‘There is nothing intelligent to say about a massacre.’
Probably the best known of Vonnegut’s work, this is the first of his novels that I have read. It’s not difficult to see why it is held in such high regard, transcending boundaries in a way which cements its status as one of this century’s classic books. Whilst it is a complex multi faceted novel, with true depth, it is often simplified and attributed as having two main purposes. The first, probably the most commonly mentioned of the two is as an anti war novel. It’s not quite what you might expect though based on this assumption, as the points made which are interpreted as ‘anti-war’ require some elucidation on the part of the reader. It’s not simply a book which says ‘war is bad and this is why.’ The second obvious message that underpins the book as a whole is Vonnegut’s questioning of the nature of ‘life’ as we see it and the incomprehensibility of time and the human condition, which often intertwines with the anti war aspects.
Although as a species we like to think we understand a lot, it is interesting that there is so much that is beyond our understanding or comprehension, and much more beyond that which we do not even realise as existing beyond our understanding. I could go on about this but it’d be less of a ‘book review’ and more a semi-intelligent circular argument couple with a complete failure to understand. Basically, this book makes you consider these kind of things. There are far more messages which can be gleaned and then discussed at length from this novel and rather than consider each one, I will leave it up to you to do so for yourself. The setting of war and in particular Dresden, provides a perfect platform for these kinds of questions to be posed. If you were not aware, the Dresden attack is considered one of the worst atrocities carried about by Allied forces during WWII and actually was responsible for the death of nearly double the amount of people as the attack upon Hiroshima, yet it is often neglected in terms of its legacy. Vonnegut ensures that Childish has experience of this atrocity and of being a prisoner of war in order to fully attack his subject, that which has imposed these experiences upon him. As such, the novel provides a powerful sense of the senselessness and utter futility of war. It is savagely critical of war and human conflict, but in a profound way which most other critiques fail to capture. Throughout the novel Vonnegut introduces and maintains his own anti-war sentiment. His similarities with the character of Billy Childish have often been pointed out, leading many to describe this as ‘semi-autobiographical’. It is certainly true that the novel really conveys a sense of the author’s passion on the subject and is all the more powerful for doing so. In fact Vonnegut himself stated that he ‘rigs’ his novels so that the characters display his opinions, something which is undoubtedly on display throughout this novel.
All of this sums up in many ways the essence of the book, but I have left out an important aspect- the fatalist alien race. This leads to many describing the book as science-fiction. But this science-fiction which is referenced is not the kind that is so often dismissed by the classic literary world. It serves a purpose in furthering the above beliefs and is utilised to fantastic effect. The Tralfamadorians have a unique sense of time, a so called ‘4th dimension’ which allows them to see what we would see in a linear sense, as already having occurred. Childish also experiences a similar thing as ‘time travel’. This completely different take on time, with everything mapped out, leads them to criticise the idea on earth that we have of ‘free will’. The Tralfamadorians exist in order to provide a sense of the irrationality of war on two levels, first they provide an escape for Childish from war, and secondly through what I mentioned above, their sense of fatalism exists as a direct criticism of the existence and pointlessness of war.
In terms of style I found myself often recalling Joseph Heller’s ‘Catch 22’. Whilst the initial comparisons are obvious, both use absurdity and dark humour, coupled with deep sarcasm to promote an intense, sharp and intelligent disgust for war. Both avoid expressly stating this hatred, both are witty, deep and in equal measures profound, and both became one of my favourite novels as I finished reading the last page. Another thing that is notable about Slaughterhouse 5 is the unusual sequence with which events are relayed. It is half chronological, but half free flowing and with no reference to time. This in fact reflects the nature of the questions the novel poses, with Childish being stuck in time an effective metaphor for the alienation his character feels from the essence of war, and the sense of satisfaction we humans draw from the killing of others. At times the narrative style and Vonnegut’s prose can be slightly confusing, but this simply reflects the confusion resulting from the questions the novel poses. The jumbled mind that Childish possesses is a result of the nonsensical nature of war and massacre, and the novel is a success in conveying that. In a way, you sense that this novel was somewhat cathartic to Vonnegut, over its course you get an impression that he himself is gradually making sense of the nonsensical war that he was involved in.
The unusual narration, the little quirks, the occasional moments of black humour serve to make me love this book even more. Almost every page has a deep, insightful statement to be found; although much of this comes down to how much you want to read into any of them, and how much you invest in this book. One thing for sure though, if you invest a lot, the rewards are generous. Vonnegut comments that the novel itself is a failure in a literary sense, but it is a profound, moving, often hilarious failure. In another sense it is a unique success. It perfectly encapsulates the authors feelings of war, is a powerful statement and unique blends a number of styles, messages and genres into a brilliant end product. Slaughterhouse 5 is a wonderful, beautiful novel and continues to be relevant to the point of being essential.
‘There are no characters in this story and almost no dramatic confrontations, because most of the people in it are so sick and so much the listless playthings of enormous forces. One of the main effects of war, after all, is that people are discouraged from being characters. But old Derby was a character now.’
0 Responses to “Kurt Vonnegut- Slaughterhouse 5”