Chapter 17: In the Field

Briefly summarize the plot and style of the story. Is this story more of a “true” war story than the account in the chapter “Speaking of Courage”?

• The plot of this chapter mostly revolves around the death of Kiowa. After his body was lost under the muck, otherwise known as  “the shit field”, everyone went on a search for his body the next day (O’Brien 155). There were two sides to this story, one of which contained the perspectives of Jimmy Cross and a young boy who was close with Kiowa. While the young boy mourns the death of his friend and attempts to find a lost item, Jimmy Cross blames himself for Kiowa’s death and begins to write a letter in his head, which he plans to write to Kiowa’s father. Jimmy is so distracted by his haunting thoughts that he ends up standing in one spot for most of the chapter while his soldiers are out looking for Kiowa’s body. In fact, he ended up completely losing himself for a while and “with his eyes still closed, bobbing in the field, he let himself slip away” (O’Brien 170). The other side of the story contained the perspectives of Mitchell Sanders, Norman Bowker, and Azar. The three soldiers spent a long time looking for Kiowa without much luck and at one point, they couldn’t do much but start placing the blame. Azar blamed Jimmy Cross because out of the “ten billion places [they] could’ve set up last night, the man picks a latrine” (O’Brien 150). Norman Bowker ends up finding the body and the three soldiers work together to pull Kiowa out of the mud.   “In the Field” is more of a true story because it doesn’t focus on only one account of the situation unlike “Speaking of Courage”, but it gives multiple perspectives. Having multiple sides to the story increases the its credibility and allows for a better grasp of the plot.

What point of view is used to narrate “In the Field”?

• The story is narrated through a third-person point of view. This means that the author was telling the story through the eyes of the characters without using personal pronouns such as I, me, mine. The third person pov is used throughout the entire chapter in every character’s side of the story. 

Why is the young man not identified in the story? What is the character’s purpose in the narrative?

• The young man unidentified in the story felt at blame for Kiowa’s death, and became determined to find him too. He felt guilty because he thought he was the reason the enemy bombed the place since “he’d been showing Kiowa a picture of his girlfriend. He remembered switching on his flashlight. A stupid thing to do, but he did it anyway...and then the field exploded” (O’Brien 163). He was most likely unknown as a metaphor that not everyone knows about soldiers and their stories. Some soldiers die in battle not being able to ever share what they went through, their stories unheard. And even though they were serving their country, some might not even remember them as heroes, just soldiers who died. His purpose in the narrative is to tell about how he and Kiowa were close, and that he was the last one to see him. He was the one that let go of him into the muck.

In “In The Field,” O'Brien writes, “When a man died, there had to be blame.” What does this mandate do to the men of O'Brien's company? Are they justified in thinking themselves at fault? How do they cope with their own feelings of culpability? Consider all of the following characters.

• The quote allowed multiple soldiers to feel responsible for one man’s death. They could be justified in their thinking, as there are multiple ways in feeling the blame, by finding the root causes or causes that helped the tragedy. For example, earlier in the book, in the chapter “Speaking of Courage”, Tim O’Brien wrote a short story about Norman Bowker. He wrote about how Norman was never the same after the war and how one of the reasons why was because he had let someone die, that someone being Kiowa. Halfway through the chapter, O’Brien describes this when he says that “he pulled hard but Kiowa was gone...he released Kiowa’s boot and watched it slide away” (O’Brien 143). Even though this story was made up, it comes to show guilt from Norman’s perspective. He blamed himself for letting it happen, for not being able to do anything. Jimmy Cross blamed himself for giving the order to camp at the lake, even though there were so many other places they could have settled in. Lastly, the young boy blamed himself for attracting enemy fire by turning on his flashlight. In truth, the ones to blame were the enemy, since they threw the bombs that ultimately led to Kiowa’s death. Yet, each soldier had a reason to blame themselves because this was war, where everyone was at fault. 

What, in the end, is the significance of the shit field story (or stories)?

• The significance of the shit field story was to show how Kiowa's death had an impact and transformed every single one of the members of the platoon. They had lost a brother and a friend. Kiowa's death also represented all the good things that get buried in war, which include friendship, family, memories, and life itself. 

Reflection:

This chapter was meaningful in itself, but thoroughly connected/ intertwined with the previous two chapter. The chapter,  “Speaking of Courage” gives Norman Bowker’s view of Kiowa’s death and how it impacted his life in general. The chapter “Notes” gives O’Brien’s view on both the story of Norman Bowker and the impact Kiowa’s death had on him. Lastly, the chapter,  “In the Field” allows the other company members/soldiers to comment. Like “Speaking of Courage,” “In the Field” is told in the third person, but instead of focusing on one character’s account of Kiowa’s death, it gives many different points of view. We can relive the situation not only from Norman Bowker’s point of view but also from that of Lieutenant Cross, Azar, and a young, unnamed soldier. These three chapters together, not only introduce different points of view and makes the storyline more clear, but it also introduces the readers to a new rhetorical strategy used by the author. The author went from third person, to first person, to third person again, all while describing the same main idea, which revolved around the impact that Kiowa’s death had on everybody.