Fallen Angels CRQs chs. 4-5 and 6-7

English 11
Fallen Angels Chapter 4-5

Please answer the following questions carefully and completely. Write a brief paragraph for each question. Use evidence from the text.


A) At the bottom of page 36, Monaco “started to say something else, then shrugged it off, and left.” What might he have started to say? Why didn’t he just say it? Does the author’s decision to describe it this way—to tell you he wanted to say something but not have him actually say it—serve an artistic purpose?

B) In chapter 4 we find the first exploration of the significance of the title. Explain.

C) In chapter 4 we learn from the same story of Lt. Carrol’s transformation and the reason for Perry’s and Peewee’s assignment to Alpha Company. One might also find in the story more about the significance of the title. Explain.

D) Lobel says that if he owned the village (where they are doing “PR” work, according to our narrator) he’d “make it into a real jungle scene”(44). What does he then describe? What irony does this ask us to think about? Why is this important? How might this be related to our big question—how does one tell a true war story?


E) Identify the role of and importance of the following:

• VC and ARVN
• Lobel
• Walowick
• Stewart
• “People in Hollywood don’t pee.”
• Paris/President Johnson/Hawaii
• The medical profile (more)




English 11
Fallen Angels
Please answer the following questions carefully and completely. Write a brief paragraph for each question. Use evidence from the text.
Chapter 6 and 7

A) “There you go again Perry. . . .You’re really hooked on reality. It’s a bad scene.” Who says this? To whom? In what context? Explain how this and similar samples of dialogue develop this character and how this character might help explore some of the themes of the novel.

B) (this is a big question—long answer) Explain the eight different answers to the question the film crew asks. Who says what? Considering what we know of these characters, do these answers seem genuine?

C) What is the point of the emphasis on “three confirmed kills”?