Tim O’Brien, “The Things They Carried”
Tim O’Brien, “The Things They Carried”
In the story, “The things they carried”, the author, O’Brien is considering himself to be a coward for going off to the war in Vietnam (61). Though a majority would say he was brave for going to fight, he would not agree. O’Brien did not want anything concerning the war. He never believed in it, and consequently, never understood why the country was in war first of all. The brave thing that he thought he had to do was going over to Canada. According to him, Canada was an insurgence act against the government, the war as well as his oppressive life at home. On a certain day, while at work, O’Brien finally snapped and made a decision of leaving his life behind to go to Canada.
He commenced his journey after packing his clothes. One week after residing at a hotel, he at last caved into his environs. O’Brien recognized that he would be extremely afraid if he disobeyed his family together with his country. Additionally, he was afraid of what people would think of him after abandoning the war. To avoid causing extra uproar, he backed away from him considering himself brave and creating a new life and yielded to his peers’ pressures. According to him, the act of returning to his life, as well as the war, was acting cowardly.
Contrary to what is believed by O’Brien, my opinion is that going off to Canada was an act of fear, which made him a coward. It is wrong to run away from something whether you concur with it or not. What value did O’Brien add to Canada by going there? It was not easy to prove the war wrong while in Canada. My thoughts about been brave comprise of taking the responsibility bestowed on someone and doing what it entails. For example, I am not in agreement with the war going on in various parts of the world, but I do not plan to move to another country. This would amount to being shameful on my side, my family and my country in general. If I were O’Brien, I would not have felt sorry for myself but would instead accept my fate.
(Mary Anne Bell)
When starting the story, Mary Ann Bell was sweet and perfect. She oversaw everything that Mark Fossie, her boyfriend wanted and acted as a form of drive for the boys at the camp. Though flirtatious, sweet and the filled with laughter, she could not avoid the war pressures. The war began to mold Mary Anne into a being that was impossible for a woman during the moment. Breaking away from her blameless ecstasy, she began to know that the war was nothing as she had imagined. Mary Anne started asking questions, after realizing the gaps she had in her conception since the war together with the land and the mystery had intrigued her (O’Brien 96). The interest shown by Mary Anne towards the war is her initial turning point into herself liberation.
The step that starts the transition of Mary from a young town girl to mongrel of combat is when she gives Mark pressure into visiting the village at a region that natives have inhabited. Before her visit, she had never physically pushed the boundaries of her association with Mark to a completely fresh height. This put her self-interest above everything. This moment made the fascination and admiration spring to novel and exceptional. She fancied the adrenaline rush coming with her new life, and she stood by it, pushing constantly to fresh limits to discover the depth of the next rush.
Mary had an addiction to her new life style. The solution for the addiction of Mary Anne was Greenies. These were the groups performing missions that were dangerous that could not be undertaken by an ordinary soldier. Mary started hanging around with these soldiers hence coming home late and later stopped coming at all. Mark was furious with this and later they broke up. This happened when she came home wearing a neck lace of tongues.
The question to be tackled is whether Mary became insane, or she found who she truly was. The answer to this can be said to be the blend of the two which amounts into finding her true self. Mary Anne should see the raw war images that will push her into insanity. She found a new freedom by being in the camp that she could not get at age 17. This was probably her initial experience outside of the guidance of her parents, and plenty of freedom. When not busy, she roamed Vietnam like a Green Berets member, eventually; Mary Anne could find her true self. The story does not seem to give proper clarification for one to make a conclusion on whether she could have found her own self, but I make the assumption that that was the case.
Apology (Justice and Duty): Socrates Speaks at his Trial
The apology starts with Socrates saying he is not aware if the Athens’s men who sums up as his adjudicators have been influenced by his plaintiffs. This first sentence is critical to the theme of the entire speech. As a matter of fact, Socrates suggests that philosophy starts with a genuine admission of ignorance. This is later clarified; he radically states that whatever wisdom he has, comes from his knowledge that he does not know anything.
Socrates asks the jury to pass judgment to him based on truth rather than his speaking skills. He indicates that he will not use complex words and phrases but will speak by use of expressions coming into his head. He insists on the orators and jury that they should always speak truth with wisdom always. However, his speech does not succeed in proving his innocence.
This scenario is common in the society today. Persons are being evaluated by their words and how well they present their words than by truth. For instance in media people tend to follow stories and incidences that have been well organized and plotted even they lack truth in them. Contrastingly, an account may be factual, but if it lacks good reporting by the journalism crew, it will have little attention with others even ignoring the story. This scenario is also common in marketing and advertising. The way an organization markets its products determines people’s perception on the product and the organization as a whole. Marketers who are persuasive enough get the attention of their potential clients even if the products they are selling do not suit them. On the other hand, there are marketers with very useful products but their marketing is not appealing to the potential customers.
They market their products based on truth hence their marketing are not very intensive. This makes the potential users to prefer to use products that have thorough marketing at the expense of those without decisive marketing. This leads to poor choice of products. This also happens with advertising whereby clients are more pleased with good advertising rather than by the quality of product. For instance, consumers can be pleased with an appealing advertising of junk food rather than advertisements on fruits or vegetables, which are rather healthy. Politicians also fit well in this scenario.
One ought to be convincing enough, to be a politician. Failure to have convincing power makes people lose trust in them. The convincing power of a politician depends with how well they present their points and policies. Most people listen to the oratorical skills rather than the truth of what they are being told. These voters then make a choice on their voting based on the oratorical skills of a politician rather than the truth in what they advocate.
Socrates asked himself whether he would be a pretender like those he was speaking to, or be himself. This questioning earned Socrates the reputation of being annoying. The mission of Socrates’ life was a proof that true wisdom belongs to the gods and human wisdom and achievements possess limited or no value at all. A majority of people portray a character that is contrary to what they should stand for in real life. For instance, Meletus’ name meant caring, but he never cared for things he professed to care. Just like it was the case in the Socrates case, corruption has been rampant today in many countries, and it is propelled by those who should control the situation.
Socrates is not afraid of death. This is because he is concerned on whether his actions are right or wrong (59). Additionally, Socrates claims that those who have fear for death show how ignorant they are. He further claims that death may be a great blessing, though a majority of people are afraid of it as an evil while they possibly cannot know it to be that way. In addition, Socrates astuteness is based on his being not knowledgeable (44).
Socrates shows his consciousness of been ignorance and admits it. However, he later states that his wisdom comes from knowing that he does not know anything. This is evident in the political, as well as social scenes today. Many politicians claim to know while, in the real sense, they lack knowledge on what is happening on the ground. They purport to have wisdom on to solve various issues the society is facing, but lack knowledge on how to go about the situation. Economic issues have been a subject of debate in most of the political platforms. Politicians without clear guidelines, on how to solve economic crises in their countries, are attacked by their opponents on grounds of ignorance. Similarly, with the rise in terrorism, national security has been a major concern. Politicians need to convince the voters that they will ensure their security to get their votes.
Reference
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
