Style, Speaking of Courage, Notes, In the Field

Group One (Speaking of Courage):

(1) To begin with, why is this story called "Speaking of Courage"? Assume the title does NOT hold any irony. In what sense does this story speak of courage?

(2) Why does Norman Bowker still feel inadequate with seven metals? And why is Norman's father such a presence in his mental life? Would it really change Norman's life if he had eight metals, the silver star, etc.?

(3) What is the more difficult problem for Norman--the lack of the silver star or the death of Kiowa? Which does he consider more and why?

(4) Why is Norman unable to relate to anyone at home? More importantly, why doesn't he even try?

 

Group Two (Notes):

(1) In "Notes," Tim O'Brien receives a letter from Norman Bowker, the main character in "Speaking of Courage." Why does O'Brien choose to include excerpts of this seventeen page letter in this book? What does it accomplish?

(2) Consider for a moment that the letter might be made-up, a work of fiction. Why include it then?

(3) In "Notes," Tim O'Brien says, "You start sometimes with an incident that truly happened, like the night in the shit field, and you carry it forward by inventing incidents that did not in fact occur but that nonetheless help to clarify and explain it." What does this tell you about O'Brien's understanding of the way fiction relates to real life?

(4) Compare and contrast possible versions of Kiowa's death in "Speaking of Courage" and the end of "Notes".  Who is responsible?

Group Three (In the Field): 

“In the Field”
1.    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”?
2.    What point of view is used to narrate “In the Field”? 
3.    Why is the young man not identified in the story? What is the character’s purpose in the narrative? 
4.    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 characters.
 5.    What, in the end, is the significance of the shit field story (or stories)?

Group 4:
 “Good Form”
1.    In “Good Form,” O'Brien casts doubt on the veracity of the entire novel. Why does he do so? Does it make you more or less interested in the novel? Does it increase or decrease your understanding? What is the difference between “happening-truth” and “story-truth?”