Close this search box.

As all English majors know, there are dozens of different ways to analyze literature. You can pick apart a book based on when it was written, or by whom. You can look at how the book treats women and people of color, and you can spend your life arguing about whether or not that (often shoddy) treatment was intentional. You can compare any of those characteristics to those of another author. You can even compare an author to himself.

Kurt Vonnegut has been analyzed in all these ways, but he may never have been analyzed the way journalist Ben Blatt does it: by the numbers. Blatt’s recent book, Nabokov’s Favorite Word Is Mauve, examines dozens of classic and bestselling authors using that so-called nemesis of English majors: mathematics. But Blatt presents his information well, and the charts and graphs provided are helpful and clear. Let’s take a look at how Vonnegut’s word usage and sentence structure compare to other authors.

Let’s start by judging Vonnegut by the most revered writing guide of all time: Strunk & White’s The Elements of Style. Vonnegut himself highly recommended the book in his essay “How to Write with Style.” Its rules of thumb include avoiding adverbs ending in –ly and eliminating the word “not” from one’s vocabulary.

Vonnegut did a pretty good job of keeping the word “not” out of his work. He only uses the word “not” on an average of 77 times per 10,000 words, putting him in the bottom fifth of Blatt’s sample of 50 classic and contemporary authors. His –ly adverb usage also isn’t too bad. In a sample of 15 authors’ –ly adverb usage, Vonnegut, with a rate of 101 adverbs per 10,000 words, ended up in the bottom third. (To put things into perspective, the sample’s greatest adverb avoider was Ernest Hemingway, and its greatest adverb abuser was E L James.)

Now let’s talk pronouns. Specifically, “he” and “she.” Like almost all of his male colleagues, Vonnegut is a habitual “he” user. He uses “he” more than “she” in every one of his novels, and Slaughterhouse-Five uses “he” 84 percent of the time. 13 percent of the 50 male-authored books Blatt surveyed used “he” 80 to 90 percent of the time, and 7 percent used it 90 to 100 percent of the time. The 50 female authors surveyed were much different; the only one who used “he” more often than Vonnegut did in Slaughterhouse was Willa Cather in Death Comes for the Archbishop.

Half the he-she comparison chart in Blatt’s book. Slaughterhouse-Five is featured in the bottom third (just 3 slots above the lowest purple).

Why does Vonnegut use “he” so much? Simple: his books tend to star men. Not that there aren’t women, of course, but they are rarely, if ever, major characters. In the case of Slaughterhouse-Five, this makes sense; a war zone in the 1940s would naturally have been composed mostly of men. But this doesn’t explain away the rarity of female main characters in Vonnegut’s other books.

Or maybe it does. In another study, Blatt considers the words authors use the most in their work. He calls these words “nod words” after author Michael Connelly’s near-constant use of the word “nod.” To qualify as a “nod word,” words have to be used in every book by a particular author at a rate of at least 100 for every 100,000 words. It also can’t be a proper noun or an extremely obscure word. This rules out words specific to a particular fictional universe, like Harry Potter’s “Muggle.” One of Vonnegut’s “nod words” is “said,” which tells us hardly anything except that his books have a lot of past-tense dialogue, but another is “father,” which may hark back to Kurt’s strained relationship with his own father. Another is “war.” Vonnegut’s books do usually have some kind of war caught up in them, whether it’s being fought during the story or not. Could Vonnegut’s understanding of wars and how they’re fought explain why he tends not to put women in starring roles? Maybe, maybe not.

So far we’ve just looked at individual words. How about sentences? This is where Vonnegut becomes more of an outlier. As most Vonnegut fans could guess, the most frequent sentence used in any of his novels is “So it goes” from Slaughterhouse-Five. It’s used 106 times, which is more than once every three pages. What’s more, it’s used more often than any other sentence in any other work in Blatt’s sample of 50 well-known authors.

Vonnegut also uses anaphora constantly. Anaphora is a literary term describing repetition of a word or group of words at the beginning of a sentence. For the purposes of his study, Blatt defined anaphora as a sentence starting with the same word or the same two words as the sentence preceding it. In Blatt’s list of books from his sample with the highest one-word anaphora, three were written by Vonnegut: Breakfast of Champions, Slaughterhouse-Five, and Slapstick. On the list of works with the highest use of two-word anaphora, two works were by Vonnegut: Slapstick again and The Sirens of Titan.

According to Blatt, two-word anaphora is more likely to be intentional than one-word. This passage from Cat’s Cradle, cited by Blatt in the book, is a clear example of intentional two-word anaphora:

Before we took the measure of each other’s passions, however, we talked about Frank Hoenikker, and we talked about the old man, and we talked a little about Asa Breed, and we talked about the General Forge and Foundry Company, and we talked about the Pope and birth control, about Hitler and the Jews. We talked about phonies. We talked about truth. We talked about gangsters; we talked about business. We talked about the nice poor people who went to the electric chair; and we talked about the rich bastards who didn’t. We talked about religious people who had perversions. We talked about a lot of things.

Not all of Vonnegut’s anaphora is this extreme, but it’s still a constant presence in his work. There are 87 instances in Slaughterhouse-Five where 3 sentences in a row begin with the same word. Here’s a list of the 10 most common 3-word sentence openers in Slaughterhouse-Five:

1. So it goes
2. There was a
3. It was a
4. And so on
5. He was a
6. He had been
7. He had a
8. They had been
9. One of the
10. Now they were

What would Vonnegut have thought of this numbers-oriented analysis of his work? Well, he did write a master’s thesis about mapping stories as curves on graphs (to watch him explain it, go to this site), so he may well have been interested in studying literature using numbers. We at KVML know we are.

Kathi Badertscher, PhD

Director of Graduate Programs at the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy
Kathi Badertscher, PhD, is Director of Graduate Programs at the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. Dr. Badertscher teaches a variety of BA, MA, and doctoral courses, including Applying Ethics in Philanthropy and History of Philanthropy. She has participated in several Teaching Vonnegut workshops and is a member of the Kurt Vonnegut Museum and Library. Dr. Badertscher has been a guest speaker on ethics in philanthropy, including at the National Association of Charitable Gift Planners – Indianapolis Council; Association of Fundraising Professionals – Indiana Chapter; and Zhou Enlai School of Government, Nankai University, Tianjin, China. In 2019 she received IUPUI Office for Women, Women’s Leadership Award for Newcomer Faculty. In 2019 and 2020 she received the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, Graduate Teaching Award.
Dr. Badertscher’s publications include “Fundraising for Advocacy and Social Change,” co-authored with Shariq Siddiqui in Achieving Excellence in Fundraising, 5th ed., 2022; “Insulin at 100: Indianapolis, Toronto, Woods Hole, and the ‘Insulin Road,’ co-authored with Christopher Rutty, Pharmacy in History (2020); and three articles in the Indiana Magazine of History: “A New Wishard Is on the Way,” “Evaline Holliday and the Work of Community Service,” and “Social Networks in Indianapolis during the Progressive Era.” Her chapters on social welfare history will appear in three upcoming edited volumes on the history of philanthropy, including “The Legacy of Edna Henry and Her Contributions to the IU School of Social Work,” Women at Indiana University: Views of the Past and the Future, edited by Andrea Walton, Indiana University Press, 2022 (forthcoming). Dr. Badertscher is also the Philanthropy and Nonprofits Consulting Editor for the forthcoming Digital Encyclopedia of Indianapolis, edited by David J. Bodenhamer and Elizabeth Van Allen, Indiana University Press, 2021. Dr. Badertscher is an active volunteer in the Indianapolis community. At present, she is a Coburn Place Safe Haven Board Member and a Children’s Bureau/Families First Brand and Marketing Advisor. Dr. Badertscher holds the MA in History from Indiana University and the MA and PhD in philanthropic studies from the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy.

Volunteer With KVML

Kurt Vonnegut Museum and Library Volunteer Application

Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions about this application’s content.