The Relevance of “Story-Truth” in the Telling of War Stories

A Senior Thesis in Classics

The Colorado College

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

Bachelor of Arts

By

Alejandra Franco

May 2016

Franco 1

Contents

The Relevance of “Story-Truth” in the Telling of War Stories ....... Error! Bookmark not

defined.

Pre-Story Interactions ........................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

The Odyssey ................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

The Aeneid ..................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

The Stories: Happening-Truth vs. Story-Truth .................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

The Odyssey ................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

The Aeneid ..................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Post-Story Reactions .......................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

The Odyssey ................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

The Aeneid ..................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Conclusion ......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

References .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Franco 2

Abstract

In the novel The Things They Carried, Tim O’Brien utilizes metafiction to

explore the idea of truth in war stories. O’Brien created two types of truth that are used

for storytelling: the happening-truth and the story-truth. The happening truth refers to

what actually happened in a story and the story-truth is a dramatized version of what

actually happened in the story. Storytellers often utilize story-truth to convey the

experience, rather than the just the events, to the audience. O’Brien hints to an interesting

relationship and positive feedback loop between the audience and the storyteller which

could ultimately cause the storyteller to utilize story-truth rather than the happening-truth.

Using this lens, the war stories contained within The Odyssey and The Aeneid were

analyzed to see how well the idea of story-truth vs. happening-truth as well as the

relationship between the audience and storyteller were present. This analysis makes it

apparent that all three of these war stories (Aeneas’, Odysseus’, and O’Brien’s) share

much more in common than originally thought.

Franco 3

The Relevance of “Story-Truth” in the Telling of War Stories

In the book The Things They Carried, author Tim O’Brien recounts his time as a

drafted soldier in Vietnam. O’Brien shares many different stories and events that took

place while deployed in Vietnam. Through various personal short stories, O’Brien (1990)

utilizes metafiction to explore the previously unquestioned notion of truthfulness in

storytelling, focusing on war stories in particular (Kaplan, 1993). O’Brien, who dedicated

a whole chapter called “How to Tell a True War Story” to this very idea, argued for a

special relationship between truth and the telling of war stories (Kaplan, 1993).

According to O’Brien, there appears to be two separate versions of the truth: the

objective, happening-truth and the subjective, story-telling truth, as he argued in an

interview: “You have to understand… There is a truth as we live it; there is a truth as we

tell it. Those two are not compatible all the time. There are times when the story truth can

be truer, I think, than a happening truth” (Herzog, 2008, p. 120). Tim O’Brien provided

many examples for when the story-truth could be truer than the actual truth in a war

story, such as: 1) War is a traumatic, hectic, and scary experience. Being that events

taking place during war are framed by these feelings and that negative kind of

atmosphere, it makes sense that a storyteller may use the story-truth in order to fill in the

gaps of memory:

“In any war story, but especially a true one, it's difficult to separate what

happened from what seemed to happen. What seems to happen becomes its own

happening and has to be told that way. The angles of vision are skewed. When a

booby trap explodes, you close your eyes and duck and float outside yourself…

The pictures get jumbled, you tend to miss a lot. And then afterward, when you go

Franco 4

to tell about it, there is always that surreal seemingness, which makes the story

seem untrue, but which in fact represents the hard and exact truth as it seemed”

(p. 71).

2) The story-truth “[gets] at the truth when the truth isn't sufficient for the truth” (O’Brien

1999). O’Brien notes that often times the happening-truth often does not convey all of the

meaning of the story quite like the story-truth does. Because of this, storytellers may

embellish or exaggerate the happening-truth (thus creating the story-truth) in order to

relay all of the nuances of the story to the audience.

Something that is often missed when analyzing The Things They Carried is the

interesting relationship between the storyteller and the audience. O’Brien – while he does

not overtly mention it – alludes to this interesting and important storyteller-audience

relationship throughout his book:

“The thing about a story is that you dream it as you tell it, hoping that others

might then dream along with you, and in this way memory and imagination and

language combine to make spirits in the head. There is the illusion of aliveness.”

(p. 230)

I believe that it is this very interesting and complicated relationship – with an emphasis

on the interactions within that relationship – between the audience and the storyteller that

O’Brien hints at that could cause the storyteller to favor the story-truth over the

happening-truth, especially in the case of war stories. There are many aspects of the

audience/storyteller relationship and interactions that support this claim.

One part of the relationship between the audience and the storyteller is the

Franco 5

audience’s expectations regarding war stories (O’Brien, 1990, p. 84). The audience

invokes various expectations when they become aware that the story being told is a war

story. These expectations may include hearing about violence, bloodshed, injury, and

even death. The audience may even expect to hear a story that is so bizarre that it is

believable, simply because the audience possesses an internalized script of what elements

war stories usually contain. If the storyteller were to tell the audience the bizarre stories

they were wanting to hear but then later say that the story was not true, the audience

would feel upset and even misled (p. 84). These feelings would not only be due to the

fact that the audience’s expectations were not met, but also since they weren’t met

because the storyteller did not tell the truth. In order to avoid this reaction, the storyteller

must not only address the audience’s expectations on some level, but they must also do so

in a truthful manner. O’Brien gives a solution to the dilemma: utilize the story-truth.

Utilizing the story-truth would allow the storyteller to accomplish two things: address the

audience’s expectations content-wise while doing so in a truthful manner. The story-truth

allows the storyteller to exaggerate and embellish the events of the story, but because the

embellishments and exaggerations allow the audience to fully grasp the story, the

storyteller can still claim that they were telling the truth. Thus, the storyteller would be

able satisfy the audience’s needs as well as their own.

Not only does the audience bring expectations and assumptions into the

storytelling situation, many times they also bring pure naïveté. The audience’s naïveté is

another influential part of the audience and storyteller relationship (O’Brien, 1990, p.

113). Being that many members of the audience have not experienced being a solider at

war, the storyteller knows that the audience is missing important knowledge pertaining to

Franco 6

the context of war stories. Telling a war story to an audience that has no experience as a

soldier at war is like “telling them what chocolate tastes like” (p. 113), almost impossible.

As O’Brien says: “It’s a hard thing to explain to somebody who hasn’t felt it…” (p. 192).

In order to try and help the audience understand or feel what it was like during the war

story, the story teller may employ the story-truth as O’Brien does in this passage as well

as throughout the entire novel:

“It’s time to be blunt. I’m 43 years old, true, and I’m a writer now, and a long

time ago I walked through Quang Ngai Province as a foot soldier. Almost

everything else is invented. But it’s not a game. It’s a form. Right here, now, as I

invent myself… I want to tell you this: twenty years ago I watched a man die on a

trail near the village of My Khe. I did not kill him. But I was present, you see, and

my presence was guilt enough. I remember his face, which was not a pretty face,

because his jaw was in his throat, and I remember feeling the burden of

responsibility and grief. I blamed myself. And rightly so, because I was present.

But listen. Even that story is made up. I want you to feel what I felt… (p. 179-

180)

As O’Brien states in the passage, he chooses to utilize story-truth rather than the

happening-truth because he wants the audience to “feel what [he] felt”, namely the

“burden of responsibility and grief” he felt in the Quang Ngai Province (p. 180). In order

to convey these feelings to the audience, O’Brien used the story-truth because it made it

more accessible and understandable to his naïve audience, allowing the audience to feel

exactly how O’Brien felt.

Among the many reasons as to why a teller of a war story would use the story-

Franco 7

truth rather than the happening-truth, a large and powerful reason is wanting to exhibit

“good form” in their storytelling. Ultimately, the main goal behind telling any story is to

relay past events in such a way that audience members are able to imagine experiencing

the even themselves. In telling a war story, good form, which O’Brien devotes an entire

chapter to with that title, is accomplishing this goal. As O’Brien says: “I want you to feel

what I felt. I want you to know why story-truth is truer sometimes than happening-

truth… What stories can do, I guess, is make things present. I can look at things I never

looked at. I can attach faces to grief and love and pity and God. I can be brave. I can

make myself feel again” (p. 179-180). In order to accomplish this goal, the storyteller

must address the expectations of the audience as well as take their naïveté of the subject

into account. As O’Brien argues, sometimes this ultimate goal cannot be accomplished by

simply using the happening-truth. Often times it is absolutely necessary to utilize the

story-truth to accomplish this. O’Brien gives a perfect example of this in the chapter

“Good Form”:

“Here is the happening-truth. I was once a soldier. There were many bodies, real

bodies with real faces, but I was young then and I was afraid to look. And now,

twenty years later, I’m left with faceless responsibility and faceless grief. Here is

the story-truth. He was a slim, dead, almost dainty young man of about twenty.

He lay in the center of a red clay trail near the village of My Khe. His jaw was in

his throat. His one eye was shut, the other eye was a star-shaped hole. I killed

him” (p. 180).

Finally, O’Brien explains that the storyteller can figure out if they’ve accomplished

the goal of storytelling by the reaction they receive from the audience (p. 77). At the end

Franco 8

of the war story there should be “nothing much to say…except maybe “Oh”” (p. 77). It is

this reaction that the storyteller is looking for when they are telling their war story. If the

storyteller receives this reaction, then it is apparent that the ultimate goal of storytelling

has been achieved: relating the story to their audience in such a way that they can place

themselves into the war, leaving them speechless. In an effort to try and achieve this

desired reaction, a storyteller may utilize story-truth. This is because the storyteller

knows that achieving good form – which is most easily done using story-truth – will help

solicit this desired reaction from the audience.

Accomplishing “good form” and eliciting the desired response from the audience

causes the cyclical relationship between the audience and the storyteller to come full

circle, creating a positive feedback loop between the two parties: the storyteller, having

been influenced by the audience’s expectations and naïveté, utilized the story-truth to

relay their war story. By utilizing the story-truth, the storyteller is able to satisfy the

audience, causing them to have the intended reaction toward the war story. Due to the

positive reaction from the audience towards the story-truth, the storyteller is then

motivated to continue utilizing the story-truth during future instances of storytelling,

beginning the cycle again.

The Art of Telling War Stories Transcends Time

War stories are not a recent invention; war stories have been around since the

beginning of time. Passed down from generation to generation, the pastime of storytelling

has been a big part of human culture. This is especially true during antiquity, the time of

the Romans and the Greeks. Roman and Greek culture has a large basis in military action

and warfare as well as storytelling. Using the points that Tim O’Brien makes about

Franco 9

telling war stories in The Things They Carried, I believe that we can look at a few famous

war stories from antiquity through a new lens: The Odyssey and The Aeneid.

Pre-Story Interactions

The Odyssey

The Odyssey tells of Odysseus’ ten-year long journey home to Ithaca after the

Trojan War. In books nine through twelve of The Odyssey, Odysseus becomes the

storyteller for his very own war story. In this part of the epic, after Odysseus has washed

up on the shores of Scheria, the island of the Phaeacians. Alcinous, king of the

Phaeacians, is holding a feast to honor him. During this feast, Odysseus dares the singer

Demodocus to sing of the Trojan War to prove that he was actually given the divine gift

of song. At this dare, Demodocus correctly sings of the Trojan War, moving Odysseus to

tears. Odysseus’ behavior does not go unnoticed by Alcinous; It at this point that

Alcinous begins asking about – and influencing – Odysseus’ story. Alcinous, who does

not know why Odysseus is crying, begins to ask Odysseus to explain his behavior. As

O’Brien notes in his novel, the audience (Alcinous in this context) is verbalizing his

expectations for Odysseus’ war story. Alcinous makes a few requests of Odysseus and his

story:

1. “So don’t be crafty now, my friend, don’t hide the truth I’m after. Fair is fair,

speak out!” (8.610-8.611)

2. “Come, tell us the name they call you there at home...” (8.612)

3. “…tell me your land, your people, your city too…” (8.618)

Franco 10

4. “…tell us your story now, and tell it truly.” (8.639)1

These questions, although they are standard to ask a stranger, are influencing

Odysseus’ story. The first and fourth commanded questions of Alcinous are interesting.

From the beginning of this interaction, Alcinous is commanding Odysseus to relay

specific information from the war story. Odysseus is obligated to relay the requested

information due to being Alcinous’ guest. On a basic level, Alcinous’ requests would

influence Odysseus’ story due to the mere fact that it would affect which information he

wishes to share for his story. For example, Odysseus may not believe that telling who his

people are is important to his war story, but due to Alcinous’ request, he must include

that information in his war story. And Alcinous states his suspicion that Odysseus may

conceal the happening truth under a deceptive story.

Alcinous’ commands and requests for Odysseus to tell the "truth that [Alcinous]

is after" could also have another effect on Odysseus’ war story: Odysseus may utilize the

story-truth rather than the happening-truth. In order for Odysseus to tell the war story

“truly”, he must be able to tell the story in such a way that Alcinous feels as though he

had experienced the tragic events himself. Sometimes, as O’Brien argued in his novel, the

story truth is the only way to accomplish this (1990). Oftentimes the happening-truth

does not accurately convey the atmosphere, feelings, and psychological state of the

storyteller. The storyteller must utilize embellishments and exaggerations in order to

create the intended – and expected – story atmosphere for the audience. Due to this,

Odysseus may need to employ the story-truth in order to make his story not only

1 The Odyssey translations by Robert Fagles, 1996.

Franco 11

accessible and relatable to Alcinous but also accommodating to Alcinous’ expectations.

After these requests, Alcinous then goes on to ask several more questions of

Odysseus:

1. “Where have your rovings forced you?” (8.640)

2. “What lands of men have you seen, what sturdy towns…” (8.641)

3. “…what men themselves?” (8.642)

4. “Who were wild, savage and lawless? Who were friendly to strangers,

god-fearing men?” (8.642-8.643)

5. “Tell me, why do you weep and grieve so sorely… when you hear the fall

of Troy?” (8.647-8.648)

6. “Did on one of your kinsmen die before the walls of Troy, a son by

marriage? Father by marriage… Or a friend perhaps, someone close to

your heart, staunch and loyal?” (8.652-8.656)

These questions further reveal Alcinous’ pre-story expectations directly to

Odysseus. Alcinous is expecting to hear stories of Odysseus wandering through various

locations, meeting the “wild” and “savage” people of these places, and losing loved ones

along the way. Again Odysseus, even before he has begun the war story, already knows

what Alcinous expects – and wants – to hear. It is these additional and explicitly stated pre-

story expectations that may also cause Odysseus to utilize the story-truth rather than the

happening-truth. Odysseus is a crafty man (being the one who drafted the idea for the

Trojan horse, he has utilized his wit to get out of many situations) and must realize that he

must address Alcinous’ expectations during his story otherwise he could be at risk for

offending him. This is especially important because Alcinous’ people are usually very

Franco 12

distrusting of strangers, so Alcinous is showing Odysseus a rare kindness by allowing him

to stay in the first place.

Alcinous’ expectations do not go unnoticed; Odysseus acknowledges them prior

to beginning his story:

“Alcinous, majesty… There’s nothing better than when deep joy holds sway

throughout the realm and banqueters up and down the palace sit in ranks… This,

to my mind, is the best that life can offer. But now you’re set on probing the bitter

pains I’ve borne, so I’m to weep and grieve, it seems, still more. Well then, what

shall I go through first, what shall I save for last? What pains – the gods have

given me my share. Now let me begin by telling you my name…” (Odyssey, 9.1-

9.17)

This pre-story disclaimer supports the claim that Odysseus is aware of Alcinous’

expectations; Odysseus states that Alcinous wants to hear the “bitter pains” of his war

story. Odysseus also responds to Alcinous commands and questions by saying that he

will continue to speak of whatever “pains” Alcinous wishes to hear – even though

Odysseus will “weep and grieve” in the process. By stating that Alcinous is “probing” for

certain negative things from Odysseus’ story it is obvious that Odysseus is aware of

Alcinous’ pre-story expectations. Then, by Odysseus stating that he will give Alcinous

what he is asking for, it is apparent that Alcinous’ expectations are influencing Odysseus’

story. Alcinous’ unintended influence on Odysseus’ story is reflected in the final

sentences of the pre-story disclaimer in which Odysseus, now knowing what Alcinous

wants to hear, wonders “what pains” he should begin the war story with.

Franco 13

In the case of Alcinous, the story-truth may be even more necessary because he is

arguably a naïve audience. Within The Odyssey, it is mentioned that the Phaeacians were

moved to Scheria by their leader Nausithous to be “far from men” after being continually

harassed by the Cyclopes (6.8). Being that Alcinous is Nausithous’ son and successor in

Scheria, a land specifically chosen because it was far from men, it can be strongly argued

that Alcinous is naïve to warfare. Alcinous’ naïveté makes Odysseus’ job of explaining

his war story that much harder because Alcinous has no personal experience in warfare

and in turn no personal experiences that would compare to Odysseus’ war story. Thus,

Odysseus must not only relay his story – and what Alcinous is asking to hear about – but

he must do so in such a manner that someone who is naïve to warfare will be able to

understand and experience his storytelling.

The Aeneid

The Aeneid tells of Aeneas’ journey from Troy to Italy after the Trojan War.

Aeneas, who narrowly escaped the fall of Troy after the Greeks created the Trojan horse,

was divinely destined to travel to Italy in order to found the great city of Rome. At the

end of the book I of The Aeneid, Aeneas and his crew have arrived at Carthage and are

happily met by the queen, Dido.

Similar to the Odyssey, Dido hosts a banquet in Aeneas’ honor. During the

banquet, Dido becomes curious and asks Aeneas to relay his war story:

Nec non et vario noctem sermone trahebat

infelix Dido, longumque bibebat amorem,

multa super Priamo rogitans, super Hectore multa;

nunc quibus Aurorae venisset filius armis,

Franco 14

nunc quales Diomedis equi, nunc quantus Achilles.

“Immo age, et a prima dic, hospes, origine nobis

insidias,” inquit, “Danaum, casusque tuorum,

erroresque tuos; nam te iam septima portat

omnibus errantem terris et fluctibus aestas.” (1.748-1.756)2

And also the unhappy Dido was dragging the night on

by means of diverse conversation, and drinking love

also persistently asking many things about Priam and many things about

Hector

and (even) asking what armor son of dawn had worn and how great

Achilles was.

“Come and relate your origin, visitor, and relate the tricks of the Greeks,”

she says, “and relate the fall of your men, tell of your wanderings

for it’s the seventh summer that brings you wandering through all of this

land and sea. 3

As Alcinous did to Odysseus, Dido does to Aeneas: she commands Aeneas to

relay information about himself and his journey. Dido asks many questions about a few

great men: Priam, Hector and Achilles (1.751-1.752). The words quales and quantus

(what kind, how much) are used to describe Dido’s questions about the great men. These

qualifying and quantifying words, respectively, make Dido’s questions about Priam,

Hector, and Achilles specific; explicitly relaying to Aeneas exactly what information

Dido is looking for. Another word, rogitans, is used to describe Dido’s behavior. In this

passage, rogitans describes Dido’s questioning behavior as being persistent. Not only

2 Latin from: Aeneid 1–6 (The Focus Vergil Aeneid Commentaries). 3 Personal translations of The Aeneid, with reference from: Aeneid 1–6 (The Focus Vergil

Aeneid Commentaries).

Franco 15

does Dido persistently ask about certain aspects of Aeneas’ story, but she also commands

Aeneas to “Come, and relate [your] origin, visitor [Aeneas], and relate the tricks of the

Greeks” (“age, et a prima dic, hospes, origine nobis…”) (1.753). In this line, Dido uses

the word dic which is conjugated in the imperative form, which makes the verb “to relate

(something)” into a command of “relate (the information I am asking for) to me”. With

these lines in mind, not only has Dido hinted about what information she wants Aeneas to

include in his story (the fates of Priam, Hector and Achilles) but she also outright

commands Aeneas to relay certain information to her in his story (his origin and the

tricks of the Greeks). In this way, Aeneas is made aware of Dido’s expectations of his

war story.

As in The Odyssey, Aeneas is obviously aware of Dido’s – as well as the other

audience members’ – expectations of his war story:

Conticuere omnes, intentique ora tenebant.

Inde toro pater Aeneas sic orsus ab alto:

Infandum, regina, iubes renovare dolorem,

Troianas ut opes et lamentabile regnum

eruerint Danai; quaeque ipse miserrima vidi,

et quorum pars magna fui. Quis talia fando

Myrmidonum Dolopumve aut duri miles Ulixi

temperet a lacrimis? Et iam nox umida caelo

praecipitat, suadentque cadentia sidera somnos.

Sed si tantus amor casus cognoscere nostros

et breviter Troiae supremum audire laborem,

quamquam animus meminisse horret, luctuque refugit,

incipiam. (2.1-2.13)

Franco 16

Everyone had fallen silent and were holding their faces intently,

thus father Aeneas commenced his story from his high couch:

“Queen, you command me to renew unspeakable pain by telling

how the wealth of my kingdom was uprooted by the Greeks,

by telling what miserable things I, myself, saw

and of which I was a great part. Who of the Myrmidons, or of the

Dolopians or of

the hard soldiers of Odysseus might restrain themselves from tears when

telling such things?

And now the moist night falls and the descending stars urge sleep,

But if love is so great to know of our falling

and to hear of the final endeavor of Troy

although my mind shivers to recollect and flees with sorrow,

I will begin.”

Prior to beginning his war story, Aeneas is met with audience members that had

fallen silent (conticuere omnes) and were holding their faces intently (intentique ora

tenebat). It is obvious by this reaction of the audience that they have expectations similar

to Dido’s about Aeneas’ war story. They are eager to hear about Aeneas’ origin, journey

to Carthage, and the great men Priam, Hector, and Achilles. If this were not the case, then

everyone else in the banquet hall most likely would not be quiet and attentive to Aeneas.

The first thing that Aeneas does before beginning his war story is address Dido’s

expectations: “Queen, you command me to renew unspoken pain by telling… what

miserable things I, myself, saw and of which I was a great part” (“Infandum, regina,

iubes renovare dolorem… quaeque ipse miserrima vidi, et quorum pars magna fui”) (2.3-

2.6). Aeneas uses the word iubes when referring to Dido commanding him to tell his

story. By using the word iubes, Aeneas is implying that Dido is royally ordering him to

Franco 17

tell his war story. Aeneas’ use of the word iubes when describing Dido’s commands

makes it apparent that Aeneas is aware of Dido’s expectations and that he understands

that he is obligated to address them in his war story. Thus, Aeneas, knowing that he is not

only indebted to Dido for showing him hospitality but also that Dido is a queen so her

commands cannot be disobeyed, must give Dido the war story that she is asking for. This

is apparent when Aeneas states that he will begin his war story despite the fact that his

mind shivers to recollect (animus meminisse horret) the war story.

Dido’s commands and expectations, similar to those of Alcinous in the Odyssey,

were bound to have an effect on Aeneas story. Not only is Aeneas’ being basically forced

to tell a story that animus meminisse horret, but he must do so in such a manner that he

addresses the expectations and answer the questions and commands of his host, Dido.

That may sound like an easy task, but like in The Odyssey, the main audience – Dido – is

naïve to war. Being a woman and a queen, Dido has never had any military experience in

her life, leaving her completely naïve to what it is like to be a part of a war. Not only does

Aeneas now have to answer Dido’s expectations, questions and demands, but he must do

so in such a manner that Dido understands. In order to accomplish this, Aeneas must

utilize the story-truth, this way Aeneas is able to stay true to his story while also allowing

Dido to experience his war story on a personal level.

The Stories: Happening-Truth vs. Story-Truth

The Odyssey

Odysseus tells Alcinous of his unsuccessful attempt to return home to Ithaca from

Troy. During these travels, Odysseus and his men sail through what has been understood

Franco 18

as a modern-day geographical location: The Strait of Messina. The Strait of Messina –

which is the strait between the southern toe of Italy and the northern shore of Sicily – is

known for its treacherous waters created by the geographical composition of the area

(Strait of Messina, 2016). The main current atop the water runs opposite of the subsidiary

current that lies below the water, with the direction of each current switching every few

hours. The strait is also known to harbor strong winds and whirlpools throughout its

narrow and rocky passage.

In ancient times, the treacherous waters of The Strait of Messina were personified

as female monsters (Scylla and Charybdis, 2016), as Odysseus’ describes them in his war

story:

“Now wailing in fear, we rowed on up those straits,

Scylla to starboard, dreaded Charybdis off to port,

her horrible whirlpool gulping the sea-surge down, down

but when she spewed it up—like a cauldron over a raging fire—

all her churning depths would seethe and heave—exploding spray

showering down to splatter the peaks of both crags at once!

But when she swallowed the sea-surge down her gaping maw

the whole abyss lay bare and the rocks around her roared,

terrible, deafening—

bedrock showed down deep, boiling

black with sand—

and ashen terror gripped the men.

But now, fearing death, all eyes fixed on Charybdis—

now Scylla snatched six men from our hollow ship,

the toughest, strongest hands I had, and glancing

backward over the decks, searching for my crew

Franco 19

I could see their hands and feet already hoisted,

flailing, high, higher, over my head, look—

wailing down at me, comrades riven in agony,

shrieking out my name for one last time!

Just as an angler poised on a jutting rock

flings his treacherous bait in the offshore swell,

whips his long rod—hook sheathed in an oxhorn lure—

and whisks up little fish he flips on the beach-break,

writhing, gasping out their lives … so now they writhed,

gasping as Scylla swung them up her cliff, and there

at her cavern’s mouth she bolted them down raw—

screaming out, flinging their arms toward me,

lost in that mortal struggle …

Of all the pitiful things I’ve had to witness,

suffering, searching out the pathways of the sea,

this wrenched my heart the most.” (11.281-11.311)

This personification of the treacherous waters of the Strait of Messina is a prime

example of transforming the happening-truth into the story-truth. Instead of Odysseus

describing the actual treacherous conditions of the Strait of Messina – rocky waters,

whirlpools, strong winds – Odysseus gives the story-truth account of his experience.

Odysseus personifies the whirlpool(s) as being a cognizant monster that is out to draw in

any passing sailors. Odysseus describes the other, rocky and cavernous side of the

straight as housing another treacherous monster, Scylla, that seeks to pull sailors off of

ships and eat them or crush them on the rocks. While a simple description of the actual

events and scenery might have conveyed the happening-truth of Odysseus’ story, it

would not have conveyed the experience itself to the audience. If Odysseus had described

Franco 20

the Strait as having ‘rocky waters’ and ‘screaming winds’, it would not have conveyed

the fear and urgency that using the personified sea monsters does. Telling the audience

that the crew members were all fearful that a giant cave monster could pull them off the

ship and of a whirlpool monster who might eat their ship whole would more accurately

convey the experience that “wrenched [Odysseus’] heart the most”. Thus, in this passage,

the story-truth was more true than the happening-truth.

The Aeneid

In The Aeneid, Aeneas also told of his experience with Scylla and Charybdis.

During Aeneas’ journey, he encountered Helenus, the son of former King of Troy, Priam.

Since the fall of Troy Helenus had become the King of a Greek city. Helenus instantly

recognizes Aeneas and his crew and tells him some valuable information about how to

successfully finish his trek to Italy. It is during this conversation that Helenus warns

Aeneas of Scylla and Charybdis:

dextrum Scylla latus, laevum implacata Charybdis

obsidet, atque imo barathri ter gurgite vastos

sorbet in abruptum fluctus rursusque sub auras

erigit alternos, et sidera verberat unda.

at Scyllam caecis cohibet spelunca latebris

ora exsertantem et navis in saxa trahentem.

prima hominis facies et pulchro pectore virgo

pube tenus, postrema immani corpore pistrix

delphinum caudas utero commissa luporum.

praestat Trinacrii metas lustrare Pachyni

cessantem, longos et circumflectere cursus,

quam semel informem vasto vidisse sub antro

Franco 21

Scyllam et caeruleis canibus resonantia saxa. (3.420-3.432)

Scylla besieges the right side, the insatiable Charybdis

besieges the left, who, three times a day, absorbs

with the bottomless

whirlpool of her abyss and she sucks vast waves in to the sheer deep,

hurls them up again in turn to the skies and breaks the constellations

with the waves.

On the other hand, a cave contains Scylla, her mouths darting out

of the dark hiding place and dragging ships into rocks.

In front her appearance is that of the face of a human and she is a young

virgin with a beautiful chest as far as to the groin, below she has a huge

body with dolphin tails connected to the belly of wolves.

It is better to round the Point of Pachynus

and circling the circumference [of Sicily] in a long course

than to have once seen the shapeless Scylla below the vast cave

and to see the stones that resound the blue wolves. (3.420-3.432)

While these lines are not Aeneas’ personal description of Scylla and Charybdis, it

can be argued that this is exactly what Aeneas saw – and ultimately how he would have

described what he saw. This is due to the fact that Father Anchises and the fellow men of

Aeneas’ crew were able to easily recognize these sea monsters using Helenus’

description:

et pater Anchises 'nimirum hic illa Charybdis:

hos Helenus scopulos, haec saxa horrenda canebat.

eripite, o socii, pariterque insurgite remis.' (3.558-3.560)

And Father Anchises [said] ‘Indisputably that is Charybdis there:

Franco 22

There are the cliffs that Helenus sung [of], tear away from

those bristling rocks, O comrades, and life yourselves to the oars

together. (3.558-3.560)

As with the Odyssey, based on the actual geographical location of the Strait of

Messina it is apparent that the story-truth is being utilized to tell this part of Aeneas’

journey. By relaying Helenus’ description in this manner, it is apparent that Aeneas’

agrees with the description and its usage of the story-truth. There is no point in Aeneas’

story where he makes any sort of comment or critiques Helenus’ description. Aeneas

simply relays Helenus’ description, with the comment that he and his crew ‘indisputably’

spotted Charybdis using Helenus’ description. Thus Aeneas must agree that Helenus’

description describes what he saw while sailing to avoid Scylla and Charybdis.

Similar to the Odyssey, Scylla and Charybdis are the treacherous waters of the

Strait of Messina personified. Aeneas understands that a simple description of the

happening truth (high winds, whirlpools and strong waves) would not be sufficient to

describe the experience of narrowly sailing through the Strait of Messina. Rather,

describing the whirlpool(s) as being a cognizant being that is consciously trying to suck

up (sorbet) their ships allows Dido to better understand the fear that Aeneas and his crew

experienced at that time. The exaggeration and transformation of the happening-truth into

the story-truth in this instance allow for Dido to fully comprehend the experience that

Aeneas is trying to tell her. Doing so, again, allows for the story-truth to be truer than the

happening-truth.

Post-Story Reactions

Franco 23

The Odyssey

Near the end of book XI, Odysseus attempts to end his story:

“But I could [not tell all of my story].

Long before that, the god-sent night would ebb away.

But the time has come for sleep, either with friends

aboard your swift ship or here in your house.

My passage home will rest with the gods and you.”

Odysseus paused… They all feel silent, hushed,

his story holding them spellbound down the shadowed halls

(11.363-11.367)

Odysseus receives the intended reaction from the audience at the premature

ending of his story. The audience is left “silent” and “hushed”, feeling spellbound by the

story that he has just told them. At this point, it would appear as though Odysseus has

accomplished his goal of storytelling, but not everyone in the audience is so satisfied:

“Ah Odysseus,” Alcinous replied, “one look at you

and we know that you are none who would cheat us –

no fraud, such as the dark soil breeds and spreads

across the face of the earth these days. Crowds of vagabonds

frame their lies so tightly none can test them. But you,

what grace you give your words, and what good sense within!

You have told your story with all a singer’s skill,

the miseries you endured, your great Achaeans too.

But come now, tell me truly: your godlike comrades –

Did you see any heroes down in the House of Death,

any who sailed with you and met their doom in Troy?

The night’s still young, I’d say the night is endless.

Franco 24

For us in the palace now, it’s hardly time for sleep.

Keep telling us your adventures – they are wonderful.

I could hold out here till Dawn’s first light

If only you could bear, here in our halls,

To tell the tale of all the pains you suffered.” (11.398-11.414)

Alcinous clearly agrees with the audience that Odysseus is effectively relating his

war story, calling the tale of Odysseus’ adventures so wonderfully told that he exhibits

the skills of a singer, causing Alcinous to feel as though he could “hold out” all night to

hear more. Despite feeling so satisfied with the skill with which Odysseus has told his

story so far, Alcinous still feels as though Odysseus is leaving out some crucial

information that he was expecting to hear – namely the war story itself. Prior to this

interruption, Odysseus’ has only told of his homecoming and aftermath, not of any actual

warfare. Instead of letting Odysseus end his story where he wanted to, Alcinous urges

(although Odysseus is in no position to decline) Odysseus to continue telling his story “of

all the pains [Odysseus] suffered” so that Alcinous can receive answers for his newfound

questions and in turn receive the war story that he was expecting in the first place.

By Alcinous not only urging Odysseus to continue with his story – past the point

that he thinks is the true ending – so that he can further address new expectations,

Alcinous is again influencing Odysseus’ story. Odysseus knows at this point that his use

of the story-truth has pleased Alcinous (lines 404 and 411), it is highly likely that he will

continue his method of storytelling and continue to utilize story-truth in order to address

Alcinous’ new expectations and questions. This is reflected in Odysseus’ response to

Alcinous:

Franco 25

So the man of countless exploits carried on:

“Alcinous, majesty, shining among your island people,

there is a time for many words, a time for sleep as well.

But if you insist on hearing more, I’d never stint

on telling my own tale and those more painful still,

the griefs of my comrades, dead in the war’s wake,

who escaped the battle-cries of Trojan armies only to die in blood

at journey’s end –

Thanks to a vicious woman’s will.

Now then, (11.415-11.425)

It is apparent that Odysseus is reluctant to continue with his story: “there is a time

for many words and a time for sleep as well” (11.417). But Odysseus understands that he

is in a position that does not allow him to disregard Alcinous requests: “but if you insist

on hearing more, I’d never stint on telling my own tale” (11.418-11.419). Odysseus is

willing to continue his story – at Alcinous direction – despite the fact that the information

that Alcinous is asking for is “more painful still” than what Odysseus has already shared

(11.419). Odysseus’ almost bashful response (“but if you insist…”) also shows that

Odysseus knows that he is effectively utilizing story-truth to tell his war story to

Alcinous, hence why Alcinous would state that Odysseus has told his story “with a

singer’s skill” (11.). Thus, it is apparent that Odysseus will continue telling his story to

Alcinous, utilizing the story-truth in order to satisfy Alcinous curiosity and expectations

for the rest of Odysseus’ war story.

At the actual end of Odysseus’ story, he gets a very powerful reaction from the

audience: “He ended it, and no one stirred or sighed in the shadowy hall, spellbound as

they all were” (13.1-13.2). Alcinous’ – as well as the other audience members present –

Franco 26

reaction to Odysseus’ story is the exact reaction that O’Brien mentions in his book. It is

the reaction of silence or the simple utterance of “Oh,” that signifies to the storyteller that

they have successfully accomplished the goal of storytelling: telling a story in such a way

that the audience fully immerses themselves into the story, leaving them speechless by

the story’s end (O’Brien, 1990, p. 77). Receiving a reaction from the audience that

signifies that the goal of storytelling has been met further justifies the storyteller’s usage

of the story- truth. This positive reinforcement from the audience thus makes the

storyteller more likely to utilize the story-truth in later situations because they know that

they will achieve the desired reaction. Because of this, the cycle of war storytelling and

story-truth begins again.

The Aeneid

Once Aeneas finished his war story, he receives the intended reaction from the

audience:

Sic pater Aeneas intentis omnibus unus

Fata renarrabat divum cursusque docebat.

conticuit tandem factoque hic fine quievit. (3.716-3.718)

Thus father Aeneas was recounting his divine fate

To everyone (whom were attentive) and told of his wanderings.

At last, he fell silent, and making an end at this place in the story,

he rested.

The reaction consisted of an attentive audience (intentis omnibus). There is no

explicit mention of a silent audience, but it can be inferred from the use of conticuit,

which is the verb that translated as part of the phrase “[Aeneas] fell silent.” While

Franco 27

conticuit describes Aeneas behavior, the lack of detail about the audience speaking – or

making any noise for that matter – in conjunction with dramatic ending of the passage

with the verb quievit, he rested, it can be argued that the audience was attentive and silent

once Aeneas had finished his story. This reaction of attentiveness and silence is similar to

the reaction that O’Brien describes as the sought-after reaction to war stories (p. 77).

Aeneas was able to tell his war story in such a way – utilizing the story-truth – that the

audience was able to relive his experiences and thus be left speechless by the end.

Aeneas also receives – perhaps more than – the intended reaction from Dido as

well:

At regina gravi iamdudum saucia cura

vulnus alit venis et caeco carpitur igni

multa viri virtus animo multusque recursat

gentis honos; haerent infixi pectore vultus

verbaque nec placidam membris dat cura quietem. (4.1-4.5)

Burdened for a long time now, the Queen nourished the wounds by means

of her veins and was harvested by a hidden fire.

The great courage of Aeneas keeps recurring and

The great honor of his people, his face and his heart stuck fixedly

And would not surrender peaceful quiet to her limbs

Aeneas was able to utilize the story-truth in such a manner that the story was

present for Dido. Dido nourished wounds (vulnus alit venis) with – presumably – the

blood in her veins. Dido was physically experiencing the repercussions of living through

Aeneas’ journey through his war story. Not only that, but Dido was also harvested by a

hidden fire (caeco carpitur igni). This fiery passion, as signified by the word igni, was

Franco 28

sparked by the great courage of that man (multa viri virtus), Aeneas. Aeneas’ great

courage was obviously conveyed to Dido through Aeneas’ war story. Aeneas was so

effective in his war story that the fiery passion that Dido was experiencing would not

surrender peaceful quiet to her limbs (nec placidam membris dat cura quietem). While

Dido’s reaction is not completely synonymous to the reaction of “Oh,” or speechlessness

that O’Brien mentions in his novel, it is comparable. Dido was so completely enveloped

in Aeneas’ story that she is having a bodily reaction (nourishing wounds from her veins

and feelings of fiery passion that courses throughout her entire body). Dido’s reaction

makes it apparent that Aeneas’ successfully utilized the story-truth in his war story

because Dido had a bodily reaction to Aeneas’ story, supporting the claim that his use of

story-truth allowed her to fully experience his war story through his storytelling.

Conclusion

Applying the lens from O’Brien’s book to the ancient texts The Odyssey and The

Aeneid allows us to interpret these classics in a new light. The reciprocal, positive-

feedback loop relationship between the storyteller and the audience – that causes a

storyteller to utilize story-truth rather than happening-truth – is interesting and oftentimes

overlooked for the sake of other, bigger themes and relationships within these ancient

texts. Not only does applying this lens retrospectively yield a new way to read these well-

studied texts, but it also highlights the trends and relationships of storytelling that have

transcended time. It is obvious that Tim O’Brien, while he was one of the first to put

these concepts and this lens into words, was not the first to actually utilize these concepts

and this lens. Storytelling is an age-old tradition that has existed since the dawn of time

and is a self-perpetuating force that has permeated all aspects of the human experience.

Franco 29

By being able to effectively apply this new lens of storytelling to various war stories, we

are further able to analyze, interpret and delve into the human experience.

Franco 30

References

Ganiban, R., Farrell, J., Johnston, P. A., O’Hara, J., Perkell, C. (2012). Aeneid 1–6 (The

Focus Vergil Aeneid commentaries). Newburyport, MA: Focus Publishing/R.

Pullins Company.

Herzog, T. C. (2008) Writing Vietnam, Writing life. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa

Press.

Homer. The Odyssey. (Fagles, R. trans.; Knox, B. intro.). New York, NY: Penguin

Books, 1996.

Kaplan, S. (1993). The undying uncertainty of the narrator in Tim O’Brien’s the things

they carried, Critique, 35(1), 43-52.

O’Brien, T. (1990). The things they carried. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

O’Brien, T. (1999). President’s lecture. Personal Collection of Tim O’Brien, Texas

States University, San Marcos, Texas.

Scylla and Charybdis. (2016). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved from

http://www.britannica.com/topic/Scylla-and-Charybdis

Strait of Messina. (2016). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved from

http://www.britannica.com/place/Strait-of-Messina