I thoroughly enjoyed Tim O’ Brien’s “The Things They Carried.” It actually took me midway through the short story to realize that the title was reflected in what the entire story was about. Also, most of the new paragraphs started with “the things they carried” or “what they carried.” O’ Brien describes physical things that soldiers in Vietnam carried: bug spray, flash lights, certain guns, etc. He goes into intricate detail describing the weight of them; to me, this was because he was showing the physical weight of the items- which seems heavy. However, he uses these things to relate to the emotional and mental burden the soldiers were carrying (to me at least)- which was a far heavier burden. Even the main character struggles with first, his unrequited love for Martha, and then the death of one of his men because of that distracting love. I noticed the repetition of the death of Ted Lavender. It wasn’t until the end of the story that the death is described. I like how the entire story is shaped by this one man’s death, but the reader doesn’t get the importance of it until the end. The Lieutenant mentions this because his life is shaped around his biggest failure. I also was having a hard time understanding why the speaker of the story kept mentioning the virginity of Martha. However, I liked the voice- third person omniscient. He knew the thoughts and feelings of the main character, but remained detached, almost as an onlooker into a memory. However, the language mirrored how the soldiers and main character acted. I especially liked the characterization: the big, muscleman, the worried, manic pill-popper, and the love-struck young lieutenant. The main character is so consumed by his love for Martha that it is almost stifling. The story has the same affect for the reader… the reader is bombarded by thoughts of her. Overall, “The Things They Carried” was very powerful to me- I felt as though it was simple, but placed the reader into a different world- which is what the main character had to learn that he was in.
You said, "It wasn’t until the end of the story that the death is described. I like how the entire story is shaped by this one man’s death, but the reader doesn’t get the importance of it until the end. "
ReplyDeleteThis is a great point -- why do you think O'Brien kept circling around this event? Why do you think he didn't simply describe it from the beginning . . or wait until the end to say that Lavendar died? What does this decision do for the story? What's its effect? Try to push yourself a little more to understand HOW the writing works and why . . . but I'm glad you're looking at structure and chronology.