tells us how little the universe cares about human suffering. It does all of this while being both funny and heartbreakingly sad.

>> No.7260007

>>7258501
This is very important, people confuses difficulty with quality, which is not always the case.

>> No.7260011

Vonnegut is the textbook example of passable/sometimes decent author, insufferable fans.

>> No.7260036

>>7259996
It was good but The Cannibal was better at dealing with similar subject matter.

>> No.7260094

>>7258384
Best review of it imo was "a comedy at which you are not allowed to laugh"

>> No.7260097

>>7258384
When I read it when I was 16 I liked it a lot but yeah I see how it could be seen as 'childlike' although since it seems to be different than a lot of novels read by most people by having extra amounts of 'randomness' I think that it definitely adds some value to it, if it didn't have any humor or randomness in it I think it'd be worse

>> No.7260649

>>7258384

It's a good book to get started reading, very good indeed. I would just recommend that one does not revisit after reading for some time. I did and realized it was not as good as I remembered, and that sort of ruined the memory of the book for me. But it is a very good book, you just have to read it at the right time.

>> No.7261077

>>7258384
I thought that was kind of the point. Whimsical acceptance of human endeavour and futility. The children's crusade etc. The most advanced species is victim to it's fate even with time being entirely visible to them
.

>> No.7261087

>>7258384
I read it but don't remember anything about it at all.

>> No.7261992

High School Dr. Seuss.

But I still love his books.

>> No.7262448

>>7258396

not OP, I read slaughterhouse when I was 18 and kind of enjoyed it, like it was a fun book, but I resent it when people talk about how great a writer he was in literature classes (ie when we're discussing david foster wallace or nabokov or someshit)

>> No.7262618

>I'm a 19 year old faggot
>I thought a veteran's novel about death was childish

>> No.7262635

>>7262618
But his depiction is almost childlike, it's whimsical and very innocent with fantastic and unbelievable moments throughout. He nearly called the book "The Children's Crusade" for a reason, it's not meant to try an understand war or depict it's brutality, the book is a "failure" because he can't bear to be mature about his time in Dresden, the whole thing is just an incredibly sad background tale of a man who obviously suffered and wishes for the kind of innocence that birds would have after war.

>> No.7262638

>>7262635

>sparing you

>> No.7262662

>>7262638
That's too cryptic for me anon.

>> No.7262685

>>7262662

Of course it's fucking cryptic. What did you want? A combat novel about how awful that shit can get? So you can write a faggoty millennial essay about how "war is bad"?

You'll never understand what it's like to spew mustard gas and roses to a woman who for some reason still sticks around even though your war didn't end (when it actually did years ago).

He spared you, and he shouldn't have. It wasn't brutal, and maybe you don't deserve that consideration.

>> No.7262735

>>7262685
I'll never understand war and neither will Vonnegut. His book is good because he doesn't attempt to.

I thought your response was cryptic, not the book by the way.

>> No.7262737

>>7262735
Also, I'm not OP. I liked Slaughterhouse-5 a great deal when I read it.

>> No.7262762

>>7262618

>What is innocence

Literally the most universal theme in literature.