"Have you read Johnny Got His Gun?" Topic

Have you read Trumbo's novel, Johnny Got His Gun?

No

Long time ago. Kind of depressing ? :/

I've seen the movie and the Metallica video "One".

No

No

No.

long ago

Nope

Enough depressing things to read at work

Yes, many years ago.

+1 Glenngary5

since we are on an American Lit thing how about Slaughter house 5 and One flew over the Cuckoo' Nest?

Read the one by Vonnegut.

Never heard of it. Have read Slaughterhouse 5 many, many years ago.

Novel – Yes, meh…
Movie – Yes, OK.
Metallica Video – Yes, rawkzorz!
Trumbo bio pic – No.

I heard that song playing in Winn Dixie one time.

Haven't and woudn't read it, haven't watched and wouldn't watch it. Seems like a big forerunner for misery-porn.

No … but did see the movie. Along time ago … it was very depressing and sad. The movie came out during the Vietnam War in '71. link
And like much from Hollywood, etc. regardless of the war portrayed in the movie or TV show. That was produced during Vietnam. It was very dark, could be some what upsetting, etc. And very anti-War. The war in SE Asia colored almost all the conflicts in the media sometimes very accurately the horrors, etc. of war. Or not …

E.g. look at Little Big Man, link and how Custer was portrayed in '71 during the Vietnam War vs. how he was portrayed in They Died With Their Boots On, in '41 during WWII . link Very much polar opposites. Like much of Hollywood, with minimal accuracy overall at best.

No and no reason to read it now.

Yes, 49 years ago to be exact.

Long time ago, and still not long enough ago. Trumbo beating the drum for the leftist cause du jour.

A long long time ago, and now I can't get the Aerosmith song "Janie's got a gun" outta my head. Kill me please.

@28mm fanatik:
Only if you ask by banging your head in morse code

NO.

+2 Glengarry5

Yes.

robert peipenbrink, do you really think "War is bad because young men are horribly maimed" is a "leftist cause du jour"?

Yes, when I was about 12, I think.

Yes

It's on my list – but it is meant to be a bit depressing.

Read it

I saw this movie around 1981, kind of haunted me and long remembered it but had no idea of its title. Searched often for years until finally found out its title. Would like to read it but not for the faint at heart and quite the anti-war novel.

It would seem the entire move is on YouTube
youtu.be/lA0IlDhITkQ

Yes. Its considered a classic anti-war novel. Written by Dalton Trumbo.

The book went thru my school like wildfire in the early 70s. An older brother had a copy and I started to read it but never finished it.

Trumbo beating the drum for the leftist cause du jour.

I felt/feel somewhat the same … And yes it is very anti-war.

"War is bad because young men are horribly maimed"

Indeed we can all agree with that … However, I doubt very few anywhere are pro-war …

Quite awhile ago, yes.

Nope

No.

Saw the movie, haven't read the book.

Trumbo's is simply another voice. It may not agree with yours; get over it.

It's interesting to note that Dalton Trumbo changed his mind about pacifism. Although he took an anti-war stance in '38 when he wrote the book, after the Soviet Union was attacked by Germany in '41, he and his publishers suspended publication of the book for the duration of the war. He apparently re-embraced the ideas and directed the film adaption in '71.

It's interesting to note that Dalton Trumbo changed his mind about pacifism. Although he took an anti-war stance in '38 when he wrote the book, after the Soviet Union was attacked by Germany in '41, he and his publishers suspended publication of the book for the duration of the war.

Wonder they waited until '41 with Germany invading the USSR ?
Plenty of invasions before that, e.g. Poland, Norway, France, etc.

He apparently re-embraced the ideas and directed the film adaption in '71.

May of had something to do with the US involvement in Vietnam, Lao, Cambodia, etc. ?

I've come across the same all-encompassing injuries of the main character being employed in other anti-war novels and TV dramatisations here in the UK, principally with regard to WW1 (our "luvvies" all tend to be fully paid-up socialists). Yet nobody, it appears, has ever considered how highly improbable it would be that such extensive injuries would have been survivable, let alone leaving the casualty "normal" in mind, given the relatively limited medical knowledge of the time. Or indeed, if someone with such severe injuries would have been "allowed" to survive, eg by being "triaged" into the "long term wait" queue.

Super M +1

The goal of such works is to get you to "feel", not "think". Thinking is bad for business.

Yet nobody, it appears, has ever considered how highly improbable it would be that such extensive injuries would have been survivable, let alone leaving the casualty "normal" in mind, given the relatively limited medical knowledge of the time. Or indeed, if someone with such severe injuries would have been "allowed" to survive, eg by being "triaged" into the "long term wait" queue.

I have to agree with that … but it wouldn't play into the narrative that the author was try to get across. But again, all warfare, especially in WWI with Tech by passing tactics, e.g. ACW, slaughter of 1000s daily was sadly a norm.

But again his "thesis" is valid in that going to war is a very bloody undertaking and should be avoided. And yes … we probably all know that. For a number of reasons.

He apparently re-embraced the ideas and directed the film adaption in '71.

May of had something to do with the US involvement in Vietnam, Lao, Cambodia, etc. ?

… indirectly because of the profit to be made from Hippies?

It's interesting that the Nazi slaughter of millions is "bad" but it is "bad" to respond with violence to people willing to do things like the Huế Massacre.

Yes, the Hue Massacre was done by the VC, and the body count there included a large number of Catholic Nuns …

So …