Discuss the effectiveness of the
novel as a metafiction. To do this, identify what conventions of metafiction
were used in the short story “How to Tell a True War Story.” In your opinion,
are the events of the story less shocking because O’Brien explains them? Would
you view the novel differently if it were purely fiction? Why or why not?
The story “The Things they Carried”, written by Tim O’Brien
makes use of Metafiction to create a more realistic story. Metafiction is effective
with this story as it fleshes out the characters for the readers and to makes
the reader relate and understand the thoughts of the characters and the
author/character of Tim O’Brien. We can see evidence of the Metafictional
conventions in the chapter “How to tell a true war story”. The first convention
that is revealed to us, and the most important, is that Metafictional writing
tells lies to tell the truth. This is the concept that was shown in the chapter
“spin”, that of making up details, to make the story connected and to piece the
memories back together. The exception being that Metafiction tells the reader
that it is untrue, and therefore, within its honesty the truth can be told. O’Brien
explains this at the end of the story “how to tell a true war story” as he
states that there was “no Lemon, no Rat Kiley. No trail junction. No baby
Buffalo...it’s all made up. Every goddamn detail...” (Page 34). This clearly
shows us the honesty that O’Brien shows the reader and from this honest, the
truth can be seem and told through the story, the made-up bits.
In my opinion, the events, particularly the shocking events
of the novel are not made less shocking by O’Brien’s use of Metafiction, but
are made to be even more shocking as the way O’Brien rationalises it and
categorises it makes it appear as if it was a regular thing to see on the frontline.
And therefore makes it more shocking as how many more times did the events such
as Azar strapping a puppy to a claymore and detonating it really happen, how
many of these shocking events occur to make O’Brien and the rest of the platoon
think it was Ok and normal? Thus if this novel had been pure fiction, I theorise
that it would have had a lesser effect on me personally than it had being
Metafictional because I would have known, and had in my head that this story is
fiction. But seeing how it is Metafiction, it makes you second guess whether
the story is indeed false, or did it really happen, is O’Brien toying with our psyche
and fooling us into thinking this is all made up, when it is one-hundred percent true? Or is
he being truthful about lying?
