Introduction:

It’s 1968 and the Tet Offensive has shocked the United States. In January of ’68, the North Vietnamese attacked heavily populated US areas, and the American people began realizing that victory in Vietnam was farther off than the government had been promising. A year later, Emilio de Antonio released his documentary, In the Year of the Pig. The documentary narrated the history of the war with a strong anti-war theme running throughout. However, the documentary’s cover was of a marine soldier, in the middle of battle, wearing a helmet with the slogan “Make War Not Love” handwritten on it. While the photograph may initially suggest pro-war ideology, the subversion of the well-known commonplace, “Make Love Not War,” inspires the audience to further question and turn against the Vietnam War.

Speech Outline:

• Introduction to the rhetorical situation
  • Exigence: Vietnam War is going on, the public’s distrust of the government and the US’ chances of winning is weakening (due in part to the Tet Offensive)
  • The cultural movements of the time (counterculture, anti-Vietnam war)
• With the public’s lack of knowledge, the documentary In the Year of the Pig is released that chronicles the history of the war
  • It also has strong anti-war themes
  • The artifact is used as the cover for the documentary
    • It’s an Oscar-nominated film (the audience is the American people)
      • Constraints: However, it’s hard to show and it mostly is showed at college
• Don’t realize at first that it says “Make War Not Love”
  • It subverts the commonplace, “Make Love Not War,” which was extremely popular at the time
    • This also proves how widespread the original phrase was and that it truly is a commonplace
• However, even though superficially it’s a declaration in support of the war, its effect is actually the opposite –>
  • The visual rhetoric of the artifact
    • Dirty, beaten down soldier in the middle of battle. A weary, tired, grim face
      • Not something like a clean, smiling soldier in propaganda
  • Even while they’re suffering in these conditions, they’re still subject to fighting this war. They have no choice, it’s survival
    • Pathos –> the audience feels bad for the soldier (maybe reminds them of a brother, friend, nephew, or son)
• By subverting the commonplace, using visual rhetoric to paint a picture of American soldiers that uses pathos, and the context of it within an anti-war documentary, the artifact actually causes people to further have a distrust in the war
  • Successfully promotes an anti-war message