Some people love it, and some people hate it. “It was just an outright pleasure to watch,” some say. While others are more inclined to say that it fell short of their expectations. Although not usually the favorite Coen Brothers movie mentioned, O Brother Where Art Thou is still popular. With a 77% popularity rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a weighted average of 7.8 out of 10 points on IMDb, the film seems to carry a “good, not great” reception to its audiences. Its domestic total gross was around 45 million, which seems a surprise compared to its limited opening weekend gross of $195,000. By analyzing the intended audience, real audience, implied audience, ideal audience, and universal audience it will be concluded whether or not the rhetorical significance of the artifact rests in its audience.
The Coens nowhere explicitly state an audience for whom they wrote the artifact. However, there is much to be inferred from where the movie was first released and to whom. The Coens decided to have a very limited release for O Brother Where Art Thou. They originally released it in the United Kingdom on 132 screens. The film then was released in the United States, but only on a scant five screens in December of 2000. The film was also submitted in various film festivals before its wider public release date in January 2001. To pull an example from the film, the highly stylized cinematography is a good indication that the audience was intended to be “movie gurus.” It seems as if the intended audience includes the Coen Brother’s peers and quite possibly themselves. They have stated in a number of interviews that they are simply interested in telling a story. When they start writing, they have no idea which direction they are going to take and what they are trying to say. This seems to be the largest indicator that the intended audience is themselves or possibly their peers.
Despite the fact that the initial audience was very narrow, that gap widened significantly as seen in the real audience. According to IMDb, there is no significant difference of opinion between the different demographics that viewed the artifact. Male, female, young, and old all seem to give an average rating of 7 or 8 points out of 10 for O Brother Where Art Thou, although females under the age of 18 gave consistently the lowest user rating for the film with an average of 6.9. Because of the film’s rapid dialogue between characters, social idioms and references, and seemingly disconnected plot, it is understandable for it to receive lower ratings from younger audiences. The real audience was likely so varied because the movie contained so many different themes that played to many demographics. For example, it was a type of love story, which played to women, and it was a crime story, playing to most male audiences. So although not intended to be understood or well-received by a wide audience, the real audience demonstrated just that.
The content of the artifact drew a particular audience as well. The implied audience created by this film had a psychographic common affinity for nostalgia. The love of nostalgia is a particular attitude that is characteristic of many Americans, so when O Brother Where Art Thou featured many old-timey scenes including bluegrass music, an implied audience was created. The demographics of this particular group would probably be middle to late adults, while some perhaps are of the younger generation. It also seems possible that geographics played a role in the implied audience. After all, the film takes place in the South which seems to be a culture of its own with ideas and values particular to that region. Although somewhat critical of this culture, via the heavy farce, those who are familiar with Southern culture likely were drawn to the artifact. Consider the scene in which the three convicts encounter the Bible salesman. This would no doubt strongly resonate with those people who grew up in or around the Bible-belt region of the South. So although not necessarily what the Coen Brothers intended, the implied audience was drawn to the artifact by its content or discourse.
Whether or not this was the intention of the author in creating the artifact, the film O Brother Where Art Thou makes an argument targeted at a specific audience to persuade after viewing the artifact. The ideal audience would view the film and be compelled to change afterward. The argument of this particular artifact would be: “If you are ‘stuck’ or ‘indifferent’ at this place in your life, you should work toward becoming your full potential.” There is a heavy influence of existentialism here. The main character played by George Clooney, Ulysses Everett McGill, asks himself in the film “who am I?” to which it seems like the rest of the film is an attempt to answer that question, although not explicitly. The demographics and geographics for the implied audience could be all across the board. A particular age, gender, region, or occupation is not necessary for a person to feel “stuck” in their life. Whether a middle-aged businessman discontent with their job or a young female who is unsure of what to do with her life, the message of this artifact plays to their particular needs. What is most important in regards to implied audience is psychographics. Here the author of the artifact is assuming a particular belief about his audience and hoping it is a variable belief and not a fixed belief.
The values of this audience in the case of this artifact would probably be unsure to begin with, but after viewing the artifact it seems the Coen Brothers may be trying to suggest his audience adopt the self-actualization theory. This theory was made prominent by Abraham Maslow and is defined as the motive to realize one's full potential. In his view, it is the organism's master motive and the only real motive to actualize itself as fully as possible as the basic drive...the drive of self-actualization. The protagonist of the film is a convict, an adequate representation of someone who is “stuck” in their life. As the movie progresses, the audience finds out that Everett actually has a goal to strive for. He has the potential to go back to his wife and be the father to his six little girls again, but he has a journey to go on before he gets there. In this, it is shown that the ideal audience for the artifact O Brother Where Art Thou are those who are at an indifferent place in their lives and would be persuaded to become their full potential.
Finally, the artifact necessitates one final audience and that is the universal audience. This audience is not tangible in nature, but rather the ultimate judge of the artifact. This ultimate judge would have a honed aesthetic because the artifact is artistic in nature. It is highly stylized and received an Oscar for best cinematography. The ultimate judge would also be a social critic who is aware of cultural idioms. He would have an appreciation for existential meaning that is an underlying theme behind this film. After playing “20 Questions” with this idea of universal audience, the answer seems to be simple. This universal audience that the authors of this particular artifact are trying to please is, in fact, themselves. Because the universal audience is supposed to be a totally rational and unbiased critic, it is difficult to make the claim that the Coen Brothers themselves are the audience. Obviously an author cannot be totally unbiased toward his work. The characteristics of this universal audience then would probably be characterized by a demographic of middle to late adults with Caucasian or African American ethnicity (because of the racial themes explored). This audience would also probably live in no particular place geographically, but ideally in the South. The psychographics of this audience would have a fixed belief in existentialism with a predisposition to respond positively to the self-actualization theory of motivation. It most definitely could be argued that the Coen Brothers themselves are the universal audience, but also likely is the “invented” critic with the characteristics mentioned above.
In conclusion, although the intended audience was extremely narrow with the Coens limiting it do just themselves and their peers, it widened significantly with the real audience. This audience was broad demographically, but had a higher concentration of adults and a lower concentration of women. The implied audience likely includes those with a love for nostalgia or an affinity for Southern culture or bluegrass music. The ideal audience would be the target of this implied argument made by the artifact: those who are “stuck” or “indifferent” in their lives should strive to become their full potential. By watching the film, the Coens may be hoping they adopt the self-actualization theory or something akin to it. And finally, the universal audience might be the Coen Brothers themselves, or a fabricated critic who possesses many of their characteristics. Audience does not hold much significance in regards to the artifact in this case because it is the artifact that impacts the audience, and not the audience that gives the artifact significance. It seems fair to conclude then, after analyzing the artifact in light of its audience, that 55% of the significance rests in its author, 35% in its genre, and only 10% in its audience.
The Coen brothers never escaped a near-death experience, never saved a baby from a burning building, and never had a run-in with the law. “We’re just interested in telling a story” they say. While the lives of the Coen Brothers themselves are far from spectacular, their films certainly aren’t. Both Ethan and Joel have been nominated for thirteen Academy Awards and have won two Oscars for screenwriting. By looking at their early interest in film, eclectic background, college education, and aversion to sentimentality, this paper will aim to answer the question: “Does the rhetorical significance of O Brother Where Art Thou? rest in its authors?”
Joel and Ethan Coen’s interest in film began at a very young age. They often used to use their friends as actors in their short films.
Born in 1954 and 1957 respectively, Joel and Ethan grew up in St. Louis Park, Minnesota, a Jewish Minnesota suburb that the Coens would later offer their lawn-mowing services to in order that they might fund their early film-making efforts.
A passion for filmmaking that started at such a young age no doubt played a role in their success. Who knows whether they would have been as successful had they started filmmaking later in their lifetime. There is no indication that their parents had anything to do with their affinity for the craft. Both parents worked for colleges and their proficiencies were in art and economics. Because they started working together from such a young age, the screenwriting process is now impossible for them to do alone. “We usually sit down to start typing together. What usually happens is we start bouncing ideas off of each other, if the ideas aren’t flowing and we aren’t on the same wavelength that day, then it just kind of fizzles out.” It is difficult to find a specific example to illustrate the influence their early interest in film had on O Brother Where Art Thou? Rather, looking at the greatness of their achievements in filmmaking and screenwriting as a whole is better testimony to how their early interest in film made the artifact so triumphant.
The Coen Brothers not only had a knack for making films, they also had plenty of creative ideas for them because of their eclectic background. Joel recalls watching everything from Hercules to Doris Day as a child. “They were fed a familiar diet of pop-culture by their parents…such a catholic range of influences (O Brother Where Art Thou? is a Homeric Blues movie, for example) left an indelible impression on their film-making.” In the generic criticism of this artifact, it was discovered that much of the rhetorical significance rested in its genre, but the eclectic nature of the genre would not be possible without the eclectic background of the minds that created it. By learning to appreciate art and entertainment in its many forms from a young age, Joel and Ethan Coen developed almost a new way to make movies – by overlapping genres and implementing the unexpected. Where else could you find bank robbers, bluegrass music, comedy, and the devil himself all in one movie? O Brother Where Art Thou? is a fantastic example of the product of eclectic minds.
When the Coens went to college, Ethan went to Princeton to study Philosophy and Joel went to New York University to study film. As is characteristic in their movies, O Brother Where Art Thou? “juggles existential and theological questions” and a portrayal of the human nature. No doubt Ethan’s study of philosophy at an Ivy League school contributed to the slew of philosophical questions presented in the artifact, primarily by the protagonist, Ulysses Everett McGill. “Well, I guess hard times flush the chump. Everybody's lookin' for answers,” said Everett. The artifact is based around the quest for a treasure, but the treasure they find is not the treasure they set out looking for. Joel and Ethan Coen had their protagonist set out on an existential journey to find true treasure. In the case of this artifact, the treasure was a reformed life out of prison to be back with his family. “A good way to describe the [Coen] brother’s opus is: a chronic search for truth” said one Christian movie critic.It seems as if Everett’s search for truth is tantamount to the Coen brother’s search for truth. Because of their college education, their movies take on a philosophical slant.
The final influence on the authors that affects their screenwriting, and this artifact in particular, is their aversion to sentimentality. In an interview with the Coen brothers, they had this to say regarding this particular trait in their filmmaking:
Q: do you think you have a generally optimistic view of human nature or is it all about how bad people can be? A: oh both. I want people to leave our movies thinking “oh look how bad people can be” but still walk out feeling like they enjoyed themselves. Q: do you have an absolute aversion with sentimentality? A: yes, absolutely.
At first glance, it may seem as if the Coen brothers have a cavalier attitude toward serious subjects. As was noted in the generic criticism of this artifact, O Brother Where Art Thou? would not be the movie that it is without its eclectic mixture of comedy to balance out the more serious themes such as crime and drama. One criticism described it as “not a traditionally mixed generic form such as tragicomedy or pastoral epic but a self-consciously contradictory artifact.” A careless criticism might offer the explanation that the Coen brothers are insincere, but a more accurate explanation is their aversion to sentimentality. The artifact is sprinkled with the depravity of human nature, for example, look at the thieving Bible-salesman or the favored politicians who secretly participate in the Klu Klux Klan. While the Coen brothers want to make sure their audience sees accurately the wickedness and folly of humanity, they also want to make sure they do not despair. Their goal is not to make depressing movies - their goal is to tell a story. Their style is, in a sense, realism. Dictionary.com defines realism, in writing, as “a theory of writing in which the ordinary, familiar, or mundane aspects of life are represented in a straitforward or matter-of-fact manner that is presumed to reflect life as it actually is.” Life is not a fairy tale, it doesn’t always have a happy ending, in fact, sometimes it is downright depraved, but that doesn’t mean some happiness can’t be pulled from it. That is what the Coen brothers are trying to do. Their aversion to sentimentality is absolutely essential in producing the kinds of films that they do.
In conclusion, just as was true of the generic criticism, O Brother Where Art Thou? finds much of its rhetorical significance in its author. The question is then, how much? It seems as if, approximately, 60% of the significance lies in the author and 40% lies in the genre. Because the Coen brothers do not use conventional genres, but often invent their own, the genres would not be possible without the authors. So while the genre is extremely critical in the significance of the artifact, the author must hold more of a claim on the significance. Their early interest in film gives the Coen brothers many years of experience in filmmaking which explains the ease with which they seem to write and produce movies. Their eclectic background no doubt contributed to the eclectic nature of the artifact, O Brother Where Art Thou? with its diverse themes. The college education of the brothers comes through in the philosophical and existential nature of the quest Everett and the two other convicts go on. And finally, and probably most importantly, is their aversion to sentimentality that contributes to the mix of portrayal of human depravity and humor that sets all of the Coen brothers’ movies apart.
What do Greek gods, epic journeys, and three prison escapees have in common? They are essentially part of the same story, told two different ways. The 2001 film by the Coen brothers, O Brother Where Art Thou, is a modern adaptation of Homer’s Odyssey which was written thousands of years earlier. The film opens with a line from Homer’s Odyssey to introduce the audience to the tale: “O muse, sing in me and through me tell the story, of that man skilled in all the ways of contending, a wanderer, harried for years on end…” This film grossed a total of $65,976,782 worldwide, and the public opening grossed $3.6 million on February 2, 2001. It was nominated for two Oscars and was submitted to the Cannes Film Festival. This paper will aim to answer the question “does the rhetorical significance of this film rest in its genre?” This paper will analyze four genres that O Brother Where Art Thou fits into. Those categories are comedy, adventure, crime, and Southern Gothic.
The first genre to be analyzed is that of comedy. Compiled resources including Allmovie.com and A Dictionary of Thematic Terms define comedy as
A film whose main purpose is to amuse and induce laughter, comedy deals with the preposterous and absurd aspects of human behavior with a sense of humor. It is a type of drama that celebrates or satirizes the follies of characters for the audience to use as a scapegoat for the ridiculousness of life. Comedy in film can also be an effective way of commenting on aspects of society, examining hypocrisies by showing how absurd they are.
This film is set in the Deep South during the peak of the Great Depression, so it is no wonder that the comedy genre was effective in turning this into a light-hearted film. Comedy can be seen in such scenes as the one when the main characters Everett, Pete, and Delmar pick up Tommy Johnson, the colored guitar player: “What are you doing all the way out here Tommy?” said Everett, “I had to be up at that there crossroads last midnight, to sell my soul to the devil,” replied Tommy. Everett answers back: “Well, ain't it a small world, spiritually speaking. Pete and Delmar just been baptized and saved. I guess I'm the only one that remains unaffiliated!” Or consider the scene when the men are coming to the end of their journey. Everett is describing the quaint little cabin with a “happy little tire swing,” but just as they come upon that very cabin, the devil character is waiting there with three graves and nooses, to which Delmar asks Everett, “where’s the happy little tire swing?” This film is a comedy because it uses humor to balance out the darker aspects of the movie.
The next genre to be examined is that of an adventure. A Dictionary of Literary and Thematic Terms and Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms define adventure as
A type of fiction that usually includes suspense, excitement, physical danger, travel to exotic settings, and a hero. The prototype of this form is Homer’s Odyssey, in which the hero faces a series of threatening situations as he attempts to voyage home. Akin to romance, the adventure story relies on a series of exciting episodes unified by the theme of a search. It is a masculinized variety of romance.
This genre also includes a sub-category that is too similar to be left out of describing this film. That genre is the road movie. Filmsite.org and Allmovie.com offer this definition for the sub-genre:
One thing they all have in common: an episodic journey or quest on the open road, to search for escape or to engage in a quest for some kind of goal, be it physical, spiritual, or psychological. The characters learn something valuable about each other and themselves along the way. The road itself takes on both physical and metaphorical meanings in these films.
The film O Brother Where Art Thou is an adaptation of Homer’s Odyssey which is the prime example for the adventure genre. Everett, Pete, and Delmar meet an old railroad man at the very beginning of the film who tells them “You seek a great fortune. You will find a fortune, though it will not be the fortune you seek, but first you must travel a long and difficult road, a road fraught with peril, you shall see things wonderful to tell! It shall be your salvation.” The form of the adventure genre is always placed around a series of events leading toward a goal or destination, and that is exactly what this film is. Ulysses Everett McGill, the hero/protagonist, devises a plan to break out of prison so he can win his wife back, but he needs help. In order to obtain the help of Pete and Delmar, he tells them that he has treasure buried out on his old property that they would get a share of if they helped him break out. Along the way they encounter a bank robber, a thieving Bible salesman, sirens, and the devil-figure who is in pursuit of them the entire time. Like the road movie states, the physical treasure they thought they were chasing at first turns out to be a metaphorical treasure that holds much more significance. Since the entire film is based on a journey, it must be defined as an adventure.
The next genre that this film takes is crime. Allmovie.com and Filmsite.org define crime as
A type of film focusing on the lives of criminals. The stylistic approach ranges from grittily realistic portrayals of the real-life criminal figures to farfetched evil doings of imaginary villains. They glorify the rise and fall of a particular criminal(s).
Again, there is a genre crossover that must be included in the defining this film by its genre. The sub-category crime comedy is not another genre, but instead serves to better define the crime genre as portrayed in this film. Allmovie.com and A Dictionary of Literary and Thematic Terms defines it as
A film that plays the conventions of the crime genre for laughs. The brains behind the jobs usually aren’t that bright, or fail to take into account several factors which place the culprits in rather sticky situations. Often the crimes are unsuccessful, bumblingly executed, or presented in such a lighthearted matter that one ends up rooting for the criminal to get away with their loot unscathed. (See also ‘Tragicomedy’, tragedies laced with comic characters)
One example of this genre is seen in the first scene when Everett, Pete, and Delmar escape from prison. The audience immediately likes and accepts their act of crime because of their likeable nature. Another example of a crime or crime comedy in this film is when Everett runs into his ex-wife and seven daughters. “Why are you telling our gals that I was hit by a train?” asks Everett. “Lots of respectable people have been hit by trains. Judge Hobbie over in Cookville was hit by a train. What was I gonna tell them, that you got sent to the penal farm and I divorced you from shame?” replies Penny. The audience finds this humorous and still favors Everett, the protagonist, despite the fact that he lies, steals, and cheats. The crime-cluttered South that this film is set in makes it a necessity that this film be defined as a crime while the hilarity of those crimes makes it a crime comedy as well.
Although this film has significant impact because of the music, it cannot properly be defined as a musical because the characters do not use the medium of music to express their thoughts and there is also no dance. Therefore, the last genre to describe this film is Southern Gothic. Information from the Mason Academic Research System describes this genre as
Unique to American Literature, Southern Gothic relies on supernatural, ironic or
unusual events to guide the plot and uses these to explore social issues and reveal the cultural character of the American South.
Southern Gothic is usually identified as a literary sub-genre with gothic being the major genre. However, other sources have also applied this genre to film as well. One example from the film of this genre is when the three convicts venture to Pete’s cousin’s house to take refuge. His cousin ends up tipping them off to the police for the reward because “these are hard times we in” (in reference to the Great Depression) to which Pete responds in shock and horror “but we’s kin!” The Southern periodical stereotypes we see here are the attitude of desperation caused by the Depression as well as the cultural emphasis on loyalty to your kin. Another example from the film is when the incumbent Pappy O’Daniel wants to pardon the three convicts to boost his image. His concerned campaign manager exclaims “But Pappy, they’re integrated!” This is of course referring to the racism that was heavily prevalent in Southern culture in the 1930s. This film must be classified as Southern Gothic due to its emphasis on the social issues and cultural nuances of the American South.
In conclusion, this film is a comedy because it uses humor to balance out the darker themes. This movie is an adventure because the plot follows the “hero” along a journey to reach a destination. The main characters are criminals so the film must be a crime and the film portrays stereotypical aspects of the American South, necessitating the Southern Gothic genre. All of these genres combined to make a box office hit that reached audiences around the world. The four genres that have been analyzed – comedy, crime, adventure, and Southern Gothic – are absolutely integral to the rhetorical impact of the film O Brother Where Art Thou. Leave any genre out and the film would not have been as impactful.
Not only did this film cause a buzz in the entertainment industry – it was nominated for two Oscars - what is surprising is that it got philosophers and thinkers talking as well. On the surface, O Brother Where Art Thou is a film about three escaped convicts on the hunt for buried treasure that loosely resembles the plot of Homer’s The Odyssey. Look only a little deeper than this though, and you will find, whether intended by the authors or not, hints of self-actualization theory as well as the philosophy of existentialism. The purpose of the textual criticism of this artifact is to find out if the rhetorical significance rests in its text. The steps that will be taken to ascertain this will be to observe: claim, data, warrant, backing, reservation, and qualifier. Elements of style and supporting material will also be analyzed.
According to the Toulmin model of analysis, there are six criteria for analyzing the artifact textually. The first that will be addressed is the claim that the artifact makes. Using the same argument from the author criticism analysis, the claim is that those who are stuck or indifferent in their life should work toward becoming their full potential.
After the argument, or claim, has been established data must be collected from the artifact in order to legitimize the claim. The protagonist, Ulysses Everett McGill played by George Clooney is pictured in the opening scene of the movie with two other inmates breaking loose from prison. In order to get the help of his fellow-inmates, Everett told them there was something in it for them too…a treasure. The audience finds out later that Everett lied about the treasure, and really just wanted to get back to his family because he heard his wife was going to marry another man. Everett’s lie about the treasure actually becomes a metaphor for his self-actualization. The treasure he found in the end wasn’t the treasure the three convicts planned on finding. In the end, Everett is re-united with his wife and six daughters. Also when examining existentialism in the film, this philosophy not only comes through in the truth that Everett’s very human nature is chosen through his life choices, but also in the rejection of religious and secular rules, painting them as merely arbitrary. The convicts’ escape from prison was not only seen as comical, but they were pictured as the “good guys” for it. Also take into account how Christianity, essentially the law of the land in that place and time, was portrayed as corrupt and hypocritical drawing from the examples of the Klu Klux Klan and the thieving Bible salesman. These serve as just a few examples of the claim, what Toulmin would label data.
Next, the warrant will be examined. That is to say, societal beliefs that serve to legitimize the claim and show how it is exemplified in human behavior. While there is a growing number in society today who settle for mediocrity, the general consensus seems to be that this is not the place where one wants to remain. Society frowns upon people who have thrown their lives away, and society praises those who have achieved much. It is also the growing trend in our culture to throw away constraints and live by the “whatever-works-for-you” philosophy of life. A definition of existentialism will tell you that
The arbitrary act that existentialism finds most objectionable-that is, when someone or society tries to impose or demand that their beliefs, values, or rules be faithfully accepted and obeyed. Existentialists believe this destroys individualism and makes a person become whatever the people in power desire thus they are dehumanized and reduced to being an object. Existentialism then stresses that a person's judgment is the determining factor for what is to be believed rather than by arbitrary religious or secular world values.
Society at large, and American culture specifically, view that those who achieve their goals positively. Also, those who are skeptical or reject societal constraints such as religion, and even the law in some cases, are viewed in a positive light.
To give support to the warrant, authoritative backing will be examined. Kurt Goldstein and Abraham Maslow are credited with the self-actualization theory, becoming your full potential. This theory claims that what should, and will, drive an individual to act is the desire to become who they want to be. The desire to become who you want to be is an existential idea. The philosophy of existentialism, attributed to philosophers such as Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, claims that we can create meaning in our lives. Kierkegaard especially maintained that the individual is solely responsible for giving his or her own life meaning. The two views complement each other and give sufficient backing to the claim that those who are stuck or indifferent in their lives should work toward becoming their full potential.
There are those who would beg to differ regarding this claim. The reservation may be held by two groups of people. Existentialism says you create your own reality and purpose - that there is no pre-existing meaning to anything because the individual creates it. Therefore, the opposite of this would be much of fundamental Christianity which believes in the predestination of the individual by God to do a certain thing. Passages like Ephesians 2:10 say "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." This does not exclude free will, however, which is often a mistaken belief or criticism of fundamental Christianity. And although tied to existentialism in certain aspects, nihilism (the “philosophy of purposelessness”) seems to be in opposition to the claim, warrant, and backing. The term nihilism is sometimes used to explain the general mood of despair at a perceived pointlessness of existence that one may develop upon realizing there are no necessary norms, rules, or laws. Although the artifact would be in agreement with the subjectivity of rules and laws, it would be in opposition to the reservation’s claim that there is no point to life. Those who would agree with the claim of the artifact say that we create our own purpose to life by our self-actualization.
And finally, the Toulmin model would require a qualifier. This would be essentially a percentage of people who would accept the claim of the artifact. After analyzing the claim, data, warrant, backing, and reservation, it is a fair assumption to claim that about 70% of American audiences would accept the claim of this movie by being compelled to reach their full potential.
To continue in the analysis of the artifact, two aspects of style and one aspect of supporting material will be analyzed. These characteristics stand out as used by the author to contribute to the significance of the artifact. First the metaphorical stylistic aspect will be observed. What makes O Brother Where Art Thou unique undoubtedly lies in the strong metaphorical nature of the plot. This is not simply a story about three convicts escaping from prison and going on a treasure hunt, the journey they take outwardly is a metaphor for the inward journey that each of them takes. Everett “finds himself” in the end of the movie, and his companions find freedom to start over. The Coen brothers definitely use the metaphorical aspect of style to uniquely impact the artifact.
Next, the diction aspect of the style of the artifact will be analyzed. If you don’t pay close attention to the dialogue in this film, you will certainly miss something. The Coen brothers used diction to make O Brother Where Art Thou unique. It is no accident that the Coens made their protagonist, Ulysses Everett McGill, a fast-talking, but highly intelligent, con-man. It is not natural to expect a convict to have substantial things to say, but Everett does. He often makes references to Biblical texts, literature, and culture. He uses words like “paterfamilias” and “bifurcated.” It seems as if what the Coen brothers might have been aiming to do here is to be unique. Their protagonist is a walking contradiction, after all. Diction is an element of style that is utilized to make this artifact unique.
There is an element of supporting material that would serve to explain the uniqueness of the artifact as well, and that element is definition. In O Brother Where Art Thou, the Coens aim to redefine how the audience looks at the institution of religion. After Pete and Delmar become convicted after seeing a community baptism, they join and get baptized as well. Everett’s response was, “Baptism! You two are just dumber than a bag of hammers!” In attempts at redefining religion, the Coen brothers have Everett claim its stupidity rather than hold it in a positive light. Another example is Everett’s definition of the devil, “The great Satan hisself is red and scaly with a bifurcated tail, and he carries a hay fork.” Again, Everett’s definition serves to redefine how the audience sees the institute of religion.
After using the Toulmin model of analysis to examine the artifact, it can be concluded that only a small percentage of O Brother Where Art Thou rests in its text. Because the message of this movie is subliminal and obscure, not all “get it.” As was seen in the audience criticism, many audiences thought the plot seemed disconnected and unorganized. Because of the stylistic approach the Coen brothers took with metaphor, the claim that the text presented was not as clear. Although the text of the artifact is substantial and makes a significant claim, it is not easily apparent to audiences. Therefore, it seems fair to conclude then, after analyzing the artifact textually, that 55% of the significance rests in its author, 35% in its genre, 5% in its audience, and 5% rests in the text.
