The Distinction of Class in Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk

Upon reading Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk, something that struck me throughout the novel was the class difference between the Bravos and nearly everyone they encountered in the Dallas Cowboys stadium. The men are referred to as heroes by everyone they meet, and yet nearly everyone they encounter has vastly more money and connections than all of the Bravos combined.

This class distinction reaches its peak when the men meet Norm Oglesby, the larger than life owner of the Dallas Cowboys. “Billy is thinking if you took every person he’s ever known in his life and added up the sum total of all their wealth, tis presumably grand number would still pale in comparison to the stupendous net worth of Norman Oglesby” (108). He is loud, arrogant, and believes that everything he says should be its own speech. He is the classic stereotype of a snobbish, upper class, white, Republican American man. None of the Bravo men particularly like Norm, but they are struck by his ability to control a room.

This class dynamic in Billy Lynn is an interesting paradox: the old, rich men revere and idolize these brave young soldiers. They live vicariously thorough them. However, these soldiers only do what they do because they have no other choice. Many of the men in the Bravo squad are a part of it because they have to be. Billy is in the Army because it seemed like a better option to him than jail (18). Shroom didn’t have a family to support him, Lake’s parents were addicted to drugs and unable to care for him, and all of the other members of Bravo came from difficult home lives as well (100).

The one person Billy meets that does not have more than the Bravos is Hector. However, Hector is in the same boat as all of them: he is considering joining the Army in order to better his life. “I got a kid and her moms don’t work so it’s all on me… that’s sort of my whole point. What I got out here sucks, so I might as well join” (72-73).  Hector is not able to make ends meet with the jobs he has, so he is forced to consider risking his own life in order to provide for his family. These men are all thought of as heroes, which they deserve, however, the people who are well-off do not realize that these men only do what they have because of a lack of other options. 

Thanks for Nothing

In Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk, just about everyone thanks Bravo squad for their service, sacrifice, and commitment to maintaining America's freedom. While many people seem genuine in their desire to thank the Bravos, at the end of the day they are left with only the words and the horrifying physical and psychological ramifications of war. 

While many are eager to thank the Bravos, very few people go out of their way to give the squad anything which could help them. The only exception I can think of is when the "boojee lady" sitting in front of Bravo squad gives the passed out Lodis her Snuggie (262). While the lady never actually thanks the troops for their service, I think this is the type of "thank you" which the troops are most appreciative of  because the lady was thinking about their well-being. While a Snuggie isn't a lot, it is certainly a more tangible thank you than what the troops received from anybody in the upper levels of Cowboy ownership. These men have accumulated an unimaginable amount of wealth, yet they only give their words as thanks to Bravo squad. March Hawey claims that watching Bravo squad's video was one of the biggest thrills of his life (192). If this was truly the case, I would think that given the amount of wealth and power he has he would be able to give something more to help the Bravos. Of course, the same can be said of Norm Oglesby. All of the thanks Norm tries to give in the novel are just attempts to increase his already unimaginable amount of wealth and to push the brand of the Cowboys. He doesn't actually care at all about the well-being of the troops. This is perhaps made most evident by his insulting movie offer to the troops, but just how cheap he is is made apparent when Billy can't even get an Aspirin from the Cowboys airplane hangar sized equipment room.

 By the end of the novel I was really disgusted with how uncharitable and greedy many of the characters with power are. There are tons of other ways which the Bravos were shafted in the novel, I chose to focus on a couple examples. I found this book funny at times but mostly depressing because of all the rich assholes in it. How did the book make others feel?

Who has the right?

I have just finished reading Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk and I can honestly say that I enjoyed reading it. I found it funny and easy to read, all while viewing the complex issue of war from the side heard from the least: the soldiers. There was only one aspect in which the book made me uncomfortable, the fact that someone who has not experienced war seems so determined to write about the traumas it induces. My basic question is whether the author has the right to depict soldiers and their unique challenges without really experiencing them himself.

To the best of my limited research, Ben Fountain has not served in the military. So it begs the question of how he can accurately write about the mental difficulties that Billy and the rest of Bravo squad face. It is easy to theorize, but how can we accept his seemingly unfounded views? I moved past this issue in several ways. Firstly, the book was enjoyable so I was able to temporarily put aside my concerns. The second coping method I found didn't happen until the literal last page of the book, where Fountain dedicates the book. Four of the people he dedicates the book to are thanked for their “guidance on military life” (309). This is comforting to me, both the fact that the author has clearly done some very personal research to support the book, and also that the knowledge that can only be gained through actual experience is being divulged by four people rather than just one.

A third way I overcame my uneasiness about Fountain writing from a first-hand military experience without ever having experiencing it comes from acknowledging my own naivety. I obviously have no military experience, so I can’t judge someone for their imagined inaccuracies. I can’t even truly know if the experiences and thoughts that Fountain portrays are what people in those situations feel like. This complicated issue is only complicated further by the fact that the book is technically fiction, despite the fact that it is trying to be realistic and discuss very serious things. In the end, it just comes down to what you decide you will accept. I trust that Fountain and his four “guides” on military life have worked together closely enough to create a work that depicts what real people might be going through in such intense lifestyles.

Billy Lynn Has A Word Salad

One of the most interesting things that Ben Fountain does in Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk is to insert sections where a series of words are strewn, unconnected, around the page. These sections, which I call “word salad,” often appear when a civilian is bestowing praise on Billy.

The word salad is generally composed of a series of seemingly patriotic buzzwords: terror, sacrifice, 9/11, WMDs, etc. Words are often spelled phonetically to imitate a Texan accent. For instance, 9/11 will be written as “nina leven” (2). One of the most striking things about these passages is their similarity. They’re the same faux-patriotic buzzwords which have been repeated so many times by Fox News broadcasters, and by the people that Bravo has to socialize with, that they’ve lost all meaning. The scattered and unconnected placement of the words on the page symbolizes the way that the words stand on their own now that they have been deprived of meaning by constant repetition.

This interpretation is supported by the fact that the “word salad” arrangement is not only used when civilians are talking about the war. It’s also used when Faison starts evangelizing to Billy, using what seems like the standard Christian schtick: God, Jerusalem, died for us, Jews, etc. (152), and when March Hawey tries to educate Billy on the intricacies of business, talking about things like “fixed assets” and “debentures.” Here, the word salad illustrates they way that Hawey speaks, not by phonetically spelling words according to his accent, but by using type fonts and capitalization for emphasis. “Players’ union” is written in all caps with five exclamation points on the end to illustrate that it’s an idea Hawey hates so much he gets angry and the mention of it, and when Hawey talks about a salary cap for players, it’s written out in a fancy type font to illustrate Hawey’s fondness of this concept (120).

The scattering of the words also illustrates the way that Billy experiences these conversations. He and the rest of Bravo have been hearing almost these exact same words from scores of people all through their tour. Since they are being forced to hear these same things over and over again, it’s no wonder Billy zones out and “[lets] the words whirl and tumble around his brain” (1) whenever someone starts to say them. Especially for soldiers who are exposed to constant repetition of it, the standard issue “grand sacrifice for our country” speech doesn’t improve with repetition.

The Importance of Experience

While I have a hard time personally relating to any of the characters in Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk by Ben Fountain, I found it to be one of the most thought-provoking novels that I have read. Just yesterday, one of my best friends from high school was deployed after several months of marine boot camp and training. I know that I will never be able to understand what he experiences, but this novel gave me some intriguing insight, even if Fountain was never in the army himself. Billy is a 19-year-old, just like me, yet my life and his life have hardly anything in common. It got me thinking, what is returning to America from war really like?

It seems as though Billy and the other Bravos are never at ease. They are always on their toes. At one point the narrator explains Billy’s thoughts, “If you relax even for a second, it will take you, thus a strategy is revealed: Don’t relax” (43). In Iraq, the Bravos are armed and on the move. That’s their life style. They don’t even know what else to do. For example, during the halftime show, fireworks go off that resemble the sounds of war in the Bravos’ minds. As soldiers, the young men don’t know how to relax and enjoy the big halftime production that many other Americans watch on a weekly basis.

The Bravos are also constantly thinking about sex and having degrading conversations about women. Billy, while having the same thoughts and conversations, dreams of the possibility of a relationship. The narrator relays, “It’s not so much that he’s nineteen and still technically a virgin as it is this famished feeling deep in his chest… He needs a woman. No, he needs a girlfriend…” (26). While I live in an environment where I could meet a guy and fall in love any day, Billy lives in a constant battle just to stay alive. Billy thinks, “Or maybe not so much a function of calendar days as the way Iraq aged you in dog years…” (86). Billy and I may be the same age year wise, but not in experience or knowledge. What he sees and does in Iraq is unimaginable to me. What the rest of the 19-year-olds do at college is just as unimaginable to him.

Is there some way that I could really know what Billy feels and experiences? I don’t think it is possible because nothing can be real to me unless I experience it. I won’t ever know what my best friend Kyle experiences as a marine, and I won’t ever really know what returning to America from war is like. But, this novel helped me think of war more objectively. The narrator tells Billy’s thoughts, “… the past is a fog that breathes out ghost after ghost, the present a freeway thunder run at 90 mph, which makes the future the ultimate black hole of futile speculation” (307).  And this is what Fountain is showing we all have in common; we all have past memories, present responsibilities, and a completely unpredictable future.

How the American Worldview Informs Our Understanding of War

In Ben Fountain’s Billy Lynn’s Halftime Walk, the narrative draws out similarities between football and war to convey an underlying fascination with, and obsession of, violence that plagues the American conscience. In its treatment of war as a spectacle or source of entertainment for the general public, the text speaks to the larger issue of how 21^st century terrorism challenges feelings of American exceptionalism and national identity that inform the American understanding of war.

Through repeated interaction between the general public and Bravo Squad, the text reveals a latent fascination with violence that dominates the American psyche. The novel demonstrates an inextricable tie between football and American values, as the crowd chants “U-S-A! U-S-A!” (128) and the playing of the national anthem before the game assumes an almost-religious status (203-207). The link between football and war reveals an underlying fascination of violence, as several Cowboys confront Billy about the experience of being on the frontlines. Beyond simply asking what weapons Billy carries, Octavian’s questions reveal a perverted obsession with violence, as he presses Billy for information, asking, “So what it do … When you pop somebody” (177). After Billy explains the results, “The players suck in their breath. ‘Unh’, someone murmurs, as if biting into something juicy and sweet.” (177). This reaction indicates death and violence elicit a sensual response, as the players react to the description of brute violence with carnal delight. Evidence of an unhealthy obsession with violence is further demonstrated through the questions posed by the media, whom focus on the grisly details of Billy’s war experience. Essentially asking Billy for a play-by-play of his battlefield actions, the media ask questions such as, “What did you do when you got to him?”, “You shot them?”, and “They were dead?” (136-137). The detail-oriented nature of these questions reveal the audience’s unhealthy desire to picture every gross detail, as his grisly answers evoke “thunderous applause” (137) from the audience.

The American obsession with violence functions to portray war as a spectacle or source of entertainment for the American public. Understanding war as a spectacle is introduced through March Hawey, who relays his personal story of Bravo Team’s famous mission. Telling of the night, March states, “Listen, when the news broke that night … that was one of the biggest thrills of my life, no lie … just a beautiful moment” (192). By framing a life-or-death mission as a ‘thrill’ or ‘beautiful’, March’s experience conveys how war is treated as a spectacle or art form that provides entertainment for the American viewer. Furthermore, in reaction to seeing the video, March states, “It was cathartic … Seeing yall John Wayne that deal, it’s like we finally had something to cheer about” (193). The use of ‘John Wayne’ as a verb directly links Bravo Team’s experience with art and cinema, and conveys the theatric or dramatic presentation of their actions to the lay public. Furthermore, the Internet’s ability to sensationalize and heroize Bravo Team’s actions reveal how America understands war as a spectacle, as the video of Bravo Team in the Al-Ansakar Canal goes viral through the web with such taglines as “Bravo snuff movie” or “America’s throbbing cock of justice” (288). Attaching crude and humorous titles to authentic war experience trivializes the concept of war at large, and reveals battle is presented as a form of spectacle or entertainment to the general public.

By linking football with the experience of war, the novel conveys an unhealthy obsession with violence that dominates the American conscience, in which Americans view war as a spectacle or source of entertainment. This worldview seems to be informed by the historical record and feelings of American exceptionalism, which have traditionally understood war to be a distant event that occurs in foreign countries. This perception of war as an abstract or faraway event is bolstered through one woman’s account, who approaches Billy and states, “I couldn’t stop watching those planes crash into the towers, I just couldn’t … I had to keep telling myself … this is not a movie” (44). The disbelief conveyed in this account reveals how September 11^th challenges the traditional understanding of war. For the first time in over 60 years, war becomes an immediate and local event rather than an abstract and faraway spectacle. Unable to cope with the immediacy of the event, the text reveals Americans tend to retreat to their traditional understanding of war as a spectacle or source of entertainment – a thought pattern that is shaped by American history and America’s record of war.

Americans Want a Good War Story, Not the Truth

Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk is centered around Billy Lynn and his experiences after returning to the States from Iraq.  Through Billy’s naïve and yet realistic account of the Super bowl in 2004 (one of many stops on Bravo’s Victory Tour) it becomes clear that Americans not only worship football and its players, they idolize the entire violent nature of the game itself.  However, this obsession with aggression and violence is extremely negative when applied to soldiers and the idea of war.  Instead of offering genuine support or even concern for the soldiers, many citizens at the game seem to only care about the blood and gore of the attacks and want to know about Billy’s firsthand accounts of the killings and battles in Iraq.  In fact, they seem to cheer Billy on as he recounts the horrific experiences and treat him as though he is a reality TV star; not a decorated war hero. Throughout these civilian encounters Billy goes back and forth between telling the people what they want to hear and feeling extremely uncomfortable as he watches their enthusiasm.  He thinks, “This is what he truly envies of these people, the luxury of terror as a talking point, and at this moment he feels so sorry for himself that he could break right down and cry” (114).  This clearly shows just how terrified Billy is of returning to Iraq and how deeply he feels that this American view of war is far from reality when compared to his current situation.  Yet another conversation sparks similar feelings for Billy when he is talking with a few of the Cowboys’ cheerleaders and one says to him

“No, yeah you were! You put it right out there and that’s strong, a lot of people can’t talk about those kinds of things I mean, like, death, you friend’s death?  And you were right there with him?  It can’t be easy talking to a room full of strangers about that.”  Billy responds to this saying “It is sort of weird. Being honored for the worst day of your life” (149).

Once again, this encounter just goes to show how gluttonous the citizens are when it comes to the death and bloodshed involved in the war in Iraq.  I cannot imagine bringing a soldier’s lost comrade up in conversation.  It’s also ironic that this cheerleader encourages Billy for openly speaking about Shroom dying on the battlefield when in reality, Billy had no choice but to speak about Shroom.  The soldiers in this novel are put on a stage and expected to give an intimate account of their horrific experiences.  Many fans simply laugh at times when Billy or one of the other Bravos are being honest and serious about their experiences.  There is no other option for the Bravos except to bear the constant questioning unless they wish to disappoint all of the expectant American citizens and lose support altogether.  They must be actors when it comes to pleasing others and forgo all of the grief, anger, sadness, confusion, and shock that they are truly feeling due to the reality of their experiences.  This is a sad but true fact throughout the novel, and it definitely leaves Billy wondering if life itself has any purpose at all when war is worshipped in this way. 

When the Law isn’t Right

Throughout the novel, the law is often personified.  When Robbins mentors Henry, he explains, “the law expects you to know what is master and what is slave… The law will come to you and stand behind you” (123).  The reverence and personal connection to the law that Robbins shows in this passage is striking.  He seems to link his own morality strongly with his respect for the law; what’s lawful is right and what’s unlawful is wrong.  His conviction is even enough to persuade Henry completely, which is why until the end Henry feels no guilt about buying slaves himself.  Henry even justifies his actions to his father “I ain’t broke no law” (138).  The novel is full of what seem to be moral contradictions.  The strangeness of a former slave turning around to buy slaves himself, people owning their own relatives and friends, all seem to point to the backwardness and inherent contradiction of the institution of slavery.  

            In the scene where Harvey eats Augustus’s free papers, he and Barnum exhibit still different relationships to the law.  When Barnum tries to stop Travis, telling him “that ain’t right, Harvey. This just ain’t right,” he responds, “Right ain’t got nothing to do with it” (212).  Harvey’s complete disregard for the law demonstrates the hatred and evil that fuels slavery.  Barnum is willing to stand up for Augustus, but only for the sake of the law.  This incident contrasts the characters of Harvey and Barnum.  While Harvey doesn’t operate with any sense of morality, Barnum feels a strong sense of what is right and wrong. I think Jones is arguing that that the problem is that this sense of morality is tied to an inherently wrong and immoral system.  Are Robbins, Barnum, and Henry any more deserving of respect than Harvey is?

            The last character Jones contrasts to these men is Counsel.  Counsel is the only white man to do something unlawful toward another white person.  However, killing anyone is also a highly questionable moral act, even though Jones makes it almost satisfying when he shoots Skiffington.  I’m not sure what Jones means by this, but clearly it is another instance of all the contradictory, complicated situations that slavery caused.  It is unclear to me which characters deserve the most blame.  It seems like the fact that Henry turned around and became a slaveholder means that Jones doesn’t believe in a moral distinction between races.  Many characters blame the law, or the institution and tradition of slavery, however, in the scene when Augustus disowns Henry, Jones seems to say that objectively, certain things are immoral and it is every person’s responsibility to realize this, regardless of society around them.

The Individual Known Worlds

The Known World shows how individual perspectives can vary so much, even in a small uneventful county like Manchester. William Robbins is a man at the one end of the spectrum. He is the stereotypical southern plantation owner who sees no problems with owning people as slaves, and treating them like a piece of property. While there are multiple occasions when Robbins shows his callous view towards slavery, it is quite well exemplified when he bans Augustus and Mildred from seeing Henry for a month. After learning Augustus pushed Henry to the ground, Robbins says, “I heard you did something to my boy, to my property” (19). Despite Robbins’s great affection towards Henry, he is a piece of property at the end. Robbins doesn’t know the names of most of his slaves as well, and they are often described by their physical characteristics, similar to how furniture or animals are described. Rita is simply known as the slave with “noticeable mole on left cheek with grey eyes” (18).

Being a southern county, one would expect that all whites would most likely have similar view points as that of Robbins; however, John Skiffington proves otherwise. He promised Winifred on their weeding night that “he and his father had sworn off slavery before they left North Carolina” (33). However, he willingly sets up slave patroller positions around Manchester, which seems contradictory to his beliefs. His flawed map of America created by “a German, Hans Waldseemuller, who lived in France three centuries before” sold by a Russian best symbolizes his view (174). He knows that it wrong, but it is what he has and what he know. He draws comfort from the sense of familiarity/normality of his everyday life, and being a man from the south, slavery naturally falls in that category. He perhaps even experiences some degree of pleasure from “believing” that slavery is wrong, similar to how he enjoys his map of “The Known World,” even though he is aware of the mistakes on it.

           

Henry perhaps carries the most interesting view point. He is a black, yet being raised alongside Robbins, he doesn't necessarily believe that slavery is evil. Rather, he thinks he could be a “gentle” slave master, kinder than any other white slave owner. It is interesting how he fails to see how oxymoronic his statement is. “He did not understand that the kind of world he wanted to create was doomed before he had even spoken the first syllable of the word master” (64). Even when confronting Augustus about owning slaves, he takes the stick from his father’s hands and breaks. He then says, “Thas how a master feels” (138). It is also interesting to note how he says such statement in a “non-white” pronunciation, highlighting the statement’s irony.

          

I maybe stretching this too far, but I see a parallel between these flawed individual perspectives, and how Christopher Columbus “found” America, especially with how Skiffington’s map is described in such detail. Columbus thought he reached the East Indies he set out for, and because that was his “known world,” he called the native inhabitants “Indians.” Instead of the location of the continent, slavery is the topic of discussion, and the characters in the book offer varying view points, despite the fact that slavery is inherently wrong, just as America were never the East Indies under no circumstances.

             

Henry's Battle with What is Right

While reading The Known World, Henry deals with the struggle between “right versus wrong” more than any other character. This inner battle is shown through the number of times the word “right” appears in the novel. In addition, the usage of the word “right” during Henry’s scenes helps distinguish what is morally right and what society has deemed as “right.”

Henry began his life as a slave, and during this time, it can be assumed that he believe slavery was wrong. However, once he was bought out of slavery and became a person instead of property, his economic status and privilege altered his view of slavery. No longer did he think it was morally wrong, but he saw slavery as a privilege of the free. When Henry tells his parents that he has bought Moses as a slave, he justifies his actions by saying, “I ain’t done nothin I ain’t a right to. I ain’t done nothin no white man wouldn’t do.”(138) Henry tells his parents that no one ever told him owning a slave was wrong, and his father argues that no one should have to tell him that slavery is wrong because he can see it is wrong with his own eyes. (137) Because Henry is now on a similar socioeconomic level as a white man, he expects to have the same rights as white men, which included owning slaves. This suggests how own abuse of societal rights can cloud their judgment of what is morally right and how power can quickly change a person’s view on inequality and injustice.  

Many characters in the novel, especially Henry, struggle with the distinction between what is morally right and what is deemed right in society. In the beginning, Henry wants to treat his slaves differently than many of the other slave owners. He wants to treat them as individuals instead of property. However, as time goes on, Henry begins to treat his slaves the same way Robbins does. Henry felt the need to beat his slaves, “but those were the ones who would not do what was proper and right.”(181) Once again, the idea of societal right vs. wrong is suggested, but in a different context. Henry expects his salves to do the right thing when he orders them around. In the same sense, Henry feels as though he has to treat his slaves and reprimand them in the way which is deemed right by society. Both the slaves and the slave owners in this novel, depending on their social status, feel as though they must abide to what is seen as the correct way to act in society. 

I believe Jones continuously uses the word “right” throughout his novel to constantly remind readers that, while the morally right thing to do may be obvious, often times people overlook it in order to succumb to what is socially right just as Henry did. Jones wants to remind readers that what is easy and what is right are not always synonymous, and individuals often times agree with societal standards because it is easier to agree with the popular and privileged choice. When something is seen as normal in society, such as slavery in this novel, people's moral judgements often times are forgotten.

Here are some questions that came to me while writing this post:

-Is it ever okay to do what is socially right versus morally right?

-Do power and privilege play a significant role in how people judge right versus wrong?

-Does Henry struggle the most with doing the “right thing” throughout the novel, or is there another character that stands out as having this issue?