The year is 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 American public to further question and turn against the Vietnam War.

The photo’s portrayal of a beaten-down soldier arouses an emotional response from the audience. While the audience was fed a positive, patriotic take from the US government, the photo completely contradicts this by instead showcasing what war truly is. The soldier’s helmet is ripping in places, he has large sweat stains, and his uniform is in disarray. This combined with the muddy and puddle-filled background, refutes the propaganda that the US government was trying to pass off as truth. While the audience not only feels bad for this particular soldier, the rawness of what appears to be a photo taken sporadically personifies all of the soldiers serving in Vietnam. It paints the picture of what the audience’s own brother, son, colleague, or friend might be experiencing at that very moment. This use of pathos penetrates the audience and builds upon their emotional connection to the war.

With the audience already feeling unsure about the war, the kairotic moment exacerbates the audience’s reaction. In 1968, the American people believed the war was unwinnable, and they were tired of the atrocities happening in Vietnam. At the same time, hippie culture was taking over, and counterculture was spreading. De Antonio capitalized off this shifting tide, and his documentary chronicled America’s ignorance of Vietnam. However, the photograph contrasts the kairotic moment it exists in. While the US was shifting towards an anti-war view, the photo clearly supports war. The juxtaposition of the film’s message and advertising exemplifies the chaos America was suffering under. The US was shipping young people off to die in a war the government wasn’t even sure they could win, all while the American public couldn’t come to a consensus on what they wanted for the war. The divide between the photo and rhetorical situation mirrors the actual divide America faced, and the hopelessness of the situation strengthens the audience’s disproval of America’s involvement in Vietnam.

Despite the photograph declaring “Make War Not Love,” the use of the commonplace, “Make Love Not War,” actually promotes an anti-war message. When the audience first sees the photograph, it initially appears to say “Make Love Not War” because the commonplace was so popular at the time. However, looking closer the audience realizes the soldier is advocating for war. This is ironic in the context of an anti-war documentary, and it forces the audience to consider why the director may have chosen this image. This poor beaten-down soldier must truly believe in war over love and devote himself to violence to survive. The underlying context of the soldier’s mental processes construes the surface-level message of the photo. The audience realizes that this soldier has no choice but to choose war, and the pathos of helpless, young soldiers forced into this lifestyle implores the audience to help.

** These are all of the paragraphs for my first artifact, and the rest of the speech will be the compare/contrast portion.