امتیاز واقعی این کتاب چهار و نیم هست، نیم نمره بخاطر مشکلات ویراستاری و ترجمه که گهگاهی میشد بهتر باشه ازش کم میکنم.
ولی بخاطر لذتی که ازش بردم، امتیاز کامل پنج میدم.

قبل از خوندن، به قصد یک ضد جنگ و یک کتاب با تصویرپردازی های خشن و جدی اومدم سراغش!
چند صفحه ای که خوندم، دیدم با یک طنز سیاه طرفم که در تمام طول کتاب، این لحن طنزگونه اش حفظ شده و بی اختیار گاهی آدم رو به خنده وا میداره.
یک صفحه از کتاب، بسیار تاریک و سیاه و مستند از جنگ حهانی دوم، و صفحه ی بعد، خیلی طنز و فانتزی و سورئال، در یک سیاره ی دیگه، همراه با کلی آدم فضایی! همینقدر درهم برهم و شلوغ پلوغ! :))

لذت کتاب رو برای کسایی که قراره بخوننش، با لو دادن داستانش کم نمی کنم. فقط توصیه می کنم بخونید. حتی اگر قراره از کسی قرض بگیرید کتاب رو، ولی بخونید، واجبه!

„И двамата се опитваха да намерят отново себе си и своя свят. Научната фантастика им помагаше много в това.“


„Кланица пет“ е една от най-великите антивоенни книги! Вонегът е изградил незабравима история, преплитайки брутален реалистичен разказ за част от втората световна война с вълнуващи научнофантастични елементи. В краткия обем на творбата, той е вложил стойностни общочовешки послания. Книгата пренася читателите в завладяваща атмосфера, въпреки че навява и доста тъга...

Били Пилгрим е ветеран от войната, който е преживял ужасите в Дрезден. Същевременно му се случва често и неусетно да пътува във времето, а към даден момент среща извънземните от Тралфамадор. От неговата гледна точка ставаме свидетели на жестоката военна действителност, както и тягостния следвоенен начин на живот. Фантастичните перипетии на главния герой и приятната ирония на Вонегът майсторски допълват мрачната история, за да се получи този чудесен роман!






„Струваше ми се, че най-добрите ветерани в Скънектъди, хора добродушни, с най-голямо чувство за хумор, ветерани, които най-много мразеха войната, бяха онези, които наистина бяха воювали.“


„Давам ти честна дума обаче, че ако някога завърша книгата, в нея няма да има роли за Франк Cинатра и Джон Уейн. И знаеш ли какво - добавих, ще нарека книгата „Кръстоносният поход на децата“.
От този момент с нея станахме приятели.“


„-Колко типично землянски въпрос задавате, господин Пилгрим. Защо вас? А защо тогава ние? Защо каквото и да е? Просто защото моментът е. Виждали ли сте някога буболечка, попаднала в кехлибар?
- Да.
Всъщност в кабинета си Били имаше преспапие, кoетo пpeдставляваше гладка кехлибарена тoпкa c калинки .
- И ето ни и нас, господин Пилгрим, хванати в кехлибара на момента. Тук думата „защо“ не съществува.“


„На Тралфамадор няма телеграми. Но вие сте прав: всяко струпване на символи е кратко настойчиво съобщение, което описва дадена ситуация, дадена сцена. Ние, тралфамадорците, ги четем наведнъж, а не една след друга. Няма никаква специална връзка между отделните съобщения, но авторът така ги е подбрал, че видени всичките наведнъж, те обрисуват един красив, изненадващ и дълбок живот, но няма поука, няма причини, няма следствия. Онова, което четем в нашите книги, е дълбочината на много прекрасни моменти, видени едновременно.“


„Попита го дали иска да му донесе нещо отвън и той каза:
- Не, имам си всичко.
- А книги? - поинтересува се Валенсия.
- До мен се намира една от най-големите частни библиотеки в света - обясни Били, имайки предвид колекцията от научна фантастика на Елиът Роузуотър.“


„Гостът от космоса проучил сериозно християнството, за да разбере, ако въобще може, защо за християните е толкова лесно да бъдат жестоки. Стигнал до заключението, че поне отчасти това се дължи на небрежното изложение в Новия завет. Предположил, че намерението на евангелието било да научи хората освен всичко друго да бъдат и милосърдни, даже към най-низшите от низшите.
Но евангелието всъщност проповядвало следното:
„Преди да убиеш някого, трябва да бъдеш абсолютно сигурен, че той няма връзки с големци“. Taкa e тo.“


„В края на краищата повечето от романите на Траут се занимава��а с въпроса за изкривяванията на времето, с извънсетивни усещания и с други неочаквани неща. Траут вярваше в такива работи и ламтеше съществуването им да бъде потвърдено.“


„Там, в болницата, Били преживя нещо много обикновено за хора без власт по време на война: опитваше се да докаже на един умишлено глух и сляп враг, че си струва да го видят и чуят.“


„На обратната страна на медальона бяха гравирани следните думи:
Господи, дари ме
със спокойствието да приема
нещата, които не мога да променя,
със смелостта да променя нещата,
които мога, и с мъдростта
винаги да мога да разбера
разликата между
двете.“

Another classic I fail to fully understand and appreciate. People can discuss as much as they want the deep meaning of it: free will, the illogical nature of human being, etc. To me, "Slaughterhouse-Five" is a story of a man deeply traumatized by war who attempts to make sense of his life through delusional ideas involving alien abductions and time-travel. The only message that came though clearly to me is the one against war. Billy's memories of Dresden massacre were the most notable ones, but even they failed to capture my interest, probably due to an extremely detached tone of the narration. Ethan Hawke's whisper-like reading didn't help either. As for writing itself, I didn't mind the constant shift in perspective. I just wish I cared at least a little bit about the characters or the story.

Have no interest in reading any more of Vonnegut's books. Barely got through this one and can't quite understand its acclaim and classification as dystopia or sci-fi. So it goes, I guess...

Reading challenge: #23, 1 of 2.

Kurt Vonnegut’s 6th and most famous novel is less satire and sarcasm and more commentary on man and war with very black humour.
When I think back to my youthful reading, my biggest recall was of the sci-fi elements that took protagonist Billy Pilgram to another planet and the vague thought that it was an antiwar novel. With this read, very much later in my life, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder felt very much the major theme. Much has been written about that, but it was not something I would have recognised in my youth. The bloke who I worked with as an apprentice got blown up in Korea and shook with fear, the old bloke on the corner who shaped up to everyone passing, this was shell shock but the fact they were inevitable victims of events that they had no control over? That never entered my youthful mind.

Antiwar The Children's Crusade A Duty-Dance certainly is, but the feeling is there that it is also a comment that war is an inevitable human condition. “So it goes” said Vonnegut after every death in this book, therefore “so it goes” could be the comment about every reoccurring human conflict over what others have claimed are generally tribal property rights. We have no choice but to be what we are. I suppose that I will get up on Monday morning and go to work. “So it goes”.
Is that free will, or do I have no choice? To be honest with myself, as much as these questions make for fascinating thoughts, I am not that intelligent to really digest or understand what direction I think they should take.
“Poo-tee-weet?”

I make the same comment as I did for the previous review, God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater. This is a wonderful book and stands the test of time. It is a read that is far better than I recall from my youth and is with that highly recommended.


In order of publication and my reading of Vonnegut’s novels.

My review of number 1 Player Piano here.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
My review of number 2 The Sirens Of Titan here. https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
My review of number 3 Mother Night here.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
My review of number 4 Cats Cradle here.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
My review of number 5 God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater here
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

رقص اجباری با مرگ

ببین سام، این کتاب خیلی کوتاه و قره‌قاطی و شلوغ و پلوغ است، علتش هم این است که انسان نمی‌تواند درباره‌ی قتل عام، حرف‌های زیرکانه و قشنگ بزند، بعد از قتل عام، قاعدتا همه مرده‌اند، و طبعا نه صدایی از کسی درمی‌آید و نه کسی دیگر چیزی می‌خواهد. بعد از قتل عام انسان انتظار دارد آرامش برقرار شود [...]

این‌ها قسمتی از اتمام حجتیه که نویسنده در فصل اول، با خواننده می‌کنه. بهش میگه چرا این کتابو نوشته، بهش اخطار میده که داستان قراره شلوغ و پلوغ باشه، و بهش میگه که این داستان واقعیه، حداقل قسمت‌های مربوط به جنگش واقعیه. با این کار، با این‌که ونه‌گات یه کتاب علمی-تخیلی درباره‌ی جنگ نوشته، همه چیز به نظر واقعی میاد.

سلاخ‌خانه‌ی شماره‌ی پنج، درباره‌ی جنگ جهانی دوم و بمباران شهر درسدن، هم هست و هم نیست؛ حداقل کتاب با این نیت نوشته شده. بیلی پیلگریم، شخصیتی که قصه‌گوی کتاب سعی می‌کنه داستانش رو برامون تعریف کنه، مدتی رو در اسارت آلمانی‌ها در شهر درسدن می‌گذرونه و از بمباران اون شهر و قتل عام مردمش، که توسط نیروهای متفقین انجام می‌گیره، جون سالم به در می‌بره. اما بیلی پیلگریم توسط موجوداتی فضایی از سیاره‌ی "ترالفامادور"، دزدیده می‌شه و بعد به قدرت خارق‌العاده‌ی اون‌ها دست پیدا می‌کنه و قادر میشه که در زمان سفر کنه.

نویسنده در این کتاب، کار عجیبی کرده: خود ِ خودش رو، به عنوان ِ یه شخصیت ِ فرعی ِ فرعی، توی کتابی که شخصیت‌هاش واقعی نیستن جا داده؛ گاهی هم به خواننده یادآوری می‌کنه که در این یا اون صحنه‌ی کتاب حضور داره. به صورت کلی، نویسنده جوری هم خارج از داستان و هم داخلشه، که واقعا بامزه‌ست.

کورت ونه‌گات شخصیت بیلی پیلگریم رو بر اساس ِ خودش نوشته. تا حدی که حتی هردوشون متولد ۱۹۲۲ هستند. این، مهم‌ترین کتاب ِ نویسنده‌ایه که خودش در جنگ جهانی ِ دوم، سربازی آمریکایی بوده و واقعا در شهر ِ درسدن ِ آلمان، در اسارت آلمانی‌ها می‌افته. بعد از بمباران ِ درسدن، شهری که ظاهرا بی‌دفاع بوده و صنایع ِ جنگی نداشته و اصلا خطرناک نبوده که بخواد بمباران بشه، ونه‌گات زنده می‌مونه و به آمریکا برمی‌گرده (شرح ِ چگونگی‌ش رو میشه در سرگذشت ِ بیلی پیلگریم دید!).

کورت ونه‌گات از پدر و مادری آلمانی، اما در آمریکا به دنیا میاد. ظاهرا پدر و مادرش به قدری از ملیت خودشون (به خاطر جنگ ِ جهانی ِ اول) خجالت‌زده و ناراحت بودن، که به ونه‌گات نه زبان ِ آلمانی رو آموزش میدن و نه از فرهنگ آلمانی چیزی براش تعریف می‌کنن. جوری که خودش در مصاحبه‌ای میگه که در دوران کودکی احساس بی ریشگی و سردرگمی می‌کرده. در نهایت هم بر ضد آلمانی‌ها، در جنگ ِ دوم ِ جهانی حضور پیدا می‌کنه و اسیر هم میشه.

بعد از اینکه به آمریکا برمی‌گرده، سال‌ها تلاش می‌کنه که چیزی در مورد ِ بمباران ِ درسدن بنویسه و همون‌طور که خودش توی فصل ِ اول ِ کتاب توضیح میده، چیزایی که می‌نوشته به نظرش قابل قبول نمیومدن. تا اینکه ۲۳ سال بعد از جنگ، موفق به نوشتن ِ سلاخ‌خانه میشه.
ونه‌گات یک بار هم تلاش میکنه در ۶۲ سالگی، خودکشی کنه، اما زنده میمونه و در نهایت در ۸۴ سالگی بر اثر ضربه‌ی مغزی میمیره. یک سال قبل از مرگش، در مصاحبه‌ای با رولینگ استون، میگه که میخواد از کمپانی سیگار ِ پالمال شکایت کنه؛ سیگاری که از ۱۳-۱۴ سالگی میکشیده.‌ وقتی ازش میپرسن چرا، میگه "به خاطر اینکه من ۸۳ سالمه و اون حروم‌زاده‌های دروغ‌گو، توی تبلیغاتشون قول داده بودن منو بُکُشن".

سلاخ خانه‌ی شماره‌ی پنج، یا جنگ صلیبی کودکان، یا رقص اجباری با مرگ، کتاب ِ دوست داشتنی ایه؛ کتابیه که مرگ رو در معنای فلسفی ِ خودش، می‌پذیره و قشنگ جلوه‌ش میده؛ کتابیه که شدیدا جنگ و جنگ‌طلبی رو تقبیح می‌کنه و سوال اساسی ِ نویسنده‌ش انگار همون سوال ِ ترالفامادوری‌هاست: چگونه یک سیاره میتونه در صلح زندگی کنه؟

|| 3.5 stars ||

There are absolutely no strong personalities or big events in this book, and nobody even feels like a truly living person, which, surprisingly, is exactly what makes the anti-war message this book wants to portray so strong.

n  

There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations, because most of the people are so sick and so much the listless playthings of enormous forces. One of the main effects of war, after all, is that people are discouraged from being characters.

n

Instead of another story filled with brotherhood and heroism that one often finds when it comes to these kinds of stories, this shows a (more realistic?) side of war where all people have turned into empty, weak shells and are all just staring gloomily ahead, trying to live day to day without a single thought going on inside their brains. This book shows how war truly destroys people; not through fear, rage or tragedy (which are the stories we already know), but through utter and complete emptiness.

n  

How nice — to feel nothing, and still get full credit for being alive.

n

When I started this book, I was expecting a story exactly as I have just mentioned we have seen plenty of times before; I expected a story of fear, rage and tragedy. Afterall, it’s about one of the biggest massacres of European history, namely the Bombing of Dresden during World War II. Obviously I would expect a grand and emotional and intense story with that, but instead… I got this. And somehow, that might be exactly the kind of war stories we actually need. Even if they aren’t as “entertaining” as the stories we are used to… After all, why would we like to see beauty or bravery or entertainment in war? Isn’t that, in a way, romanticizing the very thing we proclaim to hate and loathe?

n  

”You’ll pretend you were men instead of babies, and you'll be played in the movies by Frank Sinatra and John Wayne or some of those other glamorous, war-loving, dirty old men. And war will look just wonderful, so we'll have a lot more of them. And they'll be fought by babies like the babies upstairs.”

n

In any case, I think this book definitely brings forth an interesting thing to consider about how we write war stories.

Kurt Vonnegut is an author that appeals to condescending liberals, as he always talks down to his readers as if they are idiots. For example, reading “so it goes” over and over again got extremely annoying because I already got the point in the beginning. This is a very overrated book, as many people think it is the best work of literature ever written. Kurt Vonnegut thinks he is so clever, but he's not. He comes across as pretentious and uninspired, the way most far left-wing socialist writers do. I’m sorry that some of us who don’t like this book are too simple-minded to “understand” it. I did understand it. Some people just don’t want liberal bullies shoving their ideology down their throats all the time. The characters do not make you think or feel anything. It reminds me of Nietzsche, the incredibly overrated philosopher. If you want to write a book with an anti-war message, don’t be arrogant and condescending with your writing and ideas. It will just turn people off. The writing and story is unimpressive. I like novels with plots and complex characters that challenge and evoke strong feelings. This book does not do that. It is for people who think they are better than you because again, Kurt Vonnegut appeals to those who put down religion and “follow science” yet allow the butchering of children. It is the type of book that pretentious, arrogant English students love and look down on anyone who disagrees with them, despite these self-righteous students’ false claims that they are the most open-minded while they sip their overly expensive lattes and look at ugly artwork. I wouldn't waste time reading this book.

i can appreciate it, but i'm not sure how much i enjoyed it

کتاب خیلی خوبی بود. من ترجمه‌ی آقای علی اصغر بهرامی را خواندم. من فکر می‌کنم این کتاب به یک ترجمه‌ی خوب دیگر نیاز دارد. البته ترجمه‌ی آقای بهرامی بد نبود و ظاهرا بهترین ترجمه‌ی موجود این کتاب در حال حاضر است. ولی به نظر من بهتر از این هم می‌شود ترجمه کرد. یک فیلم هم آقای جورج روی هیل از این کتاب اقتباس کرده است که اثر متوسطی است و اگر دوست داشتید ببینید شاید برایتان جالب باشد.
Slaughterhouse-Five (1972) 6.9 Meta:66
********************************************************************************
خدایا
مرا صفایی عطا کن
تا آنچه را توانایی تغییر ندارم
بپذیرم؛
مرا شجاعتی عطا کن
تا آنچه را توانایی تغییر دارم
تغییر دهم؛
و خردی،
تا آن دو را از هم باز شناسم. صفحات 83 و 255 کتاب
تمامی زمان، تمامی زمان است. تغییر نمی‌کند. به اختصار یا تفسیر تن نمی‌دهد. زمان وجود دارد، همین. زمان را لحظه به لحظه نگاه کنید و آنگاه، همان طور که گفتم، می‌بینید ما همگی ساس‌هایی هستیم که در کهربا گرفتار آمده‌ایم. ص 113 کتاب
از چیزهایی که زمینی‌ها، در صورت تلاش کافی، ممکن است بیاموزند این است که: لحظه‌های زشت را نادیده بگیرند و همه‌ی ذهن خود را روی لحظه‌های زیبا متمرکز کنند. ص 150 کتاب
اگر چیزهایی که بیل پیلگریم در ترالفامادور آموخته است راست باشند، که ما، اگر هم گاهی خیلی مرده باشیم، همیشه زنده می‌مانیم من چندان هم خوشحال نمی‌شوم. اما با وجود این- اگر قرار باشد ابدیت را صرف تماشای لحظه‌های مختلف زمان کنم، سپاسگزارم از این که بسیاری از این لحظات زیبا بوده‌اند. ص 258 کتاب

n  “All this happened, more or less.”n

As suspected, a re-read of this post-modern classic anti-war novel brings the big picture into sharper focus. The out-of-order narrative and the science-fiction trappings of the "unstuck in time" Tralfamadorian aliens—whose fatalistic view of existence, seeing all moments as predetermined and inevitable, could be interpreted as a parody of Christianity’s concepts of divine plan and eternal life—are underscored by dark, ironic humor. Vonnegut explores the violence of war and its terrible aftermath, based largely on his own experiences after witnessing the firebombing of Dresden in WWII. What emerges is an enduring commentary on human reaction to death and tragedy, highlighting the absurdity of seeking meaning in senseless suffering.

n  “...there is nothing intelligent to say about a massacre. Everybody is supposed to be dead, to never say anything or want anything ever again. Everything is supposed to be very quiet after a massacre, and it always is, except for the birds. And what do the birds say? All there is to say about a massacre, things like "Poo-tee-weet?”n



***

ORIGINAL REVIEW 2017

I was tempted to write a review using a bunch of various short ideas, in non-linear order, with some cameo appearances by characters from my other reviews, tied all together by one massively tragic event like the firebombing of Dresden along with an alien abduction by the Tralfamadorians, and insert the phrase "so it goes" 100 times or so. My first Vonnegut. Not gonna be my last.

Soon after Vonnegut died quite a few stories were circulated about his real-life experiences as a POW in Dresden during WWII. Billy, the book’s main character, survived the firebombing just as Vonnegut did. Both recognized the good fortune of their underground prison vantage point when the flames incinerated the city above. Both had plenty to cope with, too. In telling Billy’s story, Vonnegut connects several themes. Not surprisingly, “war is hell” is one of them. Some of the other points set this work apart, though. For one, there's a feeling among many of those involved that you might as well just resign yourself to--or disengage yourself from--your situation. There’s a strong sense of the inevitable. (I don’t imagine prisoners feel much power to change the circumstances of their war.)

I suppose you could label this work science fiction, even though the elements that make it so are clichéd and simplistic. The sci-fi angle is one Vonnegut uses to good effect, though. It points out how otherworldly a war scene can feel, how memories can be real enough to throw the time continuum out of synch, and how some superior intelligence in the universe can explain, almost deterministically, why things are as they are and people do as they do.

Does Vonnegut himself believe in free will? If his brainy little space creatures serve as proxies, I’d say no. Something tells me he has a more active, moral role in mind for humankind, though, and this book was meant to suggest that by counterexample. Still, it’s a good question to ponder.

Such a great book!

I am so glad I decided to read it, after passing it by for long enough and that goes for the author as well; definitely going to delve into his other works at some point - recommendations?

I don't particularly read war fiction but the Dresden bombing running through the book held my interest and left me wanting to know more, I'm definitely going to read up on it as it sounds astonishing.

The sci-fi parts were interesting too. I can see why the book is discussed as being about what is now called PTSD but which had no name until relatively recently.

So it goes...