Throughout the years, people share stories about war. Whether its in the news, or by word of mouth, or in a history class, people are able to get a feel of what war is said to be like. Many people will never experience war, therefore, they get to "experience" war through stories. But are all war stories true? Are they believable? In O'brien's The Things They Carried and the movie documentary Restrepo, both tell stories of war, but both have a different way of doing so. The Things They Carried using exaggerated memories turned into stories about his war experiences, with plot and made up characters. In Restrepo, the soldiers and their experiences are filmed and showed straight forward, with no set plot. Both war stories have their affective ways of describing their war experiences, one is based on exaggerated truth while the other is based on strict, hard, truth. Both war stories had their own approaches to truth, but both were affective to make the reader/viewer experience war. O'brien's war stories include a plot, setting, and fictional characters. He dives deep into the characters to get a feel of what they are actually feeling in their war experiences. The use of fictional characters to describe his own war stories, allows him to exaggerate the true stories. He blends fiction and nonfiction to get to the truth. He states, "get at the truth when the truth isn't sufficient for the truth." His absorbing narrative aims at truth with exaggeration and precise observations that are sensual, particular to the sense of smell, sound, and sight. The clear observations of physical details suggests that the war experience has made a long-lasting impression on the young soldiers. "His jaw was in his throat, his upper lip and teeth were gone, his one eye was shut, his other eye was a star-shaped hole ... the skin at his left cheek was peeled back in three ragged strips, his right cheek was smooth and hairless, there was a butterfly on...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document