In both Honors English 11 classes, we watched the beginning of this interview today. In the interview, Tim O'Brien and Nate Fick talk about the ideas of truth, fiction, experience and perspective that O'Brien write about throughout the story The Things They Carried. We stopped at right around 26 minutes in. We'll finish watching the interview on Monday, and we'll discuss the story "The Ghost Soldiers."
The interview is related to “Good Form” because some stories can be true, but not have happened or it might have happened, but it doesn’t seem true. I think for this book particularly, this interview made it clear for me on what the truth actually is. I’ve always thought that some stories in Things They Carried might have been a lie, but like Tim stated in the interview, “truth changes.” I believe change is a part of life, in his book, many people change from the beginning to an end, including himself. This interview also brought out the truth about war. One thing I liked was when Time said, “Your enemy is someone else’s portrait.” I agree with that because being at war you probably think that your enemy is the “bad person” when in reality you are also the “bad person” because your enemy is not the only one fighting, you are too.
ReplyDeleteIn conclusion, I think Tim and Nate’s message for this book and interview on war was that war can change a person’s life and to those who haven’t been to war, stories and others influence and change our lives. People change and when they do, they start to value and appreciate the life they’re living.
I think that this interview was really interesting, to see how each one of them thought to write their novels. It really was interesting that Nate Fick, at first, was also really confused between what was true and what was not when he first read O'Brien's novel. It really resonated with me when O'Brien said that it "doesn't have to be the truth, to be true." This really was confusing to me at first, until I realized that he was right in saying that. What one person may think is true, could be completely false to someone else. He also was really right when saying "truth changes" because things happen and make something untrue that may have previously been true. The entire interview really cleared up how Fick and O'Brien both had bad memories from war, yet they both decided to write about their experiences. It was interesting that Fick was so interested in what O'Brien had to say as well, and I thought that he would have spoken more.
ReplyDeleteThe stories that O'Brien shared seemed to relate to the ones he wrote about in his novel. It made me question whether those stories in the novel are actually true, just with different names or different details added. He seemed exactly like you'd think: not wanting a lot of credit for much, but very open on what he had gone through in his past.
From what I saw from the interview (I was only here on monday). It showed how war really sticks with a person and that stories can alter over time. If you look away for a second you fill it in with your mind with that seems to have happened and not what actually happened. I also thought it was interesting that O'Brien just wanted the war behind him when he got back and did not want to be thanked. It seems like he was so against the war and the effects of the war effected how much someone can act like after. War really changed people and their beliefs because there is so much going on. War is a totally different reality that people experience.
ReplyDeleteFrom the story i learned that not all true war stories are true and also in the video it explained how his story cannot be logically true so that is why his book is fiction. But he enjoys writing about his experiences because its is something different to share
I really enjoyed watching the interview. The most interesting part I took from it was how the "truth" doesn't have to be the truth in order to be true (that sounds a bit confusing) - How there can be as many "truths" as there are witnesses was another interesting point. Another part I thought was interesting was how, both, O'Brien and Fick just wanted to be done with the whole war. You would think they might wanted the appreciation of serving their country, but I guess after experiencing war, you just want to return to a sense of normalcy.
ReplyDeleteConnecting to O'Brien's text, the interview relates to one of his chapters "Good Form". What is the truth and how would we know? You might never figure it out because of all the different views and ways of telling the stories. How can you tell the difference between the actual and story truth. By reading all the stories, we can see how each might be exaggerated or tweaked to sound more interesting. I would take the story truth over the actual anytime though. (Boring stories are boring)
I found the interview to be very interesting, to see how the Vietnam War and the Iraq War were so related. One way I noticed that they were related was by the way the soldiers coped with the death of friends and people. They both made little jokes or humorous sayings that would either be something the dead guy would do or say. It sounds kind of rude to a civilians point of view, making fun of a dead soldier but I bet with all the violence and gore those soldiers see in battle joking is the only way to cope with it. I also found it interesting how O'Brien didn't want a parade or any recognition for what he did in the war. If I was him I would have wanted some recognition.
ReplyDeleteFrom the story I learned that it is basically impossible to write a "true" war story. To tell a “true” war story you want to make the reader or listener feel the same emotions as you did when in the war and to get that emotion you have to lie or give false information that makes the reader feel the same as you did. Another reason you can't tell a “true” war story is because “true” war stories will sound fake and surreal to a normal civilian, so they would have to make up a story that give a similar emotion, but it will not be a full “true” war story.
I thought that this interview was clever and it opened my mind to know what Tim O'Brien was like. A simple man that wanted nothing but to be left alone, weird but yet it was the peace that he desired. I enjoyed learning about the reality of war that O'Brien refers to during the interview, the graphic images that he describes is really stocking but yet it is the reality. O'Brien seems to not have a filter telling these things to a high school class room which i thought was unique and showed his personality. I did not really capture the similarities between the Iraq war and the Vietnam war that this interview shares, I did however understand the meaning of how the Vietnam war to them as soldier had no point to it, as most think, nothing like 9/11 occurred to start the war. What captured my attention was when Tim mentions about peace. How war makes a man or simply a soldier want peace of mind, as war is peaceful with no intentions of pleasing someone. loud noises, sadness, suffering, and most important the feeling of trying not to die. overall this interview was unique and intellectual, opening my mind to what a soldier that fought in the Vietnam was like.
ReplyDeleteThe interview was interesting; it’s always intriguing to hear from individuals who have served our country because they offer first-hand accounts of what they experienced at war. O’Brien and Fick’s conversation about perception of truth, evolving truth, and objective reality were really interesting because it gave me a sense of how their experiences were at war and how they remember those experiences. I also liked O’Brien’s analysis on his chapter Ambush; he explained it was “the rock bottom of war” and that the chapter explains the “ripple effect of death.” The last thing that resonates with me is how O’Brien and Fick wanted to just vanish after the war instead of being recognized because it shows how the war truly affected them.
ReplyDeleteMany connections can be made between the interview and the text. O’Brien’s attitude in the interview towards the war and the cause of the war can be seen in the chapter “The Rainy River” when O’Brien contemplates the draft. Near the beginning of the interview when O’Brien talks about the perception of truth and the difference between reality truth and storytelling truth, connections can be made to the chapter “Good Form” where O’Brien also examines that difference and its possible significance to the book as a whole. The last connection I made was when O’Brien says he does not aim for intellectuality- he aims for the heart and the stomach, this reminded me of the entire book, which was not a book entirely about war but also about friendship, feelings, love, hate, revenge, and truth.
I thought that the interview was very interesting because it showed the similarity between the two wars. Obviously the two wars differ in many ways, but mentally they had the same effect on two people participating in the interview. One thing that really stuck with me in this interview is when Tim O'Brien mentioned how one mans enemy is another mans patriot. This resonates with me because I have never really thought about enemies in that way, but it makes perfect sense.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that reminded me of the book was when Fick told his story about escaping and passing a bunch of buildings that he completely believed he passed. But afterward, he looked at a map and realized that when he remembered could not have happened what so ever. He said he remembered passing buildings that were not even on a map. This story made me think of the chapter "How to Tell a True War Story". A true war story depends all on how a person saw it, and their perception of the event. Although the story he remembers is not completely accurate, it is still a true war story.
I found this interview to be surprisingly full of incite and new information that helped me better understand not only "The Things They Carried" but how much the Vietnam and the Iraq war were so related. One commonality that I noticed right off the bat was how both Tim O'Brien and Nate Fick had experienced instances during their respective wars when soldiers made light the horrors and death that came with being part of an American militia. One specific piece of this interview that stuck with was something that Tim O'Brien said in response to Nate Fick saying that his novel often reveals falsehoods, he responded with "It doesn't have to be truth to be true". This really enlightened me into his writing style and how he wanted to convey. That his experience is just as true as another soldier who was in the same place at the same time, no one is right and no one is wrong.
ReplyDeleteSome of the things that Tim O'Brien said resonated with me. When he talked about how the soldiers had a hard time integrating into civilian life and how is was the hardest war to come home from. This goes a long with the book because he talks about Norman Bowker and how he committed suicide because he could not adjust to life back home.
ReplyDeleteI liked the interview because it was just like the book. If someone had a question, O'Brien told it like it was. I like how he brought up how some schools thought the book was inappropriate, but it was the truth and he didn't want to write it any other way. For example, he says (something along the lines of) "when you are dying, you aren't just going to say 'Oh poop'." I also like how they said "Your enemy is someone else's patriot." Everyone has enemies, but those same enemies have people that really care about them.
ReplyDeleteIn the interview, they talk about truth a lot and it reminds of the chapter "How to Tell a True War Story." In the book, O'Brien tells us that a true war story is often unbelievable, stomach turning, and even fake, but he always brings back the point that it is absolutely true.
This interview was very interesting to me. As i watched Tim giving his responses to the questions he was asked, I could see how different questions were harder for him to answer and they were all long and detailed answers. He really put a lot of time and thought into his book and he wanted it to reflect his experiences in the war, and by giving these sort of long and expansive answers, he is relly adding emphasis to the affect it all has had on him. This was very obvious in the interview when he read the story from his book. He, at points in the reading, had to pause and almost had to cry because it was so emotional for him to re-experience. This chapter was very depressing to read, and to see him reading it out loud, was even more depressing. Just the way he said things in general gave everything more enthusiasm.
ReplyDeleteNot only his responses suprised me, but also his appearance was very intriguing. He is not the guy I would have expected to have written a book like "The Things They Carried." He mentioned at one point in the interview that when he returned from the way that he didnt want a full on parade and everything, he just wanted the old hat, jeans, and sweatshirt. This seems like more of a metaphor, meaning to just disapear, but he took that much more literally and he wore those three things at the interview. Despite his clothes, he had a voice that was more southern, and I dont know if that is just because i am used to a northerners accent, but I did not picture a guy with a voice like his in the war. Thats pretty much all I got from the interview that was jumping out at me.
The structure of the interview made it quite enjoyable to watch. The way O'Brian and Fick were able to relate their experiences in two very different wars was intriguing. It showed how all wars have similarities. Although the Vietnam war and the war in Afghanistan/Iraq are decades apart, the interview exposed the horrific reality that every soldier faces.
ReplyDeleteI also thought that the interview was very helpful in matching a voice with the text that we are reading. Although his voice was a bit squeakier than expected, hearing O'Brian read "Ambush" allowed me to further understand how he felt about the war. After listening to him speak, I could tell that if there was one thing that was definitely true in "The Things They Carried" it was O'Brian's disagreements with the objectives of the war in Vietnam. I could tell that he felt strongly about how the war was not handled correctly. O'Brian and I share similar opinions on war and I enjoyed hearing him speak.
I think that the interview was very interesting and did a good job connecting both Iraq War and Vietnam War with their similarities and differences. Obviously the two wars are very different, although they are similiar in a way because they have the same mental affect on a person. One thing that resonates with me from the interview is how O'Brien describes truth in the war. He mentions that in a certain situation people have different truths because everyone precieves things differently and not everyone can pick up on every detail.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the interview O'Brien mentions how his goal is to target the heart and feeling rather than share the story with just basic information. I related this to the story because O'Brien has stories based on love, friendships, family and personal views which makes the story more interesting to the reader.
I enjoyed watching the interview and reading the book because it was ineresting to me to read a story about war from a first hand perspective.
Watching this interview and hearing the similarities between the authors, Tim O'Brien and Fick, was very interesting to me. I thought that even thought these men fought two very different wars their experiences and mental processing seemed to overlap. One thing that stood out to me was the way the men would cope with the idea of death. I would think it was disrespectful to joke about it and brush it off like it was no big deal, but then I realized that Tim talks about this a lot in his book and it must be a common way to deal with death.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that resonates with me was the idea of truth and what is the line between real and fiction. At one point Fick talks about how he took his men through a whole mission and by the end he realized that it was physically impossible but he knew that what he thought had happened was true. Tim obviously talks a lot, in his book and in the interview, about how everyone perceives something different but yet every single person experiences something that is true. And even though what Fick experienced was actually impossible it was true to him because that is what really happened according to him. O'Brien and Fick both connect with this idea of what is true and try to explain how something can be seen as fiction but true to someone else.
I thought the interview was really interesting and there were many things that resonated with me. One of things that O'Brien said that resonated with me was that when there's a new guy, all the other soldiers start writing their names on his stuff. They do this because it's their way of claiming the new guy's stuff in case he dies. I thought that this was sad because it's basically saying you're aren't going to make it out alive.
ReplyDeleteI thought this interview was very different from what I expected war veterans to be like. While watching the interview, what resonates with me the most is when O'Brian talks about how the soldiers always imagined the enemy to be someone bad (like a wife-beater or a criminal) to make it easier to kill them. This may sound like a horrible thing to almost dehumanize someone like that, but it also makes me think that maybe the enemy is thinking the same thing. I just think it's one of those things war does to people. Most other war stories I've read were about the gore and physical difficulty of war, but I enjoyed reading O'Brian's story because he also talks about the emotional and psychological aspects of war.
ReplyDeleteWith this being said, the interview reminded me a lot of the chapter "The Man I Killed" because this chapter especially shows how much life and death are really worth during war and just because soldiers have to kill people, it doesn’t always mean they always agree with it. Tim O'Brian during this story feels remorse and regret for killing a man because he knew that he could have had a family, a life, hopes, and dreams, just like any other human being and no matter how hard you try to dehumanize someone, they will still be human.
From the interview something I noticed was that both Nate Fick and Tim O'Brien, even though they fought in different wars under different circumstances, they both have the same view on how it affects a person. While O'Brien was drafted, Nate Fick enlisted, but even then they both had a similar understanding of truth and war and how nothing is what it seems at first thought. Both men talked about how they lived through events that aren't physically correct in how they remembered it, but that's the truth in their eyes. Which leads to the important idea they mentioned about how there is many levels and layers to truth, perspective and even war.
ReplyDeleteIn Nate's own experience for example, in a fire fight once Nate could clearly remember the way the car drove out of the town and how the buildings were tall and rose above them. It had then turned out that the way Nate remembered it wasn't physically possible because the landmarks didn't match up. This is were the layers to perspective and truth are clearly seen, this is what Nate saw, this is the truth about the event as he knows it, but more happened than even he can explain. Nate and Tim both also mentioned how in war it isn't just kill or shoot, there is more to take into consideration when making decisions. You have to think of civilians and whether or not your men will be safe on a raid. There isn't just one answer but several all solving the same problem.
This interview had a lot of information to take from it but one thing sticks in my mind. When Fick talks about the truth and what they saw. Fick was saying how he thought he and his troops took turns and did things that were not even possible. So to me it was like his mind was playing tricks on him. Now that sticks with me because I wonder to what extent does this affect the war stories soldiers tell? What parts of their stories are lies? These are things I want the answer to now.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that seemed like it connected with Fick and the text was both's group and their chemistry. When Fick told his stories I got this attitude that he would take a bullet for one of his members. I thought in O'Brien's book they had a similar attitude. I felt a unity in both books and a "i got your back" mentality.
I thought that the interview with Tim O'Brien and Nick Fick was interesting and honest. It was surprising to me how both of them had similar war experiences in such different wars. They experienced all that war has to offer. From firefights to training, to nightmares once they were home. When O'Brien began to tell the class in the interview room that he speaks to them instead of choosing to speak to older generations about the war it really made me feel as if there was an important message he was trying to get across. He wanted our generation to learn about what happened to him when he was younger, and make sure that it did not happen again. He did not want to see another war like Vietnam where the soldiers fought for no reason and for that reason got little to show for it. O'Brien seemed brutally honest when he said that he was happy he had nothing to show for his duty. The fact that he said he wanted to go back to Vietnam instead of live in the states was fascinating to me because he said it was a war without a purpose. All of this that he said during the interview was honest, which was ironic because in his book "The Things They Carried", he wrote in a way that made it hard to tell if what he was saying was honest. After reading and listening to the interview I believe O'Brien is trying to say that in war, honesty is slim. Truth is slim. As Fick said, after a firefight there could be as many different variations of a story as there were men there, but they are all true in a way to the man telling them. It is all perspective.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed watching the interview with Tim O'Brien and Nate Fick. It is always interesting to actually hear the author's voice and feel their presence. It was interesting to actually hear him talk about the book as well because it helps to give more insight. One thing that really resonated with me is when he was talk about losing someone in war and how that makes it seem like war is ever lasting. He said "the war may be over but it'll never be over". I just thought this was a really powerful thing to say and it was sad to think about. I think that is absolutely true I just had never thought about it before.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that reminded me of the book is when he talked about of done he wanted to be with the war. When he came home he really did not want to receive any honor and really just wanted to forget about it. This made me think specifically of the chapter where he gets the draft letter and guides the reader through his decision making. I thought that this made sense because in the book he really did not want to go to war in the first place and did not even really know what he would be fighting for. Therefore now hearing him say that he did not even want the honor it helps to come full circle that he probably really did not want to fight in the war in the first place.
What I found most interesting during the entirety of the interview was the how much both Fick and O'Brien agreed with each other on different subjects. I suspected that with such different ages and such different wars that both were in, there would be a disparity in agreements. That helped me understand a lot about war itself and who fight in it. In reality, most soldiers who fight it, fight in it because it is their job. Well, that is for the u.s. Because for both the Afghan and Vietnam wars, the opposing side is a group fighting with passion for something they believe in. For them its not a job, its a neccesity to join the fight for what they passionetly believe in.
ReplyDeleteI also noticed and found it quite interesting that in war, soldiers from both wars discussed their beliefs on the war briefly. But it was never discussed again, the soldiers put their beliefs in their mind and kept it their, further strengthening my idea that for many, war is a job more than an at of passion. Further more, I quite enjoyed when Fick commented that in the battle field, as a leader he takes the action that he thinks is most morale. Foot soldiers are not int h know of the master plan of their home countries for the war, in frankly, I don't think most care. They do what they think is right in the small scale. I always pictured an army as one force, with one mind, doing what the leaders bid it too, but I neglected to think that every human being as an autonomous brain, that the government is not hal 9000 and the soldiers robots. They are living people who do their job but retain their morality at the same time.
I liked the interview. It really allowed me to understand what O'Brien meant when he talked about real truth and story truth. Originally I was annoyed when I would read something and later find out that it wasn't true. Now I understand that it's not that O'Brien is lying, it's that he is telling the truth as he believed it happened. He later finds out that it did not happen as such. I also thought it was interesting how the Iraq war and the Vietnam war had so many similarities even though they were completely different wars.
ReplyDeleteSomething that resonated with me was when Nate described something that happened while he was in combat and later he found that what he thought happened couldn't have happened at all. This reminds me of the chapter How to Tell a True War Story. A true war story is told based upon the perception of the story teller. What the story teller remembers might not be completely what happened but that is how a true war story is told.
After watching the interview I realized how even though Nate and Tim had different entrances to the war they are very similar. Tim O'brien was drafted into the war and in The Things They Carried he talks about how he was against the war like many other people and didn't really want to go to war at all. In contrast Nate Fick was a volunteer to the war. He may have had his personal beliefs about the war but he was there by choice. Even though they had different ways they got into the war they both were able to put their beliefs off to the side and serve for their country.
ReplyDeleteAlso, both Nate Fick and Tim O'Brien briefly speak about how ugly war is. In "How To Tell a True War Story", O'Brien says that if a war story sounds beautiful then it is not true. Then in the interview Fick at one point says "If you knew what I did there you wouldn't thank me". I just like how they don't just tell you how its such an honor to fight for their country, but paint a reall picture of what war is.
I really liked the interview because i thought it was really interesting. he cleared up his thinking process throughout the book which made some of it make sense a little better. He talked about why he wanted to write certain things and it made a lot more sense of the book for me. What was really interesting to me was that both men came from different wars and they had very similar memories of the war and experienced the same things.I think that what he said connects to some of the things that he writes about like how what he is writing isn't true but he thinks it should be true or that's what he thinks it should be like. This is also what Nate says in that he remembers something one way but it actually didn't happen which I think is a lot of the book was based upon.
ReplyDeleteI really liked the interview I thought that it was a good idea to have a Vietnam war veteran and a iraq veteran beacuse tim fought in a war that happened a while ago and fick si in the more present day generation of war. It was very interesting to hear5 both perspectives. It was interesting when fick said that he remembers something happening but didn;t know how he did it because it was off the map. They talk a lot about the truth and what is real and what is war. I think tim was very elaborate on his responses and he really showed his emotion especially when he was reading a chapter. I think the two worked out together very well and made it especially interesting
ReplyDeleteO'Brien mentioned the differences between happening-truth and the truth in his stories quite a bit. That's what really stuck with me, because his explanations are what really made me start to understand why he didn't have so much happened-truth in his stories. He's trying to make us-people who have no contest for war-understand how war makes people feel. Because they are such intense emotions that we as relative-ignorant-to-the-world teenagers have no context for, to express them O'Brien needs to use equally (or even more) intense situations.
ReplyDeleteHe also mentioned that part of being an adult is realizing the differences between happened-truth and true truth; how things you think have happened really didn't and vise versa. It makes me think of all the other instances were the world has refused to be clearly put into black and white and stubbornly insists on being grey. I know I sometimes would like to have the world to be simple and easy to understand, but other times I'm kind of glad that its so complex: it's a great challenge to try to understand.
I also enjoyed the interview. It helped me understand the book better and why Tim O'Brien decided to write it. What really stuck with my was how he wrote the book to express his feelings and experiences about the war but in a fictional way. He talked about how just because the book was fictional does not mean those things did not happen. He also discussed that although it is fictional he used it to explain why things had happened. Another part that stuck with me was when he was talking about the man he killed. We do not even think about that side of the war and how traumatic it is for people to kill other people. It still haunts Tim O'Brien to this day. It is another side of war that is interesting to look at. This interview was helpful and I enjoyed it.
ReplyDeleteThis interview was very interesting, as it gave much insight to the book. The part that resonated the most with me was when O'Brien talked about coming home from the war. Unlike a lot of people, he didn't want recognition; he wanted the war to go away and not have to face the reality of the war again. I never thought of soldiers as wanting recognition, but after he talked about how he didn't want any, unlike others, it became clear to me that many people want to be appreciated for the services they provided for their country. O'Brien also reads an excerpt from the book, Ambush. This is interesting, because it makes you think about if they go home and tell their wives and kids the same stories that they tell throughout The Things They Carried.
ReplyDelete