As we step away from Sarah Burns and The Central Park Five, we move from a gritty and dark story about wrongfully convicted youths of color, to a rather sporadic novel about Nick Flynn’s life. In terms of the class and what we are learning, we are moving from arrangement and invention, the two forms of judicial rhetoric, to style, a form of deliberative rhetoric.
We have not begun watching the film that is planning to correspond with The Ticking is the Bomb nor have we delved deeply into a lot of rhetorical keywords that we will learn about in the near future. Thus, I will try and focus on an analysis of the first chapter/section of Flynn’s novel as well as continue discourse upon the one we had in Tuesday’s (2/25) class.
We briefly went over the core/key aspects of deliberative rhetoric, which was in part about calling to the future. The point of deliberative rhetoric is to sway an audience depending on the particular situation, requiring a varying sense of decorum that fits with your audience. So far, in the first 20 pages or so of this novel I am thrown through a bombardment of feelings, emotions, past experiences, anxieties, awards, death, and the list goes on. Because of this, although there have been hints in the novel of a major plot point or theme, I cannot, with any form of certainty decipher a major plot point or theme.
One thing that was brought up at the very end of class was the cover of the book, and what that might mean for the book itself. A fellow student of mine brought up the fact that the ticking of the bomb is the bomb itself. It was an eye-opening observation with only 20 pages of loose writing in her arsenal. What she meant was that in political and/or military rhetoric we are constantly hearing of the enemy and how they are an imminent threat to freedom, democracy, etc. but that fear-inducing rhetoric could be the bigger bomb than an actual ‘bomb’ that a terrorist might blow up. Being a sociology major, this is something that is prevalent in a lot of social studies regarding legislation and the fear of public safety among the public. Basically, our fear can not only be used, but manipulated in order to garner support for certain legislations that are not good ones with a clear mind, but in the midst of panic, can be passed with the rhetoric of protection and safety.
I am also extremely curious to hear more about Flynn’s parents. He keeps going back to his father in particular, but gives multiple accounts regarding both. It seems as though his family has had a lot of problems and these problems, Flynn feels have been passed down to him. Flynn does mention that he gave up drinking because of his father, but the way he writes, specifically about the way he is hesitant about loving his unborn daughter shows his at least subconscious remembering of his parents and grandparent’s issues
With this in mind I cannot wait to continue reading with the hope of Flynn exploring his family history and background more, along with where he takes us in regards to torture and responses to terrorism. These first 20 pages have been a confusing, but enticing introduction to Flynn’s writing. His stream-of-consciousness style makes the reader curious as to what he can come up with next.
David's Art of Rhetoric Blog 