Talk:Slaughterhouse-Five

message: Krisandra Johnson's article https://digitalcommons.butler.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1121&context=bjur provides gravity towards Vonnegut's compelling and absurd novel. War cannot be present without suffering and unfortunately the absurd is a byproduct of an individual's attempt to contextualize war. Billy Pilgrim is a prisoner of war as well as time from the narrative given bouncing through time yet discovering no solace. Johnson offers history of Vonnegut experiencing being captured during World War II contributing to Billy's visceral account of the war at varying degrees. Humane treatment can be neutered once power is forcefully given with no constraint. Vonnegut describes this within his novel while Johnson provides a detailed analysis of the phrase "So it goes" allowing the individual a retrospective inward gaze to themselves until truth is left. Death, especially at the hands of cruel men with stifled opinions of the world, proves to be inhumane and heinous. Therefore the nonchalant phrase of "so it goes" allows the reader to visualize a juxtaposed image of horrific treatment being received by men who would assumedly fight though their soul has been whittled to a numb. Sean.Robi733 (talk) 5:08, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  So It Goes 

message: Here's the rule of thumb
#Start with a direct quote
#Start paraphrasing
#Anything added that's not in the quote is original research
The bottom line is that you need sources directly talking about Vonnegut and/or Slaughterhouse Five. Pulling sources talking about other things and then applying them to Vonnegut or the novel is synthesis and original research. This might be a good thing for secondary sources, but Wikipedia, like any other encyclopaedias, is a tertiary source where we repeat what secondary sources have already stated. DonQuixote (talk) 16:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither Vonnegut nor Slaughterhouse-Five claim that 135,000 people were killed in Dresden. In fact, Ann Rigney's research article, which we cite, explicitly clarifies this: "The passages from Saundby (as quoted by Irving) are read out by a fictional character in Slaughterhouse-Five and do not, therefore, necessarily express the views of the novelist or the implied message of his narrative." In Slaughterhouse-Five, the character Rumfoord reads part of the actual foreword to the actual book The Destruction of Dresden, written by Robert Saundby (who in Slaughterhouse-Five is friends with Rumfoord). This foreword, which is quoted at length, says "They would do well to read this book [The Destruction of Dresden] and ponder the fate of Dresden, where 135,000 people died as the result of an air attack with conventional weapons." So Slaughterhouse-Five is quoting a fictional character explicitly quoting Robert Saundby. In fact, Slaughterhouse-Five gives detailed attribution for the quote: "One of the books that Lily had brought Rumfoord was The Destruction of Dresden, by an Englishman named David Irving. It was an American edition, published by Holt, Rinehart and Winston in 1964. What Rumfoord wanted from it were portions of the forewords by his friends Ira C. Eaker, Lieutenant General, U.S.A.F., retired, and British Air Marshal Sir Robert Saundby, K.C.B., K.B.E., M.C., D.F.C., A.F.C. … What Air Marshal Saundby said, among other things, was this: …" So saying that Vonnegut claims that 135,000 people were killed in Dresden is a serious misconstrual. The novel explicitly attributes this statement to Robert Saundby, who actually wrote it in real life. Neither the character Rumfoord, nor the novel make this claim or have anything to say about it. It just happens to be part of the (actual) foreward that Rumfoord is reading in the novel. Attribution matters. Nosferattus (talk) 15:40, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vonnegut claims...