Hacker News Reader

Comment by tetris11 | Hacker News Reader

We had one member of the troup that did the real life Great Escape visit our school.

He handed out schematics of how they tunneled, their day-to-day logistics, communication with the outside, etc.

It was a really fun talk, but it ended on a somber note where those who did not escape were later punished/executed in revenge for the escape taking place.

In this context, someone asked him, "was it worth it?" and all I remember about his answer was him gripping his handout and giving a monosyllable reply.

View on HN

Both yes and no are one syllable. Your drawn out drama-incucing style of writing left a huge hanger that makes it unpleasurable.

I suspect that’s intentional. Not all writing aims to be pleasurable, and I suspect the parent comment illustrates the gut-wrenching pain of war really well.

What do I as a reader want the answer to be? That it was worth the death of his friends? That he’d rather they never tried? No answer is happy, and I think that’s somewhat the point. Even more touching if it’s a true story, life is sometimes so poetic it hurts.

> What do I as a reader want the answer to be?

Whatever he feels. Would he do it again?

Some writing conveys beliefs, and other writing makes readers think about their own beliefs. Both are valid, and the resulting effect may not even follow the writer’s intention. I feel this writing mostly makes me interrogate my own beliefs.

Making these types of choices are done in the interest of the writer and not the reader. Plain and simple. It draws intrigue, sometimes undue. This is one of them. That doesn't make it bad or wrong to do. As a side note, generally, its not a good idea to take make stances defending someone acting in self-interest with the guise of "art".

> Making these types of choices are done in the interest of the writer and not the reader.

I strongly disagree with this. There is a long tradition of leaving obvious questions unanswered, to force a reader to really think. A short list of some that have affected my life:

- “Mending Wall” by Robert Frost (it’s unclear whether “good fences make good neighbors” is supposed to be the true belief of the author, or the inaccurate belief of a character)

- the book of Job in the Old Testament (it’s ambiguous whether Job ever sins and turns his back on God, despite that very question initiating the conflict)

- “Jesus Christ Superstar” (doesn’t actually take a stance on whether the character of Jesus in the musical was good or not, leaving the viewer to think about it for themselves)

I know there are many others, because we explicitly studied this technique in class. It’s like the Socratic method for writing.

> “art”

My understanding of art as a field is that it largely attempts to remove any restrictions over what can or can’t be art. I think the scare quotes is contrary to that. Idk, I tend to believe most experts in their fields, including artists.

this is not one of those scenarios. The answer is clearly not obvious.

I see "gripping his handout" as significantly more vivid than the uttered response -- which OP confirms to have eluded their memory. That's the story: the teller's reaction to the question was more visceral than verbal.

Sometimes the truth is inherently dramatic. I know that when I've responded in that way -- clenching and mumbling a monosyllable -- the clench is honest, the syllable may be effectively meaningless.

And leaves no meaningful result. Without knowing why he gripped the paper it is purely left for interpretation and does not guide to a singular understanding.

The emotional response is meaningful. A desire for simple truths is helpful in some areas of life. Handling ambiguity and complexity is helpful in others. Applying an engineering mindset to emotion is a sure route to madness. Perhaps you could look at the story as a koan, and it might aggravate you less.

If it's the famous Great Escape about which the movie was made, only three men who escaped made it to freedom, and just eleven more were recaptured and survived to the end of the war— the rest of the 77 were shot. Of those 14 survivors, most passed away in the 1990s, so if you actually did get to meet one, that's pretty neat!

Certainly the depiction in the movie is that it was absolutely worth it to the men; maybe in practical terms it resulted in greater loss of life than just cooperating with the confinement, but there is value to the spirit in resisting evil that goes beyond the simple imperative to stay alive.

I bet you're right about there being value to the spirit. But if I understand correctly escape was also regarded as a matter of duty. By escaping you would not only stand a chance of making it back to Allied lines, but you would also tie up German forces searching for you.

What syllable?

I genuinely can't remember, but it left me feeling washed out.

I want to think it was "nuts"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com