Masaryk University Faculty of Arts
Department of English and American Studies
English Language and Literature
Alena Pápayová
Catch-22 and Closing Time as Postmodern Anti-War Novels Bachelor‟s Diploma Thesis
Supervisor: Mgr. Martina Horáková, Ph. D.
2013
I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography.
…………………………………………….. Author‟s signature
Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor Mgr. Martina Horáková, Ph.D. for her valuable advice and comments. I would also like to thank my family and friends for providing priceless moral support and encouragement.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ...... 5
1.1 The Theme of War in Literature ...... 6
1.2 A Postmodern Approach to War and Joseph Heller ...... 9
2. The Gap between Discourse and Reality: “I See Everything Twice” ...... 13
2.1 Catch-22 and Closing Time ...... 14
2.2 Putting Reality into Discourse ...... 19
2.3 The Critique of Bureaucracy and Social System ...... 25
3. Other Forms of Doubleness: “I’ve Got a Feeling I’ve Seen This Before” ...... 31
3.1 Temporal Aspect ...... 31
3.2 Sane Insanity ...... 37
4. Conclusion ...... 40
5. Works Cited ...... 46
1. Introduction
Joseph Heller is famous mostly for his anti-war novel Catch-22. This book is known for its absurd portrayal of war machinery and its less known sequel Closing
Time continues in this trend. This thesis introduces the elements connecting both books and analyses central topics and strategies that Heller uses. The central themes are war in
Catch-22 and bureaucracy of organizations in Closing Time, but both topics are depicted in non-traditional way. Linda Hutcheon, who has written extensively about literary postmodernism, claims that one of the main purposes of postmodernism is “the challenge to traditional notions of perspective” (A Poetics 11) and both Heller‟s novels meets these criteria. Heller uses different strategies for portraying the absurdity and ambiguous aspect of these concepts. These strategies are included in Hutcheon‟s theoretical work and include parody, irony and discontinuity (A Poetics 5-15). Hence,
Heller can be categorized as one of the postmodern writers as the techniques of postmodernism and his strategies corresponds.
The primary sources of my thesis consist of two novels by Joseph Heller, Catch-
22 and Closing Time, which are analysed with the help of secondary sources. The core of the secondary sources is constituted by several books by Hutcheon and a number of journals and articles about literature. Considering the structure of the thesis, the introduction focuses on general overview of the theme of war in literature and then the postmodern approach to the topic of armed conflict and bureaucracy is presented. This outlook is important for pointing out the differences in the view on war and organizations between Heller and other war writers which is crucial for understanding why is Heller placed among writers of postmodern period.
The thesis focuses on the central technique Heller uses in the both books – doubleness and duality. These strategies are Heller‟s main tools for portraying the
5 absurdity of the system. The ambiguity of language, the doubleness of reality and language of the book, difficult time frame of the book and often unintelligibly ambiguous definition of sanity and insanity, they all share the same feature - the two- sided aspect. The analysis of these aspects in the thesis offers a reliable guide through all Heller‟s ideas and techniques.
1.1 The Theme of War in Literature
The theme of war has been present in literature for a long time and, as Catharine
Savage Brosman observes, “war has been treated in many different modes and kinds of texts” from ancient times to contemporary literature (85). It is one of the many themes in literature, but its significance was clear from the beginning because “the role played by the Trojan war in the whole of ancient Western literature [...] can be considered the single most important topic of the body of literature inherited from early Western civilization” (Brosman 85). Eventually, other armed conflicts appeared and war, whether small and private or bloody and worldwide, became one of the central topics of literature. The authors have used various techniques for describing the war and the war literature has also served different purposes. This thesis focuses on the era which is by
Brosman described as covering literature that has to “shape a sense of national purpose and inspire bellicose spirit” (86). Heller, as a writer of postmodern literature, on the other hand, tries“to demystify war and the military” (Brosman 89). The main purpose of his novels is an absurd portrayal of the military machine during the period of World
War II and rules of society in the post-war period. His main character Yossarian refuses to sacrifice his life for the country and the only thing that is important is to survive. This might be one of the important postmodern strategies: writers refuse to portray heroism of the soldiers and use black comedy that highlights the importance of surviving. The
6 glorifying of soldiers as heroes fighting for their countries is abandoned and Heller rather asks the question, whether it is rational to sacrifice life for the country and kill innocent people in the process.
However, World War II, as a major armed conflict in the modern era, has represented a problem for writers of war literature, because the writers have not been able to express the horrors of war which spread across the whole world. As James R.
Dawes claims, “the first and most characteristic response to the war‟s chain of disasters, however, was silence” (158). The era after World War II was an era when people had to deal with what happened. Discussing the war and its horrors was not easy and it was even more difficult for writers whose job was to write stories for another generation of readers and therefore they often felt “the difficulty of describing it, of ʽsaying the unsayableʼ” (Brosman 91). The war left many people speechless about the horrors that occurred and the silence is also present in Heller‟s Catch-22 where it almost always has negative connotation. The characters often feel “rigid silence” (85), “constrained silence” (98) or “a frightened silence” (123). Seeing that Heller participated actively in
World War II as “a bombardier with the 340th Bombardment Group [and] flew sixty combat missions over Italy and France” (Jason and Graves 154), he could have felt the same problem of putting his experience in words. Moreover, this experience can be transferred to the character of the bombardier Yossarian, the “antiheroic hero” (Stern
203), who has the same position in the war as Heller.
Brosman expands the problematic aspect of portraying the war by asking how to describe the chaotic nature of war. She claims that “war [is] disorder” (91) which collides with strictly organized military system but at the same time the concept of disorganization cleverly grasps the picture of battlefield where everything is chaos.
Therefore she asks an important question for war literature writers: “How can one
7 organize chaos?” (91). Heller may have contemplated this question when thinking about the structure of his most famous book, but despite it, Catch-22 is often referred to as chaotic, “episodic and formless” (Burhans 239). This is also supported by Brosman‟s view that “postmodernism solved the problem by writing chaos into the structure of fiction” (91). However, Burhans also argues that the book is carefully built up “on a central conflict, two sub-plots, and a host of motifs” (240). Heller cleverly uses a series of flashbacks and foreshadowing for completing the chaotical structure of time. Burhans calls this phenomenon “episodic zigzags” (240) and offers several schemes for organizing the chaos in the book. These schemes are proof that Heller has carefully built the structure of the novel to appear chaotic which corresponds with the disorder of any war. However, the principle is reversed. While in the real war the authorities try to keep everything under control and the chaos is only a “side effect,” Heller tries to make his book look chaotic, although in reality it has a carefully constructed scheme. Therefore his jumbled structure of the book implies both the image of battlefield and the image of the chaos in bureaucracy which is also depicted in more detail in the sequel. Closing
Time, a continuation of Heller‟s strategy in Catch-22, moves from the war period into the time after the war. However, it depicts the impact of the war on the characters, as some of the crucial protagonists of the first book remain. Yossarian, Milo Minderbinder and chaplain Tappman are again trapped in the absurd world, only this time it is the world of bureaucracy. Heller also introduces new characters, such as Sammy Singer or
Lew Rabinowitz. Both of these men were in the war with Yossarian and although their stories in Closing Time are slightly detached from those of “old” protagonists, Heller manages to balance the new plot of the sequel with a textual return to Catch-22.
8
1.2 A Postmodern Approach to War and Joseph Heller
Postmodernism is defined by Linda Hutcheon as “a problematizing force in our culture, [because] it raises questions about [...] the common-sensical and the ʽnaturalʼ”
(A Poetics xi). War can be considered a natural part of human history because fighting for something, whether it was territory, position in hierarchy or ideology, is present in the world for ages. However, war as a concept surely raises question of common sense.
Therefore, it fits into the category which should be, according to Hutcheon, questioned by postmodernism. Heller himself asks this question several times in his books by challenging the sanity of soldiers who are willing to sacrifice their lives for their country. Hence, the postmodern approach to war differs from the approach of glorifying war. Instead of encouraging the war spirit in people, it rather emphasizes the horrors of the conflict. The techniques used for this purpose are summed up by Hutcheon in her works. These characteristics of postmodernism are parody, irony, discontinuity, intertextuality and phenomenon of pastiche (A Politics, 2-15). All of them could be applied to Heller‟s work. However, as a complete description of Joseph Heller‟s postmodern approach is quite complex, the thesis will focus only on selected techniques in connection with the analysis of concept of doubleness in Catch-22 and Closing Time.
The postmodern literature is often described as ironical and parodical. Linda
Hutcheon connects postmodernism with the idea of “the presence of the past” (A
Poetics 4) but she states that “this is not a nostalgic return; it is […] an ironic dialogue with the past of both art and society” (A Poetics 4). The concepts of the terms irony and parody are crucial for understanding Heller‟s work and therefore the definitions are necessary. Hutcheon characterizes parody as “a form of imitation, but imitation characterized by ironic inversion, [or] repetition with critical distance, which marks difference rather than similarity” (A Theory 6). Heller uses parody for highlighting the
9 absurdity of situation. His books do not parody specific events or figures, but rather the social system and people who are in charge of it. Nevertheless, parody is one of the strongest weapons of Joseph Heller for pointing out the absurdity of the rules in the military during the war. Irony, on the other hand, is described by Hutcheon as “the mode of the unsaid, the unheard, the unseen” (Irony’s 9). She reveals that “irony removes the security that words mean only what they say” (Irony’s 14). The definition of irony embodies the dual aspect of language, because there is a difference between the actual utterace and the reality. Catch-22 offers many examples of irony: one is epitomized in the title itself, which refers to the law that can send soldiers home if they are insane and ask for leave, but at the same time claims that the one who asks for it is not insane and therefore cannot be sent home (Catch-22 40). Consequently, the doubleness used by Heller in his works blends in with the postmodern concept of irony.
Therefore, the technique of doubleness used in Catch-22 and Closing Time both emphasizes the double reality of the world soldiers lived in during their duty and corresponds with the strategies of postmoderism.
Heller also integrates another important feature of postmodernism. He contests the importance of organizations, which is also the subject of postmodernism according to the statement made by Hutcheon: “Postmodernism questions centralized, totalized, hierarchized, closed systems: questions, but does not destroy” (A Poetics 41).
Postmodernism question these systems because “they are not natural, given or universal” (A Poetics 13), which leads us to ask whether the system is right. Heller does precisely this by criticising such a basic concept as country which echoes Russel‟s claim that postmodernism “deliberately undermines such principles as value, order, meaning, control and identity” (Russel qtd. in Hutcheon, A Poetics 13). The concept of a country is depicted in an ironic tone by describing the missions of soldiers as “lying down their
10 lives for what they had been told was their country” (Catch-22 11). This shows that nation is something constructed, something we are “told.” In addition, Heller connects two important features of postmodernism – the irony and questioning of principles– he uses irony to show the questionable value of dying for something that is presented as your country.
By using parody and comic elements to point out the absurdity of war, Heller does not want, however, to lessen the importance of war. On the contrary, he wants to show the seriousness of it. When asked about the humorous nature of his book, he reveals that he considers the book to be “a very serious novel, using humorous satire and irony as part of the techniques in making the novel effective” (Vosevich 97). This is visible in the comic situations, in which the authorities are often wrong and lead by mistaken illusions and misunderstood words, but in the end, it does not matter, because they are still the ones who control the number of missions and decide who is going to flight. In consequence, although they are portrayed as a parody of real-life officers and they are often not aware of the consequences of their decisions, they are still the ones who are giving orders that decide about life or death of soldiers. Heller plays with the thought of survival under these conditions and consequently, the only man who really cares about surviving is Yossarian who is therefore portrayed as insane. Catch-22 portrays his desperate desire to live which is met with incomprehension of his fellow soldiers. Clevinger, one of the soldiers willing to sacrifice his life for his country, considers Yossarian crazy when Yossarian worries about his life:
“They‟re trying to kill me,” Yossarian told him calmly.
“No one‟s trying to kill you,” Clevinger cried.
“Then why are they shooting at me?” Yossarian asked.
11
“They‟re shooting at everyone,” Clevinger answered. “They‟re trying to kill
everyone.”
“And what difference does it make?”... Clevinger really thought he was right,
but Yossarian had proof, because strangers he didn‟t know shot at him with
cannons every time he flew up into the air to drop bombs on them and it wasn‟t
funny at all. And if that wasn‟t funny, there were lots of things that weren‟t even
funnier. (Catch-22 11)
Heller places a humorous conversation in the first part of the citation which evokes smile but at the same time it is designed to question the notion of getting killed for the concept of country. In contrast, the second part of the quotation points out that there is not really anything to laugh at, as Heller explicitly says that there is nothing funny
(Catch-22 11). This (un)funny portrayal of soldiers can be an intertextual reference to
Jaroslav Hašek‟s book The Good Soldier Švejk as it was noticed by Stern. Both books deal with the soldiers at the time of war. In fact, Closing Time develops this reference further when Heller introduces “an older soldier named Schweik” (13) who “want[s] only to be a good soldier” (338). The comic portrayal of absurd situations is present in both books and therefore it is the humour and the parody of the military that connects these two works by Heller and Jaroslav Hašek, although they do not belong to one literary period. The mentioned features are, however, not characteristic only for postmodern period, but Jaroslav Hašek used them in his work for describing World War
I. As Stern writes: “both novels proceed from firmly realistic bases to the heights of humorous and satirical exaggeration – their humour is never disconnected from their realism” (203).
12
2. The Gap between Discourse and Reality: “I See Everything Twice”
As it was stated in previous chapter, the theme of war in literature could be problematic for writers willing to write about this issue. The horrors of war period have been difficult to express and writers have tried to figure out how to articulate what happened. Joseph Heller‟s technique of dealing with this difficult theme can be described as double reality: the reality of the discourse of the book and the extra linguistic reality. Both his novels point out a possible existence of a gap between what is said and what is real. However, this distinction is often difficult to see because of the power of language. Therefore the inability to see the difference often causes misunderstandings both for readers and characters and “Heller‟s comedy often arises from the cracks that open between representations and that which it represents”
(Gregson 43). This statement is voiced in the title of this chapter, because the utterance and discourse often differ from what is real. Moreover, the irony, one of Heller‟s most effective weapons, expresses the duality of the discourse in terms of distinction between what is said and what is understood. This duality is present in different layers, not only in the area of language and reality, but also by temporal aspect of both books. The readers are drawn to the centre of the plot in the book where they have to deal with war or injustice of bureaucracy and sometimes they are as confused as the characters are, because “one of the lessons of the doubleness of postmodernism is that you cannot step outside that which you contest” (Hutcheon, A Poetics 223). Heller uses this technique of doubleness to point out various catches in the system, the two-sided face of the war, its absurdity and different opinions that people in the military have towards the idea of an armed conflict.
13
2.1 Catch-22 and Closing Time
Heller‟s strategy of doubleness and duality is embodied even in the title of the book Catch-22. However, Catch-22 was not the original title of the book. The original title was supposed to be Catch-18, but the numeral in the name was changed “because
Leon Uris‟s novel had usurped the number with Mila 18” (E. Heller). Therefore, the title of the novel was changed to Catch-22 where the number was the idea of Heller‟s
“übereditor at Simon & Schuster” calling the number “the unremarkably remarkable number” (E. Heller). Nevertheless, after having read the book, this choice of number can symbolize the double reality which Heller inscribes in his work. He admits that it fits “the repetitious patterns” but he also remembers that “the choice [...] was really circumstantial” (Vosevich 102). The number 22 implies doubleness, which echoes throughout both books, and the law that bears this name is indeed ambiguous. One of the many remarks about the law Catch-22 is as follows:
There was only one catch, and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern
for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the
process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to
do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and he would
have to fly more missions (Catch-22 40).
In fact, there are two catches which again emphasize the doubleness. The first catch is the phrasing of the law. When readers look at the formulation of it, there is nothing wrong with the phrasing. It clearly modifies what is possible and how should one behave to get home from an army. The formulation is completely correct on a linguistic level. Therefore, no one can express complaints about its wording, although in real life the formulation of the catch appears impossible, because the law is contradictory, which is the second catch. In projecting this law to reality, no soldier is able to use Catch-22
14 for leaving army, because the catch itself forbids it without saying it in words. The act of speaking or formulating documents and orders becomes “both and instrument and an effect of power” (Hutcheon, A Poetics 185). The law becomes a tool for military officers to keep the soldiers at combat and at the same time it is a result of what the military machinery can make the soldiers do. The military organization demonstrates its power through the language and consequently, although Catch-22 seems to offer opportunity for leaving army and heading home, in reality, there is no possible way in which this law can help soldiers in trying to save their lives by being sent home.
Yossarian sums it up in Closing Time by stating that “people with force have a right to do anything we can‟t stop them from doing” (364), and in Catch-22 by declaring that
“the only people permitted to ask questions where those who never did” (30). This echoes the concept of irony described by Hutcheon as being “the mode of the unsaid”
(Irony’s 9) as the irony of Catch-22 is based on what is underneath the actual utterance.
This is the trend which is visible throughout Heller‟s writing. Doubleness is an inseparable part of Catch-22 and Closing Time. This thesis works with two terms: doublenes and duality. Both words imply the number two, but a slight difference can be recognized. While duality describes the two-sided aspect of one thing, as for example in
Heller‟s work where one word can have literal or metaphorical meaning, the doubleness suggests that there are two subjects which are related or interchanged. The term doubleness is applicable when talking about the relation of reality to the language of
Heller‟s books. Both are tightly connected and one should correspond with the other, although Heller poses a question whether it is really so. Hower, these terms are tightly interrelated as Heller connects both the duality in language and the doubleness of language and reality to create the mixture of absurd situations which are almost always two-sided.
15
In fact, the characters themselves often express the feeling that they sense the doubleness or duality, which is regarded by the authorities as an illness. The patient in the hospital seems to notice the doubleness in the system and that is his only problem.
His sudden exclamation: “I see everything twice!” (Catch-22 175) causes extreme chaos in the hospital and although the doctors have “no idea what was wrong with the soldier who saw everything twice [they] quarantined everyone else in the ward for fourteen days” (Catch-22 175). The metaphor could stand for an ability to look beyond extra linguistic reality and this capability is the reason the patient is quarantined. This may result in an observation that the doubleness of reality and language, which is used by organizations to manipulate people, can be seen, but the system does everything to prevent soldiers from doing so. A carefully hidden critique of organizations and their language occurs in Heller‟s work quite often and the doubleness serves as a metaphor for the false nature of communication in those organizations. Besides, it also underlines a principle taken from Hutcheon that “the relation of power to knowledge [...] is an obsession of postmodernism” (A Poetics 86), as both books try to emphasize what power can do with information by distorting the language. In Catch-22, Heller plays with the idea of communication in the military by providing the reader with absurd utterances or formulations of law, while in Closing Time he moves to the mockery of communication in bureaucracy and organizations in general.
A sequel to Catch-22, Closing Time continues with the same catch, but this time
Heller wants to demonstrate it in two different manners. Firstly, he “shows how his catchphrase has entered the language but changed nothing” (Gregson 46), as many characters in Closing Time are aware of Catch-22 and use it in their everyday life.
Nevertheless, although they acknowledge the existence of this paradoxical law in their lives, they still do not do anything to prevent it from happening. Their lives are full of
16 absurd situations. Secondly, the book plays with the same kind of law as Catch-22, only this time it is not under the name of Catch-22 but “The Freedom of Information Act”
(Closing 64). It works on the same principle of absurdity where the language is perfectly correct but when projected to reality, it does not make sense. This is an example of Hutcheon‟s theory that “discourse is not a stable [...] entity,” on the contrary, it changes “its form and significance depending on who is speaking” (A
Poetics 185). Basically, Heller leaves the same pattern for the nonsensical law and the use (or abuse?) of language stays the same, he only changes the name and the subject the law describes:
The Freedom of Information Act, the chaplain explained, was a federal
regulation obliging government agencies to release all information they had to
anyone who made application for it, except information they had that they did
not want to release. ... Hundreds of thousands of pages each week went out
regularly to applicants with everything blacked out on them but punctuation
marks, prepositions, and conjunctions (Closing 64-65).
Both laws show identical features and the core is always the same and that is “the impact of institutions on what is conventionally taken to be ʽan individualʼˮ (Gregson
31). Heller uses the character of Sammy Singer in Closing Time for declaration, that he has got nothing against the organizations and war, but it is the people who are in charge of these issues that he dislikes (Closing 91). Some characters, although they escaped from the threat of the war and Catch-22, are again threatened by the absurd law and another phenomenon in the society. Only this time it is not Catch-22 and war, but The
Freedom of Information Act and the social system in connection with bureaucracy.
As a consequence, not only is the theme transferred from Catch-22 to Closing
Time, but also Heller‟s techniques are similar. The critique of organizations in terms of
17 duality in language is still present, as Yossarian notices that people expected that “with the war over, everything ugly would change for the better” (Closing 281). However,
“not much did” (Closing 281), because the language still serves as a way of forcing people to do what the authorities want them to. The Freedom of Information Act is supposed to help citizens but in reality, the formulation is useless and has no benefits for ordinary people. The only possibility the people have is their “freedom to say no”
(Closing 281) which, however, often does not mean much in the world of bureaucracy.
Although Heller‟s strategy of depicting the aspect of possibilities in this way can portray a dreary situation, at least it shows that there “is an ideological awareness both of the political, social and linguistic repression [...] and also of the modes of possible resistance” (Hutcheon, A Poetics 181). Yossarian‟s behaviour in Catch-22 is revealed to have a big impact on the view of the world of Sammy Singer, one of the main protagonists in Closing Time and former tail gunner in the war with Yossarian, because
“it seemed to make more sense than a lot of rest” of the things happening in the war period (Closing 422). In addition, the ambiguity of organizations is taken to another level when contemplating institutions such as police. While the ambiguous character of the organization is only indicated in Catch-22, the sequel voices it explicitly. Catch-22 plays with the ambiguous understanding of the exclamation: “Police! Help! Police!”
(417), where it could be a cry for help from police or an attempt to suggest that the police are the threat. However, the reader never finds out which one it is. In contrast,
Closing Time portrays Yossarian‟s mistrust in organizations such as the police when he worries about his son Michael and he does not “want him put near anyone who might harm him. And that includes [...] cops” (97). This is caused by the fact that “he has already learned that [...] the police themselves are the enemy” (Doskow 187) as they belong to the organizational structure of institutions. The subject of Heller‟s criticism is
18 therefore slightly changed, but its basis remains the same. The actual war is substituted by a struggle to survive in the corrupted world where the rules are often made, as in the first book, by people in high position who use the language to manipulate everyone. The ability to look beyond the language and see the reality again implies that the person affected by phenomenon of seeing everything twice needs a help (Closing 415).
2.2 Putting Reality into Discourse
Highlighting the importance of differentiating between reality and discourse and the critique of bureaucracy is not coincidental. Heller challenges what has been challenged by many other postmodern writers and that is, according to Hutcheon, the problem of putting reality into discourse. She states that our perception of reality is very much influenced by its description (The Politics 31). Consequently, postmodernism is
“a questioning of what reality can mean and how we can come to know it” (32). In
Heller‟s books, the connection between language and reality is very strong and sometimes the things are taken to extremes. Therefore, the characters often do not see the difference between language and reality. In Catch-22, this is described in the episode about the death of Doc Daneeka. Doc Daneeka is announced dead, because he was supposed to be on the plane that crashed and since the documents say so, he cannot stand a chance protesting in person that he is alive (Catch-22 340-341). Heller pushes things to extremes when he writes about Sergeant Towser who finds out unpleasant news and he goes “to break the bad news to Gus and Wes, discreetly avoiding any conversation with Doc Daneeka himself” (Catch-22 342). Even though Towser realizes that Doc Daneeka is alive, he has to obey the orders and bureaucracy which says that
Doc Daneeka is dead. Dawes sums it up by saying that “things are so because they are claimed to be so” (188). Moreover, he also makes a point that when “language provides
19 no resistance [and] is fully manipulable by organizational hierarchy, persons have no protection from arbitrary force” (188). Therefore, Doc Daneeka fails to convince the others that he is not dead because “the records never lie. They may be mistaken or out- of-date, but they never lie. They are inanimate” (Closing 234). Hence, the ability to lie is attributed exclusively to people. This clearly illustrates Heller‟s effort to show that people in this book tend to believe documents, or in other words what is said or written, rather than what is real. At the same time Heller draws attention to a characteristics of language which Hutcheon points out, and that is “that language has the power to constitute [...] that which it represents” (A Poetics 192). Consequently, because language is made up by people, the untruthfulness of records is the result of human mistake. Nevertheless, sometimes it is convenient to simply shut one‟s eyes to the truth, which, in reference to war, can be, on the one hand, a way to deal with the war horrors, but, on the other hand, it can be also a threat for the person blindly following orders.
Even doctors taking Doc Daneeka‟s temperature, because of his hypochondriac nature of worrying about himself all the time, refuse to realize that he is still alive. They believe what they are told, which is that “the records show that [he] went up in
McWatt‟s plane to collect some flight time. [He] didn‟t come down in a parachute, so
[he] must have been killed in the crash” (Catch-22 343). They convey the news of his death to Doc Daneeka with sad faces, although obviously he is standing in front of them alive (343). Doc Daneeka becomes an “element[...] of a discourse which referring only to itself, neither comprehends nor controls some ʽworldʼ beyond” (Davis 71). The discourse is strongly connected with reality and Doc Daneeka‟s ʽlinguistic death‟ is transferred to the reality without further investigation. The discourse reality is absurd and even the reality of war system appears absurd. The power of the legal documents is established, but at the same time common sense forces the reader to question its force.
20
According to Hutcheon, this is exactly the feature of postmodern fiction - “it installs the power, [...] then contests it [and still] the contradictory doubleness remains” (A Poetics
180). This concept of senselessness is highlighted by another example, where one of the generals invents a phrase “bomb pattern” (Catch-22 326) and openly admits that it is a phrase he only “dreamed up just several weeks ago [and that] it means nothing” (Catch-
22 326). Nevertheless, for bombardiers it is extremely important to fly so that their bombs fall close together in order to have a good photograph. Even though it is only a made up phrase, it is the general‟s order and they have to obey it. This results in observation that, “organizations [...] are the place where language is attached to physical force [and they] see the transformation of words into deeds” (Dawes 167). No matter how irrational the language, or the statements of the officers, soldiers are bound to obey and therefore language becomes action. Soldiers do not have the right to question the orders they are given even if they are completely absurd and this is the fact that Heller wants to point out in his books. Heller criticizes the military machinery and its language which is consequently an echoing of Hutcheon‟s claim that the system is not “given” but rather “constructed by us” and that people should use their own head to figure the way out instead of accepting every uttered word (A Poetics 13).
This absurdity of language in connection to reality is taken to another level by
Heller‟s playful choice of phrases which can be understood literally, but are more often used in their metaphorical meaning. Among the many examples in the book, the following comic situation shows the misunderstandings that occur often in the conversations of Heller‟s characters. Yossarian and Doc Daneeka talk about Yossarian helping Daneeka avoid flying by writing his name on flight log:
“A little grease is what makes this world go round. One hand washes the other.
Know what I mean? You scratch my back, I‟ll scratch yours.‟
21
Yossarian knew what he meant.
„That‟s not what I meant,‟ Doc Daneeka said, as Yossarian began scratching his
back. „I‟m talking about co-operation. Favors. You do a favor for me, I‟ll do one
for you. Get it?‟
„Do one for me,‟ Yossarian requested.
„Not a chance,‟ Doc Daneeka answered.” (Catch-22 28)
Doc Daneeka and Yossarian seem to encounter a problem in understanding what is said and what it actually meant, which results in a comic situation. While Doc Daneeka draws on the metaphorical meaning of the phrase, Yossarian understands the literal meaning. The duality in language, in this case, causes only minor misunderstanding, but
Heller suggests that this also happens in the process of making important decisions. He tries to portray “the manipulation of language in different ways in which phrases can be interpreted by people who want to use them that way” (Vosevich 99). Moreover, these misunderstandings cause chaos and consequently wrong decisions and since Heller‟s works are based on the games with language, decision are often founded on faulty assumptions. Hutcheon describes this as a feature of postmodernism where “it is [...] this doubleness [between understanding and misunderstanding] that prevents any possible critical urge to ignore or trivialize historical-political questions” (The Politics
15). The reader starts to think about how things work and in this case it is the question of meaningfulness of war and military procedures that are being questioned and the question is: “Do these institutions deserve our faith?” (Hutcheon, The Politics 15).
Moreover, pretending to understand a sentence or a word in a different way from the speaker can help people avoid answering the question. This is the case of Yossarian who is asked where he was born. He answers that he was born “on a battlefield” (Catch-
22 432), which of course is not the answer the doctors want and therefore they specify
22 the question to: “In what state were you born?” (Catch-22 432). The reply is not helpful either: “In a state of innocence” (Catch-22 432). This time it is Yossarian who bends the language and uses it for his own purposes. His answers imply something about his opinion of the world – the world is in a constant state of war and the humans are born innocent and only made guilty, because, as one of the characters in Closing Time, doctor
Teemer, reveals, people “have nothing to do with [their] own evolution and are having everything to do with [their] own decline” (466). The critique is thus again placed on the system and organizations that shape our view.
Another Heller‟s favourite technique of portraying the ambiguity of the system and its absurdity is opposition in speech. Heller inserts in the conversations an answer that is not expected and it is the opposite of what should follow. This method helps build up the sense of senselessness and irrationality which results in the grotesque and comic. It also shows that some situations in army are dead ends and the only way out is to listen to orders. However, sometimes even doing that does not help, because it only leaves one more clueless. Under interrogation, Clevinger is ordered to “keep [his] stupid mouth shut” (Catch-22 72) and simultaneously the same Lieutenant asks him: “Will you speak up, please? I couldn‟t hear you” (Catch-22 72). This leaves Clevinger helpless, as he is ordered to do two things which are contradictory and impossible to perform at the same time. This concept of the contradiction in language is taken further by putting together words with completely different meanings. The description of Doc Daneeka is an example of this technique, because it shows how Heller puts together antonymous words to create an opposition. Doc Daneeka is portrayed as “a man who had grown frozen with horror once and had never come completely unthawed. [...] Actually, he was a very warm, compassionate man who never stopped feeling sorry for himself”
(Catch-22 28). The words “frozen” and “very warm” are antonyms and yet they are
23 used to describe the same person in the same situation in a very small textual unit. Even
Yossarian himself is, in Closing Time, described as “rationally irrational and illogically logical” (218), which makes him fit into the complex system of the reality of both books. The ambiguity of the war and bureaucracy embraces everything and the characters are not an exception. A further elaboration on this strategy shows Heller‟s effort to demonstrate these contradictions in everyday life. Although Doc Daneeka is described as a cold person, he is actually a very nice. The same applies to the situation in Closing Time when Mr. Gaffney talks with Yossarian about people following
Yossarian and their usage of inconspicuous cars. They are told to use “economy cars
[...] to escape being noticed. That‟s probably how [Yossarian] noticed them” (Closing
62). Heller‟s effort to show the doubleness in the form of opposition can be summarised in the words by Colonel Korn: “You know, that might be the answer – to act boastfully about something we ought to be ashamed of” (Catch-22 136). This quote expresses Heller‟s attempt to show that characters in the book behave the opposite way of what they are supposed to, in order to cover the truth. Besides, this also attempts to show the contradictory nature of organizations which can be seen in the example with the death of Doc Daneeka but also in the case of Clevinger‟s interrogation. Whether consciously or unconsciously, Heller‟s technique falls into the category that is by
Hutcheon described as “the basis for poetics of postmodernism” (A Poetics 222).
Therefore, important features which connect both books and situate them into the era of postmodern literature are “contradictory interpretations” (A Poetics 222) of books and their ambiguity in language and in context.
24
2.3 The Critique of Bureaucracy and Social System
As it was stated in the introductory part of this thesis, the most of modern war literature “ha[s] acted on the imagination of the young to shape a sense of national purpose and inspire a bellicose spirit” (Brosman 86). On the other hand, Heller portrays the war in a way that shows its mistakes, inconsistency and often irrational decisions.
These little misunderstandings only highlight Heller‟s effort to show the war in a different light. Besides, he also criticizes the organization of war machinery and the system connected to it. The documents that declare Doc Daneeka dead, although he is alive, stand as a symbol of bureaucracy which is an important part of this social system
(Catch-22 340). The connection between bureaucracy and war, which is also a strong tie between the two novels, is established at the beginning of the Catch-22. Yossarian is introduced as a patient in the hospital with only one duty – to censor letters. He considers himself to be god (Catch-22 2), because he can make some letters disappear.
One time he declares “death to all modifiers” and next time it is “war on articles” (2).
Almost the same situation appears in the sequel, only the censorship is introduced by the authorities who are obeying The Freedom of Information Act. This link evokes the feeling that Heller works with the same theme, namely that sometimes language prevents a person from understanding the core of reality and simultaneously that it is the human power that controls what is said. This censorship and Heller‟s description of it resembles the situation in the military. Yossarian considers himself to be god in the same manner that Colonel Cathart does, because he is allowed to do everything he wants and can raise the number of missions whenever he thinks it is appropriate. As
Dawes argues, this allusion also represents “the distortion of communication in the military” (181) which strenghtens Heller‟s critique of organizations. However, the organizations are not criticized in general, the main focus of the critique is placed on the
25 communication and on the language. Hutcheon explains this postmodern feature by stating that “the act of saying is an inherently political act” (A Poetics 185). The critique of organizations also plays an important role in postmodern literature as one of the main purposes is to “interrogate[...] and demistif[y] those totalizing systems that unify with an aim to power” (A Poetics 186). And military machinery certainly fits in this category.
The critique of bureaucracy is based on the portrayal of the two-faced character of organizations. The duality is established in Catch-22 and Heller extends this principle in the sequel. He develops this theme almost from the beginning of the novel. In the initial chapters of Closing Time, Yossarian has a conversation with his son Michael in which he admits:
“I had this feeling I was seeing everything twice.”
“You mean double?”
“Not that, not yet. The feeling of suspecting that I had gone through everything
before.” (Closing 28)
This is one of the first conversations that appear in the book and it refers to both the duality in language and the doubleness of reality and language that Heller invents in
Catch-22. Yossarian expresses that he senses some doubleness and although he is not sure about it, he recognizes the pattern of déjà vu. When Michael asks about the doubleness, he answers “not that, not yet” (Closing 28) where the word yet is quite interesting. Heller plays with an impression that Yossarian does not see the gap between language and reality, although Catch-22 introduces this issue repeatedly. Yossarian seems to understand the true meaning behind the words even though actual utterance says something different. This is apparent in the part where Lieutenant Scheisskopf says that “if any of it is [his] fault, [he] wants to be told” (Catch-22 64). Clevinger, who is
26 also present at the scene, hears only what Lieutenant really utters, but Yossarian expresses the he “heard him say very loudly and distinctly that he wants everyone of
[them] to keep [their] mouths shut” (Catch-22 64). In fact, the book says that Clevinger has “predilection for staring fixedly at one side of a question and never seeing the other side at all” (Catch-22 63), which can be applied to most of the soldiers who are willing to sacrifice the life for their country without even thinking about the other side of it.
However, Yossarian‟s recognition of the true meaning is confronted with his utterance in the beginning of Closing Time, where he says “not yet” (Closing 28). These words imply that the language tricks of bureaucracy and organizations cannot be really unveiled. Therefore, the gap between language and reality and duality in language are consistently incorporated in the body of Catch-22 and later of Closing Time.
Sometimes, characters themselves show the perceptiveness of this phenomenon. The sign with inscription “DANGER NO EXPLOSIVES” (Closing 110) arouses in
Yossarian and cop McBride feeling that “that could mean at least two different things”
(Closing 110). This recognition shows that Heller‟s ambiguity in language is not coincidental but rather deliberate as even the characters are aware of it. After all, they are “all in this business of illusion together” (Catch-22 181). Moreover, the sign represents an official notice and the ambiguous definition of the sign connects the institutions and duality.
When contemplating the doubleness and duality, it is important to mention the repetition of certain phrases that are uttered by the characters. Although they are repeated more than twice they need to be mentioned in order to complete the picture of
Heller‟s idea of war as described by his usage of language. The repetition in the speech of characters is noticeable and it “makes them mechanisms rather than organisms”
(Gregson 38). The examples include Doc Daneeka and his line “What about me?”
27
(Catch-22 23). He repeats his line six times in the book in a similar context of worrying about himself rather than about his patients. In connection to his other exclamation
“You think you‟ve got troubles?” (Catch-22 23) it could be seen as Heller‟s ironical remark on behalf of the doctor who is supposed to take care of others but is preoccupied with his own health, but as this statement appears several times throughout the book, the repetition highlights a movement in circles and evokes the impression of being stucked.
Gregson also claims that “instead of change and development there is repetition and aggregation” (41) which is confirmed by the number of Doc Daneeka‟s utterances of the same sentence. Yossarian notices this occurence in his conversation with Milo‟s son, because he sees that they “are talking in circles” (Closing 211). Some of the other characters confirm this observation of repetition as well, for instance Major ----- de
Coverley who repeats a single phrase twice in one conversation which makes Milo agree with Major‟s point:
“You‟re a good mess officer, Milo.”
“I‟m not the mess officer, sir.”
“You‟re a good mess officer, Milo.”
“Thank you, sir.” (Catch-22 132)
The repetition here bears two functions. On the one hand, as it was stated before, it is
Heller‟s attempt to depict the movement in circles and the mechanized world of the war system. The military routine consists of never ending missions, parades and other military procedures which repeats continually. On the other hand, it emphasises the way the language can easily influence the decisions of people and persuade them although the reality is completely different. This persuasive method is later elaborated on in the sequel Closing Time where Milo claims that he can persuade somebody only “by saying it twice” (69). The repetition functions as an example of “language [...] being
28 manipulated, misused to the advantage of the person” (Vosevich 99). People in both books are using language for their own purposes and mere repetition is enough for persuading the other person.
It is undeniable that the language plays a major role in Heller‟s description of war and bureaucracy. It is not only a device which conveys the meaning or narrates the story as it is in many other writings, it is rather a substance which is so tightly connected to reality that is sometimes almost impossible to distinguish between reality and the discourse of the book. Moreover, Heller consciously uses language to confuse his own characters but at the same time he makes them occasionally aware that something is not right. For example, when the characters notice that the grammar is not incorrect they start to doubt the reality. Yossarian starts to question reality when something is wrong with the language and he contemplates: “It doesn‟t make sense. It isn‟t even good grammar. What the hell does it mean when they disappear somebody?”
(Catch-22 368). Language is a very important part of the world the characters live in and therefore grammar of the language can influence the perception of reality. In this example, Yossarian seems to be the one to notice the discrepancy between language and reality but in the end, he does not find the answer to his questions. Heller leaves the question of the meaning of “to disappear somebody” open as none of the characters knows the answer. The language plays a major role and the gap between language and reality is presented throughout both books, therefore the importance of what is truly meant, not said, is underlined in the books. For example, Clevinger is asked about the information he conveyed to Yossarian. However, the officers are interested in “what
[he] didn‟t say to him. [They‟re] not at all interested in what [he] did say to Yossarian”
(Catch-22 75). The act of speaking seems to have no importance and focus is placed on the reality beyond the words. The officers are aware of the duality and doubleness, so
29 they are not interested in what is said. This is caused by the fact that language is seen only as an instrument and therefore the authorities are more interested in what sort of information is really conveyed to Yossarian than in what way is the information conveyed. Of course, Heller uses this quotation to increase the feeling of absurdity, but he indirectly supports the strategy depicted in the novels that the language is often placed above the reality which results in the fact that language is nonsensical but it is still considered to be the truth image of the reality. In fact, it seems like “everyone spoke [...], and no one ever said anything” (Catch-22 269).
30
3. Other Forms of Doubleness: “Ive Got a Feeling I’ve Seen This Before”
Besides from the dual aspect of language, Heller introduces in his novels other forms of doubleness which stress his major ideas. These strategies consist of the fragmentated time structure of the books and the difficult distinction of sanity and insanity. Heller plays with the dual aspect of time, whether it is the past and the present or the present and the future. Flashbacks and foreshadowings are an inseparable part of
Catch-22 and the phenomenon of déjà vu connects the novel with the sequel Closing
Time. In addition, both books play with the notion of sanity and many characters are referred to as insane, although the logic of the book again offers ambiguous view on who is really crazy.
3.1 Temporal Aspect
Doubleness and duality are used by Heller as tools for highlighting the idea of two-faced reality in the military or bureaucracy and also for depicting the absurdity of war. Language works mainly on the dual level, literal and metaphorical sense of the word is interchanged independently, and language is considered to be more important than the actual reality. Furthermore, the characters in Catch-22 and Closing Time are captured in a strange reality where everything is two-sided. This duality does not work only on the linguistic level, but on the contrary, Heller develops this idea also in the connection with time. Referring to the observation that Catch-22 is formless (Burhans
239), both readers and characters sense that something is wrong with the pattern in which things happen. In his interview with Heller, Reilly observes that “time has been turned upside down in the world of Catch-22” (508), because Heller toys with time order and the duality is represented either by the past and the present or by the present and the future. All three tenses are often interchanged and readers do not know in which
31 time of the book the chapter is situated. Moreover, the book, primarily Catch-22, often foreshadows and looks back to the past. This technique is not visible only to the reader, but the characters are often aware of this strange temporal aspect as well. Frequent repetition and returns to certain events may imply that “Heller tends to tell the same joke and laugh the same ironic laugh over and over again” (Waldmeir 194-195), but this only highlights the important events in the book. Even though Catch-22 is more associated with the difficult distinction of temporal aspect in the book than the sequel, the characters themselves do not explicitly state that they are aware of this phenomenon as they do in Closing Time when Michael Yossarian says that he has “got a feeling
[he]‟s seen this before” (216). However, they are aware of the idea of moving in circles and déjà vu which is also mentioned many times in Catch-22. These two techniques sum up Heller‟s technique of working with time. He keeps going back to the same situations several times to portray their relevance to the context of the book where “the structural messiness [...] does fortunately reinforce its major themes” (Gregson 41).
The movement in circles is apparent when looking at Catch-22 overall. The opening of the book describes Yossarian‟s encounter with the chaplain in the hospital and this theme returns in the latter part of the book, on the almost last pages when
Yossarian talks with the chaplain and realizes that “the first time [he] met [him] was in the hospital. And now [he is] in the hospital again” (Catch-22 435), which highlights the idea of moving in the circles. The situation at the end of the book resembles the beginning of it and Yossarian is aware of this occurrence. Both conversations, from the beginning and from the end of the book, are strikingly similar. In both of them the chaplain asks if he can do something to help Yossarian, but while in the first conversation he offers to bring “cigarettes... or books.... or... toys” (Catch-22 6), which, as a symbol for material help, represents chaplain‟s uncertainty about his role in life, the
32 second portrayal of the situation shows the signs of change. The chaplain asks again what Yossarian needs, but this time he is more self-confident and his help is not only material. On the contrary, he offers to bring something “like books, perhaps, or anything at all” (Cach-22 435). The comparison of these two conversations seems to deny the fact stated by Gregson that there is no change, only repetition (41). A slight change can be visible in the development of characters such as the chaplain Tappman who transforms throughout the book into a more self-assured person. The end of Closing
Time offers another example of movement in circles when the characters of McWatt and
Kid Sampson are again in the sky on mission and they realize that they “have to go in again” (551). This passage leads back to mechanized world of the military and it introduces Heller‟s idea about events repeating in the world and consequently also about ongoing war conflicts. When asked about this in an interview, Heller comments that “they‟ll find reason to go in again, and again, and again” as another armed conflicts as “Grenada, Panama, and the gulf war” occurred (Reilly 519). This never ending conflict echoes the notion of movement in circles which can be seen also as an allusion to the constant increase in the number of missions. It is a dead end, as no one can really be sent back home from war without being injured, and therefore soldiers are running in circles when they want to save their lives. It is, in Heller‟s own words, “the suggestion that things that are happening have happened before and will happen again, unless somebody [...] makes some effort to break that chain of events” (Vosevich 98).
Although the book does not focus on the critique of religion, the religion is one of the unnatural organizations criticised by postmodernism. Thus, the chaplain feels happy when he is in the hospital telling lies about his health in order to escape from war despite the fact that “common sense told him that telling lies and defecting from duty were sins” (Catch-22 364). This shift shows that Heller puts self-preservation above
33 socially established beliefs and norms such as religion and military and that although an individual is often trapped in a cycle they cannot escape, the change is always possible.
However, some things are destined “to move in circles and to return to the point at which [they] had originated, to perhaps set out again” as it is in the case of armed conflicts (Closing 125-126).
Even though the movement in circles suggests something organized, Heller‟s structure of Catch-22 appears chaotic. Although some repeated situations show signs of an organized structure, such as the one analysed above, the book is often characterized as “jumble of comment [and] character” (Burhans 240). However, the chaos of the book can be compared to the chaos of war and it can be argued that Heller carefully builds up his novels to show the senselessness of it with the help of distortion of time in narration.
In an interview, Heller reveals that “any ʽmessage‟ becomes part of the texture, stirred so much that it‟s as negligible as a teaspoon of salt in a large stew” (Plimpton).
Although the legacy of the book is surely important, Heller also places importance on the form of his work. Both are inseparable and he reveals that he “tried to give it a structure that would reflect and complement the content of the book itself, [...] which is one of chaos, of disorganization, of absurdity, of cruelty, of brutality, of insensitivity”
(Reilly 19). Therefore, although Catch-22 is not chronological and Heller jumps from story to story, this is all intentional and carefully planned. He places in the text small parts of the actual conversations or descriptions which imply where the chapter is really situated in the time frame of the book. As it was already suggested by Burhans, the number of missions functions as a reliable guide throughout the book in what can be on the first sight called “a welter of expository and foreshadowing flashbacks” (242-243).
The characters themselves are often confused by the vision that they see something they have already seen. This situation is visible also in the reality outside the
34 books, although the occurrence of déjà vu in the book is exaggerated. Heller seems to be interested in the idea of experiencing things already seen in life. The déjà vu in Catch-
22 is analysed in details and the characters often express the feeling that they are in situation that seems to be familiar although they are “experiencing it for the first time”
(Catch-22 267). Heller‟s technique of writing can be described in similar terms. Catch-
22 constantly offers only fragments of situations that happened or will happen in the latter chapters and therefore these flashbacks or moments of foreshadowing fit in place only when Heller decides to provide a complete description of a certain situation. This technique shows that not only the characters are trapped in doubleness and duality but also the readers sense this concept. Consequently, reading the specific part evokes the feeling of déjà vu because of the uncertainty whether the part was already mentioned in the novel. The comparison of both Heller‟s novels offers an example of this technique.
When reading Closing Time, the feeling of déjà vu is evoked at the beginning of chapter
28:
“Cut,” said the brain surgeon, in this last stage of his Rhine Journey.
“You cut,” said his apprentice.
“No cuts,” said Yossarian.
“Now look who's butting in.” (416)
This citation seems to evoke the feeling that it was mentioned somewhere already. The feeling of déjà vu is certainly not groundless. This is the beginning of the chapter titled
“Snowden” in Catch-22:
“Cut,” said a doctor.
“You cut,” said another.
“No cuts,” said Yossarian with a thick, unwieldy tongue.
“Now look who‟s butting in.” (431)
35
When reading these sections, the repetition again comes into spotlight although it is not visible at the first sight. The repetition functions as a reminder of Catch-22 and the similarities the both novels share. The attention is drawn on the continuity of the theme from the first book to the sequel. At first, there is the feeling of déjà vu and then comes the realization of the repetitive pattern. This approach implies the technique of intertextuality, through which Heller refers to his own work, and, at the same time, the notion that Heller tries to treat the readers in the same way he treats his characters. In an interview, he states that his “objective is not merely to tell the reader a story but to make him a participant – to have him experience the book rather than read it” (Reilly 507).
Both the audience and the participants are drawn into the mixture of flashbacks where they have to figure their way out. In addition, this kind of repetition suggests that Heller conforms to another feature of postmodernism which has not been contemplated yet.
The postmodern writers often use intertextuality, the term which, according to
Hutcheon, “functions as a formal marking of historicity” (A Poetics 124) because, as she explains, any literary work has to be a “part of prior discourses [to] derive[...] meaning and significance” (A Poetics 126). Heller refers in his sequel to his first book and makes reader aware of the repetitive pattern, but both situation show differences in their development. While the first scene of operation talks about an actual wound after being stabbed with knife by Nately‟s woman (Catch-22 432), Closing Time brings back the issue of seeing everything twice. However, the situation is reversed, because while in Catch-22 Yossarian claimed to see everything twice (178), in Closing Time when they are showing him fingers in order to find out what is wrong with him, he sees “still one. The same” (417). For doctors it is the sign of improvement which links to the
Heller‟s idea that the system prevents soldiers from seeing both sides of things.
However, Yossarian‟s view of the ambiguous world remains the same even in the
36 sequel and he seems to understand that if he does not want to outrage the authorities, he has to pretend. Heller uses intertextual reference to depict the fact that nothing has changed – neither Yossarian‟s view, nor the world itself.
3.2 Sane Insanity
Heller‟s use of antonyms was analysed in the chapter on language, but the words
“sane” and “insane” need a separate analysis, as the definition of being (in)sane is the basis of understanding the irony of his books. The character most associated with the insanity is Yossarian. But even this is challenged, as Schopf points out, because Catch-
22 differentiate between two forms of insanity: the healthy one and unhealthy one (91).
Hungry Joe is used to have nightmares at the time he is not scheduled to fly and is waiting for other orders (Catch-22 48). This situation is described by Shopf as “a perfectly healthy insane reaction” (92) while Orr‟s reactions are considered “not healthily insane” (Schopf 91-92) because “he is not a social being involved in protest against Headquarters” (Schopf 91). Both characters are considered crazy, but one form is a healthy craziness, because the person is marked by war horrors, while the second one is unhealthy, as the insane person is not participating in the protest against the authorities. However, who is the insane one? Catch-22 states about Yossarian several times throughout the plot that “that crazy bastard may be the only sane one left” (107), as he is the one doing something to save his life. The law Catch-22 allows insane soldiers to be sent home. Insane soldiers are those that “keep flying combat missions after all those close calls” and “a concern for one‟s safety in face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind” (Catch-22 40). In other words, the sane people are, in the eyes of the military, those who are worried about their future and about their own lives and those are the ones that army want to control. People
37 worried about their life would leave if allowed and therefore their duty is secured by
Catch-22 in a way that it excludes an option of leaving the military. On the other hand, insane soldiers do not protest and they continue to fly missions. That is why they are allowed to leave the army – because they would never have thought about it. They are blinded by seeing only one side of the problem and Catch-22 offers a metaphor of “the flies in Appleby‟s eyes” (41). Appleby is a soldier conforming to the rules of society – he accepts values such as “God, Motherhood and the American Way of Life, without ever thinking about them” (Catch-22 13). Blind appreciation of these issues prevents him from seeing beyond, “although he probably doesn‟t even know it” and consequently “can‟t see things as they really are” (Catch-22 41). People like Appleby need someone to open their eyes, because in the beginning even Yossarian “is unaware of his power” and only in the end he learns that “he, and no-one else, is in control of his fate” (Sniderman 252). That is why the Catch-22 has been invented and that is why in the time after the war The Freedom of Information Act has emerged. The sane people are the ones that are questioning the system and its values and because they try to change something, they are a problem and they need to be regulated. On the other hand, the insanity is inscribed to people who blindly obey the rules. However the book offers also another distinction, and in the eyes of soldiers like Cleveinger, the sane people are the ones obeying the rules whereas the insane people try to reform the system. Heller uses this ambiguous portrayal to show that there are always two sides of the same coin.
As Yossarian points out, being crazy “doesn‟t mean [...] mistaken” (Closing 288).
Yossarian‟s craziness is therefore perceived only by his friends and other soldiers, while the officers and generals see him as rebellious (Waldmeir 194). This complex description of sanity and insanity is alluded to throughout both books with the connection to seeing twice. The definitions of (in)sanity depends on through whose eyes
38 the reader is looking. The ambiguity of the terms echoes the whole system of two-sided aspect of organizations as the duality is an inseparable part of the definition and this is
Heller‟s weapon.
Sanity and insanity are portrayed as threatening factors for organizations. One sane person, sane according to the logic of Catch-22, is not a difficult issue to deal with, but as the books are trying to point out, “the insanity is contagious,” and it can be applied on sanity as well (Catch-22 8). More people questioning the principles become a problem and that is why the organizations need to bend the language constituting the rules. An alternative is the problem. The system works when there is no other possibility for people to choose. This possibility of change poses a question for Heller,
“whether human beings [...] have freedom to operate within [institutional structures]”
(Gregson 50). As Colonel Korn claims: “the men [are] perfectly content to fly as many missions as [...] as long as they [think] they ha[ve] no alternative” (Catch-22 421). A hope for a change makes them out of control (Catch-22 421). The logic of the book is summarized by a quotation that “one good apple can spoil the rest” (Catch-22 429).
This statement made by one of the authorities, Kolonel Korn, sums up most of Heller‟s strategies. It shows how the opposition in speech works and simultaneously it portrays that organizations are afraid of spreading of the (in)sanity.
39
4. Conclusion
The theme of war has been in literature portrayed in various ways, but the specific feature of postmodern literature is its grotesque image of the conflict. Jospeh Heller, in his book Catch-22, uses irony and parody to strengthen the importance of human life in the time of war. The heroism of soldiers is substituted for desperate desire to survive.
They live in an absurd world where everything is ambiguous and even after the war, they cannot escape from the nonsensical laws of organizations, as it is depicted in
Closing Time. Both books are connected not only by the presence of similar laws and characters, but also by the strategy that Heller has chosen for creating the image of the world. This technique is in this thesis termed doubleness and duality. The strategy offers a convenient way of dealing with the theme of war, because it shows the ambiguous nature of it. The war is viewed differently by the officers in charge of it and ordinary soldiers risking their life. Similarly to the literature that can either glorify or demystify the war, the rank is a determining factor on how the war appears. The authorities do not risk their lives and therefore they are proud of their military missions or battles. On the other hand, soldiers do not have the choice to refuse to go to war and they see the war from the other side. Hence, Heller questions organizations and bureaucracy not only at the time of war but also in the peace time. The characters in Closing Time realise that although the war is over, they still cannot escape the supremacy of institutions and that the bureaucracy is still ruling their lives. The critique is built with the help of irony which echoes postmodern principles as formulated by Linda Hutcheon.
The doubleness and duality are terms which are present throughout the books, from the title of the first book till the last chapters of the sequel. The difference in the meaning of these two terms is only small. Nevertheless, the distinction can be made: while duality is shown in example where Heller plays with literal and metaphorical
40 meaning of one word, doubleness is portrayed by the double attribute of reality and discourse, where both of them are tightly connected but still they exist separately. Heller attempts to show that the duality in language and the doubleness of reality and the discourse of the book together create the absurd situations which show the two-sided nature of the world.
The reality of both books is constantly confronted with the reality of language, or in other words, extra linguistic reality is in clash with the reality of the books‟ discourse.
The language plays an important role in Heller‟s writing and the technique that is the focus of this thesis is the ambiguity in language, the doubleness and duality of the discourse of the book. The two-sided aspect of language results in absurd situations which make the reader think about the organization of the world. This aspect of language is not only Heller‟s invention, but it is grounded in theoretical background of postmodernism as described by Hutcheon. The irony works on the dual mode as well,
“the mode of the unsaid” (Irony’s 9) where the duality is visible in the difference between the utterance and actual meaning of the words. This is projected into Heller‟s books in various examples which all show common signs of absurdity, mockery of organizations or authorities and duality in meaning of the words. The following passage is not an exception of this technique and as it is a quotation from Closing Time, it shows that Heller follows his strategy established in Catch-22. In this passage, Milo tries to persuade officers to purchase his new bomber plane that is quicker than the speed of sound and even light. General Bingam, the highest rank in the room, shows his lack of common knowledge:
"Does light move?" he demanded finally.
A leaden silence ensued.
"Light moves, General Bingam," Milo Minderbinder sprang in finally, with relief
41
that he could...
"Are you sure?" [General] asked, and swiveled his sober mien to the specialists on
his right. A few of these nodded fearfully too. Some glanced away.
"That's funny," Bingam said slowly. "I see that light standing on the corner table
and it looks perfectly still." (Closing 72)
The word “light” is here used in two meanings – the light as an electromagnetic radiation that makes things visible and the light as the source of illumination, for example the lamp. The play is not between literal and metaphorical meaning, as it was in the chapter on discourse, but still the core of the technique is present. The misunderstanding between General‟s and Milo‟s idea of light mocks the General and his view on world. He lacks common knowledge of physics which should not happen to the officer of his rank. Consequently, the whole passage functions as a grotesque portrayal of absurd reality of organizations where the high officer is not able to grasp the meaning of a simple thing, but still, he is the one in charge of things.
The doubleness and duality are visible in the core of both books – the laws which are the basis of the books share the doubleness of language and reality and tricky definitions. The law Catch-22, the core of the book that bears its name, and The
Freedom of Information Act mentioned in Closing Time, are ambiguous in a way that although their definitions are linguistically correct, after transforming them into reality they are not helpfull for ordinary people. Although Catch-22 can be a way for soldiers to leave the army, the formulation of the law excludes the option the same way The
Freedom of Information Act is supposed to provide information for people, but in reality it provides them only with information the authorities decide to reveal. In addition, the word “freedom” in the name of the act can be seen as a freedom for people to ask, but at the same time the freedom of authorities and bureaucracy to decide how
42 and whether they answer. This critique of war and bureaucracy is Heller‟s aim and the people who see the ambiguity in the system, the two-sided face of it, are depicted as insane.
The notion of sanity and insanity provides another example of Heller‟s choice of the theme of doubleness and duality. Throughout Catch-22, many characters are considered insane or crazy. However, the concept of insanity is not clearly defined, as
Schopf notices, because there is a difference between healthy and unhealthy insanity
(91-92). Moreover, the authorities secured the meaning of the world insane also by the definition of Catch-22 where the insane people are not afraid of flying combats in danger of their life so they can be sent home, but as long as the person is aware of the danger, they are not insane anymore and therefore has to continue fighting. The result is that the authorities invent this law to control the people and force them to do what they are told, but at the same they give them a false hope of a way out of the situation.
Language, therefore, serves to people who have power and the critique is not placed on the organizations but on the people in charge of them. They use language for controlling soldiers or even ordinary people who are not able to see the truth beyond words. And who is able to see the other side of things is by the authorities called crazy or insane.
The depiction of the whole system as a mechanized world, where people are portrayed as machine, goes hand in hand with the idea that soldiers should not worry about dying for their country, because they are only a part of machine. This concept of machinery is evoked by repetitious phrases and utterances of characters. As one of the men interrogating the chaplain claims after repeating the same sentence twice, the difference of the utterances is often only “implied, in the way [they] say it” (Closing
312). Therefore, the difference is apparent only to the speaker and the other one has to listen closely to understand the actual meaning. This is often difficult in the reality of
43 the books, as Heller tries to convey the message that people are often able to see only one side of the issue. The repetition is used also as a tool for changing other person‟s opinion which shows how the language can easily serve as a result of power, when the authorities can afford to bend the language to serve for their purposes, but also as a tool when the language itself manipulates other people into doing something (Hutcheon, A
Poetics 185).
Besides, the repetition implies also another important element of both books and that is the movement in circles. The utterances repeat and the characters are often aware of this occurrence. However, they can do nothing to change this fact as they are only a part of the system. The movement in circles appears also in connection with the temporal aspect of the books. In Catch-22, time is considered to be an important element, because Heller uses it to portray the never-ending circle of war and bureaucracy. The circle is evoked not only by repetitious pattern of utterances and situations, but also by the fact that although the war is over in Closing Time, the characters are in the same situation as in Catch-22 where certain law is controlling their law and they are not able to escape it. Moreover, thanks to the difficult form of Catch-
22, which is may be often seen as chaotic, the reader experiences the same feeling as characters in the book, the feeling of déjà vu. The déjà vu works, therefore, on two levels. The first level of it is the déjà vu that the chaplain feels when “he remember[s] experiencing the same disquieting sensation” (Catch-22 267) of seeing a man on tree before, and the second level of the déjà vu is represented by the feeling that Closing
Time evokes in the readers, because some of the utterances echoes Catch-22. This happens also in the case of famous Yossarian exclamation in Catch-22 that “he ha[s] decided to live forever or die in the attempt” (24) is in the sequel transformed into the observation that he is “not going to live forever [...] even though [he is] going to die
44 trying” (285). Therefore, although the repetition and movement in circles implies that there is no change, something is indeed changing. Heller combines the impression of permanency with the hope for change which shows that the transformation of the culturally accepted values is possible.
45
5. Works Cited
“An Impolite Interview with Jospeh Heller.” The Realist 39. (November 1962): 18-32.
Web. 4 April 2013. ˂http://www.ep.tc/realist˃
Brosman, Catharine Savage. “The Functions of War Literature.” South Central Review
9.1.Historicizing Literary Contexts (1992): 85-98. JSTOR. Web. 17 March
2013. ˂ http://www.jstor.org/stable/3189388˃.
Burhans, Clinton S. Jr.. “Spindrift and the Sea: Structural Patterns and Unifying
Elements in Catch 22.” Twentieth Century Literature 19.4. (1973): 239-
250. JSTOR. Web. 17 March 2013. ˂ http://www.jstor.org/stable/440541˃.
Davis, Gary W. “Catch-22 and the Language of Discontinuity.” NOVEL: A Forum on
Fiction 12.1. (1978): 66-77. JSTOR. Web. 17 March 2013.
˂ http://www.jstor.org/stable/1345211˃.
Dawes, James R. Language of War: Literature and Culture in the U.S. from the Civil
War through World War II. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002. ebrary.
Web. 3 March 2013.
Doskow, Minna. “The Night Journey in Catch-22.” Twentieth Century Literature
12.4 (1967): 186-193. JSTOR. Web. 17 March 2013.
˂http://www.jstor.org/stable/440667˃.
Gregson, Ian. Character and Satire in Postwar Fiction. Chippenham: Continuum
International Publishing, 2008. ebrary. Web. 3 March 2013.
Heller, Joseph. Catch-22. New York: Dell Publishing, 1990. Print.
---. Closing Time. Great Britain: Simon&Schuster Ltd, 1994. Print.
Heller, Erica. “Catch-18”. The Paris Review. n.p., 2011. Web. 21 March 2013
˂ http://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2011/08/04/catch-18/˃.
Hutcheon, Linda. A Politics of Postmodernism. New York: Routledge, 1989. Print
46
---. A Poetics of Postmodernism, History, Theory, Fiction. 1st Edition. New
York: Routledge, 1988. Print.
---. A Theory of Parody. Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 2000. Print.
---. Irony’s Edge. New York: Routledge, 1995. Print.
Jason Philip K., and Mark A. Graves. Encyclopedia of American War Literature.
N.p.: Greenwood Press, 2001. ebrary. Web. 17 April 2013.
Plimpton,George, and Joseph Heller.“Joseph Heller, The Art of Fiction No. 51.” The
Paris Review. N.p. n.d. Web. 21 March 2013.
˂ http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/3894/the-art-of-fiction-no-51-joseph-
heller˃.
Reilly, Charlie, and Joseph Heller. “An Interview with Joseph Heller.” Contemporary
Literature 39.4. (1998): 507-522. JSTOR. Web. 4 April 2013.
˂ http://www.jstor.org/stable/1208724˃.
Schopf, Wiliam. “The Blindfolded and Backwards: Promethean and Bemushroomed
Heroism in One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest and Catch-22.” The Bulettin of
the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association 26.3 (1972): 89-97. JSTOR.
Web. 4 April 2013. ˂ http://www.jstor.org/stable/1346650˃.
Sniderman, Stephen L. “ʽIt was all Yossarian‟s Faultʼ: Power and Responsibility in
Catch-22.” Twentieth Century Literature 19.4 (1973): 251-258. JSTOR.
Web. 17 March 2013. ˂ http://www.jstor.org/stable/440542˃.
Stern, J.P.. “War and the Comic Muse: The Good Soldier Schweik and Catch-22.”
Comparative Literature 20.3 (1968): 193-216. JSTOR. Web. 17 March
2013. ˂ http://www.jstor.org/stable/1769440˃.
Vosevich, Kathy A. Conversations with Joseph Heller. Web. PDF file. 4 April
2013.
47
Waldmeir, Joseph J.. “Two Novelists of the Absurd: Heller and Kessey.” Wisconsin
Studies in Contemporary Literature 5.3 (1964): 192-204. JSTOR. Web. 17
March 2013. ˂ http://www.jstor.org/stable/1207357˃.
48
ENGLISH SUMMARY
This Bachelor‟s thesis focuses on two works by Joseph Heller, namely Catch-22 and Closing Time. Both books are analyzed in the frame of postmodern literature, where the presence of postmodern strategies in Heller‟s works is used to highlight his purpose, which is the absurd portrayal of war and bureaucracy. However, the main purpose of this thesis was not the categorization of Heller into the postmodern period, but rather demonstrating that he uses postmodern strategies, such as irony, contradictions, intertextuality and distortion of time, to show the ambiguous aspect of the world and subsequent critique of it. The thesis of the work claims that Heller uses doubleness and duality for displaying the true nature of system and at the same time questions cultural values of society. The critique is placed on the truthfulness and reliability of these institutions and the reader is offered a different view on the organization of the world.
The thesis opens with a longer introduction which offers the theoretical background, supported by literary theorist Linda Hutcheon, and various literary journals. This introductory part was necessary for understanding the concepts of postmodern literature as well as the concept of war in literature. The main body of the thesis consists of two chapters, each divided to two or three subchapters. The first chapter deals with the gap between discourse of the book and reality and the second chapter offers a view on other forms of doubleness that are situated in the books.
Although these forms are different, together they create a complete picture of the absurd and grotesque portrayal of the reality as seen by Joseph Heller.
49
ČESKÉ RESUMÉ
Tato bakalářská práce se soustředí na dvě díla Josepha Hellera, jmenovitě na Catch-
22 a Closing Time. Obě knihy jsou analyzované v rámci postmoderní literatury, přičemž postupy postmodernizmu slouží k vykreslení Hellerova záměru, kterým je zobrazení absurdity války a byrokracie. Avšak hlavním cílem této práce není zařazení
Hellera mezi autory postmoderního období, ale poukázání na fakt, že postupy tohoto období, například ironie, rozporuplnost, intertextualita a pokřivení času, slouží v jeho tvorbě pro vykreslení dvojí povahy světa a jeho následující kritiky. Hlavním cílem práce je dokázat, že Heller používá dualitu na zobrazení pravé povahy systému a zároveň zpochybňuje kulturní hodnoty společnosti. Kritika je zaměřená hlavně na pravdivost a spolehlivost těchto institucí a čtenář má možnost získat odlišný pohled na svět.
Úvodní část práce nabízí teoretický podklad podložený tvorbou Lindy Hutcheon a různými literárními články. Tento teoretický úvod je potřebný pro pochopení základů postmoderní literatury stejně jako konceptu války v literatuře. Hlavní stať práce se skládá z dvou kapitol, z nichž každá je rozdělená do dvou nebo tři podkapitol. První kapitola se zabývá dualitou mezi jazykem knihy a knižní realitou, a druhá kapitola nabízí přehled jiných forem duality nacházející se v knihách. Ačkoliv jsou tyto formy duality rozdílné, společně tvoří ucelený obraz absurdního a groteskního zobrazení reality tak, jak ji vidí Joseph Heller.
50