TOW #24: Let's Pretend This Never Happened (IRB #3, Part 2)

Let’s Pretend This Never Happened is a “mostly true” memoir by Jenny Lawson, which presents her life as a series of humorous, albeit disturbing stories. Her funny stories are designed to help her reader realize that “... you are defined not by life’s imperfect moments, but by your reaction to them” (Dedication). 

Having finished the book, I can now examine her rhetorical strategies on a large scale. One of the most important things Lawson does is arrange her book chronologically. Lawson begins at the beginning of her life and works through her years growing up, and then her years as an adult. While this might sound rather basic, it is crucial to her work due to the fact that Lawson clearly (as discussed in the previous blog post) wants her audience to feel a connection to her as a person. Thus, as Lawson shares the funny, happy, and devastating moments of her life from as far back as she can remember, it is as if Lawson’s story becomes part of the reader’s story, as a close family friend, or even as a family member. Therefore, when she later references earlier times, the reader can think humorously to him or herself “I remember when Jenny did that!” just as two friends recounting tales from childhood would do. This closeness between author and audience is key to Lawson’s achievement of her goal to embrace the imperfections of life, because Lawson is a clear example of someone who has, and who is, to the reader, very likeable. 

Another overarching strategy used by Lawson is to creatively name her titles. Again, while a seemingly basic strategy, it is very effective. Though Lawson’s stories were interesting, after a few, interest might drop off. The cleverly named chapters were a constant motivation to keep reading, as they piqued curiosity. Titles like “Thanks for the Zombies, Jesus” and “Honestly, I Don’t Even Know Where I Got That Machete: A Comic Tragedy in Three Parts Days” make the reader confused enough to want to know what Jesus has to do with Zombies, and why Jenny (I feel like I can use her first name after reading this book, which means she reached her goal) has a machete! Without readers interested enough to keep consistently reading, Jenny Lawson could never attain her goal. However, with the strategies she used, I remained interested and believe that she did indeed achieve her goal.

TOW #23: Eddie Rickenbacker on Raoul Lufbery's Death (Written Text)

Raoul Lufbery is recognized as a French and as an American ace in the First World War for his 17 confirmed combat victories (and supposed numerous others). He served in an American volunteer unit to aid France before America officially entered the war called the Lafayette Escadrille. When America did enter the war in 1917, he remained as an instructor for new American pilots, one of whom was Eddie Rickenbacker. Lufbery’s plane was shot down in May of 1918 and he apparently jumped from the cockpit, after which he fell some 200 feet and landed on a garden picket, which was ultimately the cause of his death. Rickenbacker, later an ace himself, describes first hand the death of his instructor in his book of memoirs, The Flying Circus, which was intended to be read by the American public.

Rickenbacker arranges his memoir in a manner that mimics a flow of thoughts when one is telling a story. Rather than just describing the event, he explains how Lufbery’s last flight began, then adds in a bit about Lufbery, as if realizing as an afterthought that his audience might not be entirely sure who the man is, then he proceeds to describe the fateful moment, and follows that with a flashback to a few days before the event. This format, though not chronologically organized, gives the reader the impression that Rickenbacker was truly affected by the death of his instructor. It also gives the piece a much more natural feel, so that it seems as though it was spoken directly to the reader, not written with many revisions. This is likely important to Rickenbacker, as he was well-known amongst the American public, and probably wanted to maintain his image as a common American hero, not to distance himself by sounding too formal for the people.

Additionally, Rickenbacker refers to Lufbery by his nickname, “Luf.” This informal attitude towards the major builds his credibility as someone close to the man. As a friend and apparent eyewitness, the public is much more likely to accept his version of the story, though the truth is largely debated. It is interesting that Rickenbacker chooses to tell the version of the story that Lufbery’s plane burst into flames and he leapt to “certain death rather than endure the slow torture of burning to a crisp.” In fact, there has never been evidence to prove that Lufbery’s plane was aflame, and eyewitnesses much closer to the event did not describe the plane as being on fire. It is much more likely that Lufbery was standing to fix his jammed Lewis machine gun and was thrown from the plane when it flipped. Rickenbacker seems to be paying one last tribute to his mentor by telling America that Lufbery’s jump was a “hopeless but a heroic attempt to preserve his life for his country!” Given his own popularity and the perpetuation of this story of Lufbery’s death, such as in Jeff Shaara’s To the Last Man, shows that he was largely successful.

TOW #22: Information Wanted (Visual Text)

On June 4, 1898, about a month after Commodore Dewey’s stunning victory at Manila on May 1, a cartoon was published in Judge, an American satirical magazine. The cartoon depicts a rather shocked-looking Uncle Sam holding a dark-skinned baby, wearing what appears to be traditional native clothing. The cartoonist aims to show the bewilderment of America at the imperialistic position it got itself in due to the Spanish-American War.

Attached to the crying baby is a tag that says “Philippines with compliments of Dewey.” This implies that the Philippines was a territorial acquisition, a gift to America by a very capable commodore, not a land with its own people that ought to have independence. In the cartoon, Uncle Sam looks quite confused, likely because America went into the Spanish-American War with the intention of liberating Cuba from oppressive Spanish rule, but quickly became an imperialistic power of the same nature as the hated Spain. At the very bottom of the cartoon is written: “INFORMATION WANTED. Uncle Sam - ‘Now that I’ve got it, what am I going to do with it?’” The comment further supports the idea that America was unsure of its new position. America, a nation which had rejected colonization at its origin, was ending the nineteenth century a colonizing nation itself.

The cartoon is set up so that Uncle Sam and the baby are in the forefront. The depiction of America as the strong, old, white man, and the Philippines as a screaming baby of a darker skin tone, depicts America’s perceived relationship to the Filipinos - one of superiority. Surely one could argue that America was depicted as a man and the Philippines as a small child just to show the comparative strength of each on the world scale, but ultimately the baby is still crying, making it appear not only of weaker physical strength, but also of a weaker mental strength. The traditional garb appearing on the crying baby makes it seem as though the indigenous culture is inferior to the white man’s culture. Even though the cartoon is meant to be mocking to American government to some degree, it still highlights the perceived superiority of the white man.

Finally, in the background there are ships. I cannot tell for sure whether they are supposed to be Dewey’s recently victorious forces, or the German and other European navies that crept into the Manila harbor waiting to see if America would leave so that they might fill the power vacuum left by Spain. The fact that they are in the back and that Uncle Sam is facing away from them makes them appear as yet another problem brewing on the horizon, which, when Uncle Sam notices them, will direct his decision as to what is to be done with the Filipino baby. That is, they will affect America’s decision to grant the Philippines independence or to remain in control of them.

TOW #21: The American Boy (Written Text)

In May of 1900, before taking becoming the United States’ president, Teddy Roosevelt wrote an essay in a popular youth periodical, St. Nicholas Magazine For Young Folks. His “American Boy” was one in a series of essays on boyhood, and Roosevelt wrote to inspire each young boy to develop into a “good American man.”

Roosevelt repeatedly juxtaposes opposites in his writing, beginning with the first line: “Of course, what we have a right to expect of the American boy is that he shall turn out to be a good American man.” In this case, boy and man are the figures he is contrasting. He follows this with a series of sentences that make similar juxtapositions, like “he won’t be much of a man unless he is a good deal of a boy,” or “coward” and “weakling” versus “work hard and play hard.” Ultimately, the repeated contrast of opposites is meant to highlight the importance of boyhood to the development of a good man. In the first few paragraphs Roosevelt makes clear that this is his position, but does not give much evidence to back it up. He instead relies on the audience accepting what he says as truth. The juxtaposition has much to do with why Roosevelt’s stance is so easily acceptable. When opposites are proposed, one sees two distinct options, one of which often is more preferable, and the audience can clearly follow the logic of the preferable options to the author’s intended conclusion. For Roosevelt, that is the characteristics of a good boy from which a good man can develop.

Another interesting tactic Roosevelt employs is appeal to the lower class. He writes: “Of course boys who live under such fortunate conditions that they have to do either a good deal of outdoor work or a good deal of what might be called natural outdoor play do not need this athletic development.” He is not-so-subtly stating that the lower class laborers have an advantage over the upper class in becoming real men. This is a unique approach, and to some degree an accurate one, if the characteristics of a man really are the ones he defined. However, I wonder about the effectiveness of his strategy, because while most American boys would fit the description he is giving, would most of the audience of a magazine be poor or wealthy?