The Slaughterhouse-Five novel is different from most, due to the lack of chronological order in the narrative. The narrator begins the book by discussing his timely desire to write about his experience in Dresden during World War II. However, he has already spent countless hours writing thousands of pages on this confusing subject, all of which have been abandoned. In order to realize his wish to complete this novel, he calls on his old war buddy, Bernard V. O'Hare. After agreeing to reunite with the intention of remembering their days in Dresden, the story begins. The story follows main character Billy Pilgrim who often jumps through time; this is what ultimately creates the lack of chronological order in the story. The story is told through narration, but the narrator who is obviously involved throughout the story is never fully revealed. However, with further research into the time period and other important factors in history, this gap can be bridged. By implementing the traditional analytical approach, one clearly notices the similarities between the education, occupation, and wartime experiences shared by the author Kurt Vonnegut and the narrator of the story; Considering Vonnegut as the narrator, the author himself goes through many war experiences in his own life, due to World War II which he often uses as inspiration for his novels. Many people think, “Vonnegut is best when he talks about his war experiences” (Clark). This hints at the possibility that Slaughterhouse-Five is a product of the true events of Vonnegut's wartime period. Thus, when examining this accusation in more detail, the reader realizes the abundance of discussion about the war that the narrator so obviously speaks about. Here is one of many times this happens in the novel when the narrator explains: “We were formed in ranks, with Russian soldiers guarding us; English, Americans, Dutch, Belgians, French, Canadians, South Africans, New Zealanders, Australians, thousands of us are about to cease being prisoners of war” (Vonnegut, 7). Ultimately, this shows that the narrator was indeed a prisoner of war, providing an opportunity to connect with the author. Ironically, the author himself was a prisoner of war. This is clearly stated: “He was sent as a prisoner of war to Dresden” (Allen). This creates an obvious similarity that continues to insinuate that the narrator and Vonnegut are one and the same, making this accusation more and more concrete. However, this continues after