Friday, March 21, 2014
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Discussion Question #3
Discuss whether the climax has already passed with Mcwatt's killing of Kid Sampson.
Although the author uses confusing chronology, the story has not yet reached its climax. Mcwatt flying into Kid Sampson is a crucial point in the novel, as it brings home to the men the fact of death in the war. However, it is a tool to set up more conflicts in the book, and not as the climax of the novel. For instance, Kid Sampson's death set up existential trouble for Doc Daneeka because he was falsely written on the flight log, and thus considered dead. "'Doc Daneeka's up there, too.' 'I'm right here,' contended Doc Daneeka, in a strange and troubled voice, darting an anxious look at Sergeant Knight" (Heller 338-339). This quote is from the group on the beach watching as Mcwatt kills Kid Sampson and then himself. From this point, nobody seems to acknowledge Doc, which is obviously setting up some bigger conflict. Mcwatt's mistake can't be the climax of the book because it is used as a plot device to set up bigger conflicts.
Although the author uses confusing chronology, the story has not yet reached its climax. Mcwatt flying into Kid Sampson is a crucial point in the novel, as it brings home to the men the fact of death in the war. However, it is a tool to set up more conflicts in the book, and not as the climax of the novel. For instance, Kid Sampson's death set up existential trouble for Doc Daneeka because he was falsely written on the flight log, and thus considered dead. "'Doc Daneeka's up there, too.' 'I'm right here,' contended Doc Daneeka, in a strange and troubled voice, darting an anxious look at Sergeant Knight" (Heller 338-339). This quote is from the group on the beach watching as Mcwatt kills Kid Sampson and then himself. From this point, nobody seems to acknowledge Doc, which is obviously setting up some bigger conflict. Mcwatt's mistake can't be the climax of the book because it is used as a plot device to set up bigger conflicts.Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Catch-22 Discussion Question
Discuss the significance of the man in white and what he represents.
In the book Catch-22 by Josef Heller, the man in white, while not a major character, is used as a tool to establish and reinforce a few of the book's major themes including seeming worthlessness of man in war and the inefficiency of bureaucracy in war. The man in white is first introduced while Yossarian is in the hospital in the beginning of the book. The man was sneaked into Yossarian's ward in the middle of the night while everyone was sleep. Covered completely from head to toe in white wrappers, none of the men in the ward know anything about the man in white. Yossarian describes the man in the first chapter:
The men in the hospital ward were all terrified of the man in white. He is intended to highlight how men are viewed by bureaucracy as dispensable. The man in white remains faceless and nameless, a direct symbolization of the lack of individual from the viewpoint of bureaucracy. Later in the book, it is hypothesized by Yossarian and others that there might not even be a man in there at all. Months after this man dies, another man in head to toe bandages is brought in. The second man is treated the same as the first, which leads the men to believe that it is the same person inside. The man remains representative of the worthlessness of the individual to a government in war. He remains a mystery; even whether or not he's alive is a mystery. He symbolizes bureaucracy's apathy toward the life of individuals in an attempt to push them through the system and secure a win for the bureaucracy.
 |
| Faceless man - how bureaucracy seems us according to Catch-22 |
"Sewn into the bandages over the insides of both elbows were zippered lip through which he was fed clear liquid from a clear jar. A silent zinc pipe rose from the cement on his groin and ... carried waste from his kidneys and dripped it efficiently into a clear, stoppered jar on the floor. When the jar on the floor was full, the jar feeding his elbow was empty, and the two were simply switched quickly so that the stuff could drip back into him. All they ever really saw of the soldier in white was a frayed black hole over his mouth" (Heller 4).
A stop motion, artistic video depicting the man in white's story.
The men in the hospital ward were all terrified of the man in white. He is intended to highlight how men are viewed by bureaucracy as dispensable. The man in white remains faceless and nameless, a direct symbolization of the lack of individual from the viewpoint of bureaucracy. Later in the book, it is hypothesized by Yossarian and others that there might not even be a man in there at all. Months after this man dies, another man in head to toe bandages is brought in. The second man is treated the same as the first, which leads the men to believe that it is the same person inside. The man remains representative of the worthlessness of the individual to a government in war. He remains a mystery; even whether or not he's alive is a mystery. He symbolizes bureaucracy's apathy toward the life of individuals in an attempt to push them through the system and secure a win for the bureaucracy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)