Category: David Foster Wallace

David Foster Wallace opens the speech with the fish anecdote to introduce the subject of discussion to his audience(college students); knowledge is not measured by education alone, rather acknowledging one’s surroundings. The overall effect of the line “This is Water” demonstrates the basic realities that are overlooked in life. Wallace repeats this line twice to emphasize his argument that basic concepts lose meaning in life when we are taught to think in the “automatic default setting” set by society.

Wallace believes that “learning how to think really means learning how to exercise some control over what you think..”( para. 5). He argues that true education is not about numbers of facts it is learning how to change lenses from the automatic “default setting” of thinking to a different perspective. Real education means less arrogance and less thinking that one is in the “absolute center of the universe” according to Wallace. He also argues that constructing meaning from experience is being able to control ones conscious. Wallace argues against the subconscious thinking because it is rigidly based on one’s self and nobody else.

Wallace uses a hypothetical narrative of “an average day” to belabor society’s way of life after graduation. He sarcastically describes the day in a perspective that shows minimal freedom of choice in a day and myopia. The narrative is used as an eye opener to the graduates of the basic burden of being an adult; to allow the future generation to choose wisely in life. The effect of the “average day” described by Wallace elaborates the boring average day which can be caused by excessive stress and thus our brain switches to the default setting that we are in the center of attention. The point that Wallace is attempting to achieve by describing the average day is that our surroundings are just as important as a mundane person.

Wallace utilizes elongated syntax and colloquial diction in his speech to draw attention to the main point of his argument. Wallace dwells on the tediousness of the average workday by evoking negative emotion by using words such as “tired, hurried” and “ pissed and miserable”. The sentence “ It’s the end of the workday” reinforces it content by setting the scene for the audience to visualize the scenario, to allow the audience to be in the right state of mind for persuasion.

During his speech, Wallace, emphasizes that he is not offering “banal platitude” or “moral advice, rejecting excessive cynicism. His speech revolves around the central argument; underrating the “ubiquitous, important realities are often the that are the hardest to see” implying that we (society) simply cannot escape the undeniable truth regardless of our valiant efforts. Wallace is concerned about avoiding becoming a cliche himself by talking about adult life. Wallace was successful in avoiding becoming a cliche because of the different sentence structures used, and the informal diction.

Throughout his speech, Wallace switches between sophisticated diction to colloquial language. Wallace uses colloquial diction when discussing minute points in his speech such as “…you will totally hose…” (para. 5) and “ The point is that petty, frustrating crap…” (para. 9). It is appropriate for Wallace to use colloquial language to make the audience feel identified and experience a personal connection between the speaker and the audience.

Wallace builds a tension between two ways of being/living in the world to allow the audience to chose which side would they rather live. Wallace described the two ways of being are those who are aware of their surroundings and those who are not. Those who are truly educated, those who know the “Capital T Truth”, and those who have freedom, are the ones that are aware of their surroundings. He explains the difference between the two and gives multiple examples such as the Fish story and describing the “average day of work” in depth. However, it is evident that he supports those who are aware of their surroundings more by using negative connotations toward the opposing way of living. He describes the opposing argument in a sarcastic, cynical tone implying that those who choose that life tend to be “pissed and miserable”

This is Water speech embodies several characteristics of a commencement speech. Wallace does not directly acknowledge the graduates for their achievements or progress in life, instead, he prepares the graduates for the near future. Although Wallace did not acknowledge the audience he does creat and identification between the graduates and himself in several instances. For example, he introduces himself in an informal way by creating a common ground between Wallace and the audience when he states “you’re worried that I plan to represent… I am not the wise old fish.” (para. 2). Wallace also presents the world and its challenges when describes the adult life in paragraphs 7-11. The author presents hope in a dramatic way to the audience, the hope that he presents is when he says “we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over: ‘ This is water, this is water.’” He believes that the only hope left is being aware of our surroundings and reminding ourselves where we stand in society.

Who is “Good People”?

Society has a general idea of what makes a person good: selflessness, righteousness, moral uprightness, and so on. The definition of “good” deviates from this basis when it comes to subjective perceptions of which morals are good or bad. What we define for ourselves as good or bad is either taught to us or learned over time, and often during this process, we find ourselves at a fork in the road. “Good People” by David Foster Wallace is a short story that captures a moment of moral conflict in two young people’s lives that many should be able to relate to, even if they did not experience the same circumstances. A boy, 19, and a girl, 20, face a tough decision between aborting their child or their futures, reputations, and principles. Told from a third person limited point of view, the narrator focuses on the emotions of the boy, Lane A. Dean, Jr., whose internal conflict spreads from taking responsibility for his pregnant girlfriend to small actions such as whether or not he should touch her. Through Lane’s battle with himself, he is forced to face his beliefs and grow as a person. Wallace’s story encapsulates the hardship that comes with binding oneself to unrealistic ideals–whether they come from religion, family, or society.

The irony of “Good People” is that the young couple in the story are who most would define as good people; they’d met in campus ministries, worked part time jobs, and the girl–Sheri–had bought her own car. Lane described Sheri as being mature for her age and his mother liked her because “she knew what she wanted,” (Wallace). Once she got pregnant, the career that she had planned to pursue was put on the line. She no longer knew what she wanted because she was faced with a decision between two things that were important to her–her faith and her future. As for Lane, he was experiencing his own hell; “He was starting to believe that he might be serious in his faith…He was desperate to be good people, to still be able to feel he was good,” (Wallace). Throughout the story, Lane quotes the Bible and shames himself for not following the scripture. Because, in Lane’s eyes, what makes a person good is their faithfulness to what the Bible preaches, he believes himself to be sinful for getting his girlfriend pregnant out of wedlock. The tribulations Lane and Sheri experience stem from the pressure to be good people as their religion taught them. When faced with the moral dilemma of unplanned pregnancy that would force them to either give up their potential futures or violate the laws of their god, the couple no longer felt like they were good people. They eventually put religion in

Other readers may not agree that conflict between religion and the couple are not the focus of the story; they may believe that religion is only a factor Lane and Sheri would consider in their decision, and the real conflict is Lane’s relationship with Sheri. Lane consistently pried at the validity of his relationship throughout the story; he struggled to comfort Sheri, was not sure he deserved her, and whether or not he loved her was questionable. Early on in the story, Lane’s thoughts tell us, “Different parts of him felt unconnected to each other. She was smarter than him and they both knew it,” (Wallace). Lane then continues his train of thought by describing all the aspects of Sheri he admired and coveted. From this point on, readers are aware of his insecurity about his relationship, and from this insecurity, his relationship with her is damaged. While all of this is true, I still believe the theme is the conflict between self and religion because Lane’s relationship insecurities are only magnified to a problematic level when he begins to compare himself to Sheri, who he believes is holier than himself. Lane even goes as far as to think, “She was in serious in her faith and values in a way that Lane had liked and now, sitting here with her on the table, found himself afraid of. This was an awful thing. He was starting to believe that he might not be serious in his faith,” (Wallace). In fact, the story ends in a cliffhanger, and readers are left to assume whether or not the couple chose to abort. This may be because it is not the decision that is important, but the process of reaching that decision. The unplanned pregnancy putting a strain on the couple’s relationship is one conflict in “Good People”, but the strain is driven by their religious beliefs, and this is the focal conflict.

Readdress body. Why it is important. How it applies to readers. Examples. How to understand. Why the story ends in a “cliffhanger”. Summarize main points. Draw back to intro. Clinch.

Main keywords of the essay: David Foster Wallace, commencement speech, analysis, two young fish, old fish, This is Water

Essay characters: David Foster Wallace, old fish, two young fish

Concept: Inspirational Speech, Essay

Size: 959 words, 3 pages.

This example is going to analyze the main ideas, and life lessons that are contained in commencement speech ‘This are Water.’ It can be used for reference and understanding of how a student may consider text and carry out an analysis of the main ideas or themes. Everyone’s perspective on a commencement speech should be different. Check ‘This is Water’ David Foster Wallace analysis and see if your opinion differs.

This is Water’ Analysis Essay

‘This is Water’ is a short story that comes from a public commencement speech that was given by David Foster Wallace at the Kenyon College in Gambier, Ohio USA. Importantly, it gives David Foster Wallace’s outlook on life and things he saw with his own eyes. In fact, he did not believe these findings were sensational but there is a lot that we can learn from his speech ‘This is Water‘.

David Foster Wallace’s ‘This is Water’ commencement speech starts with two young fish come across an older fish that is passing by. The old fish says, “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” The two young fish are confused by this and eventually ponder over; “What the hell is water?” While this may seem like a simple story, it is actually philosophical and has a deeper meaning that we may break down and examine. Thus, it is essential to analyze ‘This is Water’ commencement speech in order to identify lessons he portrays.

The first life lesson in David Foster’s ‘This is Water’ concerns “default setting”. This refers to idea of daily tasks we do and thoughts we have without actually thinking about them and that lack real meaning. David Foster Wallace demonstrates how in mainstream society, we often forget about what really matters and get ideas about real things that have meaning. By acting unconsciously we are not paying enough attention to our experiences and are ignorant of our surroundings. For example, we might be thinking about our jobs or how much money we have and not about real things, such as how beautiful nature is or how our bodies work every day to keep us alive. Of course, that is what David Wallace tries to show in ‘This is Water’. While the older fish has learned to see the beauty, the young fish are not paying attention. They have never noticed water and often took it for granted. As David Foster Wallace says, “in the day-to-day trenches of adult existence, banal platitudes can have life-or-death importance.” One should stop, make an analysis of their own actions.

The second lesson from David Foster Wallace’s ‘This is Water’ is that you have the freedom to look at life differently and you control viewing the world out with the default setting. You have a choice, find an approach to people and the world. The author believes you have awareness. He provides his own analysis, “you get to decide how you’re going to see it. You get to consciously
decide what has meaning and what doesn’t.“ You are not programmed to only think one way and have the ability to change an outlook. While people often believe they are stuck in the “rat race”, they may decide if they want to view something negatively and achieve a poor outcome or look at something positively and feel better about it. David Foster Wallace demonstrates this in his example, “If I don’t make a conscious decision about how to think and what to pay attention to. I’m going to be pissed and miserable every time I have to shop.” Many people are narrow-minded, judging others, and he makes this dear in his example of the tiring and slow work. It is only you who has power to change a situation and make it hopeful and happy, as well as choose how to judge other people.

‘This is Water’ by David Foster Wallace makes you question what your natural default setting is. Do you react negatively to situations around you and do not think about the simple beauties? Do you accept the world as opposed against you rather than looking at the bright side? As he states in ‘This is Water’, “the most obvious, ubiquitous, important realities are often the ones that are the hardest to see and talk about.” Yet, you can make the analysis and conscious decision to do this if you want to.

Of course, speaking to college students in the United States, David Foster Wallace points out in ‘This is Water’ that an education in the US is more than just a piece of paper and doesn’t mean just learning “how to think.” In particular, it means how to “exercise some control over how and what you think”. David Foster Wallace stresses that you can have the ability to change your
reflecting process, for example being kind to other people. Main message in ‘This is Water’ is that in life there are more superficial things. Once you choose to acknowledge this you may live fully and discover ‘the water.’ A quote that demonstrates this analysis is, ‘None of this is about morality or religion, or dogma, or big fancy questions after death. The capital-T Truth is about life before death.’

In particular, David Foster Wallace focuses on showing empathy and compassion towards other people. Regardless of situation, one should be able to see life and everything around from different angles. You have an ability to not become stressed or anxious about a situation. By being consciously aware and showing compassion, you should make your life experienced, more meaningful and positive. David Foster Wallace points out his analysis that while you can be frustrated and bored waiting in a heavy traffic jam after a stressful day at work. “Hummer that just cut me off is maybe being driven by a father whose little child is hurt or sick in the seat next him.” David Foster Wallace says that the world does not always revolve around you and that there exist bigger and more important reasons why things happen. It is essential to have perspective, think that people may be in worse situations than you can even imagine. You are not always superior to everybody else. The analysis of ‘This is Water’ by David Foster Wallace helped to discover its main lesson.

Introduction:

David Foster Wallace’s commencement speech, “This Is Water,” challenges the conventional ways of thinking and prompts the audience to examine the unconscious patterns that govern their lives. This critical essay delves into Wallace’s profound insights, dissecting his examination of consciousness, empathy, and the importance of choosing how we perceive and interpret the world around us.

Body:

The Mundane and the Profound:

Wallace begins by highlighting the banality of everyday life and the tendency to default to self-centered thinking. He urges the audience to break free from the automatic responses and engage in a deliberate act of conscious awareness. By questioning our default perspectives, we can uncover the profound significance that lies within the seemingly ordinary moments of life.

The Power of Perception:

Wallace emphasizes the power of perception in shaping our reality. He argues that we have the ability to choose how we interpret the world and the events that unfold around us. By actively cultivating empathy and understanding, we can overcome our natural inclination towards self-centeredness and embrace a more compassionate and interconnected view of the world.

The Struggle of Consciousness:

Wallace acknowledges the inherent difficulty of maintaining conscious awareness in a society that often encourages mindless conformity. He highlights the challenges of resisting the pull of societal norms and the constant bombardment of distractions. According to Wallace, cultivating conscious awareness is a lifelong struggle that requires effort, discipline, and self-awareness.

The Illusion of Certainty:

Wallace exposes the illusion of certainty that often pervades our thinking. He challenges the notion that our personal perspectives and beliefs are absolute truths, urging the audience to remain open to alternative viewpoints and interpretations. By embracing intellectual humility and recognizing the limitations of our own understanding, we can foster intellectual growth and engage in meaningful dialogue with others.

The Importance of Education:

Wallace underscores the role of education in expanding our consciousness and developing critical thinking skills. He argues that education is not merely about acquiring knowledge but also about cultivating the ability to think independently and question the assumptions that underpin our worldview. Through education, we can break free from the constraints of our default modes of thinking and embrace a more expansive and empathetic perspective.

The Challenge of Everyday Life:

Wallace acknowledges the inherent difficulties of maintaining conscious awareness in the face of the mundane challenges of everyday life. He recognizes that it is easy to revert to autopilot mode when confronted with the monotony and frustrations of daily routines. However, he encourages the audience to view these moments as opportunities for growth and transformation, urging them to choose their responses and find meaning even in the most ordinary circumstances.

Conclusion:

David Foster Wallace’s “This Is Water” serves as a wake-up call, challenging us to question our default modes of thinking and embrace conscious awareness in our daily lives. Through his profound insights, Wallace urges us to cultivate empathy, challenge our assumptions, and choose how we perceive and engage with the world. By recognizing the power of conscious awareness, we can break free from the limitations of our own perspectives and lead more meaningful, compassionate lives.

Introduction:

David Foster Wallace’s essay “Tense Present: Democracy, English, and the Wars over Usage” explores the intricacies and controversies surrounding the usage and interpretation of the English language. This critical essay delves into Wallace’s arguments, examining his insights on language, democracy, and the ongoing conflicts over linguistic norms.

Body:

Language and Power:

Wallace highlights the relationship between language and power, arguing that language shapes our perception of reality and influences societal structures. He emphasizes the role of linguistic elitism and its impact on social hierarchies. Wallace suggests that the wars over usage are not merely debates about grammar or syntax but battles for power and control over language, ultimately affecting our understanding and interpretation of democracy.

Prescriptivism vs. Descriptivism:

Wallace critiques prescriptivist approaches to language, which impose strict rules and regulations on grammar and usage. He argues that such approaches limit language’s ability to evolve and adapt to the ever-changing needs of society. Instead, Wallace advocates for a more descriptivist approach, which acknowledges the organic nature of language and its capacity to reflect the diversity and dynamism of human communication.

Language as a Democratic Enterprise:

Wallace explores the notion of language as a democratic enterprise, wherein no single group or institution holds the authority to dictate linguistic norms. He argues that democratic ideals should extend to language, allowing individuals to express themselves freely without being bound by rigid linguistic rules imposed by self-proclaimed gatekeepers. By embracing linguistic diversity and inclusivity, we can foster a more democratic and inclusive society.

The Paradox of Authority:

Wallace discusses the paradoxical nature of linguistic authority, where those who claim expertise often misuse their power to enforce arbitrary rules and judgments. He critiques the self-appointed language police who use their knowledge of language as a means of social control and exclusion. According to Wallace, the imposition of rigid linguistic standards can perpetuate inequality and hinder democratic discourse.

Language as a Tool for Manipulation:

Wallace exposes the manipulative potential of language, highlighting how language can be used to shape public opinion and control narratives. He draws attention to the deliberate misuse of language in politics and media to manipulate public perception. By challenging the misuse of language and promoting linguistic awareness, individuals can become more discerning and critical consumers of information.

Embracing Linguistic Fluidity:

Wallace suggests that instead of engaging in divisive language wars, we should embrace linguistic fluidity and open-mindedness. He encourages a nuanced understanding of language usage, recognizing that different contexts and communities may have their own unique linguistic practices. By fostering a spirit of dialogue and understanding, we can move away from the wars over usage and cultivate a more inclusive linguistic landscape.

Conclusion:

David Foster Wallace’s essay “Tense Present: Democracy, English, and the Wars over Usage” provides a critical analysis of language, democracy, and the conflicts surrounding linguistic norms. By questioning prescriptive approaches and advocating for linguistic inclusivity, Wallace urges us to reconsider the power dynamics inherent in language and promote a more democratic and diverse linguistic landscape. Embracing linguistic fluidity and recognizing the manipulative potential of language can lead to a more inclusive and democratic society where language serves as a means of expression rather than a tool for control.