Saturday, April 4, 2009
Herr Response
"Dispatches" by Michael Herr is a piece that I have mixed feelings about. I like the raw uncensored way in which he tells the story of the conditions in Vietnam. He doesn't leave out any of the horrible things that he sees around him. Dead bodies aren't downplayed, but talked about in a human-reaction sort of way. I had trouble following this article in respect to his overzealous, rambling descriptions. I understand that this is what many people enjoyed about the writing but it kind of made the story get lost in all the words for me. When his writing was clear and coherent I enjoyed it, but I was left wondering if he hadn't been on drugs when he was writing some it. I commend him for sticking it out in Vietnam. He brought true stories of death and destruction to light for many Americans at home who couldn't possibly imagine the horror of actually being there and experiencing it. Herr writes a compelling piece without any hesitance to include all the details, making raw and real, though I would have preffered more story and less rambling description.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I also had very mixed feelings about "Dispatches." I concur with Terra's assertion that the uncensored style of writing Herr employs makes his writing more enjoyable because I believe it seems to provide a more realistic sense of the chaos and tension that was pervasive throughout the war. Herr's writing stands in stark contrast to the images of the Vietnam War that the government tried to promote to rally support for their efforts abroad. However, I also disliked Herr's writing when it was less-structured because I found that it often made it harder to perceive what his intentions were. I think that his choice of style was purposeful, as if to show that soldiers thrown into the war had constantly jumbled, hectic, and confusing thoughts, but I feel that the role of a journalist is to help convey the realistic nature of the war while also shaping the information they present in a coherent narrative to inform the masses or the circumstances at hand.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I understand where you are coming from. Many people had mixed feelings about this reading. It was a bloody image that he painted, that is for sure. However, that was one of the reasons I liked it. I think for me, it was an uncensored change of pace. We have been reading structured articles all semester, so it was kind of nice for a different type of reading. There were times where I was a little confused, and had to go back and read a paragraph again, but I did not mind doing that. The reading seemed more real than the rest, because he did not leave anything out. I can definitely see why some people did not like this particular reading.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Herr's writing was little hard to follow, but personally that's what I enjoyed about the article. He kept everything raw. At the time I don't believe that Americans should have had a filter on the things that were happening in Vietnam. People needed to know the gruesome details in order to start questioning our involvement in Vietnam. Also, Herr probably was on drugs when he was writing this. It had to be hard to relive his experiences on paper.
ReplyDelete