Rhetoric and Lot 49

As I was reading the book I quickly discovered that it really wasn't an easy text to read, and there was a lot of confusion in many parts. I read many pages over and over to get a better understanding, but what I found that helped me best was to put myself into Oedipa's shoes. I wanted to really visualize the story through the way it was being told, and throughout the story I realized that Oedipa encounters nothing but questions upon questions. It seemed like after every event, something new would arise. This was very similar to how I felt when I was reading. As she was trying to figure out how everything was connected, so was I.

I honestly really couldn't find a connection to the Vietnam War. I didn't know if I wasn't reading it carefully, or I was too focused on the details. The time period of the book was written around the time of the war, and its use of satire maybe connected through the contrast of what was going on in America with the war and the home front, but I couldn't find a direct correlation. However, In terms of rhetoric, this book gives us lots of room for argument and debate. We can take many angles of this story and discuss it. I think Pynchon purposely wrote the story the way he did to really help us understand that not everything has answer, and sometimes we have to just figure it out ourselves. Just like our rhetoric class.

As we discussed in class, rhetoric is a means of argument, debate and persuasion. Logos, which is logical reasoning, plays a major part in this book. She tried to logically put the pieces together and create a conclusion just as I did as a reader. Toward the end of the book she questioned whether this whole thing was planned, and if Pierce was behind all this. As you read you can conclude that as well, but there's also the argument that she's just crazy and Oedipa was too obsessed with the whole thing. She ended up looking too much into the details and wanted to just believe what she wanted. Pathos, which persuasion through emotions, was definitely apparent while reading the book. I was rather confused from the beginning of the book to the end. We encounter many new events before anything is really resolved. Frustration becomes a factor for the reader, and while reading you can tell Oedipa becomes frustrated at the whole ordeal, and her life as well. We see that Oedipa takes the mystery to the extreme when she becomes overly obsessed, and loses all connection with herself and peers. Ethos is clearly shown through Oedipa's character throughout the whole book. She wants to use her common sense, and all the information she received from all the people she meets to piece the whole thing together, but obviously is left with nothing more then anticipation for her answer.

So I like I mentioned, I may have looked past something when trying to find a connection to the Vietnam War, but I definitely how the book is related in terms of rhetoric and how we must approach the topic for this class.