It was noted from the very beginning that there were “no partisan movies or conservative agenda,” regarding the article (Course Packet, 92). This summarized the very structure of the article. The article would state a given fact, discuss it in one way that would view McCain is a positive light, then turn right around and analyze it in another way that would view McCain in a negative light.
Take the example of how David Foster Wallace satirizes McCain as “a cool guy” (Course Packet, 107). Previous presidential candidates were in “student government and band,” which was perfect leadership experiences for a future presidential candidate, while McCain was a “varsity jock and hell-raiser” (Course Packet, 107). The audience indirectly sees how McCain is a bad choice for the presidency spot because of how he isn’t as qualified as the previous presidents. However, in the same paragraph, Wallace says how this quality of McCain can be good. Who doesn’t love a presidential candidate that seems like a human being? It’s the perfect commonplace for all voters.
Another good example is McCain’s time as a prisoner of war. His honor of the US military’s Code of Conduct for Prisoners of War showed capability “of devotion to something other… than his own self interest” (Course Packet, 96-97). However, this could also be deemed as bullshit, maybe even “both the truth and bullshit” (Course Packet, 97).
There are two sides to things for Wallace. He displays how one single fact can be twisted and turned to either appeal or repel the audience. This is a tactic that most politicians use (as implied by the article). Not only that, but it can be extended further to the realms of rhetoric. Any fact can be used for our purpose. We just need to know how to redefine terms and use the words to our advantage.
No comments:
Post a Comment