Starting at the very beginning of the novel, on the title page, Vonnegut confused me with seemingly sensible sentences about “the planet Tralfamadore, where the flying saucers come from.” It is not until page 32 (of the big brown version) that Vonnegut decided it was about time to inform us that Billy had, as a matter of fact, “been kidnapped by a flying saucer [from Tralfamadore] in 1967.” Then, on the next few pages, Billy reveals that his writing style/thought process is an attempt to mimic the thought process of the Tralfamadorians.
Now, I could write this blog post as an analysis/listing of all of the Tralfamadorian ideas displayed in this novel so far, but before we get to that (if we do) I would like to explain to you how Billy’s kidnapping by the Tralfamadorians is basically Doctor Who.
For those who don’t know, Doctor Who is a British TV show that has been airing since 1963. It follows the timeline of the Doctor, a Time Lord from a planet called Gallifrey who travels through time and space in his TARDIS. Throughout the show, he dies and is regenerated multiple times. For this post, I would like to focus on the Eleventh Doctor, played by Matt Smith. One of the Eleventh Doctor’s companions (people/humans who travel with him) is Amy (Amelia) Pond, often accompanied by her husband, Rory.
On Rory and Amy’s wedding anniversary (Season 7 episode 4: “The Power of Three”) the Doctor shows up, whisks Amy and Rory into his police box TARDIS, and then they leave. The episode shows how they go from time to time (at one point Amy accidentally marries Henry the 8th; he’s the one who had six wives; if you want to watch, here’s a song about him: https://www.schooltube.com/video/123d1074578941487a5f/HORRIBLE%20HISTORIES%20-%20The%20Wives%20of%20Henry%20VIII%20(Terrible%20Tudors) ) and then at the end of it they return back to the anniversary party just a few seconds after they left. However, when Rory’s father (played by the same actor who played Arthur Weasley) questions the Doctor, he admits they have actually been gone for seven weeks.
There are a few connections to be made between this episode of Doctor Who and Slaughterhouse-Five the most obvious being that no one notices that the Ponds or Billy have left. As Billy describes, “the Tralfamadorians had taken him through a time warp, so that he could be on Tralfamadore for years, and still be away from Earth for only a microsecond” (32-33).
The other two connections are smaller and more ironic than significant. The first is that Billy leaves the night of his daughter’s wedding and Rory and Amy leave during their anniversary party. Both instances are connected to weddings. The second connection is that, while away, both Amy and Billy enter into a new relationship with someone living in the place they are visiting. With Amy, it is, as previously stated, King Henry VIII, and with Billy, it is Montana Wildhack, a “former Earthling movie star” who he mates with while on Tralfamadore (32).
It would be cool to find out if these are related at all; like if one stole the idea from the other (the TV show came out first, so the idea of travel through time and space wasn’t new, but this episode didn’t air until 2012), but since that is not possible, in conclusion, I would just like to mention one thing that connects both the TV show Doctor Who as a whole and the novel Slaughterhouse-Five. Both main characters, the Doctor and Billy, are involved in a war. For the Doctor, it is the Time War, where all of the Time Lords (and Ladies) other than himself (and the Master/Missy) die, and for Billy, it is World War II. These wars seem to define the characters of both these “men” (the newest Doctor is a woman) and push them into the actions portrayed in the novel/show (Billy would never have written the novel if he hadn’t been in the war; the Doctor basically becomes the Doctor because of the war).
Any Whovians out there, do you agree? Also, on a completely different note, can anyone explain to me how the War Doctor is not the First Doctor? I haven’t seen the original series so that stuff trips me up. Thanks!
So Doctor Who is a free will story though. The whole point is that 99% of time is in flux, and can be changed. There are a small number of events too important and set in stone to be changed--"fixed moments" which if the Doctor changed would have dire consequences. So in that way it is not the same. It's approach to time travel is a relatively human 3-dimensional approach, and while the Doctor can see time as a landscape, he sees it as one to be changed at any point, rather than already said and done (with the exception of the fixed point, i.e. Destruction of Pompeii, End and Birth of universe, etc.)
ReplyDeleteHowever, Doctor Who does have the concept of the "big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff" which certainly fits. It makes time not a linear thing, but something where all moments are always happening. Time is looping in on itself and your own consciousness is merely one of the lines. Billy follows just a loop on the ball of time, as he jumps between times but remembers the past and the future.
I just said something along these lines on Raya's blog. Changing things in the past in the show has serious effects on the future, and in fact the whole show rotates around the idea that he shouldn't change set events but he does. Occasionally you get an episode with a mental breakdown when he tries too hard to play God. The Doctor and the Tralfamadorians are not the same because although they can see in 4-dimensions, the Tralfamadorians still can't "change" time. Every event is still set, whereas the Doctor changes TONS of things.
DeleteI have seen some episodes of Doctor Who, mostly with the Tenth and Eleventh Doctors, and although I have not seen the particular episode you are referring to, I can picture it in some ways. I think one difference is that although Billy Pilgrim and the Doctor both travel through space and time, the Doctor does it intentionally and Billy does not. He is thrown to seemingly random moments in his life. Also, Billy is constrained to the limits of his life when time-travelling. For example, he could not travel to Ancient Egypt because it is outside of the timeline of his life, which he can't control.
ReplyDeleteI don't watch Doctor Who, but from how you explained it, the difference seems really uncanny! It would be cool if that episode of Doctor Who was inspired by Vonnegut. Additionally, I really appreciate your link to Horrible Histories - My aunt brought me those books from England as a kid, and I read them probably a hundred times.
ReplyDelete