On the 21st of May 2005, David Foster Wallace gave a commencement speech at Kenyon College titled This is Water (Farnam Street Blog, n.d). The speech is motivational in nature, attempting to encourage the audience to be more empathetic in their day-to-day lives. Following a 20-year battle with clinical depression, David Foster Wallace committed suicide in March of 2008. This essay will argue that an analysis considering his suicide and history of depression can give new insights on the purpose of his speech. This essay will argue that This is Water could be regarded as an attempt to help himself and others experiencing depression and raising awareness for mental health issues. The speech will be analysed through three main theoretical frameworks: (1) Change in ethos following his suicide. (2) Framing and re-framing to highlight his day-to-day struggle with depression. (3) Employment of metaphors to help the audience understand depression.
Background Information
David Foster Wallace was an American author, known for his dark, often satirical analysis of American culture within his novels and short stories. He wrote multiple best-selling novels, including Infinite Jest (1996) and The Pale King (2011 published posthumously).
From his early 20s, Wallace suffered from major depressive disorder, and spent over 20 years on Nardil, an antidepressant medication developed in the late fifties. Due to it’s many side effects, including low blood pressure and bloating, Nardil is rarely prescribed for long periods of time (Max, 2009). Wallace was, despite his success, generally unsatisfied with the success of his work. In 2008 he decided to quit Nardil, as he believed the antidepressants were inhibiting his writing. Following numerous failed attempts to find another effective drug regime, he took his own life in 2008 (Max, 2009).
David Foster Wallace never published a word about his depression, however several of his works refer to mental illnesses. His short story The Depressed Person (1998) is one notable example.
Means of Persuasion: Ethos
The basic job of a rhetorician, as identified by Aristotle, is to “discover the best available means of persuasion” (Leith, 2012, p. 45). This can be divided into three lines of persuasive appeal (1) Ethos; or ethical appeal, persuasion resulting from the character of the speaker. (2) Pathos; is an emotional means of persuading the listener by appealing to their emotions. (3) Logos; persuasion through the use of reasoning (Leith, 2012). This essay will assert the claim that David Foster Wallace’s ethos was only fully exposed posthumously, following his suicide in 2008.
Ethos can be pre-existing, as found in speeches given by public figures such as Barrack Obama, or can be developed throughout a speech. The central idea of ethos is to project an impression to the audience that you are someone worth listening to, an authority on the subject.
David Foster Wallace did not exude a grand impression of formal authority, instead opting to wear “granny glasses” and a bandana (Max, 2009). Students in the audience described him as “a man swept up by a tornado of pomp and circumstance. As your picture hints, everything about him was dishevelled, even when clad in the finest robes Kenyon could supply on an hour’s notice” (Harnett, 2011). At, the time the graduates of Kenyon College did not regard Wallace as an authority or expert. However, his dishevelled appearance and open concern of sweating made him relatable to the audience. Members of the audience identified with Wallace and his ‘minor’ day-to-day struggles, resulting in a successful reception of his message.
The speakers existing reputation can create ethos, independently from the speech. David Foster Wallace’s ethos is altered following his suicide. Once the audience is aware of Wallace’s 20-year battle with major depressive disorder, he inherently becomes an expert or authority on the subject. It is through this development of a new form of ethos that This is Water could be interpreted as a reflection of his constant battle with depression. Throughout his speech he makes several explicit and implicit references to suicide and depression, which this essay will analyse through the rhetorical frameworks of framing and metaphors.
Forcing a Change in Perspective: Framing and Re-framing
In his book Don’t Think of an Elephant, George Lakoff, describes frames as the mental structures that shape the way we see the world (2014). In his speech, David Foster Wallace makes use of a combination of framing (1) and re-framing (2) in his parable regarding waiting in traffic.
(1). “I can spend time in the end-of-the-day traffic being disgusted about all the huge, stupid, lane-blocking SUV’s and Hummers and V-12 pick up trucks, burning their wasteful, selfish, 40-gallon tanks of gas” (ll. 99-101).
(2). “These people in the SUV’s have been in horrible auto-accidents in the past, and now find driving so terrible that their therapist has all but ordered them to get a huge, heavy SUV so they can feel safe enough to drive” (ll. 119-121).
Wallace employs this parable to force the audience to recognise that although they may be the hero in their own stories, they are not the hero of everybody else’s story. He believes that through education we can evolve into thinking in a way that is mindful to all people.
Lackoff explains that as language activates frames, new language is required for new frames (Lackoff, 2014). When comparing the two quotes from above we can recognise a distinct difference in the language employed. In the first quote Wallace used pessimistic diction, including negativity-connoted adjectives such as “disgusted”, “wasteful” and “selfish” to invoke pessimistic emotions in the audience. In order to further dehumanise other drivers he employs personification, giving the SUV’s and Hummers human attributes: “V-12 pick up trucks, burning their wasteful, selfish, 40-gallon tanks of gas.” Wallace describes this general negative view of the world, as the unconscious frame of mind.
In contrast, the re-framed parable told further on in the speech employs the use of an anecdote about other drivers, to encourage the audiences’ sympathy towards other people. This is an effective appeal to pathos, as it attempts to change the way that the audience sees the world. This is what Wallace describes as the conscious frame of mind: when people are actively mindful of others. This combination of framing and re-framing is used to implore his audience to be vigilant in constructing positive meaning from their day-to day experiences. The challenge of finding positive meaning, is perhaps one that Wallace himself ultimately could not bear. This inference is endorsed by the authors Robert K. Bolger and Scott Korb, who in their book “Gesturing Toward Reality: David Foster Wallace and Philosophy” argued that Wallace used this speech to outline his own spiritual philosophy. He believed that it required constant effort to remain conscious and altert through the long slog of adult life. Wallace employed this proposed method, of consciously exercising control over what to think, as an attempt to wrestle with his anxiety and depression (Bolger & Korb, 2014).
Extended Metaphor – Shooting the Master
In This is Water, Wallace employs an extended metaphor to imply a link between what he describes as his “default settings” and what the audience may choose to recognise as his depression. In their book “Metaphors We Live By”, George Lackoff and Mark Johnson define the essence of a metaphor as “understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another” (2008, p. 5). Wallace describes the ease at getting lost in “the constant monologue inside your own head” (l. 31), and refers to the old proverb “the mind being an excellent servant but a terrible master” (ll. 38-39). The metaphor ‘excellent servant’ uses diction, in the form of adjectives to acknowledge how powerful our brain can be, and how effective it can be in completing the tasks that we set it. On the other hand, the terrible master refers to your brain building walls of metadata, until you are so confined under your own mental weight that you suffocate (Sharma, 2003). This is a metaphor; imploring people to consciously choose to be more empathetic towards others as this will intrinsically lead to greater happiness.
Wallace remarks upon this metaphor noting that “It is not the least bit coincidental that adults who commit suicide with firearms almost always shoot themselves in: the head. They shoot the terrible master.” (ll. 41-43) When considering Wallace’s suicide as a factor, it is not unreasonable to suggest that this metaphor could be extended further to claim that he identified himself as a servant to his own major depressive disorder. As explained by Lackoff and Johnson the purpose of a metaphor is to help the audience to understand a concept. Unless the individual audience members have directly experienced depression they cannot understand it. Wallace uses this metaphor to help his audience understand the effects of depression, and through this raises awareness for the issue.
This inference is not unique to this analysis; in fact this phrase has faced some debate, with the published format being subjected to a slight rewrite following his suicide. The publisher chose to omit the phrase ‘they shoot the terrible master’ reasoning that this omission is a must to preserve the original message. An avid supporter of this edit is Tom Bissell who believes that “any mention of self-annihilation in Wallace's work…now has a blast radius that obscures everything around it” (2005). Unfortunately, the real intention of This is Water died alongside Wallace, and thus when analysing we must be aware that no inference can be truly proved or disproved.
David Foster Wallace’s This is Water, and the discussion generated from his suicide had a significant foundational impact on the increasing trend of political focus on mental health and awareness. As Wallace was a prominent public figure, he was in a unique position to pull attention towards his poignant message. His suicide becomes somewhat of a turning point for the discourse surrounding suicide and depression. The insights to his constant battle employed language, which was easy to comprehend, even for those unaffected by depression. David Foster Wallace attempted to define on paper an abstract concept. His work has aided in determining the necessity for clear communication and education regarding mental health
It is very clear that the interpretation of David Foster Wallace’s 2005 speech “This is Water” has changed following his suicide. On delivery the speech appeared motivational in nature, focusing on compassion and empathy. Regardless of the original intention, explicit and non-explicit references to depression, through framing and metaphors, shifts the perceived purpose of the speech. The re-establishment of Wallace’s ethos; as an authority or expert on depression, lends itself to be interpreted as a message or advice to others experiencing depression.