In an interview, Tim O'Brien said, "Good movies -- and good novels, too -- do not depend upon 'accurate portrayals.' Accuracy is irrelevant. Is the Mona Lisa an 'accurate' representation of the actual human model for the painting? Who knows? Who cares? It's a great piece of art. It moves us. It makes us wonder, makes us gape; finally makes us look inward at ourselves."
What do you think O'Brien means by this quote? Do you think "How to Tell a True War Story" is an "accurate" portrayal of Vietnam? What is the difference between accuracy and honesty? Can a work be inaccurate but honest? Or accurate but dishonest?
Do you agree with O'Brien's perspective? Why or why not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
i think obrien is saying that the term accuracy doesnt portray the whole picture. an accurate statement may represent some truth to a story, piece of art or even a testimony but its not exactly the same as truth. an accurate point can be a small points amongst many other points that were not said. for example in a court investigation a witness's points can be accurate but it can not be true if it leaves out some useful information. so i think a story can be accurate but dishonest at the same time. so truth according to obrien is the exact interpretation of a story without aything left unsaid. how to tell a tru war story is an accurate portrayal of vietnam; it is actuall one of many accurate stories told by solders.
ReplyDeleteIt may not be an accurate portrayal of Vietnam but it can show the reader the intensity of what it must have felt like to be in the middle of war. To see your friends die in front of you and have every thing taken away so quickly. That is why i think he used the animal shooting as a perfect example. He describe his friend shooting away all kind of life in that buffalo. If you really pay attention it almost as if he saying they were shooting away their own lives in that war day after day and watching their friends die one by one.
ReplyDeleteI think O' Brien is saying that while war may have one general definition or one general goal, it's experiences and meanings can be of different truths. I think O'Briens story was accurate in the fact that it portrayed true feeling of soldiers. While the events may not have happened, the stories can be related to by those who know anything about war and give those deeper depth who do not know as much.A work can be inaccurate and honest as long as it portrays real human emotion. I agree with O'Briens perspective, if a work is able to move an audience, there has to be something there that is relatable and therefore connects on some level of honesty with the audience
ReplyDeleteNikisha
I strongly disagree with O'Brien. Honesty shows the gritty and real truth of a specific event, in this case Vietnam. If accuracy is irrelevant, then it's for the ignorant people who like life to be a fantasy. O'Brien states "It moves us. It makes us wonder, makes us gape; finally makes us look inward at ourselves." What about the audience who wants a real portrayal?
ReplyDeleteMasiz
I agree and disagree with O'Brien because different times call for different representations. When one is doing something for entertainment, I believe that something does not have to be that "accurate." But in other important matters, honesty is necessary.
ReplyDeleteI agree with O'Brien; who cares if its accurate just as long as it moves us. Besides I think if people sole focus in writing a novel or making a movie was accuracy everything would either be too graphic or boring. A great example is documentaries, most of them are either too revealing or put people straight to sleep.
ReplyDelete