Exaggeration In Tim O Brien's The Things They Carried
Tim O'Brien walked through Vietnam as an infantryman during the Vietnam War. A war that took place 50 years ago now; a great majority of the population was not even born during the time of the war. It is easy to forget an event from such a long time ago, but O'Brien, it seems, can never forget. And he doesn't want to forget. And he doesn't want anyone else to forget. He wants the world to understand the war, and the toll it had. For that reason, he writes novels and stories chronicling the war, specifically, The Things They Carried, a war novel which contains a collection of short stories he had previously published. Through O’Brien’s use of commentary, self reflection and exaggeration, the reader comes to understand the moral complexities
…show more content…
He embellishes the stories to drive home the deeper meanings. When discussing why he invents the stories, he gives a comparison of a story that would have only truths, and one that would be embellished. He says after the war, because there were so many soldiers he both directly and indirectly killed, he was left with “faceless responsibilities and faceless guilt,” but by giving the soldiers stories and exaggerations, he can put a face to the men he killed. (180) This creates a more emotional experience for the reader, and allows them to grasp the sensitivity of the issues. It demonstrates the way he uses his commentary to enhance to readers understanding of the conflict. He applies this to his story about killing the man. He says, “...I was present, you see and my presence was guilt enough. I remember his face, which was not a pretty face, because his jaw was in his throat, and I remember feeling the burden of responsibility and grief. I blamed myself. And rightly so, because I was present” (179). This occurs after he tells that the man detailed in “The Man I Killed” was not actually killed by Tim, but by numerous members of the platoon. Here, Tim used exaggeration to make readers believe that he himself had been at this moral crossroads. And because throughout the novel Tim is the character that readers become most invested in, (The novel is primarily written from his perspective, and he is almost always present for the events) readers feel more sympathy for Tim’s moral struggle. His use of commentary and exaggeration allows the reader to see the finer lines of the
He embellishes the stories to drive home the deeper meanings. When discussing why he invents the stories, he gives a comparison of a story that would have only truths, and one that would be embellished. He says after the war, because there were so many soldiers he both directly and indirectly killed, he was left with “faceless responsibilities and faceless guilt,” but by giving the soldiers stories and exaggerations, he can put a face to the men he killed. (180) This creates a more emotional experience for the reader, and allows them to grasp the sensitivity of the issues. It demonstrates the way he uses his commentary to enhance to readers understanding of the conflict. He applies this to his story about killing the man. He says, “...I was present, you see and my presence was guilt enough. I remember his face, which was not a pretty face, because his jaw was in his throat, and I remember feeling the burden of responsibility and grief. I blamed myself. And rightly so, because I was present” (179). This occurs after he tells that the man detailed in “The Man I Killed” was not actually killed by Tim, but by numerous members of the platoon. Here, Tim used exaggeration to make readers believe that he himself had been at this moral crossroads. And because throughout the novel Tim is the character that readers become most invested in, (The novel is primarily written from his perspective, and he is almost always present for the events) readers feel more sympathy for Tim’s moral struggle. His use of commentary and exaggeration allows the reader to see the finer lines of the