|
|
|
|
|
|
The Glorious Loyalty Oath Crusade gives the reader a taste of Heller's satire. On one level what is satirized is the super-patriotism of those who think allegiance to one's country can be forced and who define loyalty in terms of superficial acts. Heller gives us the distorted logic that no one who is loyal would object to proving it by signing pledges, and he shows the distortion by carrying that logic to its consequence: the more you sign the more loyal you are – it doesn't even matter whether you mean it or not. Note, too, how Captain Black confuses adults expressing their commitments with children learning the meaning of allegiance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The satire on super-patriotism operates on a higher level, however, as a satire against dominating bureaucracy in general as the squadron begins to realize that the administrators whose job is to serve them have taken control of their lives instead. Appropriately, it is Major — de Coverly who puts an end to the crusade. Here he is described as having a ''Jehovan bearing,'' and we are told that the "wall" of officers parts before him like the Red Sea, a reference to Moses' deliverance of the Hebrew people. The injection of a Godlike figure here picks up on the allusion to Jehovah in chapter two. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Besides setting a framework for the squadron's deliverance from the crusade, however, this build-up of Major — de Coverly prepares the way for the comic deflation of expectations which occurs when the supposedly suave and indomitable major orders, "Gimme eat." Despite the deflation, however, the major – who really does affect his world – contrasts with Captain Black who can only pretend to be "a man of real consequence" through the imposition of his will in pseudo causes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chapter twelve begins with the men waiting in the rain and ends with the rain ceasing. This not only establishes rain as a metaphor, but allows the introduction of Hungry Joe's dream as a metaphor, too. In between are scenes of the moving of the bomb line, Wintergreen's competition with Milo, the recurring argument between Clevinger and Yossarian, the story of the La Page glue gun, and the drunk scene. How are these to be understood? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First, Heller helps us through the context of style. The punning description of Nately's "grave young face" sets the tone for the chapter, a tone broken by comic action. This comedy is aided by the repetition of lines, particularly those concerning Peckem's "ability to get men to agree." This device, however, alerts us to the device of juxtaposition which dominates the "theological" discussion: each time someone takes the name of |
|
|
|
|