Are theories attached to the text or buried within them? When a painter paints do they ponder “I wonder what people will think ?” Or “I wonder if they can see what I see?”. In Johnson’s deep dive of Melville she uncovers many theories within the text to attempt to prove that theoretical questions are already buried within the text themselves rather than a shiny new treasure that the readers find. She also touches a little into the blurred lines of truth and lies that Saussure talks about as we the readers often assume a perspective or that a story has a singular interpretation, a tradition that has gone on since the inception of text like the bible.In showing 4 separate arguments Barbara reveals that Billy Bud can be interpreted as a criticism of the broken nature of truth as much as the justice system itself. In Melville there are three characters . We have Billy the main protagonist described as innocent , handsome, illiterate and simple minded, Then we have Claggart who is described as intelligent , articulate and cunning with a startitiling and uncomfortable appearance not to be confused with unattractiveness . Lastly the Captain is described as a dreamy book snob . Each accordingly assigned the position of good, evil and judge . So when presented with a case in which Billy murdered Claggart most people decided he was instantly innocent and a sign of truth and Claggart lies and guilt .However in a certain part of the essay Barbara tears this apart through questioning many facets of the evidence pointing to such to point to a possible theory and lesson in BB that the truth isnt straight forward as much as it can just be what’s convenient and easy . This is shown in the ambiguous ending that somehow tells the story in different ways through a song in which Billy is portrayed as a grown man ,and paper in which he is portrayed as the villain . Essentially sending us back to the beginning to relive the tale through different lenses . Who knows maybe one of the endings is the true tale after all we never are told about how the narrator hears the story in the place.

One of the first arguments Barbara makes is how willing we the audience are to dig into Claggart’s description given for a lack of information while also overlooking the same in Billys as shown when she says..”The fact that nothing is known of Claggart’s origins is not a simple, contingent….· lack of information; it is the very origin of his “evil nature…in Billy’s case, an equal lack of knowledge leads some readers to see his origin as divine. ..who his father is, Billy replies, “God’t’nows.” .I think this shows that truth and fact are believed just on the notion of being right but convenient. The way Billy is described makes us the readers give him the benefit of the doubt off the drop because of his lack of intelligence and stutter but that’s all we know .On top of that Barbara finds his obsessive control of people’s view as him being a golden boy unsettling . For someone that’s portrayed being harmless and not very smart you can also argue he is possibly just as manipulative. Being a carpet or pleasant to be around can be done genuinely but when its done fishing for a rewarding response from people it’s manipulative as you are purposely changing and carving parts of your external image to get an advantage in some way shape or form whether its the peoples favor or self satisfaction. To add the mounting case how is it that a timid likable boy is able to kill a captain in one punch ?? This goes back to the case of not knowing anything about billy as Barbara also mentions “As Billy is being taken from the merchant ship to the warship, he shouts in farewell, “And good-bye to you too, old Rights-oJ-Man.” . Again this shows another side of Billy that’s never mentioned and is read as a attitude and final middle finger to his stay at the ship which doesn’t make any since when he was forced to go. Also its mentioned that Billy is the peacemaker of the ship as a reason for him not to leave . While this may make Billy seem like a good kid another way this can be interpreted is Billy disturbs the work on the ship and is again a manipulative character so much so that he changes the mood of what would thought to be a dreadful duty to something entirely different attracting people to do his bidding and buy into his innocence like a moth to the flame.Overall at a quick glance Billy is taken as innocent even readers and critics bought into it which proves that truth and lies within itself are subjective social constructs that mankind created so there can be winners and losers in the battle of intellect we wage on each other.

What is the weight of a breath ?If you ask someone you would come across two different answers . Some people would say nothing . I mean air is weightless . Others would say it’s invaluable . Those people aren’t technically wrong but they aren’t talking about the weight of a breath but the value of living .But who’s wrong comes down to who’s asking and they’re subjective opinion . A philosopher or a physicist ? And about there being two different answers I lied . I could only think of two answers. There’s probably more wrong than right but after all that’s up to you ,or me ,or both ,or either ,or someone ,or no one. In Nietzsche’s “On Truth and Lying Nietzsche says he first laws of truth. “For the contrast between truth and lie arises here for the first time.. The liar .. uses the valid designations, the words, in order to make something which is unreal appear to be real. .. He misuses fixed conventions by means of arbitrary substitutions or even reversals of names. “ explaining that truths and lies are closer than we think and is apart of the game we humans play for perceived superiority over each other in a battle of intellect and the very idea of right and wrong are a figment of our imagination
Additionally Nietzsche also says “The pride connected with knowing and sensing lies like a blinding fog over the eyes and senses of men, thus deceiving them concerning the value of existence. For this pride contains within itself the most flattering estimation of the value of knowing.” . In this quote he draws humankind as a ignorant creature that names to give reason to live through lies again mention blur between truth and lies as a system of oppression in which we shackle ourselves and gain superiority over others giving us a reason to live and without it we would have no desire to live or value life as much as we do. However I disagree with this notion as knowledge existing in the first place is the reason we place value on things and creates a as we would never think to place value in existence or anything for that matter without knowledge . Also us being living beings our existence inherently has value to us regardless of if we place a certain value and or priority to it. We don’t have to think about doing something as simple as breathing; it’s done without much thought. The toddler or newborn instinctively place value in staying alive in breathing despite not knowing yet the meaning of death and therefore the value of life. Therefore one could argue the will to live being tied with a self importance from the hubris we gain through the construct of intellect can be proven false dismantling Nietzsche’s argument of language and fact or truth being an illusion rather than a natural evolution of intellect that mankind was gifted. All in all we in both lies and truth fill the content of what and how we live . But as living being the choice and desire to live was given to us the minute we were born and transcend beyond the grand scheme of things even what we think we know.