Textual Analysis Essay

Matt Williams

Wendy

English 1010

September 25, 2007

Textual Analysis Essay

David Griffith’s Prime Directive is an interesting essay, talking about a multitude of subjects, but bringing them all home to one main theme: human nature. He relates to us a true story of a night in his life: the night before Halloween. He opens up to us using a night in his life, and talks to us about politics and human nature. He uses imagery and familiar figures of speech to make his point and to win us over to his way of thinking.

The structure of Griffith’s essay is just that of a story. He tells the story chronologically. Yet his theme is still expressed strongly, and in an organized way. It is as if he himself is reminded and convinced in the order that he tells, reminds, and convinces us. It flows and makes sense. His tone and attitude throughout the essay is that of a character; a man trying to have a good time and trying to stay away from the house, which exemplifies loneliness. His voice throughout the essay is somewhat humorous, but is mainly serious, as he is bringing up a rather grave and touchy subject.

Griffith opens up on the night before Halloween, telling us about the start to his night. “…the world seems rife with omens.” (Griffith 125) Here he uses foreshadowing, warning us of the upcoming events and things to come. Throughout the essay, he informs us of his night, the parties he goes too, the conversations he participates in, informs of us what the Prime Directive is, and other various things. He appears down-to-earth by trying to relate to us, whether it is by use of cell phones to him mentioning names of popular music artists. “I flip open the cell phone and scroll through my list of contacts; I need company. That’s the genius of the thing—it cuts loneliness.” (Griffith 126) Here he relates to us, because a lot of us use our phones to keep us company, to find people to talk to, to text message, etc. “I flip open the cell phone; it makes a xylophonic noise; I arbitrarily push buttons to give the appearance that I have official business here.” (Griffith 126) He also uses his phone as a means of escape, showing that people don’t like being caught seemingly out of place; that they want to appear to be important.

Next he opens up some about his home life, letting us know where he’s coming from, while at the same time revealing his guilt and sorrow. “I should be in Indiana helping my wife hang pictures, or raking leaves…” (Griffith 126-7) This lets us know why he is out going to parties instead of being with his family. While he is at a party, discussion arises around Star Trek. They mention the Prime Directive. “The Prime Directive is the moral code that governs the conduct of all Space Federation members; it says that no Star Fleet personnel may interfere with the healthy development of alien life and culture.” (Griffith 127-8) Here he is still in story mode, but sets up the theme of the essay: politics and human nature. They’ve struck gold! The room erupts with excitement! Griffith uses this to bring home the idea of politics, and to introduce the war in Iraq. “The room erupts—we’ve hit upon something. Star Trek is a morality tale! Someone rattles off the different ethnic backgrounds of the characters—It’s like the United Nations… It’s like trying to introduce democracy to Iraq!” (Griffith 128) Now he has introduced part of his theme, and in a clever way. “There’s a feeling that the Prime Directive will help us to solve this crisis.” (Griffith 128) So, now we know Griffith’s stand on the war; leave them alone to deal with their own problems themselves. Why get involved?

He continues telling about the party, and they continue to talk about the war in Iraq. They mention some confirmed atrocities of the war: Iraqi casualties, no weapons of mass destruction, detainees being held without charge. “But nobody mentions Abu Ghraib.” (Griffith 128) Here he introduces the next theme, human nature.

He leaves this party to go to another party, so he doesn’t have to go home to loneliness. Here he runs into an old friend of his, dressed as none other than army specialist Charles Graner. Here Griffith tells the story of re-enacting the taking of the abominable pictures of the detainees of Abu Ghraib. “He has actually gone through with it, gone beyond the point where rational people turn back, chicken out, shake their heads and laugh it off. It is somehow exhilarating.” (Griffith 133) Griffith here starts talking about rationality and intelligence. Here, he starts the process of stereotyping soldiers, and saying that we’ve all got cruelty inside us. “It was his way of showing that what went on in Abu Ghraib was not a case of ‘a few bad apples,’ but a case of what we’ve all become, what we’re all capable of.” (Griffith 134) Here he points out that we all are cruel on the inside, that we are all capable of being animals. “The still images we’d all seen on the news, on the internet, had become useless, inert, lifeless—they required work on our part, work to imagine the suffering of others, work to insert ourselves into their large, unspeakable silence.” (Griffith 135) Here he proves that we are truly all animals by making us realize that what he says is true. It is hard to imagine what those detainees went through. It requires work and effort on our part. Sure, we’ll be grossed out by the pictures we see, or at least the first time we see them, but after that it takes work, even with such gruesome images, to imagine what Graner and England put those poor people through. “But then it’s so easy to moralize the situation, become polemical about it. Those soldiers were hicks from the sticks; something in their environment made them this way. In those photos, they were acting out their sick fantasies of power on the poor detainees.” (Griffith 135) Here Griffith comes back to his stereotyping. “Have we come to expect nothing more from people like Graner and England, who we imagine to be from tacky trailer parks in dead-end hollers?” (Griffith 135) “Educated, metropolitan people could never do such things; we are too aware too aware of the ways in which we must respect one another’s differences; too aware that any amount of cruelty is uncivilized and culturally reprehensible. These kids from the sticks make perfect soldiers because they naturally hate what is foreign.” (Griffith 135) In these last couple of quotes, we get images in our minds. We picture trailer parks with families who have little to no intelligence; we see people out in the country farming, they can’t be intelligent at all. We see these people, or at least are talked into seeing them by Griffith, and think that they are capable of such atrocities. We also see people in big houses, with expensive cars and business suits, and we imagine, or, once again, are talked into imagining, that they could not possibly do such things. Griffith is very clever at winning us over to his side. He uses great imagery and figures of speech to create mental images, such as ‘hicks from the sticks’ and ‘educated, metropolitan people’, to win us over to his bias, his stereotyping, and his way of thinking.

Griffith also tries to convince us that even though re-enacting taking pictures of Abu Ghraib is cruel and grotesque, it also makes us mindful of them, allowing us to mourn them and sympathize with them. “I posed with Graner, and by doing so, humiliated those victims all over again. But didn’t I also commemorate them and mourn them? This was more than just post-modern satire. In that moment, Graner and his prisoner were alive, in front of me.” (Griffith 136) “This practice of recreating Christ’s Passion is not a metaphor. You actually participate in the condemning of the Lord, and by doing so, become mindful of the fact that man’s sin made his death inevitable. It’s this mindfulness that makes the difference.” (Griffith 136) Here Griffith uses religion to bring home a point, uses Christ’s Passion, something most people are at least vaguely familiar with, to convince us and make us understand something. To convince us that re-enacting things like Christ’s Passion and the atrocities of Abu Ghraib brings them close to home for us. Makes them seem more lifelike. Makes us feel guilty, and allows us to sympathize with them. “If I am not mindful of what I’ve done, I’m nothing but a ham, a pornographer. If I am mindful, the photo might become sacramental—a reminder of my fall from grace.” (Griffith 136) He makes the point that if we are mindful of the wrong that we have done, it allows us to sympathize with those the wrong was done towards. He uses the terms ‘ham’ and ‘pornographer’ to emphasize that point. When you see the term ham, you typically think of something dead and lifeless that is going to be devoured by something. When you see the term pornographer, it makes it seem like the person is trying to make fun of it, almost, or trying to use it for personal gain, perverting it.

At the end of the essay, Griffith passes out candy with his neighbor. “Mel is a kind, loving man, even if we don’t see eye to eye on religion, so I agreed.” (Griffith 137) Here he describes a loving, nice, thoughtful man, but he then continues and describes him again: “They walked to the table and as the first dipped his hand into the bowl, Mel sat straight up and roared, ‘WHAT’RE YOU DOING?’ The two kids screamed and ran from the porch. Mel stood up and with his mask still on, laughed and laughed. The man was giddy—I mean scarily pleased with his ability to cause small children to hyperventilate.” (Griffith 137) Griffith uses this scenario as a ‘case in point’, to drive home his point that we humans can be both incredibly kind, loving and sympathetic, and at the same time evil and heartless.

So, we now see what Griffith is saying. We see his views on the war in Iraq, along with his stereotypes and his views on Abu Ghraib, or more specifically, people like Graner. We see some of the ways he tries to convince us of his stand on things; he uses imagery and familiar figures of speech, along with chronologically structured story to get his points across. So, will the Prime Directive help us solve the war in Iraq? Griffith seems to think so.

Works Cited

Griffith, David. “Prime Directive” A Good War Is Hard to Find: the Art of Violence in America Brooklyn. Soft Skull Press. 2006.