“Something isn’t right here”: American exceptionalism and the creative nonfiction of the Vietnam War

In this thesis, I argue that few attempts were as effective in correcting the exceptionalist ethos of the United States than the creative nonfiction written by the veterans and journalists of the Vietnam War. Using critical works on creative nonfiction, I identify the characteristics of the genre that allowed Paul John Eakin to call it ‘a special kind of fiction.’ I summarise a brief history of creative nonfiction to demonstrate how it became a distinctly American form despite its Old World origins. I then claim that it was the genre most suited to the kind of ideological transformation that many hoped to instigate in U.S. society in the aftermath of Vietnam. Following this, the study explores how this “new” myth-making process occurred. I use Tim O’Brien’s If I Die in a Combat Zone and Philip Caputo’s A Rumor of War to illustrate how autobiography/memoir was able to demonstrate the detrimental effect that America’s exceptionalist ideology was having on its population. Utilising narrative and autobiographical theory, I contend that these accounts represented a collective voice which spoke for all Americans in the years after Vietnam. Using Neil Sheehan’s A Bright Shining Lie and C.D.B. Bryan’s Friendly Fire, I illustrate how literary journalism highlighted the hubris of the American government. I contend that while poiesis is an integral attribute of creative nonfiction, by the inclusion of extraneous bibliographic material, authors of the genre could also be seen as creating a literary context predisposing the reader towards an empirical interpretation of the events documented within. Finally, I claim that oral histories were in their essence a synthesis of “everyman” experiences very much in keeping with the American zeitgeist of the early Eighties. Focussing solely on Al Santoli’s Everything We Had, I demonstrate how such polyphonic narratives personalised the history of the Vietnam War.

TEACHING AMERICAN CIVIL WAR MUSIC IDSTORY WITH MODERN EDITIONS OF PERIOD MUSIC FOR FULL CONCERT BAND

This dissertation explores a method of teaching the history of Civil War music and musicians through modern full-band editions of original brass band music. In the study of music history the period of the Civil War is rarely discussed, or at best, mentioned only if a student takes a specific course on the history of bands and happens to look deeply into the background of some of the early band pioneers such as Patrick Gilmore, who served in the Union Army as a bandmaster. The history of the musicians, bands, and music performed during the Civil War deserves study to provide a way for students and audiences to learn this history. This project includes lesson plans that can be used with the arrangements of the period music as well as select published music that is also representative of the period. Included with the historical information are four arrangements of original brass band music now scored for full concert band. Each arrangement includes a section scored for brass only with optional brass band parts. Historical information is provided on the Civil War period bands and how each side used them, on the composers of the music, and also on the individual compositions. The historical information can be used to supplement the lesson plans to teach the history, as well as for program notes for audiences. The research involved locating information on both Union and Confederate bands available in books, other dissertations, articles, and interviews with Civil War music historians. The original brass band music is scored for full band. This method will allow teachers and conductors to highlight this period of wind band history and to share it with both students and audiences. Included with this project are photos and video footage taken during a visit with the 1st Brigade Band of Watertown, Wisconsin, an historical organization dedicated to recreating the music and performances of an actual Civil War era band.

State power matters: power, the state and political struggle in the post-war American novel

This article is concerned with resituating the state at the centre of the analytical stage and, concomitantly, with drawing attention to the dangers of losing sight of the state as a locus of power. It seeks to uncover the relationship between two related lines of critical inquiry: Marxist and Foucauldian theories of the state; and the attempts by three postwar American novelist (Ken Kesey, William Burroughs and E.L. Doctorow) to determine the nature and extent of this power and to consider under what conditions political struggle might be possible. It argues that such a move is needed because recent critical analysis has been too preoccupied by corporeal micropolitics and global macropolitics, and that the postwar American novel can help us in this move because it is centrally concerned with the repressive potentiality of the US state. It maintains that the resuscitation of Marxist state theories in early 1970s and a debate between Poulantzas and Foucault is intriguingly foreshadowed and even critiqued by these novels. Consequently, it concludes that these novels constitute an unrecognized pre-history of what would become one of the key intellectual debates of the late twentieth century: an engagement between Marxist and post-structuralist conceptions of the power and resistance.

Message from the President of the United States, transmitting of a report of the Secretary of State, in relation to individuals selected from American prisoners of war, and sent to Great Britain for trial, and also in relation to any orders for retaliation, &c., &c.--

April 16, 1814. Printed by order of the Senate of the United States.

Why are we still at war? : or, The American question considered ; in a series of essays rejected by the journalists as unpopular ; recommended to a candid perusal /

In the Pamphleteer, vol. 4, p. 551-576. London, 1814.

A report of the Secretary of State, in relation to individuals selected from American prisoners of war, and sent to Great Britain for trial, and also in relation to any orders for retaliation

Printed by Roger C. Weightman

Why are we still at war? : or, The American question considered ; in a series of essays rejected by the journalists as unpopular ; recommended to a candid perusal

In the Pamphleteer, vol. 4, p. 551-576. London, 1814