This was one of those books that I thought I might've read way back when, but I didn't take credit for it until making sure. So, now I'm pretty sure I hadn't read this book before! I have to say it was a bit underwhelming; I thought it was a bit too precious to start with, but I did warm up to it by the end. After reading it, I read a bit more about Kurt Vonnegut and saw that there was at least some autobiographical material in the book (Vonnegut was taken prisoner in WWII, held captive in a slaughterhouse in Dresden, and survived the firebombing of Dresden in an underground meat locker), which was very interesting. I do understand its importance as an anti-war novel, I just thought the first half of it was kind of silly. ( )

This book works on so many levels and as others have said is extremely sad and funny at the same time ( )

I went into this book knowing it was a politically driven story (I mean, hello, the forward tells you as much in the first place) but I found that even with that in mind, the story was still quite enjoyable. (I generally loathe all politically driven conversations; everyone’s too focused on swaying someone to their point of view to actually value another individual’s perspective. …but that’s a whole other can of worms we can leave unopened at this time.) Most of the animal characters were developed off of existing political leaders, two or three people (in one character), or groups of people in the Russian Revolution at that time. I really, really enjoyed the irony of the ending and how perfectly it captured the corruption of socialist ideas in the hands of corrupt leadership. I almost wish I could have been alive to witness the effects of this allegory on the world. But then again, it might have been harder to get my hands on a copy then…

And while I can see the depiction of the Russian Revolution and it’s components within this story, I also think that these characters and scenarios can transcend the intended allegory. Meaning it’s contents can be applied to more than just the Russian Revolution and it’s leaders, but to any nation in which leadership is corrupt and all powerful.

Anyway, Orwell’s writing was good – I would have liked it to be a touch more smooth and easy reading like, and it is a short book but you get a lot of detail and development from the story and it’s characters.

I definitely recommend reading it, if not for the historical nature of it then for the unique portrayal of the ideas held within.

Full review: https://wanderinglectiophile.wordpress.com/2018/02/14/mini-reviews-slaughterhous... ( )

The girls that get it, get it… and I don’t ( )

The reviews on the back of my copy say that the book is "very funny ... sad and delightful," and that it is "a funny book at which you are not permitted to laugh, a sad book without tears."

I would agree with both. The book is sad throughout, but in a resigned way; the book is funny throughout, but not in a laughing way, not in a comedy-show way, but in the way one laughs at something they feel only emptiness for.

The story of Billy Pilgrim is misery throughout, and yet I can't help but feel like him that everything about him is alright.

So it goes.

I give this four stars, not because it isn't an excellent novel, but because - despite its quality - I didn't "enjoy" it as much as others in my library. ( )

A great story, a fractured mind reconstructs the Dresden massacre which passes almost unnoticed to the world.

The piece often reaches deep into something to try to get you to understand, maybe something is there, maybe not... ( )

Had to re-read this classic. The world doesn't seem to be improving on its level of intelligent. Our store of knowledge grows with the exuberance of exponents. Yet our ability to glean from that store is no better than when we sat on the steppes eating raw meat while our toes froze. ( )

Hard to describe... interesting, weird, sad but great... ( )

How better than to write book about war than with an insane protagonist? Tragic, sad and beautiful. ( )

Slaughterhouse Five gives a unique perspective on WWII. It follows Billy, who survived the bombings of Dresden, Germany. It starts off a bit confusing because it jumps around the timeline a lot. However, once you get used to that, it can be seen that the whole novel is an homage to PTSD. Billy randomly finds himself back in wartime, even though it’s 1967. In order to cope with the tragedies, he envisions a life from a science fiction novel. One where he is abducted by aliens. He needs that escape to survive. It was very interesting to see the connections made to mental health, whether purposely or accidental, in wartime novel written in 1969 when PTSD didn’t have a name other than “shell shock”. This is a must read. ( )

I picked this up because I was looking at this website that had pictures of literary tattoos and an extraordinary number of people had "Everything was beautiful and nothing hurt" tattoos. I was like, "What is so great about this quote that all these people had it permanently inked on their bodies?" Turns out, the quote is kind of a non-sequitur. I mean, I'm sure you can figure out a way in which it's deeply integral to the book's themes or whatever, but in terms of the narrative, it just appears as a thought the main character has and then is never mentioned again.

Another popular tattoo from S-5 on that website is "So it goes," which makes a lot more sense to me because Vonnegut writes it every single time he mentions death. Nothing like a nice little momento mori on your forearm, right?

I gave this book five stars because it is hella deep. The plot jumps around different times like crazy, but everything feels connected, which is quite a feat in terms of writing ability. Some people may think the whole alien abduction thing is sort of stupid, but I'd be lying if I said this book didn't really make me think about the nature of time and human suffering. ( )

It's embarrassing that I hadn't read Slaughterhouse Five until now. It's also embarrassing that I liked it this much. It's like only just now reading 1984, and then gushing to all your friends about it. Ugh.

But anyway here's my thoughts:

There's an interview of Kurt Vonnegut somewhere where he says that Billy Pilgrim was based on one of his actual war buddies, a guy who wound up dying of the "Thousand Mile Stare." The horrors of war got to him so much that he retreated inside of himself, rejected all food or water, and wasted away. In short he visited Tralfamadore and never returned.

It is established early on that Billy Pilgrim gets abducted by four-dimensional aliens, the Tralfamadorians, who tell him that they see all of time at once the way humans can see distance. In this way they reveal that everything that has happened is inevitable and nothing can be changed. The best you can do is look away to a more pleasant time. The rest of the book is defined by this time-shifting, quietest philosophy. It isn't just that the scenes are told out of order, with the ending first so we know the fates of the main characters the same way the aliens would. It's also Billy's total passivity to the horrors and cruelty around him, his blithe and almost uncomprehending acceptance of violence and misery. It's ok that the allies bombed Dresden, it's ok that your psychopathic fellow soldiers hate your guts, it's ok that you marry a woman you don't love or that you have kids you barely know, it's fine that your life sucks. That's the way it's always supposed to be. So it goes. Just mentally travel back to that time you took a nice nap, or back to Tralfamadore where the aliens have abducted a beautiful supermodel to be your girlfriend. They even built a comfy home for you.

That Tralfamadore is an escapist fantasy is made clear by the scene where Billy finds a girly mag that luridly speculates on the fate of the missing celebrity. That Billy's abduction resembles a letter to Penthouse ("then they kidnapped Marilyn Monroe and she totally became my space-wife!") is not an accident.

But it might not be as clear that the Tralfamadorians are villains. Critics have accused this book of justifying violence with its "so it goes" fatalist philosophy, but they miss the point. The aliens are depicted as totally heartless in their omnipotence. This is a book about the dangers of escapism, on the problems of turning your head toward something more pleasant. This book accuses society of having a thousand-mile-stare. We all have collective PTSD and we retreat inside of vapid power fantasies and schlock. In doing so we shrug our shoulders to the miseries of the world with an impotent "so it goes." ( )

And what are you, [writer], but a Loose-Fish? — Melville

Hard to dispute that this is Vonnegut's best work, though what he has most in common with Céline and Dostoevsky is a pronounced un-even-ness in style.

The high-energy (already tired) prose, which the college applicant can maintain for a sentence, sustains itself for at least a chapter here, and in contrast to the usual exhausted Vonnegut style, the humor is not merely didactic. (The most aberrant "so it goes," is the infinite expansion of the sign which occurs just once: "The water was dead. So it goes." What does Vonnegut think he means by this?) Céline's Journey to the End of the Night is the same but mostly better, if not slightly less humorous, in its early war narrative (some sections of prose which Vonnegut appears to have lifted directly), although Céline appears to be under the (wrong) impression that we are interested in reading his Candide. And perhaps the best thing Dostoevsky has ever written is the account of the mock execution in The Idiot, though we are perceiving all the time, in that otherwise humorless text, that he really wanted to be writing Pierre in War and Peace. ( )

Not what I expected (though I don't really know what I did expect). Interesting way to tell a not-very-engrossing story. I didn't really feel like I got to know any of the characters, and didn't really care about them. ( )

Wacky and profound with nuggets of truth every which way. ( )

I love Vonnegut, but hadn't gotten to this best-known book til now. This is exactly the level of existential doom I am familiar with, of apathy and passivity towards the inevitable, of grasping for answers and knowing no satisfying ones will turn up. So it goes. ( )

Here's what I wrote in 2013 about this read: "Hmmm, the first Vonnegut read and not at all what expected. Being in Dresden at the time of the fire bombing impacted him significantly; he tells the story almost bizarrely (remember, it's my first Vonnegut). Wikipedia says the novel is exploring free will; ok. So it goes." Quotations in the comments section are my exact kindle highlights. ( )

Not sure I appreciate the time leaps, but nonetheless, a great read! ( )

The first time I read this twenty years ago, I gave this 2 stars. That was back when I was offended by "gritty" writing styles, and there is some of it peppered throughout this novel. This time around, while it's still not the most comfortable for me, I can see it for what it is and see how it fits the story, the character, and the reality of the message. Basically, it isn't gratuitous; it fits.

I was also able to more clearly understand the symbolism, themes, and connections this time around. Vonnegut represented Billy so well in being so disconnected from his life, for good reason, except for those few moments when the reality of it all hits him. The character development made it quite clear and believable why Billy was experiencing life the way he was experiencing it. "Just go on without me." So much more deep and complex than I understood years ago. ( )

Still is one of my favorite books. This won't be the last time I read it. ( )

I didn't know much about this book, just that it's one of the greatest anti-war books according to the back cover. So I was quite surprised when the character started travelling in time and even more when he was abducted by alliens. I have some theories about what they might symbolise and who knows if I'm right or wrong.
I didn't find Billy Pilgrim likeable because he doesn't do much, especially during the war. He is just there during these horrific events. And even though I don't like it, I might have been like him in a similar situation.
I loved the writing because death, violence, trauma and helplessness are there but not highlighted. They just are. ( )

One of the most original and heartrending books I've read. A vivid mix of fantasy and memory, woven together magically. One of the true greats, with a distinctive voice. ( )

I didn't get a lot of what should have been obvious in this book, and had to read SparkNotes to understand it.

I liked it, but it was a little strange. Maybe I'm just not that into literature. Could of been a sci-fi book or a historical fiction. ( )

My favourite of 2021. Simply fantastic and wildly imaginative. ( )