Discussion: Okay.
Post: Too short? Sorry.
A poetic book telling the truth about a modern war--a war with no clear justification, goal, enemy, or heroes. Started by old men who never fought a war who had no exit plan, because they planned on staying there forever. One member didn't want to read it due to the horror it would contain. And didn't come for the discussion. (She was encouraged to read it by a member who thought the book beautifully written; I'll let you know if she does.) Another member came who disliked the book because of its gruesomeness.
Everyone else thought the book captured what it must have felt like to be a young soldier in such a meaningless slaughter of innocence and youth. With beautiful language.
Minor issues: The letter--was it a device or real? What was Bartle's crime? Should that have stayed a mystery?
Guilty that I hadn't finished the book in time and rushed through the last sections, I didn't offer this thought: Does the poetic voice remove you from the horror and keep you as numb as the soldiers became? Or was my speed reading keeping me from feeling the pain?
Politics entered the discussion: Should there be a draft? Would that prevent the U.S. from entering such wars in the future? What has an all professional army done to the country and us? Trained to be killers only; jobs that previously led to skilled worked performed by Halliburton--what is there for soldiers returning to civilian life?
Why was discussion okay? Too much agreement. We have to stop agreeing.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete