#9. Could-have, Should-have, Would-have...and the Nothing-at-all's

If you could change something about the novel, what would it be?

I would change absolutely nothing about it. I realize this sounds sooo lame, but I thought about it.

After thinking of what I didn't like and what I did like about the book, I realized that you have pros and cons in life. Vonnegut tried to make his novel realistic in a sci-fi sort of method, which worked with the events. To take away any part of the novel would be to destroy the very essence of it. It may not seem that the trivial sections of the book would matter (such as what books Kilgore Trout wrote), or it may seem that some events were not given enough time to play out (such as Edgar Deby's execution). The reality is that that was how Vonnegut wanted to write the book. He actually graded his novels at one point in his life (Google this if you don't believe me). The only novel he gave an A+ to was to S-5. That says something about how he felt about this particular work. He downplayed Derby's execution because it was just one more death in his book. So it goes.

And think about it this way:

• Is there a more comedically tragic way ofValencia dying rather than of carbon monoxide poisoning? I have an odd sense of humor, I must admit, but the way Vonnegut described her anxiety when news of Billy's plane accident hit made the whole scene amusing. Ironically, she was the one who ended up dying as she was on her way to visit Billy in hospital.
• Is there a better beginning to a book than giving it all away? It's like a PowerPoint presentation, you present Table of Contents  for what you will cover, and then you break it down. It helps organize a reader's thought process. The quality of a book should not have to rely on surprise and suspense, but on its content and uniqueness. And what's more unique than the random line "Poo-tee-weet"?
• Is there really a better way than Pilgrim being killed othered than by a hitman of Lazzarro's choice? I doubt it. There was satisfaction and a sense of closure when Lazzarro fulfilled his revenge. Otherwise, Lazzarro's character would have just been another lame all-words-no-show kinda guy, which is already ubiquitous in life. That would have been boring.

S-5 is perfect the way it is because I couldn't imagine it being written with alternative scenes. It may be a psychologically human thing to think this way, but that's my take on this.