The listless Billy that we see throughout the duration of Slaugherhouse-Five is one that most likely is aware that his situation is “hopeless” in a sense that he’s incapable of changing anything that’s happening to him. Billy is aware that he’s in an “anti-glacier” (in reference to the quote about how trying to write an anti-war book is like trying to write an anti-glacier book; you’re going against something that’s impossible to get rid of) situation. I think one of the most independent decisions that Billy makes during the duration of the book is the decision to try and tell humans about his experiences on Tralfamadore. Upon his attempt at educating the world, he is called a fool by those closest to him, and dismissed as someone who is clearly crazy. If we’re taking Billy’s perspective throughout the novel at face value (which is easy enough, since this is a work of fiction), we know that he did go to Tralfamadore and his experiences are authentic. It’s possible that the message here is that it was fated that the rest of the human population wouldn’t know about the Tralfamadorians, and no matter how much Billy tries, he’s going to continually be met with confusion and doubt.
What counts as someone being a true “character” in the book is their ability to actually make decisions that attempt to go against what is going to happen, regardless of their decision. I’d also make a small case for Edgar Derby—when he stood up for what he believed in against the American Nazi, he was making a small attempt to change his fate. We know that he still ends up getting shot (after several reminders throughout the book), and even though he might not have been self-aware of his fate like Billy, it’s still notable that he made an subconscious effort to distinguish himself from other characters in the novel. Overall, I would say that the model Vonnegut uses--having characters with "free will" (not actually) operating within fate--was an interesting way to make readers question their own existence and what having free will really means.
Haha, as I read your title, I was thinking, "What about poor old Edgar Derby?" So I'm glad you brought him up. I do agree though, that Vonnegut gives us very little in terms of character in this novel. Billy's family members remained unnamed, so we can only talk about them in relation to Billy (thought some of them we only see in one scene). So many other characters are just minor plot drivers. Though I would say that along with Billy and Edgar Derby, Paul Lazzaro and Roland Weary could be considered legitimate characters. Each of these men seem to make decisions that affect Billy's life (trying to kill him versus trying to save him) and we get to know them quite a bit throughout the novel.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if Derby is making an effort to change his fate, necessarily, when he stands up for his big "character" scene and confronts Campbell--he's of course unaware of the absurd fate awaiting him, and he doesn't see himself as "doomed" in the way that we do.
ReplyDeleteBut he is trying to speak up, to change the fate of the immediate situation in the room--unlike the other Americans, he speaks stirringly in defense of American principles. And when Vonnegut calls him a "character" for doing so, the term doesn't seem entirely complimentary--it's close to calling him an idealistic fool, and his speech doesn't seem to resonate at all, with anyone in the room (and maybe not with the reader, either, given how undercut it is with irony).
Vonnegut's suspicion of "characters" is connected to his suspicion of plotting, as detailed in chapter 1--the idea that such a book could almost inadvertently reinforce a heroic narrative of war.
I think one of the most interesting aspects about Slaughterhouse-Five is the question of whether or not the Trefalmadorians actually exist in the novel or if they are just a creation in Billy's mind. My group did our panel presentation on this exact idea and we got a pretty good discussion in class from it. I think either interpretation is viable if we are taking the novel at face value like you said. On on hand, you may be right in that he was the "chosen one" by the Trefalmadorians and experienced trefalmadore and all of their ideas. On the other hand, you could have a what seems to be a PTSD guy who is imagining all of this stuff to cope with what he had gone through.
ReplyDelete