jqm967

IB HL2 Language A: Literature

5 March 2023

Word Count: 1465

Characterization and Humanity in Slaughterhouse-Five

Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut follows the story of Billy Pilgrim through WWII.

Billy encounters many people with extreme, and often ironic, characterization. WWII

propaganda employed stereotypes to characterize the people fighting as enemies or allies,

villains or heroes. Vonnegut pushes characterizations to extremes in Slaughterhouse-Five to

expose and subvert these stereotypes, showing the shared humanity of people even during war.

Vonnegut begins the book by introducing Bernard and Mary O’Hare as two characters in

a “real-life” metanarrative who discuss with him the novel that would become

Slaughterhouse-Five. Bernard V. O’Hare, a war acquaintance of Kurt Vonnegut, and Mary

O’Hare, Bernard’s wife, are introduced as living normal lives but still working through the

trauma caused by the war. Mary O’Hare became furious at Vonnegut because she was worried

that he would repeat common war stereotypes in his book. Mary states, “‘...you’ll be played in

the movies by Frank Sinatra and John Wayne or some of those other glamorous, war-loving,

dirty old men’” (Vonnegut 18). She recognizes that the way war is portrayed in the media is

inaccurate, and hides the truth. Vonnegut includes this relatable character to show how real

people are against war and recognize the harm of the stereotypes of war. Vonnegut is also

metatextual in having the typical war-stereotype clearly defined so that his characterization of

future characters can relate and contrast to this definition. Vonnegut uses O’Hare to emphasize

the impact of inaccurate stereotypes of war on real people.

 Vonnegut uses the hyperbolized, negative characterization of Bertram Copeland

Rumfoord to challenge the stereotype of the American military leader as a hero. Rumfoord is

narcissistic, with little concern for other human lives. Vonnegut describes Rumfoord’s wife as

“...one more public demonstration that he was a superman” (237). Vonnegut thus characterizes

Rumfoord as someone who cares only about himself by showing that he values his wife only as

an object, not a person. This is symbolic of the military in that the lives of soldiers, on both sides

of the war, are seen as mere objects. Additionally, Vonnegut describes Rumfoord as “thinking in

a military manner” (246) when he was unable to comprehend Billy speaking in the hospital.

Rumfoord instead thought “...that an inconvenient person, one whose death he wished for very

much, for practical reasons, was suffering from a repulsive disease” (Vonnegut 246). The word

“inconvenient” highlights a problem within Rumfoord and the military in which life itself is not

valued intrinsically but it is instead seen as worthwhile only if it benefits those in power.

Vonnegut also writes, “The staff thought Rumfoord was a hateful old man, conceited and cruel”

(247). In the passage, Vonnegut uses the staff’s judgment in order to reflect the sentiment

Vonnegut is trying to convey about the military: the military is hateful towards other groups,

conceited in thinking they are better than others, and cruel in how they undervalue others’ lives.

This contrasts to the typical war stereotype presented by O’Hare where, instead of being popular

and “glamorous” (Vonnegut 18), Rumfoord is hated by those around him. Vonnegut characterizes

Rumfoord in such an unlikeable way to illustrate the problem with the military treating some

lives as disposable rather than as inherently valuable.

In contrast, the Englishmen are characterized in extreme positivity, presented as the

stereotype of the perfect soldiers. Vonnegut writes, “The Englishmen were clean and enthusiastic

and decent and strong” (119). The repetitive nature of the adjectives reinforces the positive
qualities of the Englishmen, illustrating how soldiers should interact. Vonnegut later wrote a

German major “...considered the Englishmen close friends” (163). Even though they are

enemies, and as such would be expected to see each other as irredeemably bad, the Germans

celebrate the Englishmen and value their lives. This demonstrates the shared humanity soldiers

can feel during war as stereotyped enemies can become friends. However, Vonnegut later

subverts the characterization of the Englishmen. Despite being on the same side, the Englishman

despise the Americans, describing them as “‘Weak, smelly, self-pitying—a pack of sniveling,

dirty, thieving bastards,’...” (162). Again, the repetitive nature of the adjectives reinforces the

perception held by the Englishmen of the negative qualities of the Americans. It also

demonstrates a contradiction in the typically positive characterization of the Englishmen,

exposing the failure of the Englishmen to see the humanity of the Americans in their struggles.

The Englishmen’s characterization is also not completely masculine, demonstrated when the

Englishmen performed “...a musical version of Cinderella” (Vonnegut 123). Masculinity is a trait

typically associated with soldiers, with Frank Sinatra and John Wayne being hypermasculine.

However, the Englishmen are participating in a typically feminine story, suggesting real soldiers

are more nuanced than stereotypes. The silliness of the situation also suggests a break from the

serious, war-loving soldiers depicted in the media. All together, the Germans, Englishmen, and

Americans demonstrate the complexity of humanity, relationships, and character, which cannot

be simply defined by stereotypes or the side of the war you’re fighting on. Through this,

Vonnegut demonstrates the shared humanity of soldiers in war.

Vonnegut also shows the shared humanity between all soldiers through the negative and

ironic characterizations of Ronald Weary and Paul Lazzaro. Although these two characters are

American soldiers, they are characterized as bad people. Vonnegut describes Weary as “...stupid
and fat and mean” (44). Echoing his description of the Englishmen and Americans, Vonnegut

uses the repetitive nature of the adjectives to highlight all the negative qualities of Weary. This

characterization is ironic because Weary is fighting on the same side of the war as Billy, so he

should be depicted as an ally. However, Vonnegut uses the characterization of Weary to show

that there are bad people on both sides of the war. This point is reiterated in the characterization

of Paul Lazzaro as consumed by a need for brutal revenge. Vonnegut depicts Lazzaro’s need for

revenge in his desire to kill Billy on behalf of Ronald Weary, someone Lazzaro had only met

briefly. Lazzaro also says, “‘So I promised him I’d have this silly cocksucker shot after the war’”

(Vonnegut 179). Vonnegut creates a contrasting characterization of Lazzaro as a loyal friend and

a murderer, representing the diversity of humanity in one person. A clearly morally corrupt

character is again placed on Billy’s side of the war to show neither side is all good or all bad.

However, Lazzaro also illustrates the complexity of humanity by understanding that the Germans

aren’t all bad. Lazzaro “...didn’t have anything against the Germans” because they hadn’t

wronged him (Vonnegut 177). By such a violent character being impartial towards the Germans,

Vonnegut is showing that opposing soldiers aren’t inherently evil. The negative characterizations

of Ronald Weary and Paul Lazzaro illustrate the diversity within humanity, and how which side

of the war someone is on doesn’t determine their character.

Vonnegut’s sympathetic characterization of German soldiers also illustrates his concern

with demonstrating shared humanity even during war. The German soldiers who capture Billy

defy the stereotypes of brutal enemies. Vonnegut notes that they were young and old, describing

a young fifteen-year-old boy as being “...as beautiful as Eve” (68). Vonnegut’s characterization

of the German soldiers as innocent emphasizes their humanity and value. Vonnegut also

highlights the shared humanity between the German soldiers and Billy through descriptions of
their unsuitable clothing. Vonnegut writes of the German soldiers, “They were irregulars, armed

and clothed fragmentarily with junk…” (67). During this time, Billy isn’t properly dressed for

war either, wearing civilian shoes with a heel missing. All of them being clothed haphazardly

creates a link between them, highlighting their similarities as ordinary people. Vonnegut again

used the judgment of characters in the book to make his point expressly. Contrary to the

stereotype of Americans as “tall, cocky, [and] murderous” (Vonnegut 191) held by the Germans,

Billy is seen as ridiculous when he first enters Dresden, because he is wearing a “blue toga and

silver shoes” (191). Billy’s characterization contrasted so strongly with the German’s perception

that it provoked outrage. A man on the street said, “‘And do you feel proud to represent America

as you do?’” (193). The German people had to learn that the American people weren’t terrifying,

but were instead, in their ridiculousness, normal people.

In conclusion, Vonnegut uses characterization throughout Slaughterhouse-Five to show

the shared humanity between the two sides of WWII. He defines the war stereotype and its harm

through the realistic characterization of Mary O’Hare. He illustrates the negative power of

stereotypes through Bertram Copeland Rumfoord and the American stereotype. He illustrates the

diversity among sides of the war through Ronald Weary, Paul Lazzaro, and the group of German

soldiers. Finally, he illustrates the potential friendship between enemies through the Englishmen

and the Germans. War creates artificial divides, forcing stereotypes on groups of people.

Slaughterhouse-Five undermines those stereotypes to emphasize shared humanity on both sides

of the war.
Works Cited

Vonnegut, Kurt. Slaughterhouse-Five or the Children's Crusade: A Duty-Dance with Death. Dial

Press Trade Paperbacks, 2009.