But why does it go? And where?

     After finishing Slaughterhouse Five, I am left uncertain as to what Vonnegut means by his constant chant of "So it goes" after every mention of death. I read the book last year for a book talk. Then, I read the phrase as strictly ironic. I thought it was supposed to call to the reader's attention how war makes death so commonplace that we become cold to its tragedy, and that Vonnegut viewed this dispassion as a strictly bad thing. Going through the book a second time, I'm not so sure. I think it totally could be read straight. As in, time is a construct; what will be, is was and always will be; just let life happen.

     On the one hand, the way the Tralfamadorians talk about war just sounds like you're supposed to disagree. "We have wars as horrible as any you've ever seen or read about. There isn't anything we can do about them, so we simply don't look at them. We ignore them. We spend eternity looking at pleasant moments." Now I can read this one of two ways. One of them is that the Trafalmadorians collectively have an unhealthy amount of denial indicative of a compromised mental state. The other is that there's some massive, Orwellian government enacted brainwash going on in Tralfamador. Either way, I can't take their advice to Billy seriously and I don't think Vonnegut does either. Additionally, Vonnegut compares himself to Lot's wife. She looked back. She cared about the death and destruction behind her. So too then must Vonnegut.

     But at the same time, Billy seems happy, viewing life so passively. He's got more inner peace than anyone in the book who has passion and cares when people die. And these characters, the ones who try to create meaning and narrative in their lives are almost universally portrayed as ridiculous. No one reads Roland Weary's inner monologue of the constructed dramas of his life and thinks "I want to be just like him". Edgar Derby's impassioned speech on American Ideals falls flat. Valencia wants to believe Billy is deep and she cries out of love for him but Vonnegut does not encourage the reader to take her seriously. More often than not, she's seen gorging herself on candy bars. 

     It's such a weird thing, because I truly believe Vonnegut sets out to write an anti-war book. And what's the point of writing an anti-war book if you subscribe to Billy Pilgrim's worldview? If you believe we're all listless playthings of forces beyond our control, why does it matter what you think of war? War will happen. You might as well write an anti-glacier book. Furthermore, if death means nothing, why be opposed to wars?

     But the more we talk about this book, the more evidence I see for Vonnegut's sympathy to Billy's worldview. I can't reconcile the anti-war Vonnegut and the Zen Vonnegut, but they seem too at odds to coexist. I'll keep trying to figure it out.