Angles of Vision

I find it very simple to see the similarities between these four types of litterature. These readings all touch on the subject of truth in very different ways but after reading them all you understand that personal truth its very much based on perception and experience. In "I know the moon" you see very clearly that the animals all know that the moon exists yet they relate the moon to their lifestles and what they know (Example the frog relates the moon to a lilly pad and a lilly pads are what the frog sees and deals with all day.) In the book they found the scientist because they all percieved him as the one they could depend on for the "truth". When the scientist told them what the moon truly was they all realized what they thought was wrong and mor together agreed because they all trusted this scientist. In the book "the wolves in the walls" Alkl but the little girl believed that if the wqolves came out of the walls then it would all be over yet they could not explain why or even what "it" was. When the wolves did indeed come out of the walls the family took to action and ran from the house never intending to step in again for they believed it was all over. The little girl who was not told what was over or even why still decided that her pig poppet was more important than "it" and went for it. The wolves themselves believed the exact same thing the humans did and fleed. There was no such thing as it being all over yet they have been told that and believed something that wasn't true. In "how to tell a war story" Obrien explains how he watched a younger man die and goes on about how he could swear that the sun was what killed this young man. When in reality he stepped on a mine right on the sunline throwing what was left of his body high into a tree. He also spoke of a man who had tried to tell him a story and for effect he lied about things to make the story more and to get his point across better. I barely recall duickinson's poems but i believe that she reffered to truth being immortal and i believe compared truth to a god. After reading them all you get to understand that there is what happened and then there are the multiple different stories of the witnesses never really the same but all have the same result. My favorite of the four had to be "how to tell a war story" i could see myself most agreeing with Obriens way of explaining how it really is all how it's seen. I especially loved how he said there are no war stories there are love stories and other stories based of the emotions and not the actual war, and how the war was just details in the story or a setting. I do believe that truth does have many variations and reality can be turned to truth over and over untill it no longer resembles itself