Friday, January 29, 2016
Heroes Anyone?
In the movie The General Johnnie Gray, a simple engineer,tries to win the heart of his girlfriend by enlisting in the army. Although he is refused, he eventually takes on a group of Northern soldiers who hijack his train. Not only does he rescue his beloved Anabelle (and General), but he also helps defeat a Northern army in battle. Yet, his methods are hardly standard derring-do. Is Johnnie just lucky or a true hero? Does this film endorse standard ideas of military heroism or make fun of them? Or does this movie redefine a hero? What does this movie tell us about heroism (or related concepts of machismo, chivalry, or militarism)?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe Johnnie is a very lucky and is a true hero. I believe a true hero is defined by their motives. In Johnnie's case his motives were pure: rescue his girlfriend. Although he had a lot of luck in his quest to get his save his girlfriend I believe that doesn't take away from his motives which makes him a true hero. I believe this film redefines a hero. The traditional picture of a hero is someone who is generally strong, brave, and macho. A classic example is Perseus, someone who is like a demigod with no flaws. I believe that this movie creates the persona of a hero that doesn't necessarily lie with perfection itself, but rather how imperfections can benefit the hero. Many scenes show how Johnnie's clumsiness, obliviousness and flaws worked out for the better. One example is Johnnie blowing up the bridge which won them the battle. I think the movie really does a great job of reiterating that everyday people can be heroes. Johnnie didn't have to be a soldier to save the day and his physical strength and his lack of planning don't actually harm him. His girlfriend is another example, she helped Johnnie destroy the bridge, but she was far from the traditional image of a hero as well and was just a normal person like Johnnie. I think the movie sends a strong message that machismo doesn't really matter. There were no scenes that showed how machismo was important in any way, the movie often downplayed the idea of masculine pride by making a mockery of it and showing how it can lead to rash and foolish decisions. One example is when the Union generals ordered the train across the burning bridge. The film also touches on the idea of chivalry and I believe it supports it. In the movie I believe Johnny acts very chivalrous as he lets his girlfriend use his leg as a seat to sit. The movie highly emphasizes that the motives for actions are more important than physical and mental characteristics.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis movie redefines a hero by questioning the qualities and context of Johnnie’s actions as well as their impact. By creating a character that physically does not abide by the stereotypical image of a hero, but rather one that is small and scrawny, The General moves away from the typical hero persona. Moreover, Johnnie’s actions are less than decisive. His clumsiness and ignorance work to advantage as time and time again he simply gets lucky. Examples of this are when his sword accidently flings into the back of the man about to shoot him and when he accidently launches the canon into the dam. Conversely, Johnnie’s aptitude as an engineer also leads to the fact that some of his actions as a hero were perfectly meaningful. Examples of these are when Johnnie tore up the rails quickly when returning back to home lines, when he came up with the plan to put Anabelle in a potato sack, and when he knocked the Southern officer out and stole his uniform to rescue Anabelle. The ambiguous nature of Johnnie’s decisiveness as a hero not only redefines a hero, but it mirrors a post-war society nature. When the United States entered World War 1, we did it with an idealistic purpose to spread democracy around the world as heroes. However, the devastation and massive loss of human lives post-war changed America’s desire to intervene with other countries and as we can see with The General, sparked debates about what it truly means to be a hero. Previously, heroes were portrayed as big, strong men who know exactly what they are doing and always rescue the women. In this movie, the lines aren’t so clearly drawn. While there are elements of the first definition of a hero, Johnnie isn’t big and strong. He doesn’t always know exactly what it was doing and it was not his first intention to rescue Anabelle when he started to chase the train. In a time when war and life as we know it had been changed forever, it only makes sense that the long held definitions and stereotypes of what it means to be a hero would be rethought as well.
ReplyDeleteThe movie, The General, redefines heroism by mocking the former expectations a hero is given. In most classical films the hero is a strong, handsome, manly man who saves the day by using his strength and bravery to take down the enemy. The hero often is a soldier or a general. The way the directors Buster Keaton and Clyde Bruckman depicted Johnny Gray as the hero mocked both the concept of a hero and all of the past qualities given to these heroes. They first mock heroes by showing Johnny as a small, skinny man who doesn’t live up to the standards of his girlfriend. Then, the most important way of their mockery, they show Johnny actively trying to join the army but repeatedly being rejected. This shows that the army thought they had absolutely no use for Johnny even though he was volunteering to help. Of course after he is turned down by the southern army he goes onto almost single handedly defeat many northern troops who stole his train, save his girlfriend, and win a major battle for the south. This by itself mocks the army by having a frail weak man who was not allowed to join their force accomplish goals that their group of masculine, strong men could not. The other way they mock stereotypical heroes is by constantly showing the soldiers for both the north and south as foolish and stupid individuals. Some examples of this were when the northern soldiers weren’t able to figure out how to turn the train tracks so that they could merge onto a new track and had to ask for an engineer’s help, when the general of the northern army told the conductor of the train that the bridge was strong enough to hold the weight of the train but it then immediately collapsed when the train went over it, and when the northern soldiers were constantly having water dumped on them, being clumsy, and getting hurt. Even though Johnny Gray was very different from past notions of what a hero was, he was able to accomplish every goal of a hero; fight for the honor of your army, win the battle, and get the girl. This is how the directors of The General were able to both mock what a hero was and every characteristic of what people thought a hero should look like and act like.
ReplyDeleteThrough its portrayal of Johnnie Gray, the “hero” in the movie, “The General” teaches us that there are many different aspects to heroism that are complex and multi-dimensional. For all intents and purposes, I do believe that Johnnie Gray is a hero in "The General” because he helps many people and overcomes several challenges. Although this is an almost indisputable fact, Johnnie's character still comes into question because of the intentions behind his motives. It seems as though, throughout the entire movie, Johnnie's sole purpose for doing any of the heroic things he did was not out of selflessness or thoughtfulness for other people, but only with his best interest at heart. When he went to join the army, he did so because Anabelle would not have him any other way. I suppose that Johnnie saving Anabelle from her captors was heroic, but mostly everything else that happened to Johnnie happened by luck. I do not want to take away from all the spectacular things that Johnnie did because, as I've previously said, he is a hero. But he seems to be a hero without any of the qualities we'd normally expect to see in a hero. This is where the multi-dimensional dynamic of heroism comes in because not every aspect of a hero will be admirable. I think the real question should not be whether or not Johnnie is heroic, but instead whether or not Johnnie should be a hero that we aspire to be.
ReplyDeleteI believe that The General shows that heroism comes in all different forms. The General mocks the military but at the same time praises it. The military represents bravery, hardship, sacrifice and patriotism. When Anabelle’s family first hears the news that the Civil War has begun, her father and brother immediately enlist in the Confederate army. They want to defend their nation and their beliefs even at the cost of their lives. This type of response to war is expected of the men which is why it is so upsetting when Johnnie cannot enlist. Another example is when the Union soldiers risk their lives to go down to the South to destroy the South’s railroads and steal supplies. Yes, they do kidnap Anabelle but that is not intentional; she simply happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
ReplyDeleteHowever, The General also mocks the military because being a soldier is not the only way to be a hero. Even though Johnnie cannot join the military, he still becomes a hero through his persistence in chasing the Union soldiers to get Anabelle back. He never gives up no matter how difficult his journey gets. He could have given up while he was chasing them on the trains to the northern states but chose not to because he loved Anabelle too much. He is the only one who can save her because he is the only one who knows how to drive a train. However, Johnnie does have fortune on his side. Though he makes many comical mistakes, sometimes, they end up helping. For example, when he uses the cannon to shoot the train with the Union soldiers on it, Johnnie’s decision to use the cannon is a very smart one but his execution becomes the problem. First, the cannon does not shoot far enough. Then, the second time he almost gets hit by the cannon; it is luck that the cannon hits directly behind the Union soldiers’ train. Johnnie’s actions and the soldiers on both sides show that heroism comes in different forms, but share similar qualities such as bravery and perseverance.
Johnnie Gray is a lucky son of a gun that represents a different side of heroism than the standard model. Johnnie’s daring adventure through enemy grounds and the accidental rescue of the damsel in distress eventually ended in the southern victory in battle. Throughout the entire film every stage of this triumph had a comical scene where it almost seems as if Gray is doomed to fail until somehow he escapes, because of an accidental incident which winds up saving him. The amount of luck that swings his way is statistically impossible to happen within a 24 hour period. However, I do not think that luck is the only thing that defines Gray’s miraculous victory. His bravery to fight alone in order to save his train, his girl, and his army was truly admirable. When he was not failing to do simple tasks he was also using his cunning smarts to manipulate his odds of success, this can especially be seen on the train. I think that Buster Keaton wanted to show that the smart, clumsy, and brave skinny kid can be just as much as a hero as the macho fighter. The new depiction of the hero is probably also representative of the American population post-World War 1. Coming back from the bloodiest war ever, where across the world huge losses, there was a sense of disillusionment with the ideas and morals of war. It was once seen as an honor to be a soldier and fight for your country, which was depicted in the opening scene where people were rushing to enlist. However, after World War 1 there was a disgust with war and no one was really happy that America won the war, because in the end we lost millions of soldiers. I think Buster Keaton was attempting to make a joke about militarism and the military image in general.
ReplyDeleteJohnnie Gray is a lucky son of a gun that represents a different side of heroism than the standard model. Johnnie’s daring adventure through enemy grounds and the accidental rescue of the damsel in distress eventually ended in the southern victory in battle. Throughout the entire film every stage of this triumph had a comical scene where it almost seems as if Gray is doomed to fail until somehow he escapes, because of an accidental incident which winds up saving him. The amount of luck that swings his way is statistically impossible to happen within a 24 hour period. However, I do not think that luck is the only thing that defines Gray’s miraculous victory. His bravery to fight alone in order to save his train, his girl, and his army was truly admirable. When he was not failing to do simple tasks he was also using his cunning smarts to manipulate his odds of success, this can especially be seen on the train. I think that Buster Keaton wanted to show that the smart, clumsy, and brave skinny kid can be just as much as a hero as the macho fighter. The new depiction of the hero is probably also representative of the American population post-World War 1. Coming back from the bloodiest war ever, where across the world huge losses, there was a sense of disillusionment with the ideas and morals of war. It was once seen as an honor to be a soldier and fight for your country, which was depicted in the opening scene where people were rushing to enlist. However, after World War 1 there was a disgust with war and no one was really happy that America won the war, because in the end we lost millions of soldiers. I think Buster Keaton was attempting to make a joke about militarism and the military image in general.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis is very simple, Johnnie is very lucky with his actions, but because of the way the movie is set up, it shows the audience (specifically men) how they are expected to act. Since Johnnie isn't in the army and was able to almost single handedly take down a Northern army, we can see how this movie can poke and make fun of the Army. And what makes things even more entertaining and interesting is how Johnnie manages to take down this Northern army. It seems that while he was trying to organize a plan or execute something, it would fall apart but still manage to benefit him at the same time while breaking down the North. Within this comedic style movie, there are some situations that the audience should pay attention. For example chivalry, Johnnie chases down his crush and rescues her from the Northerners kidnapping just to prove his love for her. Because he gets the girl at the end, the movie starts to give men watching the film ideas on what it means to be a man and how to take care of you woman. Overall, this movie does a great job of showing Johnnie's lucky ways in a educational manner. Giving the audience something to laugh about but also a thought evoking situation.
ReplyDeleteBuster Keaton plays Johnnie in a movie about his endeavor do win over the heart of Anabelle. In The General, Johnnie displays acts of heroism as he fights his way in and out of the Northern lines. However, his acts are very controversial because they are also portrayed as accidental or out of luck. This is especially true while he is following a stolen train manned by northern soldiers. There are many occurrences of Johnnie’s heroism and luck. An example of his heroism is the scene where Johnnie gets off his train while it’s moving to remove debris from the tracks. While picking up a wooden beam he falls back onto the cowcatcher. As the train continues to move closer to another piece of debris, Johnnie is forced to find his balance and use the first piece of debris he picked up to knock the second piece off the tracks, and is successful. Johnnie is forced to use all the talent and skill he had to keep the train on the tracks, which makes this an act of heroism. With that, he also has many acts of luck. An example of this is when he loaded the cannon to shoot over his train and land on the stolen train. But Johnnie runs into a few problems along the way. After he loads the cannon and starts climbing back to the front of the train, he accidentally detaches the cannon from the train with his foot and the hitch falls onto the tracks. The cannon cart starts to bounce causing the trajectory of the cannon to get lower until it is aiming directly at him. But right before the cannon fires the train makes a left turn and suddenly the enemy train is right in front of the cannon. The Cannon fired and landed right next to the enemy train, effectively scarring them of southern firepower. Johnnie did not intend to this, however it worked out the way he wanted it to. It is not an act of heroism, in was purely luck. In the end, there is a good balance of both luck and heroism. Having both aspects of heroism and luck provide a realistic view of Johnnie and one that connects to the viewer. Overall, it was key to have it in the movie.
ReplyDeleteThe film portrays Johnnie as an unlikely hero, mocking military heroism in the process. The conclusion that this movie arrives at, however, is that Johnnie’s unlikely heroism will always be submissive to the importance of military heroism in society. The film very clearly mocks military heroism because in all of the standoffs between Johnnie and the typical military heroes, Johnnie emerges the victor. One of the clearest examples of this is when Johnnie and Annabelle burn the bridge. The northern military heroes try to be very macho and continue across the bridge even though it is burning and the bridge ends up collapsing. It is Johnnie’s genius that wins in this instance. It was his idea to crawl to the front of the train and get the kerosene lamp in order to burn the bridge and prevent the northern supply line from joining the entire army. This event is all part of his glorious yet hilarious quest to rescue Annabelle from the union army. The quest is definitely a heroic one, typically played out by a macho military man. This movie mocks that idea by showing a quirky, average, engineer as the one to carry out the heroic feats. The movie subtly challenges the notion of machoism by showing how only Johnnie, a talented engineer, would be able to outsmart his opponents. This film still perpetuates the ideals of traditional military masculinity with its ending. Even after Johnnie risked his life to sneak in to a union safe house to rescue Annabelle and puts her needs first during their rogue time in the forest, she refuses to take him back until he is in a military uniform. While the movie may question the validity of this conclusion given Johnnie’s accomplishments, it still shows that the ideal is prevalent in the society.
ReplyDeleteIn this film, I think that Buster Keaton's Johnnie Gray truly is a hero in a movie which redefines heroism. Heroism in this sense is closely linked to bravery, in a seemingly hopeless scenario, Gray showed that he would do anything to save the one he loved. Even if the means of completing the goal was not "heroic" per say (though he still completed his goal in the end) the initial action of deciding to go after the Anabelle even when he had no backup was a heroic act in itself and portrayed Gray as a character who would do anything for those he loved. The movie pokes fun at the standard military as the soldiers from both sides of the war are portrayed as clumsy, doltish, and just generally less intelligent than the other characters in the movie. I think this movie wanted to show that one should never listen to others when they say that you can't be a hero. Johnnie Gray was refused entry into the military so he became a hero by unconventional means. I think the movie was trying to show that anyone can be a hero if they set themselves onto a goal and see it through and not just the standard military heroes. While most of Gray's success could be attributed to luck, a lot of bravery went in to what he did, he lit the bridge on fire to prevent the Union from crossing (which he knew from earlier would be their goal) and was able to save the Southern army as just one example of his brave and heroic actions.
ReplyDeleteIn the General, Buster Keaton's Johnnie Gray is both a hero and simply lucky. Though these ideas somewhat contrast with another, I feel that the movie gives a different definition to what dictates a "hero". Being a hero is typically associated with having a primary trait that betters you from others. For example, being stronger than everyone else, or smarter, etc. However, Johnnie is neither stronger nor smarter, in fact he's really nothing special, just plain lucky. He is portrayed as clumsy, funny, and goofy which completely contrasts what heroes are normally made out to be. The one thing that Johnnie really did have was bravery, he immediately enlisted in the army and made several attempts to do so after being rejected. However, I think that with this the movie was trying to portray the idea that anyone can be a hero. Johnnie was brave and persistent, which leads me to believe that the movie was trying to express that anyone can be a hero and get lucky so long as they are brave. Bravery was the core of Johnnie's success and was represented by his beloved Annabelle, who brought out the bravery in Johnnie whenever she needed help (which was a lot) and turned him into the hero he was.
ReplyDeleteIn, The General, by Buster Keaton, the ideology of the modern hero is mocked ad redefined. Usually in a movie a hero is brave, strong, confident, etc. Main character Johnny Gray mocked the image of the ideal hero in many ways. First, the hero typically has a physical appearance of strong and muscular, but Johnny is a short scrawny train conductor. The hero typically also is very brave. Johnny in the movie was not very brave for example when he encountered a bear. When Johnny saw the bear he was frightened and did not act like a hero typically would. Rather than fighting the bear, Johnny presented the idea of hiding out from enemies. Lastly a hero typically does everything on purpose. Johnny on the other hand did not do everything on purpose. The first good mistake Johnny made was when he miss fired the cannon in the direction of the enemy and forced the enemy to retreat. My personal favorite was when he accidently threw his sword and killed one of the opposing enemies. By the end of the story it was quite apparent that Johnny Gray was the hero. I believe that Keaton is attempting to break the ideology of what the perfect hero must be like, and show to his audience that anyone can be a hero. Being a hero is not all about how you look or how strong you are. Being a hero is about fighting for what you believe in, and doesn’t matter how you get there all that matters is the end result.
ReplyDeleteI believe Johnnie is a hero in the fact that he stepped up to the plate, however, his actions at the plate were mainly lucky. This film portrays the south as the heroic group. In the film Johnnies ignorance and clumsiness play a large role in his luck. If it weren't for his uncanny luck, Johnnie would either be dead or girlfriend-less. This movie seems to make fun of military heroism by depicting it as a form of luck centered around the lesser intelligent. In the movie it seems that clumsiness is just not tied down to Johnnie, but is spread across the north as well. The one scene where Johnnie broke part of the track and the north officers couldn’t even fix the problem. They had to have engineers do it for them. This leaves us wondering, who really runs our country. Another scene where the militaries IQ seems denounced was when Johnnie first starts his journey. It takes the north an extremely long time to realize that he is just one train, even though they’ve been given countless opportunities to look at the train. Johnnie's luck landed him a role as a Lieutenant. This leaves people to ask the question, "what does it really take for someone to become a military hero?". Should we be trusting people like those that Johnnie faced in his excursion to protect our country? Aside from our preconceived notion of what heroism is, this movie depicts heroism completely different. The General leaves us with the impression that heroism consists of a "scrawny little" guy with uncanny luck.
ReplyDeleteJohnny, despite his efforts, is not a true hero, and instead his character is a mockery of the hero ideal. He does not redefine heroism, but only makes fun of its unrealistic ideal and points to the false myth surrounding great deeds. For his part, he conquers many challenges using trickery and luck, and his actions are not within the realm of reality. He rescues his girl by accident, he fires a cannon at the enemy train through sheer incompetence, and he ultimately assists in the battle and wins his promotion by chance. He demonstrates that heroism does not require a hero, and that people claim false accolades for deeds that are not necessarily difficult to accomplish. His triumph again and again over the traditional hero archetype, which is exemplified by Annabelle Lee’s brother, the Southern general, and the Northern officers. Considering that all of these figures took the straight and narrow path to heroism, trying to find it through military accomplishment, and still fell short of Johnny’s bumbling efforts, it is clear that the movie is pointing out that the traditional view of heroism is in fact false. It does not necessarily redefine it, because Johnny is so unrealistic that he cannot become a model for future actions. But he points out the hypocrisy of military heroism.
ReplyDeleteOverall, Johnny is not a true hero, nor does he intend to be. His main goal is not to rescue the girl, but to make the audience laugh while doing so. Johnny is the central figure, so logically the viewer is rooting for his success. But he is a comedian more then a protagonist, and is not there to exemplify a new way of acting, but to mock heroism through his comedy by showing the falsity of it, and display his own irreverence toward heroic moments in history.
I believe that Johnnie Gray is a true hero, no matter how lucky of a hero he is. I believe that what makes Johnnie a hero is his bravery and his will do act in a time of trouble. Johnnie was willing to do whatever it takes to save his (ex?) girlfriend, and he decides to take action in a time where others would have done nothing. Throughout his quest, he is accompanied by a tremendous amount of luck that allows him to be successful but he is still a hero for the simple fact that he was successful. I think this film redefines what it means to be a hero as Johnnie is not the typical strong, macho guys. This film tries to show what makes you a hero is your will and not your physical characteristics. I think this film endorses militaristic ideas, because part of the military is being patriotic, and this film shows that everyone was willing to join enlist and fight for their land as seen by the huge lines at the enlisting offices. At the same time, the film displays the military generals as foolish and like they do not know what they are doing, which is kind of mocking them. However, I think that this helps to show that you do not need to be highly ranked in the army to do great things, and it supports the idea that anyone can be a hero.
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning of the movie the viewer learns that Johnnie’s Annabelle, Johnnie’s girlfriend, and The General, Johnnie’s train, are the two most important things to him. In the movie, a hero is portrayed to be a strong, smart, and patriotic person. Annabelle, Johnnie’s love interest, seems to agree with this statement. After Johnnie rejected from the army, Annabelle refuses to see Johnnie. In the following clip, spies from the north sneak into Johnnie’s town and steal his train; coincidently, Annabelle was also on the train at the time. Throughout the rest of the movie; Johnnie proves the stereotypes wrong by saving his girlfriend, his train, and his town. Although Johnnie is not very smart or physically a strong person, he is clever in his area of expertise: driving a train. Throughout the movie Johnnie is seen standing on the cowcatcher displacing obstacles while the train is in motion, slowing down the chaser by locking the fork in the track, and burning the bridge to stop the northern army. Although Johnnie is shown to be a clumsy person who always makes mistakes, his mistakes somehow always have a positive ending. For example, when Johnnie mistakenly fires the canon at the wrong angle the viewer is led to believe that the cannonball would hit Johnnie and his train. However, right at the last minute, the train and the cannonball hits the train hijackers. His clumsiness is also seen in the battle between the Northern Army and the Southern Army. During the battle, Johnnie accidently fires a canon vertically leading the viewer to believe that the cannonball would fall and hit his own army. Miraculously, the cannonball falls in the river destroying the dam and flooding the opponents. At the end of the movie, Johnnie is rewarded and recognized as a hero and a soldier. I believe that this movie tells us that one does not have to have a list of character traits to be a hero. Anyone can be a hero.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteBuster Keaton’s The General isn’t a typical portrayal of a hero, it’s more complicated than that because the definition of a hero changes throughout the film and Johnnie is extremely lucky. In the beginning when it is announced that the southern military is enlisting new members, every man in the town rushes to enlist. When Johnnie Gray goes to enlist his girlfriend is ecstatic because he is going to be a “hero”. Johnnie is denied enlistment and his girlfriend breaks up with him. This film makes it seem that to be a hero or to be macho as a man, you need to be in the military. Later in the film, Johnnie chases after a train stolen by the northerners. On this train is his lover who was kidnapped. On his adventure to save his girlfriend, Johnnie isn’t only a hero or only lucky. Johnnie is a lucky hero. His heroism is shown when he decides take a train and chase after her. Johnnie proves how brave he is when he goes through many dangerous encounters with the northerners. His bravery makes him a hero but not the hero he is portrayed as. Johnnie is consistently assisted by luck. The cannon on the train tracks, the train falling on the burning bridge, the cannon shooting straight up striking the enemy, and the sword flying in the air striking an enemy were all luck, portraying him as a hero that he really isn’t. In the end, Johnnie is celebrated as a true war hero. Whether Johnnie believes that he deserves all of the celebration for his luck facilitated heroism, we will never know.
I think that in The General, heroism is a multi-faceted construct which evidently can take many forms. While at the time, the concept of heroism had a fairly defined theme of masculinity, bravery, and militarism, The General, working in conjunction with its comedic nature, flips that definition by putting the spotlight on a whimsical protagonist who succeeds not by brilliant schemes or physical stature, but by cleverness and luck. In the end however, the same end-goal is achieved; the war is won, the protagonist gets the girl, and not much seems to have deviated from status quo, at least in terms of the end-product. I think that while not exactly overt, this film does play as somewhat of a parody to classic war movies and military heroism. There are moments throughout the film in which we see classic military strategy and demeanor spoiled by Johnnie executing an improbable gag, which I think serves to diminish the notion of fundamental strategy and push the importance of luck and cleverness in a battle-situation. Johnnie is both lucky and a true hero, and I don’t think the two are mutually exclusive. Just because Johnnie does not fit the typical picture of a military hero doesn’t mean that his bravery and persistence don’t justify his success in the end. I think by illustrating Johnnie’s journey to heroism as whimsical and unconventional, but nonetheless ending at the cliché definitions of success, that point is driven home.
ReplyDelete