1.) “One guy I knew really was shot in Dresden for taking a teapot that wasn’t his. Another guy I knew really did threaten to have his personal enemies killed by hired gunmen after the war. And so on. I’ve changed all the names" (Vonnegut 1).
-People are dying for nothing. This is just absurd. A person died for taking a teapot, that is crazy.
-Book should not be banned because it takes away the first amendment from the author.
2.) "Little Billy was terrified, because his father had said Billy was going to learn to swim by the method of sink-or-swim. His father was going to throw Billy into the deep end, and Billy was going to damn well swim" (Vonnegut 55).
-This is crazy, what kind of person does this to their son
-the book is violent.
-but i still would not ban this book because it would take away the first amendment rights from the author.
3.) "An unseen hand turned a master valve. Out of the showerheads gushed scalding rain. The rain was a blowtorch that did not warm. It jazzed and jangled Billy's skin without thawing the ice in the marrow of his long bones" (Vonnegut 107).
-Life in a war was pretty intense. Cold, painful showers would be the worst. Shower turned on randomly too.
-Still should not be banned because it would take away the authors first amendment rights.
Ozi,
I do agree with you that it is his first amendment right to write about the things he said. Although I do not think this book should be banned I think the reasons people were offended by this book were much more deeper then what you discuss. In addition, just because we Americans have first amendment rights does not necessarily mean we should go to extremes. If everyone used the first amendment as an excuse or to offend or be obscene then America would be out of control. All and all, I believe the reasons people wanted/want this book banned are more skin deep then a boy whose dad throws him in the deep end. There are definitely more controversial things written in this book.
Reply
Ozi Pervez
4/8/2013 09:11:19 am
this makes more sense now!
Reply
Ozi Pervez
4/8/2013 09:32:08 am
The second book i am reading is Catch 22 by Joseph Heller:
1.) “when you talk to the man upstairs I want you to tell him something for me. Tell him it ain’t right for people to die when they’re young. I mean it. Tell him if they got to die at all, they got to die when they’re old” (Heller 185).
-I think the book should not be banned. The book is violent and lots of murders happen for ridiculous reasons. The book is similar to Slaughterhouse 5 because they are both books about war. Tons of deaths take place, and occasionally sexual content happens. I don't want the book to be banned because it takes away the first amendment rights from the author, but I understand why it is banned.
2.) “Do you really mean that it’s not my business how or why I get killed and that it is Colonel Cathcart’s? Do you really mean that” (Heller 123)?
-I think it is crazy that people don't get to know how they get killed. I guess that is how it happens in war. Death by surprise is another story, but you still know how you died. For an example, a heart attack is a death by surprise, but at least the person knows the cause of death. Not knowing how you end your life is cruel punishment.
Reply
Skeeter Arvizu
4/12/2013 05:24:00 pm
“One guy I knew really was shot in Dresden for taking a teapot that wasn’t his. Another guy I knew really did threaten to have his personal enemies killed by hired gunmen after the war. And so on. I’ve changed all the names" (Vonnegut 1).
•When the events of the book are experiences faced by the author directly, it's nonsensical for the material to be censored.
•This quote provides a perfect insight to the style of the novel as a whole, told through the eyes of the author, as he remembers it. It might not be a perfect recollection of events, but as he remembers them.
•Obscene or not, if the events of the novel are a recollection of memories by the author himself as a sort of realistic fiction – nonfiction.
“You were just babies in the war – like the ones upstairs! . . . But you're not going to write it that way, are you. . . . You'll pretend you were men instead of babies, and you'll be played in the movies by Frank Sinatra and John Wayne or some of those other glamorous, war-loving, dirty old men. And war will look just wonderful, so we'll have a lot more of them. And they'll be fought by babies like the babies upstairs” (Vonnegut 10.)
•This quote speaks on the harsh reality of war versus the dramatic, action packed, movie-esque perception of war.
•Unlike other harsh scenes in the novel, this one lacks vulgarity and explicitness, it relies on the fact this is the true, cold and disgusting nature of war and the way we prefer to perceive it.
•An obscene and disturbing thought, but still true nonetheless, and when the people being sent to war at the time were not much older than students currently banned from reading this book, it makes no sense to censor it.
When a Tralfamadorian sees a corpse, all he thinks is that the dead person is in bad condition in that particular moment, but that the same person is just fine in plenty of other moments. Now, when I myself hear that somebody is dead, I simply shrug and say what the Tralfamadorians say about dead people, which is 'So it goes,'”
•This represents the decay of Billy Pilgrims sanity, as well as his morality. The creation of an alien race with which he can compare his own mindset, and a sort of existentialist approach to death. People are, then they are not.
•Another realistic take on the effects of war on an individual, no longer is death a huge thing, but rather just another moment in the timeline of a human life.
•The lack of care of the death of other human beings is not something people want to acknowledge. However when faced with death repeatedly, and when put in the face of death oneself, and individual will slowly accept this mindset. Things are, death is, life ends. This is simply the reality of the situation. Censorship of reality does not make sense.
Reply
Shane DeGrote
4/15/2013 02:28:44 pm
All three of these quotes are fantastic for the argument of ridding the ban of the book. Kurt Vonneguts writing definitely has some harsh language and vulgar content however it needs to be read and understood that this language and sentence structure is needed for his exceptional book.
Reply
Kenny
4/15/2013 04:43:06 pm
all three quotes are amazing, especially the in depth explanation of each quote. my faviorte quote you used is the third becuase of the reality of what has happened, why ban a book if its reality love that point!!
Reply
Marissa Jurado
4/15/2013 06:16:02 am
These quotes come from my second novel, Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut.
“God made mud. God got lonesome. So God said to some of the mud, "Sit up! See all I've made," said God, “he hills, the sea, the sky, the stars" (Vonnegut 265).
This quote could be seen as controversial because it is teaching a fake religion. Those of religious beliefs may find this offensive because they do not believe God made mud and the world due to loneliness. In their views God is perfect, therefore never lonely. Additionally, it is saying that the only reason for the existence of mankind is because God was lonely. In my opinion, I believe that this is merely a book about a pretentious religion. While it may be indirectly mimicking actual religions, it is just a book. Just because someone criticizes others beliefs does not necessarily mean their book should be unavailable to others.
“She was a fool, and so am I, and so is anyone who thinks he sees what God is doing" (Vonnegut 5).
This quote is saying that anyone who sees Gods work is foolish. With that being said, those who believe in a God can take this to offense because Vonnegut is basically saying you are a fool who believe you see God’s grace. This statement undermines the thought or beliefs of miracles and God’s will.
“She hated people who thought too much. At that moment, she struck me as an appropriate representative for almost all mankind” (Vonnegut 33).
By stating the above, Vonnegut is insulting mankind. He is saying that human beings (most) do not like people who think too much. I can see why a mother/teacher would not want their children/student to read this. To such a negative outlook on society may be a negative influence to certain people. Additionally, teachers teach that thought is good. If no one likes someone who thinks then why is it good? All in all, I do not take this as belligerent. It is the sad truth about many of individuals in the world. We must not think, but instead do!
Reply
Marissa Jurado
4/15/2013 06:41:52 am
These quotes come from Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut.
“The visitor from outer space made a serious study of Christianity, to learn, if he could, why Christians found it so easy to be cruel” (Vonnegut).
Due to the fact that this statement is flat out attacking Christians is a reason why people would want to ban this book. The world we live in today must not offend or leave out anyone. It is not nice. An outer space visitor, who wants to know why Christians are cruel, may not sit well with all Christians. Vonnegut is scapegoating cruelty to Christians. I guess I could take offense to this as a Christian. The statement is stereotyping Christians as cruel.
“He had a dirty picture of a lady attempting intercourse with a Shetland pony” (Vonnegut 39).
Discussing bestiality is not at all appropriate in American society. Let alone having a picture of it. Some people do not want “children” or even themselves to know that it actually exists and that some people are turned on by it. It is a social taboo that is not tolerated. Even though, I frown upon the subject matter, I believe it is necessary for the book to have the effect it does. I believe Vonnegut is using this to capture the desensitizing war has on individuals. They are so withdrawn that they find something like bestiality attractive.
Reply
Ozi Pervez
4/15/2013 07:12:09 am
I agree with both of you!
Reply
Mrs. Matayabas
4/15/2013 10:26:28 am
Hi Marissa, I wanted to help you support your argument -- I see what you're saying about offense taken by Vonnegut's line about Christians being cruel; however, you would make a more powerful point if you address his implication directly. There are plenty of past indiscretions of Christianity that were not "nice." You could mention a few and then turn your attention to the lesser known kindnesses of the Christian church, such as helping the homeless, community programs, or aid to refugees. Only church scandals, religious wars, or religious imperialism are well known, whereas the kindnesses of the church remain obscure. Looking on the more media-covered indiscretions of the church as an "alien," as Vonnegut suggests, of course the church looks worse than it really is -- it takes looking beyond the obvious to see what is of value. Hope this helps! Mrs. M
Reply
Shane DeGrote
4/15/2013 02:09:21 pm
"Even though Billy's train wasn't moving, its boxcars were kept locked tight. Nobody was to get off until the final destination. To the guards who walked up and down outside, each car became a single organism which ate and drank and excreted through its ventilators. It talked or sometimes yelled through its ventilators, too. In went water and loaves of black-bread and sausage and cheese, and out came shit and piss and language" (Vonnegut 70).
-Kurt Vonnegut uses vulgar language to describe the horrid situation that Billy Pilgram was situated in. This sort of language is obviously disagreed with by parents and teachers who believe that students shouldn't read such vulgar language, however this language helps describe the situation and must be used to make his point.
"The Tralfamadorians tried to give Billy clues that would help him imagine sex in the invisible dimension. They told him that there could be no Earthling babies without male homosexuals. There could be babies without female homosexuals. There couldn't be babies without women over sixty-five years old. There could be babies without men over sixty-five. There couldn't be babies without other babies who had lived an hour or less after birth. And so on. It was gibberish to Billy" (Vonnegut 114).
-The Tralfamadorians describe to Billy Pilgrim the amount of sexes for humans, and shows just how detailed and crazy Billy Pilgrim was. However what he says in the book back was extremely controversial speaking of homosexuals as necessary to everyday life back then was frowned upon as homosexuality was not welcome.
Reply
Shane DeGrote
4/15/2013 02:24:47 pm
Quotes from The Jungle:
"The meat would be shoveled into carts, and the man who did the shoveling would not trouble to lift out a rat even when he saw one—there were things that went into the sausage in comparison with which a poisoned rat was a tidbit. There was no place for the men to wash their hands before they ate their dinner, and so they made a practice of washing them in the water that was to be ladled into the sausage. There were the butt-ends of smoked meat, and the scraps of corned beef, and all the odds and ends of the waste of the plants, that would be dumped into old barrels in the cellar and left there. Under the system of rigid economy which the packers enforced, there were some jobs that it only paid to do once in a long time, and among these was the cleaning out of the waste barrels. Every spring they did it; and in the barrels would be dirt and rust and old nails and stale water—and cartload after cartload of it would be taken up and dumped into the hoppers with fresh meat, and sent out to the public’s breakfast" (Sinclair 141)
-Sinclair describes the way that they handled the meat that would be served to people, and how disgusting the food industry was in Chicago. This content in the early 1900s was extremely graphic and sickened readers knowing that their food was so disgusting. This caused much controversy and even had food acts installed because of the book. But without this graphic description the book would not be as reliable.
"They put him in a place where the snow could not beat in, where the cold could not eat through his bones; they brought him food and drink-why, in the name of heaven, if they must punish him, did they not put his family in jail and leave him outside-why could they find no better way to punish him than to leave three weak women and six helpless children to starve and freeze?" (Sinclair 191)
-For the 1900s much of this content was very vulgar and disappointing. Many did not approve of this content and did not want their young to read the explicit content. However without these impact full descriptions most of the book would fail to be so powerful and hindering the youth of such content is criminal.
Reply
kenny McBride
4/15/2013 04:52:04 pm
When a Tralfamadorian sees a corpse, all he thinks is that the dead person is in bad condition in that particular moment, but that the same person is just fine in plenty of other moments. Now, when I myself hear that somebody is dead, I simply shrug and say what the Tralfamadorians say about dead people, which is 'So it goes,'”
-this quote talks about death and the reality of death, this is controversial to alot of people because death hurts and it changes a lot of people around you, but the reality of death is it happens.
“The visitor from outer space made a serious study of Christianity, to learn, if he could, why Christians found it so easy to be cruel” (Vonnegut).
- this line in the book is challenged because of the attack it has on christians it is specifically calling christians cruel and hateful, i am a believer and i dont find this quote very cruel or harmful at all, i dont believe we should limit people from knowledge because of one line.
"Even though Billy's train wasn't moving, its boxcars were kept locked tight. Nobody was to get off until the final destination. To the guards who walked up and down outside, each car became a single organism which ate and drank and excreted through its ventilators. It talked or sometimes yelled through its ventilators, too. In went water and loaves of black-bread and sausage and cheese, and out came shit and piss and language" (Vonnegut 70).
-Vonnegut uses very strong and obusred language that can be harmful to a lot of people, but to get your points across and to put people in the situations that he was in he needs to be loud and hurtful, Billy Pilgrim was in a horrible situation but i enjoyed reading it because i had a whole new perspective and respect for the POW'S in WW2.
Reply
kenny McBride
4/15/2013 05:01:22 pm
Quotes From the In Cold Blood.
The enemy was anyone who was someone he wanted to be or who had anything he wanted to have.” Capote
- this line in the book was referring to the murderes when he picked his nezt target, this can be looked at as strong language because its staight language on the next person he wanted to murder..
6.
“[Dick] was holding the knife. I asked him for it, and he gave it to me, and I said, ‘All right, Dick. Here goes.’ But I didn’t mean it. I meant to call his bluff, make him argue me out of it, make him admit he was a phony and a coward. See, it was something between me and Dick. I knelt down beside Mr. Clutter, and the pain of kneeling—I thought of that goddam dollar. Silver dollar. The shame. Disgust. And they’d told me never to come back to Kansas. But I didn’t realize what I’d done till I heard the sound. Like somebody drowning. Screaming under water.”Capote (244)
this was one of the first murders Dick and Perry were commiting this can become a little uneasy for anyone reading a book because of the people they were killing were innocent, and we can all agree that Capote loved to write in details.
I didn’t want to harm the man. I thought he was a very nice gentleman. Soft-spoken. I thought so right up to the moment I cut his throat.” Capote (244)
this is when perry killed his victum, and cut his throat reading this part made me a little uneasy the detail and crusom images that were put in the minds of the readers. but people should know what they are reading and i believe that this book has a right to stay on the shelves because of its detail and hooks.
Reply
Leave a Reply.
Author
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.
RSS Feed