Past. Present. What’s the Difference?

Even though we only read three stories from Fire and Forget, (and only talked about two in class), it interesting how each author is able to portray the degrading, dehumanizing aspects of war through their storytelling. In “Redeployment” by Phil Klay, it’s obvious that the war has changed the narrator. With his first statement of “We shot dogs. Not by accident” (39), you can sense his indifference to the injustices he has committed. He finds himself unfazed by the fact that he went along with shooting the dogs, even though he is a dog person. The narrator then brings his detached nature back home where he has to deal with his dog, Vicar, who is slowly dying. When the time comes, instead of taking him to a vet, the narrator decides to put the dog down himself, explaining that he knows how to do it the correct way.

In the time leading up the the deed, the narrator treats this task as his mission. He recalls the training they had and how he’s been in similar situations before. He observes that the hesitation he has before he completes his mission is similar to one he experienced back in the war where he watched his comrades shoot an insurgent floating in a cesspool. Back then, he hesitated, consequently failing his mission. But now, his training has gotten him to this point, and now is not the time for failure. He was unable to complete his mission in the past, so he must make up for it in the present. He kills his dog in the most humane way he knows, quick and painless. At the end, he admits “[He] couldn’t remember what [he] was going to do with the body” (52). He is so immersed in that wartime procedure, that when it comes to disposing of the body, he doesn’t know what to do. In the army, it is assumed that they didn’t move the dogs they killed. They just left them there, lying dead in the streets. But, this isn’t just an ordinary dog; it’s his dog. This goes to show how detached the war environment has made him. He is, at times, unable to bring himself into reality until it’s too late.

This story contrasts with the other short story we read called “When Engaging Targets, Remember” by Gavin Ford Kovite. This story was in a “choose your own adventure” format and centered around a young college student who has been drafted into a difficult military situation. The format of “choose your own adventure” is a very interesting choice because it allows readers to be immersed in the narrator’s world. To some extent, you control the character’s actions and so you are partly responsible for the imminent repercussions. But, in typical “choose your own adventure” stories, there is always a good path and a bad path, whereas in Kovite’s story, there essentially is no “good” path. Both storylines have unfortunate outcomes. Refusing to shoot at the engaging vehicle causes you to lose the trust of your fighting comrades as they have decided to risk their lives to save yours and you didn’t return the favor. In essence, you are being frowned upon for hesitating to kill a potentially innocent person. You think too much and are therefore penalized. On the flipside, if you do shoot and kill the passengers inside the approaching vehicle, even though you have chosen the “right” option, it doesn’t feel right. From then on, you are a changed man. You have killed someone and, as the main character admits, “you will want to kill again” (171).

Reading and discussing these stories back to back shines light on the true nature of war. It doesn’t matter what shape you come into the war, you almost always come out a different person, and possibly for the worst. More humane actions are frowned upon and considered “cowardly”, for you have a mission. Consequently, these two characters will never stop having missions in life that will correlate to their times on the battlefield. No matter how much they fire, they can never forget.