Tap-dancing Shandakaforians are ludicrous!

So I know we should be done blogging by now, but this draft has been laying untouched for too long as I completed my other posts, and I feel like I should complete it and share it with y'all before I retire as a blogger. 'Cause if I don't do it now, it'll be gone for good.

If you read my other posts, you'll remember that I wrote about characters in Slaughterhouse Five potentially being able to travel through time. Well, I have come to the conclusion that if I could change one thing in the novel, I'd have a villain who can chase Billy through time. Now before you say that Vonnegut never had such a thing happen to him during his life, hear me out.

We will never know for sure whether or not Billy really travels to Tralfamdore, nor do I care for the sake of this post. The important thing is, Billy believes it happens. A person can be prisoner to his own thoughts, and Billy takes it to a whole 'nother level by informing the public of his ludicrous beliefs. What if, for the sake of changing the story dramatically, Billy's mental stability becomes so unhinged that he starts to believe there is a dangerous murder chasing him through time to kill him? If it were to happen, here's how I'd play it out.

I felt that I should add more pictures? ;)

After Billy returns from Tralfamadore back to the blissful tortures of Earth, his new knowledge of time and its true meaning is seeking out by a mysterious creature. This creature, neither human nor Tralfamadorian, needs the knowledge to complete his mission, which he cannot reveal to Billy. When Billy refuses and escapes the clutches of death (with the help of his pals, the Tralfamadorians), he becomes unstuck in time and returns to his childhood. There, while eating breakfast with him father, he sees the mysterious being peering into his window, unbeknownst by his father. Little does he know, but this creature, a being stronger than any human but weaker than the Tralfamadorians, is planning to take over the universe, but his people need to fully understand the concept of time first. This thirst for knowledge leads to a great sci-fi adventure for Billy, who must find a way to recruit the Tralfamdorians and protect the universe. Ah, and before you say that time is structured in a certain way and the Tralfamadorians can't/won't attempt to help Billy, the mysterious creature (who comes from planet Shandakafore) is defying the laws of time and somehow travelling through it at will, thus allowing him to chase Billy through varying moments of his life.

Zach Ezwawi overcomes Beethoven in non-linear fashion. (Response to Blog)

For the response blog post (Assignment #10), I will be reviewing my buddy Zach "Wawi Wawi" Ezwawi's blog, appropriately titled "Zach's Slaughterhouse 5 Blog." I decided to review his blog because not only were we both complaining about the assignment to each other, but because I found it really easy to relate to most of his posts. 

I really liked his last post, "What Would Vonnegut Think?," so I'll review it first. It contained the exact same thoughts that I had about whether Vonnegut would like our blogging project or not. I agree with Zach fully in that Vonnegut would like the idea of others spreading his ideas and beliefs, which is exactly what we are doing in this assignment. Zach wrote, "We can also feed off of each others ideas and opinions, reblogging somebody's idea while adding some of [our] own or getting inspiration off of them." I really liked his is idea of "feeding off," since we are all essentially gaining more knowledge and absorbing other students' ideas when we read them, and it all stems from a few lines from Kurt Vonnegut's mind. 

I also liked the idea of "two classes worth of blogs connected to one main central blog." I didn't fully realize how many of us were participating in the project until I read that assignment, and the first thing I did was go to Mr. Lynn's central blog and check the blog list. The wealth of knowledge accessible for the whole world to use about Slaughterhouse Five was incredible, and it really helped me envision how inspirational a writer like Vonnegut could be. 

A really good idea Zach had was incorporating a video into his post. Maybe its just me, but I tend to watch a lot of the "Related Videos" after finishing the video at hand. Several videos after Zach's, I have come to the conclusion that Vonnegut, who has a kind of school-teacher vibe, would be amused by the idea of a whole bunch of teenagers reflected on his writing amongst each other. He was a man with a lot to say, and I, like Zach, think that he's support the chance that we'd say whatever else he might have wanted to say. 

The second post I chose to review is titled, "Slaughterhouse Five: The Movie." This was one of the only posts I did not agree with wholeheartedly, for the most part. While we both agreed that Slaughterhouse Five was an amazing book but the movie was terrible, Zach argues that it would make a great movie with the right "team of professional film makers." My opinion could be found here, and I basically say that it may be a decent movie for those who have already read the book, but it would be a terrible experience for people with no background knowledge about the story. 

Zach clearly knows what he wants in the movie, mentioning CGI, music, transitions, and a team of skilled writers as being essential to make a successful movie.  I also agree with those points, but I think that those factors would only be important for a Slaughterhouse Movie targeted at Slaughterhouse Five's readers. Zach thinks that 'music should change accordingly to better fit the mood," but I think that would just throw off the viewer even more. It would be too confusing to be listening to heavy metal in the midst of a war scene, and upon being hit by a stray bullet, to find yourself listening to classical Beethoven while Billy lays on his vibrating bed. The heavy metal would still echo in your ears and mind, thus throwing off the feeling of this entirely new scene. 

I think that, instead, the film makers should have scenes with similar music follow each other. For example, if Billy is in the German camp and the background music was a calm, classical tune, whatever scene he travels into should also feature calm music. This would eliminate the mixed feelings and emotions that would occur with sudden changing music. Since this would occur a lot in a Slaughterhouse Movie, it would be a challenge to find the right set of music and their order. Still, it is extremely important, since music can alter entire scenes. 

The third and final post I want to review is, "Assignment #5: Sorry Readers, No Life Lesson For You." I was intrigued by some of the ideas Zach said he'd like to incorporate in his novel, especially his position on morals. The following sentence really caught my attention: "[E]veryone's posts that I read had morals to them, but for me, I probably wouldn’t write a story with any meaning at all." I, too, wrote that I would do something similar, focusing my story more on the character's adventures than on teaching him lessons. This seems to be a pretty popular idea, since most of us don't learn a life lesson everyday. Still, there are always lessons to be learned, even if they aren't presented up front to the reader. For example, Zach said that he'd like his protagonist to be an underdog who always wins. This could be seen as a way for the author to show that you should never give up, no matter how lopsided things may seem. 

Zach's novel would "probably be really cliché," according to himself. This doesn't like really inviting news to me, unfortunately. Some people enjoy classic tales retold again and again, however, I like unique novels, and even if a story has already been told, there are always different ways to tell the story and give the reader a whole new experience. No offense to Zach, but I don't really want to read a story about a teenager who, after overcoming obstacles as an underdog, has to deal with one final villain, and obviously end up winning. 

Here's what throws me off, however. Somehow, Zach's story is going to be "nonlinear... like Vonnegut, where the story is kind of all over the place," and a "page turner." I honestly can't imagine a novel with such a cliché plot being a page turner, and writing it in a nonlinear fashion may only make it confusing while not adding much value to the book. Sorry, Zach, but I don't think this book would be a success.

Overall, I enjoyed reading Zach's blog and comparing our opinions. While they matched at times, some of our ideas also contrasted. Its definitely interesting to see how different or similar somebody's thoughts could be compared to yours while you're reading the same text. 

Innocent Communist deals drugs to optometrists!

It is almost impossible for a character like Billy Pilgrim to exist nowadays. A person as innocent and harmless is bound to be affected by peer pressure and bullying early on in life, and I'm betting he'd turn out a smoker or crackhead. It just seems so much more likely that he would be almost forced into bad situations, unless he learns to fend for himself and be more social. The Billy we see in Slaughterhouse Five is always pushed around, even as an adult, and is not capable of asserting himself or giving an opinion about any matter (other than time travel after his trip to Tralfamadore). 

Adolf Hitler, a source of inspiration for all. 

The world is not a place for people who are too happy-go-lucky and always expect things to work themselves out. Billy would be traumatized by almost being drowned by his own father. This would probably translate to a lack of trust towards his own father, and that could extend towards the family. Child Billy tends to not get too close to his peers at school, preferring to keep to himself. His marks aren't too great, and his self-esteem is constantly taking hits from other kids calling him a loner and from his parents (probably his dad) looking down upon him. 

Teenage Billy then discovers a whole new realm of possibilities with drugs, which he is introduced to in high school by other kids who feel like him. They are among the first that Billy can relate to, so he feels the need to please them. His innocence is pulled away from him with every puff and injection, and it only get worse. Those he thought were his "friends" now charge him and abuse him, making him feel even worse. The result? More drugs! Life continues downhill, with our poor Billy, who already left home, dropping out of school. He can no longer find any change for crack and starts to look a lot like this. 

It's unfortunate, but most guys like Billy don't conveniently meet an optometrist with an unloved, marriage-seeking daughter and the ability to give them a high-paying and respectable job in return for marrying her. Then again, most guys like Billy don't keep that same attitude past high school, since it is so unrealistic to live a life like that. 

CGI helps Benjamin Button see the light!

Yeah, I'm a hypocrite. In class, I said that Slaughterhouse Five would make a good movie, and that the trailer wasn't too bad. Either I was out of my mind or I have finally seen the light. There is absolutely no way that they could translate such a complex novel into a movie successfully without ruining key key elements of the book. I haven't seen the movie yet, but I can assure you that a remake would be very unlikely.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one in class that had to re-read some parts of the book to fully understand them. I just needed to slow down and break down some sections to differentiate between time frames and such. This would be impossible in theaters, since you can't pause or rewind the movie.

Time-travelling scenes, which would make up the majority of screen time, would be very crazy. A viewer who has never read the book before would be very lost for any answers or explanations, as the concept is not explained too well. Ideas like these are more easily explained on paper, where you can keep reading them till you understand, but on the big screen, the movie-goer would need to be naturally bright and a quick thinker. This is the biggest issue facing the movie, as confusion would be so prominent among viewers that the movie's message would not be received by them. If you spend all night trying to figure out how Billy closed his eyes during the war and woke up in his home, chances are you won't notice hidden metaphors and symbolism.

The fact that you are able to witness a man's strange life from the beginning till the end, with no real enemy or conflict (much like Forrest Gump or The Curious Case of Benjamin Button), and lose yourself within his story is very attractive, but the viewer's experience becomes a blur when you are constantly being pushed from one moment in life to another. It works well in book form, where you can slow down and focus on certain segments, then put things together for yourself, but in a movie, where ideas tend to be spoon-fed to you, it becomes a challenge and requires brain power to become emotionally involved with a scene but be able to quickly change feelings into another scene.

In the case of the original Slaughterhouse movie, transitions seemed to be choppy and random, which leads to an even more dizzying experience that is already hectic enough. Sure, CGI is better nowadays, but adding explosions and realistic Tralfamadorians does not make up for other mistakes. A remake of Slaughterhouse Five would be a colossal mistake, and hopefully no studio is fooled into making it. Sure, those who have read the book would know what's going on, but studios don't target such a small demographic, especially with a movie requiring such a huge budget for smooth transitions and appropriate musical scores. Overall, not too many potential audience members have read the book, so it really would be a bad idea to make a movie for them.

Lazaro kills originality, loses consciousness.

We all should know by now that Billy Pilgrim is Slaughterhouse Five's protagonist. If you know that by now, you deserve this. What we DON'T know, however, is this: is Billy the only character in Slaughterhouse Five that is unstuck in time? It would be really cool to see Vonnegut's world through another character's eyes. Does Edgar Derby see his life before it happens too? Did he know he would be shot for stealing a teacup while he was a kid? Did he ever travel in time while teaching a high school lesson? Did Lazaro inform his future victims that they would be assassinated by him because he had already seen it happen? Did Weary every wake up to find himself dragging Billy through the rough patches in war, only to fall and regain consciousness in his parents' living room?

Reading another book using the same idea would be nice, but it also kills the originality that made Slaughterhouse such a huge hit. Still, the idea of other characters also travelling through time indefinitely like Billy is appealing, and could be added into the book as Vonnegut switches between characters. Sure, it would make the book probably the most confusing novel of all time, but I know that I, for one, would love to read it.

From what I understood in the book, Montana Wildhack understood the concept of time-travel, but Vonnegut made no further application of other characters and their knowledge of this concept. If the other characters were also unstuck in time, I don't think it would really change anything in the story, since a moment in time is structured a certain way and cannot be changed. Still, I'm just thinking out loud, and I thought it would be a pretty cool concept.

Vonnegut's smarter than you and steals your wallet.

Imagine if Vonnegut eliminated time-travel in Slaughterhouse Five. That's right. No time-travel. Just an organized story of a weird guy named Billy Pilgrim. I tried re-reading key parts of his life and organizing the plot in my mind into a neat order, but it is next to impossible. Even if we were to sort through dates of events, there are so many elements in Billy's life that seem completely random. For example, where do the Tralfamadorians come into play? We know those events come into play sometime after the war, but things get tricky. Are they real, or are they a figment of Billy's imagination? If they are real, did Billy leave Earth after the war and return to live in Ileum as an old lunatic after his extraterrestrial adventure?

Kurt Vonnegut is smarter than you. And he knows it.

Many of my peers complained that Slaughterhouse Five did not have a true ending, but did it even have a true beginning or middle? In reorganizing this book, we could identify the beginning as Billy's childhood, maybe through flashbacks. The middle would mostly be the war and Dresdan. The end now becomes more clear. Whether his trip to Tralfamadore is real or not, the end would still involve his assassination after a presentation on time-travel. Before that, we would see his marriage, career as an optometrist, and meet his family. 

Here's the catch, though. How would the plot go? There really isn't any real antagonist or conflict facing Billy in Slaughterhouse Five, and it is mostly known for its confusing time frames and organization methods. This translates very poorly into a neat version of the book. Sure, there's the suspense factor that would be returned, since the reader has to learn everything as the tale progresses, but people won't really find anything unique about the novel. Vonnegut knows this, so he wrote his book in a way that would attract attention and bring people to understand his ideas and themes. 

Vonnegut's excuse for writing his novel the way he did was that one could not write an organized story about a topic so crazy and hectic (war). This, however, may only be partially true. Slaughterhouse Five, while containing important ideas about war, also incorporates other messages, such as enjoying the happy moments in life and forgetting the bad. However, most members of the public would not want to read a story like his if it was clear-cut for us. As I said in an earlier post, Vonnegut gives us the major spoilers of the book early on so that we can fully focus on the other elements of the novel, and by keeping it so messy and unorganized, he further helps that same goal. Oh, and by making Slaughterhouse so unique, more people want to read it, which means that Vonnegut makes more money. Yup, winning. 

Paranoid girlfriends call 'em how they see 'em! (Alternate for #1)

Kurt Vonnegut grew up in America and always identified with American culture. However, he expressed his sadness at the fact that his parents and grandparents were ashamed of their German heritage. Vonnegut claims that he did not grow up knowing many German recipes, children's stories, or customs. Examine Vonnegut's attitude towards Germany and the Germans in Slaughterhouse-Five. Does Vonnegut attack or defend his ancestry through his comments about all things German in the novel? More importantly, do you think that such attempts at assimilation and culture conformity are ever justifiable?

Really? Vonnegut having bias in his writing? That's about as likely as him supporting the United States' interference in Libya. Vonnegut is one of the most straight-up, honest, and real writers I have read. He calls it how he sees it with his own eyes, not how he wants to see it. If he watched somebody punch another guy randomly, he won't make excuses for either side or explain the situation. No, guy A punched guy B, 'nuff said. That's one of the reasons why he didn't say much about Edgar Derby's shooting. The guy stole a cup and he got shot for it. 'Nuff said. Moving on. That gives me the impression that the Germans probably were decent captors. 


Now, when you say "all things German," that includes everything from their army to their cities. Vonnegut comments that Dresden, before being bombed, looked like Oz. Haters would say that his view of Germany is positive, as shown by statements like these, but again, Vonnegut just thinks that Dresden looks nice and appealing. Relax America, he's on your side! Quit acting like that paranoid girlfriend just waiting for her partner to let something slightly off-putting slip.

C'mon: haters, swag, reppin' where
he came from...Vonnegut could
pass as an African American rapper.

Since Vonnegut identifies with American culture, fought for America, and considers himself American, wouldn't it make more sense for him to be praising the American army? Instead, he informs us about their poor outfits, weaponry, greed, and general filthiness. Again, this isn't because he is anti-American, he's just calling it like he sees it. There isn't much to complement in war, but the Germans' treatment towards him and their other prisoners is much more respectable than the Americans' treatment towards their own captives. Vonnegut knows this, so he points it out in the form of positive treatment of German guards towards Billy and company. A reader without much knowledge of Vonnegut as a person may think he does this to defend his German roots, however, we know who is he and what he stands for. 


Do I think "that such attempts at assimilation and culture conformity are ever justifiable?" Hold up there, which attempts at assimilation or conformity? Maybe this is because I took a different stance than other people, but I don't think Vonnegut attempts to assimilate at all. He stands up for what he believes in, and he isn't one to try to appeal to others. Slaughterhouse Five was as controversial as any of the books we read this year, so clearly he doesn't care too much about the haters. What does Vonnegut have to say about those haters? He calls them preposterous, and thinks that "he or she is like a person who has put on full armour and attacked a hot fudge sundae." 


He calls his own shots, and if that doesn't fit your agenda, than too bad for you. He took his time writing this novel, and he isn't trying to suck up to any of his readers. Like him or hate him, Vonnegut's got swag and his own agenda to follow. He's calling 'em how he sees 'em, and if you have a problem with that, put the book down! 


In terms of his family, however, their assimilation was very justifiable. I would not never want to lose my own heritage and cultural beliefs, but Vonnegut's family come from a whole 'nother perspective. Their culture and nationality (German) was generally despised during the time of his childhood, mostly because of corrupt leadership, communism, and terrible foreign relationships. America was not very multicultural, either, and  it would be hard for a known German supporter to find a good job, for healthy relationships with others, and not gain lots of enemies. Nowadays, on the other hand, one should be proud of their background, especially in a multicultural environment like Canada, and to a slightly lesser extent, the U.S. I don't agree with his family's actions, but I can see where they are coming from. 

Forrest Gump vs. Billy Pilgrim! (You knew this was coming!)

Coincidence, or fate? It just so happened that I watched the movie Forrest Gump for the first time only a few days before we started reading Slaughterhouse Five. Unfortunately, I was a little late on pointing out in class (I believe it was Jason who beat me to it) what I believed to be a unique observation of the similarities between the two protagonists of both works, Billy Pilgrim and Forrest Gump. The movie was still fresh in my mind, and it had a lasting impression on me with its memorable characters, unique tale, and inspiring messages. This lead to a spark in my mind upon entering the world of Billy Pilgrim. The similarities between Forrest and Billy are quite obvious, although some stark contrasts are also visible between the two characters.

Well, the producers and directors
definitely got this wrong. Does
this look for Billy really seem
 innocent and confused? 

Both Forrest and Billy, while fully grown adults, seem to give off an innocent, almost child-like vibe. I can't help but feel that it really isn't either of their faults when they make idiotic mistakes. Forrest attacks his crush's boyfriend while they are kissing, in the belief that he was forcing himself upon her and causing her some sort of pain. He says things in serious moments, like when his friend is discussing his loss of limbs and religion, that show that all he is is an overgrown child, such as, "I'm going to heaven, Lieutenant Dan." Billy, as we've all seen, tends to be the shy little kid who can't seem to get anything right. He dresses inappropriately for war, notices strange and pointless things instead of paying attention to the task at hand, and is also physically small-sized, thus giving the impression that he is younger and potentially more foolish to others. 

Another thing they have in common is their ability to look ahead and plan their lives. Billy seems to wander around in life aimlessly, relying on his family, the sympathy, kindness, and generosity of others, and pure luck to get him through life. He marries a desperate women who's father gives him a good job, his daughter cares for him when he seems to go insane, and he was lucky to be given a chance by the public to speak out about time travel. 

Hmm...Forrest Gump doesn't look so
helpless or clueless here either. 

Forrest also relies very heavily on luck/chance and the actions of others to move on with his life. His mother sleeps with a school principal to allow him to enter, since his own efforts were futile (his IQ was 75, 5 points below the minimum of 80 to enter public school). Forrest's speed is also coincidently discovered by football coaches, which would soon translate into a scholarship and a chance to go to college. 

A major difference between the two characters is their attitude, however. Billy, as we described him previously in class, seems to have an existentialistic view on life. There isn't very much to motivate him to do more than exist. He tells his companions during war to keep moving and leave him behind, instead of keeping a positive view and attempting to stay alive. Forrest, on the other hand, is rewarded the Medal of Honor by the army for his rescue efforts during the Vietnam War. While Billy willingly gives himself up, Forrest tries to help others and save as many people as he can. He is also consistently believing that there is a chance his love for Jenny can be fulfilled, and that they can live happily ever after. This sense of hope and his ability to be more than a bystander makes Forrest stand out when compared to Billy, who seems to be just...there. 

Premature ADD kids spoil the surprise! (#2)

Write a response to or commentary about one of the Vonnegut quotes from the handout provided. Explain how the quote reveals something about Vonnegut that can also be found in his writing. Make a connection between the quote and the novel or a personal connection to the topic or message in the quote that you've chosen.

"I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you can see all kinds of things you can't see from the center."

My immediate reaction to this quote was that it is very relatable to Vonnegut's stance on suspense, which goes as such: the less, the better. Suspense is the "edge," and by having less of it, you are getting farther away from the center.  Vonnegut wants to eliminate most suspense, so that the reader can focus more on the story being told and the major themes behind the novel, instead of thinking, "Uh, okay cool, so what happens next?" Relax ADD kids, you can have most of your answers up front, so maybe you can now focus on what the author is trying to get across to you.


Vonnegut gives us the last sentence of the book. He reveals very early on exactly how Billy will die. We blatantly informs us that a newly introduced character, Edgar Derby, will be shot by a firing squad for stealing a tea cup later on before most of us can even remember his name. Somehow, though, Vonnegut manages to do this without falling over the edge. The center is just too tempting to leave, and by giving us all these details an spoilers we are pushed to the edge. There, our minds become more open to the messages within the pages of the book. We realize that Vonnegut is telling us that stopping war and violence is impossible, that we should cherish the happy moments in life and forget the bad, that death is inevitable and should be welcomed with open arms.


How differently would our perspectives be if the spoilers were not prematurely announced? I know that I would be so shocked at Billy's lack of reaction to death threats and his eventual assassination that I wouldn't realize that he believed he was ready. I would be so immersed in my own point of view that I wouldn't appreciate Vonnegut's goal in his writing. My own feelings and reaction would naturally override my brain's thought process, at least during initial contact. In Edgar Derby's situation, by already knowing his fate, I was capable of noticing his character and personality more. His death would also come as a huge surprise to me at the end of the novel, which means that Vonnegut would have to use more that a sentence or two to explain the situation like he does. Derby's shooting, when we see it coming early on, shows us the cruelty of mankind towards each other, and the dark nature of war. 


This quote can easily be interpreted differently by other readers, however, I felt that the relationship it had with Vonnegut's stance on suspense was very relatable, and it stood out to me very clearly. 

Denzel Washington is a racist comedian! (#5)

If you were to start writing a novel, what would be the basis for your work? Vonnegut obviously chose his war experiences but seems to have tied them into a somewhat laissez faire view of life. What do you feel the public should learn through your story-telling? Explain the genre, character types and / or general plot of a book that you would write.

Believe it or not, I've written many short stories throughout my life both in school and out of school. I once even considered pursuing a career in literature and creative writing. But, like most people over time, I changed and set my eyes on another potential career. However, I've always wanted to write my own fiction novel based on real events, much like Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five, but I could never find the time to do it. If I DID write my own novel though, it wouldn't be a typical teenage romance story (sorry ladies ;) or an action-packed/mystery/things-blowing-up novel either (sorry fellas ;).

Whoever's hiding in the bottom left corner is a goner. When
Denzel gives you that look, you're not getting anything less
than a steak with cut up springs in it. 

I'm a HUGE movie lover, and one of my favourite types of movies are post-apocalyptic or dystopian movies. The Book of Eli is one that comes to mind (starring Denzel Washington). The main character is clearly shown to have a mission throughout the movie, but the directors also manage to show the different aspects of society during this time. From rich, educated book collectors to prostitutes and store owners, the characters in these morphed worlds are relatable to us, but they also allow the director to add his or her own creativity to help us envision a different form of society. There is so much potential in writing a post-apocalyptic novel to add my own beliefs and ideas while taking the reader to a whole new world to explore. Movies give the viewer a sneak peak of what could be an amazing book, which may be the reason Brave New World and 1984 didn't do as well on the big screen as they did as literary masterpieces. 

Now, maybe this is becuase I've just read Slaughterhouse for the first time, but I feel that I can relate my own creative writing style to Vonnegut's. We both enjoy employing dark humour into our work, although his is probably far more evil than mine. My humour would be similar in that I'd make subliminal jokes and let comedic comments slip by in serious or tense moments. There would be plenty of these tense moments in my novel, since a typical post-apocalyptic movie would revolve around some sort of destroyed world and/or an evil tyrannical force (I, Robot, I'm talking to you!). I'm a pretty easy going guy, and I feel that a person's writing (much like their music, art, and what they eat) shows who they are as a person and is a reflection of their personality. That's why I feel that my writing should include a hint of comedy even in the most random of situations. 


I personally do not consider myself racist or support racism in anyway, but I think that making stereotypical comments about a wide range of races is an easy way to grab attention, attract controversy, and get people to laugh. Much like this guy, my novel would include stereotypical characters that, if they were to be described on this blog, may get me suspended or force Mr. Lynn to fail me. The main character would be a flawed one, making him more relatable to the average reader. Greed, anger, and corruption would be widespread in a post-apocalyptic world, so any human would be susceptible to negative behaviour. I haven't really done many interesting things with my life yet (sigh, not my fault), but I think that I have read about and met a decent amount of different people that could be used for inspiration for characters. It's always helpful to have a foundation for characters that a writer could add to and change. However, many people would not be able to relate to many characters. This will become clear once you read the plot outline. I really hope most of you guys reading this aren't greedy murderous gang members (no offense, if you are :$). 


Ah, the plot. Of course, this is one of the most important parts of the novel, after the characters and the paper to print the story on. I don't want to ruin the whole book for you, since you'll have to pay for the whole thing when I become rich and famous, but it goes a little like this.


A man (we'll call him Tim for now) is living in a post-apocalyptic world being ruled by gangs and thieves. It is 2099, and every man fends for himself. Most of the female population has been wiped out, with the few women either disguised as men, working as prostitutes, or infertile because of complex mutations traced back to terrible living conditions and disease infestation. The human population has been decreasing significantly, with almost no children born after 2070 and most of them killed by the time they hit puberty. Tim, born in 2076 to a women who was forced to abandon him at birth, is a nomad in this world and constantly moving from one location to another. He was cared for as a child by a man (let us call him Marshal) who felt pity on him, and they would become like father and son as they aged. Marshal dies early in the novel,  but his teachings live on through Tim: kill, or be killed. This Darwinian ideology follows Tim throughout the novel as we see how the world has changed by the end of the 21st century. There are plenty of twists and turns, however, when Tim realizes that survival may mean the interference of an outsider he may have to trust. This will change his life in a way that could yield to be an abnormal power... or a curse.


On shelves November 6, 2011.

Offensive parents at skewl! (#3)

Do you feel literature that could provoke strong reactions should be withheld or censored? What are your thoughts about SH5's potential to offend readers? You might also consider making connections to the other novels that we've read this year (also banned books at some point).


I believe books that provoke negative reactions and feedback should be censored or banned by those offended by the writing. The author of the book still has the freedom to express their ideas, beliefs, and emotions in their novels, but if a school or store wants to ban the distribution of the literature, they should be allowed to. Distributors of the novels would receive plenty of criticism from consumers who are offended or feel that the novel is inappropriate. Instead of hearing all the complaints, the easiest thing for these distributors to do would be to just ban the novel. Those who still want to buy the novel could look for other stores to buy it from. 


Another major issue is the banning of novels in schools. Some material, such as Slaughterhouse Five, contain sexually explicit or offensive language/ideas, so schools do not think it is worth the headache of listening to parents complaining about the text. Other novels could be chosen for students that are not as controversial, thus reducing parental interference with the curriculum and increasing productivity. 


People will argue (as many of my peers already have) that an author as a right to write whatever he pleases, and that the book should be put down if one is offended by it, however, those giving the public access to the writing also have a right to withhold the book from them. Sure, there are plenty of lessons to be learned and a whole new world to explore in the pages of a book, but books creating as much controversy as Slaughterhouse Five or Brave New World may not seem worth the trouble to school administrators, store owners, or even publishers. The public's backlash and negative reaction to a novel can affect sales of other novels from the same publisher or distributor, and since money is a priority in our world, the banning or withholding of the novel is logical and beneficial.