An Analysis Of Bruce Lincolns 's ' The ' All Don 't Listen About Your Pawpaw '
1305 WordsDec 3, 20166 Pages
“Y’all don’t listen to your pawpaw, he’s just full of myths,” was a common expression shouted across my grandparent’s cracker box type home growing up. My pawpaw was a talker, and always had something to say if given the opportunity to say it. There was no such thing as a quick trip to Foodland for sugar, as an hour long conversation would always commence out of whichever unsuspected person happened to ask how his day was. He was known for sitting in our towns old pancake house with his buddies, sharing the same stories about the war, much to my cousins and I’s dismay when we were taken along with him. However, on rainy summer days you would always find my cousin and I crossed legged in the floor beneath his favorite chair, begging for him to tell us more of the “myths” grandma hated to hear. In Bruce Lincolns preface, he says myths can be seen as strongly negative, strongly positive, or somewhere in between (Lincoln, 1999, pg. ix). An example given to describe this gray space is of myths being stories for children (1999). To my cousin and I, these stories were strongly positive. In our eyes they were as Lincoln says, the “primordial truth” (1999). Gifts from the past our paw paw decided to give us when we needed to be sat down after a sugar high, or when we begged him until he caved. To my Grandma they were just foolish lies that she hoped our impressionable minds wouldn’t cling on strongly too. Reflecting on this now, I see that it was just a story for children,