The device the author used in turning it into some strange, over the top mystery is inferior to having our protagonist spend a conscious lifetime dealing with the same horrors we both recognize to be so destrucitve. I think the far out aspect dilutes the real horrors you described so well...

I think you may be missing the point: The mysterious aspect that you see as sensationalism, I see, simply, as our protagonist's point of view---his mind is confused and forever lost. His life is unconscious. That's the whole point. It's not a concsious lifetime dealing with horrors. It's a life of confusion, of knowing you desperately need to be somewhere and never being able to get there.

The author has used the best method possible for allowing us to understand this by making us see the world from the injured soldier's point of view---which, to us, is mysterious and confusing---no less so than it is to the soldier himself. Therein lies the horror, the drama, and the poignancy of the story.

Yes, the narrative is designed to be eerie and mysterious, but I don't think it's all that over-the-top or far out. It is, in fact, a very creative and compelling way to tell a story. If it had been simply told straightforward as "the facts of war's horrors and how they destroyed a young man's life", I think the story would have been nothing more than a maudlin melodrama, a cliche. A USA Network TV movie.

Guess we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this one.