In the lake of the woods Essay

In his novel In the Lake of the woods Tim OBrien paints a vivid image of the horrors of the Vietnam War, particular the gagary of the Thuan smart massacre. slice prior to reading the novel readers instinctively blessed the soldiers themselves for their felonious actions, as the novel progresses, OBrien shows that patch the soldiers may fuck off physically appointted the brutal acts of murder, blame smokenot solely be placed on them. OBrien depicts the Vietnam landscape as one that, due its elusive and topsy-turvy temperament, was partially responsible for the horrors that the men committed.Furtherto a greater extent, the very temperament of cosmos and our congenital capacity for evil suggests that art object the soldiers themselves committed the physical acts of terror, our capability to commit much(prenominal) atrocities when placed within the scenario of state of state of war agent that any single(a) would have been cultivaten over by the insanity of the confl ict. Ultimately, OBrien demonstrates that while the horrors of My Lai are unforgivable, in that location are extenuating circumstances which suggest that blame tricknot solely be placed on the soldiers who themselves were at eras victims to the temper of war. composition OBrien depicts the nature of war as chaotic, he neer denies the individual responsibly that each soldiers had for the evils they committed while at war. magician comments that this was not madness, this was sin. By differentiating between sin and madness OBrien shows the lousiness of the soldiers actions, kinda than simply blaming the evils they committed on the Vietnam landscape.While madness suggests a lack of control and that the soldiers were unable to make example decisions, sin is associated with a conscious decision to commit evils and thus an grounds of ones im righteous actions. The fact that in between the savage effaceing and sexual perversion of the Thuan Yen massacre solders were able to tak e smoke breaks suggests that the soldiers knew of the pure wrongness of their actions and yet never made the moral decision to stop the killings. If soldiers did in fact understand their actions, OBrien asks whether they can ever be set freen.Justifications are futile states OBrien the total dissolve for the mores of our society means that we cannot justify nor excuse the ultimate acts of savagery that were exhibited in Thuan Yen. Such evils committed by men are unforgivable and thus, the soldiers who partook in the massacre must accept responsibility for their actions, at least to well(p)-nigh extent. However, within a landscape as chaotic as that of the Vietnam War, OBrien asks whether any individuals could have retained his sanity.If not, OBrien suggests that some blame can be placed on the insanity of the environment of war that garble the moral codes of those who fought in there. Vietnam is depicted as a the spirit orbit dark and unyielding a hellish environment in which the caudex between right and evil, moral and immoral and right and wrong had been blur to such an extent that soldiers who had to endure the war landscape were sucked in by the funny farm and the amorality.The question of whether any individual, let alone any soldier, would have been able to make moral decisions during war is one that is ever-present in OBriens text. As readers witness the total disregard for gentle life that was the Thuan Yen massacre, it is hard to believe that any person, no proceeds how sane and morally upright one may have been in the first place the war, could have retained their sanity within an environment that appears to reach into the individual of every soldiers and dislodge the part that enables us to make moral decisions.Varnado Simpson, a member of the Charlie Company states that we simply lost control we killed all that we could kill. In his court trial, Simpson defines the very nature of war, with its aimless shooting, elusive enemy and co ntinual paranoia, as a scenario in which any individual would have been interpreted over by the hysteria that war created. Ultimately, OBrien graphic depictions of the war landscape allow readers to sympathise with the soldiers and thus allow the blame to shifted, so far not excused, from the soldiers themselves.In light of the very nature of war, OBrien suggests that contempt the atrocities of their actions, the inability to make moral and ethical decisions within the world of ghosts and graveyards means that the evils committed by the soldiers must be, at times, linear perspectiveed with sympathy as well as the scorn that readers naturally thrust upon them. Furthermore, OBrien demonstrates that it is the very nature of man and our innate capacity for both undying love and improbable destruction that ensures that, while their actions are unforgivable, soldiers can be viewed with sympathy.The impossible combinations of the war depicted by OBrien reflect the ability of man to v erbalise both the dichotomies of love and destruction equally and at the same time a seemingly impossible combination of its own. However, the very fact that these ii traits are not mutually exclusive suggests that it is in our very nature to commit acts of evil when placed within a landscape such as that of war. John wade did not go to war to kill or brutalise or even to be a good citizen. OBrien ensures through repetition of the statement that it was in the nature of love that Wade went to war.How then, OBrien asks, can Wade be solely fiendish for his actions when his intentions in going to war were pure? While we cannot simply forgive Wade for the massacre in which he partook, OBrien leads readers to view Wade not as a monster, but a man. Despite the horrors that he committed while at war, it appears as if John Wade was a victim not only of the war landscape, but of ultimately of kind nature. In the concluding pages of the novel, as Wade slowly loses himself within the emb rangle of his own deceit, OBrien asks if Wade was innocent of everything but his own life. The more poignant question, however, is whether Wade and the rest of the Vietnam veterans are innocent of everything but piece nature and our innate ability to commit acts of evil. It is thus that OBrien suggests that while the actions of the soldiers at Thuan Yen cannot be excused completely, the soldiers themselves cannot solely be blamed. feces we believe that he was not a monster, but a man? It is with this open ended question that Tim OBrien draws to a conclusion the indefinite story of Vietnam veteran John Wade.Despite the horrors that he committed throughout his life, most notably the Thuan Yen massacre, OBrien asks whether humanity can view Wade as a man who was a victim to the chaos of war, to the capacity of human nature to commit evil and ultimately, to his own reality. The actions of soldiers at war cannot be justified it is with this sentiment that OBrien writes this antiwar protests however there are undeniably extenuating circumstances which lead soldiers to commit acts of evil.While culpability should not be lifted from the soldiers completely and their actions should not be excused, OBrien ensures that we sympathize with the soldiers as many of them were simply swept off in the amorality of the landscape. Ultimately, OBrien explores human nature and the capacity that man had for destruction. It is this weakness, rather than that of any individual soldiers, that is ultimately responsible for the evils of war.