Generally, when we think of soldiers in a war story, we think of dead serious men covered in sweat and dirt. We also think of them having secret plans and different formations when attacking. They always have it under control and they are all patriotic heroes.
The Things They Carried and Three Kings suggest otherwise. In both The Things They Carried and Three Kings, the soldiers joke around with each other, even in horrible situations. In the book, O'Brien explains that the soldiers were anything but serious, even when a friend was injured or killed. This was a way that the soldiers coped with their hard, depressing lives. O'Brien described it as "stage presence." (20) The soldiers would put on an act (their joking around) to hide their deep and true feelings.
Soldiers are thought of having a plan and being in control. In The Things They Carried, O'Brien's platoon would walk and walk without a real destination. As they passed towns, they would burn them to the ground, just for something to do.
They searched the villages without knowing what to look for, not caring...setting fires and sometimes not, then forming up and moving on to the next village. (15)
Despite the soldiers we see in movies, according to O'Brien, soldiers are not in control all the time. After the war, Norman Bowker killed himself because he was not in control. He was haunted by the terror of war. Many soldiers in the book were haunted by the violence that occurs in war.
We think of soldiers as being extremely patriotic. In the recording we listened to in class, the man who died in war and received a medal seemed very patriotic because he sacrificed himself for his country. In The Things They Carried, "I was drafted for a war I hated...the American war in Vietnam seemed to me wrong." (40) Since O'Brien was against the war, he initially had no patriotism to his country. He was fighting the war because he was forced to and he didn't want to die for his country.
I agree that the Three Kings and The Things They Carried showed a new perspective of soldiers, well for me at least. It is interesting to see how the characters of war stories are affected in different ways of similar events. I agree that soldiers are thought of as being very rigid and in control of the situation.
Posted by: Lucy M | 10/01/2009 at 06:51 PM
I though you brought up a good point. It is interesting how each character's character changes as the war progresses. Most of the time the media focuses on the war statistics, but even thought they are important, the public shouldn't ignore the really hearts and lives that get put on the line. I feel that the media should reflect more on the positives and less on the negatives.
Posted by: Eric B. | 10/01/2009 at 08:07 PM
I liked how you brought up a different view of the soldiers. Like Eric and Lucy said, you never really see the true nature of the soldiers. The media just shows them in a patriotic way, maybe its a use of a little propaganda. I really like this post because it brings up something that I have never noticed before. Nice Job!
Posted by: Louis A. | 10/01/2009 at 09:43 PM
I totally agree with Maya. I really liked how the movie focused on only a few certain soldiers, so you got to be more attached to the characters, and like Eric said, that is opposite of what the media does. The movie showed us that soldiers come from every walk of life, and they are not all big, strong, fearless men.
Posted by: Emilie B. | 10/01/2009 at 09:45 PM