So here's what I've got so far...
As I've been reading through this book, I've noticed a lot of things that sort of tie it into this whole ambiguous postmodernism thing. And in a way, I feel like I should maybe not be thinking these things, because it's a whole new semester, and I would like to move past postmodernism and shift my focus to more of a contemporary type of deal--but there are many postmodern things about The Things They Carried, as I'm noticing them. For one, it's very self-aware: Tim O'Brien constantly states things like "This is true" (pg 67) and "This is one story I've never told before" (pg 39). In a way, O'Brien is tearing down those walls, between narrative and reader; every story has the feel of not a chapter in a book, but a living, breathing story, being told by a living and breathing storyteller, told directly to the reader, who is supposed to listen and take it for what it is, what it isn't, what it might be...
The whole subject of "truth" is a central (how funny, using the word "central," considering the fact that postmodernism is all about the total absence of a center...) theme behind postmodernism, and I would say it's also a predominant theme in The Things They Carried (at least, so far, and in my general observations). I guess the biggest example of this in the text is the whole story, "How To Tell a True War Story." And then the whole story proceeds to tell you just how impossible that is, or at least tries to: "A true war story is never moral... You can tell a true war story if it embarasses you... It's difficult to separate what happened from what seemed to happen." I've been finding it really interesting, how O'Brien twists everything around so you're just not sure what he means and what he doesn't--is he writing about stuff that has actually happened to him, or is it fiction? Or is it a little of both?? I guess in that way it's all deconstructed, and such. It's not just a novel. I feel like I haven't gotten too deep into it yet, so that's all the insight I can really offer... I'm looking forward to analyzing it, though. I'm really liking this book so far.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Monday, January 25, 2010
what IS it?!
So when I saw this week's prompt, I kind of got a little excited. Finally, a discussion I felt I could get myself into... Maybe. "What is Postmodernism?" What a crazy question to ask--and there's not much of an answer, in my general opinion. So that's what I'm going with, I guess. Postmodernism for Beginners has taught us that reality is fragmented, and potentially different to each person. So the only explanation of postmodernism I could possibly give is what, exactly, it means to me, right?
And I've been complaining about that all semester, so now I've got a little bit of a chance to form coherent sentences and such out of it. Whew--take a deep breath, a sip of coffee, and let's get a move on.
I've kind of been getting the feeling that postmodernism is, in just a few words, an excuse to get out of anything--and maybe I don't have a whole lot of proof supporting that claim, but what is truth, anyway? What good does my truth do you, in the long run? I could believe with all my existence that the sky was purple and the grass was bright orange, and it still probably wouldn't shake your belief that they're blue and green. Truth is subjective. Truth is always changing. Truth isn't truth anymore, because honestly, truth is supposed to be that one thing that is unshakeable. That one thing that exists no matter what, no matter how you possibly look at it--2+2=4. You know. Gravity is what keeps us down on the surface of the earth. We go to school from eight in the morning till almost three in the afternoon. We know these things. They're the truth.
Postmodernism doesn't necessarily skewer faith, but it sort of discounts it. Take the grand narrative, for example, the metanarrative--maybe one of the biggest ones, so big you don't even think of it this way, is Christianity. You ask a Christian what he or she thinks, and he/she'll tell you, "God exists. I believe in him." And to them, that's true, that exists, it's the truth. It works for those people. But it doesn't always work for everyone else. So theoretically, there's no real center holding us all together, nothing around which every human being can revolve, sharing some similarity with every other human being.
...But what about humanity itself? Can't we all agree that we're human? That's kind of how I'm feeling, the more I think about it. And then there's always the argument that the entire lack of a center, the complete absense of a metanarrative, is a metanarrative in itself. It's all contradictions!! In my eyes, postmodernism is just a bunch of contradictions, and one big giant excuse to disagree with people about things that there should be no disagreement. (...Is disagreement a word? If it's not... I just made it one.)
Personally, I believe that faith is what moves us forward through a lot of our lives--not necessarily religious faith, since I'm not an overly religious person. But there are some things that I think we just need to take as "truth," and not question so much. Like science. Biology class. My textbook can tell me it exists as much as it wants, but I personally have little evidence of the existence of DNA polymerase III, I've never seen it. I just choose to believe it. We believe what we want, and in the end, we don't believe what we don't want to believe. Sometimes that gets us into trouble. But at the same time, that's a little bit of what makes us human.
All I really know is that I don't get postmodernism all that much, and I'm not a particularly huge fan, but I've been using it all semester: "In my reality," I may tell Deanna, "you don't actually have red hair. Maybe it's purple... with polka-dots." I could really believe that. And to me, it would be true. What an excuse to get away with ridiculous things.
I'm not saying that it all can't be used for other things--just stating, in that weird and tired way that I tend to state things in, that it's not really my cup of tea. Postmodernism. Because it can be a cup of tea, if it wants to be. It could also be a giraffe, I bet. Maybe I really do believe it's a giraffe. ...Only I don't believe it's a giraffe.
And I've been complaining about that all semester, so now I've got a little bit of a chance to form coherent sentences and such out of it. Whew--take a deep breath, a sip of coffee, and let's get a move on.
I've kind of been getting the feeling that postmodernism is, in just a few words, an excuse to get out of anything--and maybe I don't have a whole lot of proof supporting that claim, but what is truth, anyway? What good does my truth do you, in the long run? I could believe with all my existence that the sky was purple and the grass was bright orange, and it still probably wouldn't shake your belief that they're blue and green. Truth is subjective. Truth is always changing. Truth isn't truth anymore, because honestly, truth is supposed to be that one thing that is unshakeable. That one thing that exists no matter what, no matter how you possibly look at it--2+2=4. You know. Gravity is what keeps us down on the surface of the earth. We go to school from eight in the morning till almost three in the afternoon. We know these things. They're the truth.
Postmodernism doesn't necessarily skewer faith, but it sort of discounts it. Take the grand narrative, for example, the metanarrative--maybe one of the biggest ones, so big you don't even think of it this way, is Christianity. You ask a Christian what he or she thinks, and he/she'll tell you, "God exists. I believe in him." And to them, that's true, that exists, it's the truth. It works for those people. But it doesn't always work for everyone else. So theoretically, there's no real center holding us all together, nothing around which every human being can revolve, sharing some similarity with every other human being.
...But what about humanity itself? Can't we all agree that we're human? That's kind of how I'm feeling, the more I think about it. And then there's always the argument that the entire lack of a center, the complete absense of a metanarrative, is a metanarrative in itself. It's all contradictions!! In my eyes, postmodernism is just a bunch of contradictions, and one big giant excuse to disagree with people about things that there should be no disagreement. (...Is disagreement a word? If it's not... I just made it one.)
Personally, I believe that faith is what moves us forward through a lot of our lives--not necessarily religious faith, since I'm not an overly religious person. But there are some things that I think we just need to take as "truth," and not question so much. Like science. Biology class. My textbook can tell me it exists as much as it wants, but I personally have little evidence of the existence of DNA polymerase III, I've never seen it. I just choose to believe it. We believe what we want, and in the end, we don't believe what we don't want to believe. Sometimes that gets us into trouble. But at the same time, that's a little bit of what makes us human.
All I really know is that I don't get postmodernism all that much, and I'm not a particularly huge fan, but I've been using it all semester: "In my reality," I may tell Deanna, "you don't actually have red hair. Maybe it's purple... with polka-dots." I could really believe that. And to me, it would be true. What an excuse to get away with ridiculous things.
I'm not saying that it all can't be used for other things--just stating, in that weird and tired way that I tend to state things in, that it's not really my cup of tea. Postmodernism. Because it can be a cup of tea, if it wants to be. It could also be a giraffe, I bet. Maybe I really do believe it's a giraffe. ...Only I don't believe it's a giraffe.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
