Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Catch-22: Going Crazy Is The Only Sane Thing To Do

Joseph Heller's Catch-22 takes place during an actual shooting war, World War II, and follows the lives of the members of the fictional 256th Airborne Division, stationed on the fictional Mediterranean island of Pianosa. The story examines the insanity of war in two ways; on one hand, soldiers would have to be crazy to fight in a war, and bureaucracy does nothing but create confusion.

Capt. Yossarian is a bombadier in the squadron who wants nothing more than to go home. When he reported for duty, he was told he would have to fly 30 bombing runs, then he would be sent home. Unfortunately, Col. Cathcart, his squadron's commanding officer, wants nothing more than to become a general, and he believes that the best way to do so is continually increase the number of missions his men have to fly. He believes that this will show the general he serves under that his men are the toughest men in the US military, and that he is responsible for this fortitude. Early on, Yossarian learns of Catch-22, a military rule that will potentially allow him to go home early. All he has to do is tell the base doctor that he thinks he's going crazy, because crazy people can't fly bomging missions. The problem is that the military is of the belief that crazy people are incapable of knowing they are crazy, so if you think you are crazy, you are truly sane. But the doctor cannot seek out crazies, they have to come to him. As the book goes on, Catch-22 comes to have other meanings as well, all of which lead to circular logic that never truly makes sense.

The craziest part is that Yossarian is likely the most sane person in the book. Heller likely was influenced by Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland because Yossarian is often the only person who ever makes sense. The people Yossarian encounters win arguments through flawed logic because they are in authority. Furhtermore, military bureaucracy is seen as almost being the word of God; even if all the evidence points to one conclusion, if the paperwork says otherwise, that is what is viewed as truth. For example, there is the dead man in Yossarian's tent who isn't really there. This refers to a man who was transferred to the base on Pianosa; his stuff arrived before he did, and he was to be tentmates with Yossarian. While en route, his plane was shot down, so he was never able to check in. Because he never arrived, he couldn't claim his stuff, and the Army was unable to dispose of it because the man was not stationed anywhere at the time of his death, and was, in a sense, not part of the Army at that time. It makes no sense, but the clerical error made it so. Another time, the doctor was believed to be on a plane that crashed, and he was marked dead. A letter of condolence was sent to his wife. But he wasn't actually dead, but because he was dead on paper, everyone pretended that he was dead, even when he was speaking to them. The doc sent his wife a letter to explain what happened, but the Army kept sending her letters telling to ignore the cruel pranks.

The book also examines the idea that soldiers would have to be crazy to put themselves in such dangerous situations. As I said in the intro post, WWII was in many ways a noble fight, but even so, I cannot imagine being on the front lines of combat. Yossarian argued this point with one of his colleagues, who was very idealistic, and knew that defeating the Nazis would serve the greater good. But Yossarian countered that he has no interest in the greater good if he is not around to enjoy it. Fortunately, most soldiers aren't that selfish/pragmatic, otherwise we wouldn't have an army (but if every soldier in every country believed this, maybe there would be no armies; how would countries wage war then?!).

The style of the book reflected the idea of insanity; the story was told out of chronological order, and things were referenced that the reader was not yet aware of. The book is a bit confusing, but the pay-off is worth it if you pay attention.

Up next: Do you believe in magic?...

No comments: