"Objects of Affection"

“Objects of Affection” is written by essayist and literary translator, Ewa Hryniewicz- Yarbrough. Her work has appeared in The Missouri Review, The Threepenny Review, Ploughshares, The American Scholar, TriQuarterly, The New Yorker, Poetry, The Paris Review as well as The Best American Essays 2012.

In "Objects of Affection", Yarbrough talks about her attachment to objects and how she became so attached to them. She also explains her grandmother's influence on her hoarding habits. This essay's targeted audience is most likely middle-aged people because a younger audience may not be able to understand the World War II references and the environment that Yarbrough grew up in.

Yarbrough grew up in a communist Poland, during a period with many shortages of practically everything, including food, clothes, furniture. She states that this may be where her complicated attitude toward objects stems from. She also attributes her reluctance to part with objects that could possibly be repaired to her grandmother. Her grandmother seems to have been a significant figure in her life because the author goes into great detail about her and how the 1944 Warsaw Uprising effected her attitude towards objects. Contrasting with her own fascination of objects, Yarbrough says her grandmother owned only "the necessary items, simple and functional, no trinkets of any kind" (171). We can infer that her grandmother developed this unsentimental attitude after everything she had perished in the Warsaw Uprising.

I think the author achieved her purpose of explaining why objects are important to her. To help achieve her purpose, Yarbrough mainly uses pathos. She describes her childhood memories with her grandmother to appeal to the readers' emotions. Her writing is also sprinkled with colorful similies. For example, she described the food in the U.S. piled like "elaborate pyramids" (170). At the end of the essay, Yarbrough writes, "objects help us exorcise some of our fears, ...they are stronger than we are, perfect and independent,... they give us a semblance of permanence and grant a stay against chaos, darkness, and oblivion" (175). Yarbrough loves objects because they are a tangible part of history to her. They connect her to the past and to people, like her grandmother. I agree with her that objects have meaning because they have history, however, I disagree that "objects are stronger than we are". Although sometimes objects may outlive people, without us, their memories and stories are meaningless.

"Semblance of Permanance"

"These mute witnesses to human life inspire awe and amazement at the mere fact of their survival" (167).

bestiws.com



"My Father/ My Husband"

“My Father/ My Husband” is a short story written by David J. Lawless. He doesn’t seem to be well known for any other stories. However “My Father/ My Husband” did win the Prism 2011 nonfiction contest. 

I found this essay to be different from the other ones I have read so far. Lawless is not the sole protagonist in this story. It is mainly about his wife. In addition, the entire essay is mostly a dialogue between Lawless and his wife, with the exception of a few paragraphs that explain the background info. In the previous essays, there was very little dialogue and mostly narration. 

“My Father/ My Husband” seems to be suited more toward an older audience due to the topics of dementia and alzheimer’s. In his essay, Lawless portrays his daily life with his wife suffering from dementia and alzheimer’s. This story is definitely one of the most beautiful and heartbreaking reads in The Best American Essays 2012. For the past two or three years, everyday, Lawless’s wife asks him the same questions. Are you my father?  Where do we live? Do we have children? She doesn’t remember marrying him and even insults him sometimes. “I’ve never been married. And I certainly wouldn’t marry an old man like you. Look at you. Gray hair. Big belly. Who would marry you?” (194). My heart went out to Lawless as he patiently answers her questions over and over again everyday, only for her to forget the next day, or the next minute. At one point, his wife even calls the cops on him for being an intruder.

Lawless uses the rhetorical device pathos in “My Father/My Husband”. Although his wife doesn’t remember who he is, he stays by her side and repeatedly answers the same questions everyday. Even though she doesn’t remember him, he is still her patient, loving husband. Throughout the essay, his wife often jumbles memories between her husband and father. I think this is because they were both two loving, respectable figures that were present throughout her life. Throughout his essay, Lawless successfully demonstrates his true love for his wife to his readers.

"True love"

"'You are not my husband. I never had a husband.' 

'Yes, I am.' He taps his cheek and leans toward her.

She kisses his cheek and they both Smile" (206).

Bob Phillip

thechive.com

"Killing My Body to Save My Mind"

“Killing My Body to Save My Mind” is written by Lauren Slater, a psychologist and writer. She is a frequent writer in The New York Times Magazine, Harper’s Magazine, and Elle Magazine. She also has been the recipient of many awards, including the 2004 National Endowments for the Arts and the selection of multiple essays in the the Best American Volumes. 

“Killing My Body to Save My Mind” is about Slater’s experiences of the side effects of anti-depressant, Zyprexa, particularly weight gain, and how it’s effected her health, self-esteem and family life. It  most likely is targeted towards a middle-aged audience, or people who have experienced depression or Zyprexa because they would be able to relate the most. 

In this essay, Slater first introduces herself as a pessimistic obese woman who is trying to get life insurance. She then explains her obesity as a side effect from the drug, Zyprexa which she takes to suppress her deep depression. At first Zyprexa works so well that she ignores her rapidly increasing weight. It isn’t until Slater gains an additional 80 pounds that she realizes the damage it’s done. Zyprexa not only has made her hefty, it’s also put her at risk for diabetes, cardiovascular problems and cancer. Slater knows that as long as she keeps taking the drug, she won’t be able to live past her seventies. But she keeps on taking it. 

Slater’s purpose of writing this essay is to explain her sacrifice.  She decides that although Zyprexa has many disadvantages, such as a shortened life, weight gain, and risks of cancer, she values her mental health more than her physical health. Similar to Murray, in “How Doctors Die” Slater chooses a life of quality over quantity. To her, being able to love and communicate with her husband and children is the most important thing in life.

I think Slater definitely accomplished her purpose of defending her choice to take Zyprexa despite the side effects. Many people put in her position would probably do the same thing. In addition Slater’s writing contains many colorful metaphors that capture the readers’ the attention. For example, she describes her depression as “a wet velvet curtain, heavy and dripping”, and her hunger as “a wolf after winter, when he’s gone a whole season without prey” (257).  Slater’s story is relatable to many. It shows that in life, we must sacrifice certain things for greater priorities. 

"Sacrifice"

"I'm killing my body to save my mind- and it's downright scary. I can practically feel the sugar in my blood, practically hear the crystals clanking" (260).

Tom Nagy

Gallerystock.com

"How Doctors Die"

“How Doctors Die” is written by Ken Murray, a retired clinical assistant professor of family medicine at the University of Southern California. Its publication generated national attention after becoming viral on the internet. It helped develop conversation on controversial issues about patients’ wishes to end their lives and doctors’ decisions.

“How to Die”, similar to “The Good Short Life” may be written for an audience who is dealing with death of loved ones or just informative reading for a normal person. Murray wanted to provide the readers with the doctors’ views on death, which surprisingly contrasts with what they do explain his own choice on his death.

In his essay, Murray states that doctors are trained to do everything to keep their patients alive. However, they don’t want the same care for themselves. Murray’s fellow physicians have said that they’d rather be left to die than put in intensive care. “Some medical personnel wear medallions stamped “NO CODE” to tell physicians not to perform CPR on them” (232). When it comes to dying, most doctors will refuse to get radiation, chemotherapy, or surgical treatment even though they have access to any sort of medical care they want. So why are doctors so adamant about dying without medical help? According to Murray, “doctors know enough about modern medicine to know it’s limits” and after treating so many patients, they know “what all people fear most: dying in pain, and dying alone” (231). So when terminally ill doctors are faced with the decision to seek further treatment or stop treatment and spend time with their family, doctors will usually choose the latter. 

Through rhetorical devices and personal examples Murray achieves his purpose of explaining how people deserve a life of quality, not just quantity and a death with dignity. His essay is able to appeal to the readers through his use of logos and pathos. He persuades the audiences against intensive care for terminally sick patients with numbers and stats of the medical bills. In addition, he appealed to the audience emotionally by giving examples of his dead patient and cousin. The patient went against his advice and sought surgery, dying shortly after, but his cousin sought no medical help and enjoyed his last couple of days. “How to Die” was an interesting read that provided readers with a different perspective. 

"No Code"

“Some medical personnel wear medallions stamped “NO CODE” to tell physicians not to perform CPR on them” (232).

Jacob Sanders 

Jacobsandersillustration.blogspot.com

"The Good Short Life"

"The Good Short Life" was written by the journalist and author, Dudley Clendinen. Clendinen wrote for the New York Times and was also an editor for The Baltimore Sun. His essay is about his 18-month struggle with a terminal disease called ALS, or as Clendinen liked to call it, Lou. His essay is most likely targeted for people dealing with the death of or dying loved ones.

I found this short story intriguing because of the way he approached the topic of his death. Rather than ignoring his impending death, Clendinen decides to relish it by chronicling his last months on public radio and doing activities he enjoys with friends and family. He definitely came to terms with his fate, stating, “I’m having a wonderful time.” 

The way people deal with death is one of the most important topics Clendinen addresses in the essay. His purpose was to tell his own story to help make it easier for people to talk about death and dying. His main message to the readers is that people must accept the death of loved ones and also respect the wishes of those who would rather end their own life than let the disease kill them. He talks about how in our country, “we obsess about what to eat and dress and drink and live. But we don’t talk about how to die” (65). Clendinen sees Lou as “a weird blessing because there is no escape” (64). In fact, he is prepared. Clendinen says that he will pick the time and place of his death. He states that he would rather commit suicide than allow others to waste a huge amount of love and money caring for somebody who is no longer there. 

At first, after finishing the story I wasn’t sure whether I thought Clendinen’s choice to commit suicide was selfish or reasonable. However, after thinking about it and putting myself in his shoes, I’ve come to the conclusion that I agree with his decision. I wouldn’t want my family wasting money on me just so I could live a few more months as a vegetable either.

I think Clendinen succeeded in accomplishing his purpose of opening people’s eyes to how they viewed death through his essay. It was definitely advantageous that he was the protagonist because it made it more personal for the reader. In addition, he used many rhetorical devices such as logos, pathos and ethos in his writing. He appealed to the audience by stating stats about the costs of treatment and care, describing his daily struggles with ALS and most importantly challenging the majority’s view about dying. Clendinen’s metaphors and irony also drew me to his story. His humor and light-heartedness contrasts with the gloominess that usually surrounds the topic of death. For example, when talking about his wish to commit suicide Clendinen writes, “I just have to act while my hands still work: the gun, narcotics, sharp blades, a plastic bag, fast car over-the-counter drugs, oleander tea (the polite southern way), even helium. That would give me a really funny voice at the end” (66). Some may not agree with Clendinen’s way to end his life, however, the essay has definitely taught the readers that although death is inevitable, they are in charge of their own lives and should live it to the fullest.

"Moving on"

"When the music stops-when I can't tie my bow tie, tell a funny story, walk my dog, talk with Whitney, kiss someone special, or tap out lines like this- I'll know that Life is over" (66).

 http://indianapublicmedia.org

Don Glass