I need a thesis for 'B.O.C.'

I did a 2,000 word essay on BOC simply as a Post Modernist text n got 65% on it, its not great but I'll put a few key sentences up:

Another purpose of the illustrations is to emphasise the childish nature of the book, or more cryptically the alien nature of the book. The drawing mentioned above assumes that the reader would probably not know what a stork looks like, even though most of the people reading it probably would. These, and more overtly the language (“Like all Earthlings at the point of death…” ) convey the idea that either the author or the reader is not from Earth. This makes sense of, as if a reason were warranted, the fractured, broken rhythm that is Vonnegut’s style; a watching alien could make no more sense of Earth than writers can, which is why bullets are described as “projectiles [that] could wreck the wiring or the bellows or the plumbing of a stubborn human being, even when he was far, far away.” Postmodernity no longer looks for knowledge in truth, but “in a practical subject – humanity.” That is to say Breakfast of Champions is not a truthful interpretation of life via conventional forms, but through the laws it creates for itself. Central to the theology of Postmodernism is that the laws are there to be investigated, not adhered to

We may note that Breakfast of Champions is a classic example of a Postmodernist text by its fusion of playfulness and seriousness. So this novel of “junk” becomes, at the end, a way for Vonnegut to exorcise his characters, to free them. In the preface he states how the book’s maturity with a “drawing of an *beep* but the book has, at its very end, a drawing of the author crying. The novel drifts in and out of seriousness, and revels in the notion of plurality, celebrating the fact that texts such as this do not fit neatly into a category but are willing to be serious and funny at the same time. This play-making furthers the point made earlier about incommensurability because it is neither a comedy nor a tragedy (or it is both). One can read this duality as the novel refusing to conform, or simply as Postmodernism refusing to be classified as “high art”. By switching between the two genres they each become a lampoon of that which they are mimicking, but we can trust neither because, as Lyotard states, “everything received has to be suspected” Even the drawings serve a double purpose, to emphasise both the childish nature of the novel, but also to remind us that one can be both funny and serious.

If this strikes the reader as an odd plot device it is because Postmodern texts, while accepting that so much has gone before and nothing new can be done (a point which Vonnegut ends his preface with, stating that only Romeo and Juliet and music is sacred) it bends the “rules” which apparently exist in a way to investigate them. It becomes art which refuses a hierarchy, which does not want to fit into a literary canon. Not only does this example reject grand narratives, it mocks them, and in saying that only Shakespeare is sacred he is mocking the rest of the literary genre. One may say that Postmodernism never takes itself too seriously, so when Vonnegut enters as a character the reader is made further aware of the book’s construction. Later on Vonnegut writes, “I had made him up, of course…I made Rosewater [a peripheral character in this novel] an alcoholic in another book….I could have killed him…but I let them live on” which references the whole literary genre as one of Vonnegut’s earlier efforts was entitled, God Bless You, Mr Rosewater. So if the reader finds themselves querying the novel, Vonnegut has “won” because we become aware that this is not real life.

Hope I don't get done for this...