




The Vietnam War remains a controversial subject in American history. Considering its nature as a proxy war, many claim the legitimacy of why we had to draft American soldiers to fight in the war. The aspect of this controversy, combined with the time frame of the war (1963-1975), makes it the perfect subject matter to portrayed in films, television, and books. The media interpretation of the Vietnam War is almost as controversial as the war itself; because many media interpretations rely on clichés and stereotypes of Vietnam soldiers. It’ll be discussed more in-depth later, but contrasting that trend is Tim O’Brien’s fantastic novel The Things They Carried. What makes it different from most over fictitious interpretations of the war is the realism and honesty the novel represents, especially compared with the aforementioned false media portrayals. The novel is a more realistic interpretation of the Vietnam War, because of its lack of stereotypes and addition of real experiences; a strategy that’s rarely seen in American Media when regarding the Vietnam War. 

One of the best ways to look at how the accurate the book is to look back at history. More specifically, the oft-forgotten history of life after the war. Brenda Boyle and Jeehyun Lim’s Looking Back on the Vietnam War is a very comprehensive look into the aftermath of the Vietnam War. The text focuses more on the Southeast Asian aftermath of the War, rather than just the American side of things. Perhaps the most relevant piece of the writing is found in chapter 11, the section about the American media’s interpretations of the war. It discusses how many American movies and literature regarding the Vietnam War focuses on the horrors and personal struggles, yet also weirdly naturalizes war (Boyle, 176). It gives impression that war is inevitable and always worth fighting for, a statement that simply isn’t true. These interpretations causes us Americans to have the mindset to “Go to war because we think it is in our best nature to do so and, consequently, there is no alternative to warring one.” (Boyle 190) In other words, portrayal of war in American media often shows life in war at its best and worse, leading us to think that going war must be the answer when asked to serve. This serves as an contrast to what many people think the Vietnam War to really be, as it instead is often seen an unnecessary proxy war that the United States didn’t really need to be in. 

However, an exception shows the glamorization of war in our storytelling is in The Things They Carried. Much of the novel is in mundane side of life in war, and what we can learn about the characters and their situations from these simple moments. Even just looking into their backpacks, we can learn more about these soldiers. Reading things like “Ted Lavender, who was scared, carried tranquilizers until he was shot in the head… (O’Brien, 328)” or “Kiowa, a devout Baptist, carried an illustrated New Testament that had been presented to him by his father, a Sunday-School teacher In Oklahoma City.” creates a more in depth look at soldiers. Rather than just seeing them as killing machines or damaged people post-war, one can see a more human side to them. Ted Lavender looks much more vulnerable knowing he’s scared of the war, a side of a soldier most war stories would never share. Kiowa’s bible gives a more sentimental and gentle aspect of himself, another trait rarely seen in soldiers. People often disassociate soldiers from certain feelings and emotions like anxiety or nostalgia, which certainly is a flaw with the way we Americans look at our soldiers. They truly are the same three-dimensional human beings that we are, yet they seldom get the same attention of being so. That’s why Tim O’Brien’s novel is so popular and celebrated - it adds realism and a sense of familiarity to war. It helps readers gain perspective on what our soldiers go through, rather than take away perspective. 

Additional support of why The Things They Carried is so realistic stems from another source. Cristina Rísquez’ article “Dissent as Therapy: The Case of the Veterans of the American War in Vietnam” discusses the always controversial subject of veterans’ life after they return from war. Rísquez argues that the general quality of life of veterans (focusing on those who fought in Vietnam) is unfortunately too low, as veterans often struggle with both personal demons with PTSD in their life after War. A lot of this stems from how the media we consume portrays the veterans. The article discusses how media interpretations of Vietnam War veterans are often much more negative than positive. 

  More likely than not, these veterans are characterized as either physically or emotionally wounded individuals who, in their pain, stand as emblems of the disfigured national body that emerged from the quagmire that was Vietnam. They are pervasively presented as fragmented bodies, bodies in pain, severed pieces of body, bodies in wheelchairs, dead bodies in black body bags. (Rísquez, 102)

Unfortunately, this is an accurate statement about the characterization of Vietnam Veterans. Characters like Lt. Dan from Forrest Gump, Walter from The Big Lebowski, and Chris Taylor from Platoon are all just a few examples of fictitious Vietnam War veterans whose chief character trait is their physical/mental handicap. While they all have story arcs and character development to an extent, all of them fall back to a basic, almost stereotypical connotation of being forever inflicted from violence from combat; as well as carrying hyper-violent tendencies in their lives. Additionally, the fact that so much of this war imagery contains things like “body bags” and “severed pieces of body” just goes to show how violent and bloody our war imagery is. Of course it's expected for some of it to be violent, but certainly not this extent. 

On the other side of things, Tim O’Brien’s novel is much more complex than the expected violent imagery. In addition to the aforementioned items in their backpacks, there are moments in the book that really do contrast the bloody imagery often seen. A prime example is when Kiowa reacts to the death of his friend, Ted Lavender. According to the novel, Kiowa “Wished he could find some great sadness or even anger… Mostly he felt pleased to be alive. (O’Brien, 337). Scenes like these show just how two-sided wars are. For as much blood and hardship there is, there is also complex moments like these, that showcase multiple emotions and a time of peace and self-reflection. Rather than Kiowa going on a murderous rampage like the common stereotype, he instead is introspective, thoughtful, and enigmatic. That’s way more honest and closer to home, and a large reason why the novel succeeds in being so realistic. That could also be accredited to why the book is popular, especially when taught in colleges and high schools to American students.

To this day, the Vietnam War remains very controversial in American history. That isn’t to say that all other wars have no controversy, but the Vietnam War has disagreeable choices in almost every aspect to it. From America’s reasoning to enter war, it’s drafting of thousands of young people, it’s death count, and even the way modern cinema and literature portray the war, it’s easy to see why the war remains so controversial today. Fortunately, The Things They Carried wasn’t like that last aspect, and instead provides a much more realistic and thoughtful outlook onto the war. By choosing to use relatable and human character development rather than hyper-violent stereotype, O’Brien creates a more realistic story that’s better for the reader. If there were more instances of texts like Tim O’Brien’s novel, it would do a lot of good both for audiences and veterans, because we see much more out of real people.




