Essay/Term paper: Catch-22
Essay, term paper, research paper: Catch 22
See all college papers and term papers on Catch 22
Need a different (custom) essay on Catch 22? Buy a custom essay on Catch 22
Need a custom research paper on Catch 22? Click here to buy a custom term paper.
The Deft Touch of Catch 22:
Heller's Harmonious Unison of Comedy and Tragedy
Since the dawn of literature and drama, comedy and tragedy have always been partitioned into separate genres. Certainly most tragedies had comedic moments, and even the zaniest comedies were at times serious. However, even the development of said tragicomedies left the division more or less intact. Integrating a total comedy and a total tragedy into a holistic union that not only preserved both features, but also blended them into a new and harmonious entity remained elusive. That is, until Catch-22. Using his unique style and structure, Joseph Heller masterfully manages to interlay humor and terror, comedy and tragedy, and reveals in the process the perversions of the human character and of society gone mad.
The first stroke of Heller's deft touch is his presentation of outrageous characters, acting outrageously. From the first chapter, we are presented with a slew of unbelievable characters whose actions and ideologies are uproariously funny, and horrifically disturbing. In fact, the manner in which the reader recognizes the character's dual nature will serve as the first example of Heller's amalgamation of comedy and tragedy. Dunbar's theory of life is first received with a burst of laughter from the audience. Life is short, and Dunbar wishes to extend it as much as possible. If time flies when one is having fun, then conversely, time must slow when one is bored. Dunbar endeavors to make his life as boring as possible, thus increasing the length of its passing. Indeed, it is understandable why such an attitude should elicit a laugh, but the further implications are horrific. Society's emphasis on life over meaning comes as a shocking revelation to the audience. Heller further reinforces that idea with characters such as Doc Daneeka, who values self-preservation and money over responsibility and friendship, and Milo who values self-improvement and fortune over the lives of thousands of others. The motif that follows gives us characters that are, above all else, more interested in self (Cathcart, Mrs. Daneeka, Duckett, the Old Man, Peckem, etc.). Though they are initially humorous, their nature is ultimately revealed to be false and horrific, arousing disgust and pity, a brilliant combination of comedy and tragedy.
The perversion of society is revealed further in a second major type of character, the deluded. Though most serve largely as foils to Yossarian and his philosophy, much can still be made of their condition. Clevinger is perhaps the best example of a deluded character. His debate with Yossarian serves as an insightful evaluation of their psyche. He argues that, although everyone is trying to kill him, everyone is not trying to kill him. The humor of the debate cannot be denied, but horror and tragedy are equally present. The debate leaves the audience struggling to decide who is crazy. Clevinger falls into an obvious contradiction, but his argument still strikes as common sense. In face of Yossarian's triumphant "What difference does that make?" the audience is left not only with the realization of its speciousness, but of the realization that they believed it. The terror evoked by the deluded lies mainly in that the audience is equally deluded. Perhaps Clevinger, Appleby, and Havermeyer are fighting for "what they have been told" was their country-- and perhaps so has the audience. The genius of Heller's characterization is further enhanced as the audience sees itself in the hollow rationale of the deluded, and is aghast with horror, even in face of such humor. With this revelation, Heller compels the audience to follow the rebellious path of Yossarian, or fall victim to the indoctrination of society, and meet the same fate as the deluded.
As the audience is bombarded with insanely comedic ironies of Catch-22, they are further aware of its horror. A primary example of irony is found in Milo, when he is praised for bombing his own company when it is learned that he made a great deal of money. Again, this evokes a staunch laugh, and then leaves the audience aghast with horror. Exaggeration makes this funny-- an event such as this occurring, and then inciting such a reaction by those affected is almost unfathomable-- but the ultimate truth provides the terror. Society truly does reward persons for profit, even if it results, as it often does, in terrible distress. The further instances of ridiculously backward behavior-- Hungry Joe's screaming, Havermeyer's disregard for life, McWatt's destructive flying, Cathcart's "list", etc.-- further provide the audience with humorous instances of exaggeration, whose ultimate truth proves to be horrifying. Heller's blend of hyperbole and truth create a horrifying, though comedic, charge for his irony.
Perhaps the most memorable attribute of Catch-22 is its mind-boggling paradoxes, or, as they are more commonly referred to, catches. These paradoxes range from the harmlessly absurd, to the insanely catastrophic. When Yossarian and his friends begin asking clever questions to disrupt boring educational sessions, Colonel Korn decides that only those who never ask questions may ask questions. When they want to discuss a problem with Major Major, they are allowed into his office only when he is out. Even when Yossarian is offered an apparently harmless deal that would allow him to go home as a hero, there is a catch. He must betray his friends by praising the officers who caused many of them to die. And as Heller shows, life is reduced to one frustrating paradox after another.
The most notable instance of the paradox is Catch-22. The first solid reference is Doc Daneeka's version, presented to Yossarian on the matter of groundings. To be grounded, one must be insane, but one must also ask to be grounded. However, asking to be grounded shows the desire for self-preservation, a sure sign of sanity. For, if one were truly insane, one would fly the missions voluntarily. Thus, no one is grounded. This is striking for its sophistry and circularity, and is certainly humorous, but its implications are equally grotesque-- more and more deaths. As the novel continues, the paradoxes remain equally humorous, but their implications even more gruesome. The Catch decays, moving into the civilian world with the Luciana marriage conundrum. Later, it appears with official regulation stating that one's orders must be obeyed, even if they conflict with official regulation. Finally, the truth of Catch-22 is revealed in the MP's destructive and inhumane rendition, they can do whatever you can't stop them from doing. Ultimately, Catch-22 is the unwritten loophole that empowers authorities to revoke your rights whenever it suits their cruel whims. It is, in short, the principle of absolute evil in a malevolent and incompetent world. As humorous as Catch-22 is (initially at least), the horror intertwined with it is strikingly evident.
Likely the most important element of Catch-22 is its absurdity. Absurdity pervades the novel, creating dually humor and terror. The absurd Lt., Col., Gen., Sheishkopff's obsession with parades is quite droll. Again, however, the implications are ghastly. Sheishkopff views his soldiers as puppets, wanting at one point to wire them together to create a perfectly precise machine. This reflects society's insane obsession with order and conformity, even at the cost of individuality and humanity. A further example of such dehumanizing absurdity occurs at the hospital. Yossarian has suffered a leg injury and is told to take better care of his leg because it is government property. Soldiers, therefore, are not even people, but simply property that can be listed on an inventory. In a bureaucracy, as Heller shows, individuality does not matter.
Maybe the most absurd character in the novel is Colonel Cathcart. He continually raises the number of missions for no other reason than personal prestige. Though he achieves nothing by this, he continually persists. Cathcart's absurd drive for prestige is again emphasized in the Saturday Evening Post incident. He tries to copy another squadron's prayer meetings, not for morale, but for the absurd thought that he will be featured in the Saturday Evening Post. Even his reason for not going forward is absurd; he refuses to accept the enlisted men praying to the same God as the officers. Perhaps Cathcart's most ridiculously absurd action is his "List". Ultimately, his career is measured out in "Black Eyes" and "Feathers in His Cap" rather than in success, morale, or human life. Cathcart remains one of the novel's funniest characters, but his essential inhumanity and selfishness creates an equally contemptible character. Cathcart presents another example of Heller's beautiful weaving of comedy and tragedy.
Final examples of the horrifically humorous absurdity of the novel are the death scenes. Clevinger is the first to make his departure, flying into a cloud and never returning. The unreasonable logistics of his demise are certain to garner laughs. Likewise, Kid Sampson's gruesome death at the blades of a propeller-- followed by McWatt's suicide-- is sadistically funny. The absurdity of Dunbar being "disappeared" cloaks its awful truth. Even life and death can be at the whim of the army bureaucracy, as demonstrated by Mudd's "life", and Daneeka's "death". At the outset these deaths are indeed comically absurd, but the basic horror of it is enough to make one nauseous. Absurdity represents one of Heller's most skillful blends of comedy and tragedy in the entire novel.
Though seemingly irreconcilable genres, horror and tragedy are nimbly fused into a whole creation by Heller's unique style and structure. Heller creates situations where the audience laughs, and then must look back in horror at what they were laughing at. Through brilliant characterizations, superb irony, mind-boggling paradoxes, and ingenious absurdity, Heller manages interlay humor and terror, comedy and tragedy into a beautiful whole as Catch-22.
Other sample model essays:
Catcher in the Rye / Catcher In The Rye
Holden and His "Phony" Family The protagonist, Holden Caulfield, interacts with many people throughout J.D. Salinger"s novel The Catcher in the Rye, but probably none ha...
Catch 22 / CATCH 22
In Catch-22, Joseph Heller reveals the perversions of the human character and society. Using various themes and a unique style and structure, Heller satirizes war and its values as well as using the ...
English Composition / Catherine The Great
Catherine the Great: Empress of Russia, (1762-1796) History 120, Section 4 Russell Smith Dr. Homer December 2, 1999 One of the most interesting, hard-working and powerful people to grace the pages of ...
English Composition / Censoring Pleas For Help
In the article "Censoring Pleas for Help", Dwight R. Lee talks about government price controls. The author likens government price controls to government censorship, arguing prices are how ...
English Composition / Censorship Is Wrong
Censorship: an official authorised to examine printed matter, films, news, etc., before public release, and to suppress any parts on the grounds of obscenity, a threat to security, etc. (Dictionary, M...
English Composition / Changes From The Paleolithic To The Neolithic Age
There were changes that occurred from the Paleolithic Period to the Neolithic. Small changes were made in this time, from the culture, to bigger changes like economics, and agriculture. How did m...
English Composition / Character
aracterPhil The sun was setting. Far to the east, threatening black clouds arose from the fumes of pollution from the several smokestacks towering over the city. The streets were pocks marked a...
Edgar Allen Poe / Characterization Of Montressor
Characterization Of Montressor In The Cask of Amontillado by Edgar Allen Poe, the dark side of human nature is exemplified through the character ...
College Essays / Character Essay
After reading Arthur Miller's play "A view from the bridge," I am convinced that the most striking character is Marco. He is an Italian immigrant that moved illegally to the United ...
Role of Comedy in Marriage
W.L Courtney, a distinguished editor, stated that "thoughtful laughter is an inner experience-a sort of internal chuckle-which does not display external manifestations. It is the enjoyment of the intellect when situations or characters or sometimes, phrases strike one as happy exhibitions of humor." Jane Austen emphasizes the idea of "thoughtful laugher" in her novel, Pride and Prejudice, through the relationship of Elizabeth and Darcy. "Thoughtful laughter" is notable in Austen's use of the misunderstandings between the characters. These drive the two further apart until the two realize their mistakes were based on pride and prejudice.
The initial conflicted relationship between Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy begins at the Netherfield ball. After Mr. Bingley introduces Elizabeth to Mr. Darcy, he later coldly states to Bingley how Elizabeth is only "tolerable... but not enough to tempt me" (Austen, 8). Elizabeth overhears his comment and is not surprisingly angered. Elizabeth concludes that Mr. Darcy is "only the man who made himself agreeable nowhere" (18). She further assumes that Mr. Darcy is a cold person while in fact he is shy and uncomfortable around others. After the ball in Netherfield, Miss Bingley begins a conversation with Mr. Darcy and asks Elizabeth to join in a playful game to find a defect in Mr. Darcy's character. Elizabeth concludes that Mr. Darcy's "defect is a propensity to hate everyone" (49). Mr. Darcy, on the other hand, rebuts her comment stating that she "is willfully to misunderstand" who he really is (49). Elizabeth bases her faulty conclusion on her experience with Mr. Darcy at Netherfield when he showed no interest to talk to her. Her comment leads Mr. Darcy to conclude that Elizabeth misunderstood his actions. Both characters make incorrect judgments about the other because they believe their pride and prejudice blind them to each other's true character. This brings forth "thoughtful laughter" on the part of the readers because they know the characters are making mistaken judgments.
After the events at Netherfield, Mr. Wickham misleads Elizabeth to believe that Mr. Darcy and his family ruined Mr. Wickham's social standing. Mr. Wickham made false claims about Mr. Darcy's father not leaving part of the Pemberley estate or monetary benefits for his gambling habits. Therefore, Elizabeth believes Mr. Wickham and accuses Mr. Darcy of false charges. Mr. Darcy defends himself in a letter about how Mr. Wickham sprouted the rumors. After Elizabeth receives Mr. Darcy's letter does she begin to understand that she has erred. Consequently, Elizabeth and the Gardiners arrived in Pemberley, Mr. Darcy's home estate. Elizabeth told the Gardiners that she has no reason to go to Pemberley, but Elizabeth comments about her new feelings toward Mr. Darcy when she sees the estate: "I might have been mistress!" (212). Elizabeth comes to realize that if she did not misjudge Mr. Darcy's character, then she could have lived a happy life in Pemberley. Elizabeth begins to see her mistake on Mr. Darcy's character. She contemplates about her mistake during a walk with the Gardiners: "Elizabeth felt that they had entirely mistaken his character, but said nothing" (219). Elizabeth surmises that Mr. Darcy is nowhere close to disagreeable as described by Mr. Wickham. Elizabeth understands that she has wronged Mr. Darcy, and Mr. Darcy realizes that he misjudged Elizabeth. As a result, the relationship between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy begins to foster from the misunderstandings. The meeting at Pemberley and Mr. Darcy's letter show a contrast to their first encounter in Netherfield. This contrast allows the reader to connect "thoughtful laughter" to Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy as they discern and understand each other's errs.
The true meaning of "thoughtful laughter" is different because it does not come from an "external manifestation" but rather a way to express idea through humor. Jane Austen puts Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy in a situation where one makes a faulty judgment about the other. The reader "laughs" as Jane Austen describes the how Elizabeth and Darcy faced challenges that came about from these misunderstandings. However, they came to a conclusion that resulted in a happy relationship when realizing the errors in their decisions. Austen's use of "thoughtful laughter" helped convey the idea that humor through misunderstandings can allow for happiness to be achieved in a relationship.
I just need some advice on how to fix this essay up... The prompt is "thoughtful laughter" and I don't think my argument is solid at all... This is an overdue essay that I need to turn in soon, but I really am struggling in the class and need some more advice from other people. Please let me know anything! Thank you in advance!