The Things They Carried
A classic work of American literature that has not stopped changing minds and lives since it burst onto the literary scene, The Things They Carried is a ground-breaking work of Vietnam War fiction and a meditation on war, memory, imagination, and the redemptive power of storytelling.
In this landmark collection of stories, The Things They Carried depicts the men of Alpha Company: Jimmy Cross, Henry Dobbins, Rat Kiley, Mitchell Sanders, Norman Bowker, Kiowa, and the character Tim O’Brien, who has survived his tour in Vietnam to become a father and writer at the age of forty-three.
Taught everywhere—from high school classrooms to graduate seminars in creative writing—it has become required reading for any American and continues to challenge readers in their perceptions of fact and fiction, war and peace, courage and fear and longing.
The Things They Carried won France's prestigious Prix du Meilleur Livre Etranger and the Chicago Tribune Heartland Prize; it was also a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Critics Circle Award.
BUY THE BOOK
Community Reviews
This book is a combination of war stories, stories of veterans before and after the war, and Tim's feelings about the storymaking process. While I quite enjoyed Tim's reflections on the Vietnam War and storytelling, there were many things I failed to grasp. The incessant use of derogatory terms such as "gook", "dink" and "mama-san" removed me from moments of the book. And maybe I am missing the point when I say so, but I cannot understand why the author would publish fictional stories as though they were true, and then reveal later on what is actually taking place.
What I really mean to say: if you want to express the depth of a certain event and how much it has affected you/others, why would you tell fake stories to do so? O'Brien spends several chapters of this book highlighting his experience with the man he killed. As we near the end, he admits he: did not kill him, did not see him, and does not know his face.
O'Brien spends several chapters focusing on Norman Bowker. He spins an elaborate story of Norman, destroyed by being unable to save Kiowa as he drowned in 'shit water'. He explains the process of writing, going on to discuss an earlier draft:
"... in the end the piece had been ruined by a failure to tell the full and precise truth about our night in the shit field" (153).
Truthfully I can't understand why Tim would make the choice to add a dead man's name into a story that puts him in a terrible light, and on top of everything else, STILL isn't even true. Good storytelling does not always have to be positive, I suppose? ...Perhaps there is a deeper point I am missing? The blur between fiction and fact is unappealing to me, though it seems to be an unpopular opinion. Others seem to find it a 'book that has something for everyone', or one they were 'surprised to enjoy'. Maybe a second read could do me some good!
Tim points out that war stories are framed around injustice. I can't understand why he would write things worse than what truly was to make a point. It seems to defeat the purpose. Finishing this book, I realize I was confused by his intentions at the beginning, middle, and end.
It is certainly a rollercoaster of a read. Can't wait to hear what others think!
See why thousands of readers are using Bookclubs to stay connected.