Reality.... an objective subjectiveness

Hmmmm..... very much agree with that one guy (the article writer, forgot his name already lol) that O'Brien writes only in the realm of his reality. But I do not criticize him for it. Okay, so he focuses on his experiences, or at least how he percieved the war to be. This narrow focus is needed though, i think, to get O'Brien's feelings across. Because that's what he wanted to do right? Get his feelings across?? I talked about all of this already in my last blog, feel free to retrospect (totally not the right verb, but you get what I mean) if needed. Anyway, I just commented on how he is an unreliable narrator because he twists the truth. But actually it is revealed that he does not really twist thge truth, he just explains what he thinks is the truth; what his reality is. So can you really condemn him for that? How can he describe how everyone feels about the war when he doesn['t know how everyone is feeling. Of course he could generalize and stereotype everyone he comes in contact with, but he does not actually know how everyone is affected by the war. It cuold be different for everyone. Not to mention that the nation ws completely not in agreeance as to what the war is even being fought for! SO really, how can one guy recap everyone's mumbled and jumbled, not agreed upon view on the war?? Impossible! Clearly, he was writing to get the feelings he felt about the war across to the reader. Not neccessarily the feelings as a whole. Bravo O'Brien, i say...

The Things They Carried, Depressing Much?

Super depressing and contradictory. Basically that's how I sum up this book.
It's really hard to trust this narrator. But I always catch myself enveloped in the novel, believing everything he says. Perhaps I'm just a careless reader. Oh well, i'm getting off topic...
So I find trends of major contradictions. "A true war story cannot be believed". WHAT?!?! If it's true, why can't I believe it?? Okay, I'll be honest, I do sorta get it, but it's frustrating as a reader. Because now I have to constantly search for the truth. But actually, I think he means that the truth is what we make of it. It's actually our interpretation. Well that's how I interpret it anyway. Also, I think that he has to add in the depressing, brutal, almost animalistic happenings into his stories, whether they are true or not, to get his point across. Not neccessarily for their truths, but to get to the truth. The excess details, or lies, are there to capture your attention. If you stay interested and really get involved in the story, then you can feel the story. He talks about how war can't be experienced unless you are there, so he tries to get the feeling of war across to people. Also, i'm sure he wants someone to relate to so he tries to get people on the same page. Overall, it's depressing and unbelievable. But i think it has to be for someone to be able to believe it.
Sorry this sucks and I;m talking in circles :( lol