Jack London: The Man Who Lived “To Build a Fire”.

 

To Build a Fire is one of those stories that have stuck with me. Decades after the first reading, that image of just sitting down in the snow and letting yourself free to death haunted me. 



Jack London was a doer, a man equipped and willing to take on difficult jobs to provide for his mother and sisters, while he had dreams of being a writer. Young and strong, he had worked as an “oyster pirate, a sealer, and a hobo; had worked in a cannery, a jute mill and a laundry” (Haigh 1) where he was slogging in the steam when a ship brought word of a goldrush in the Klondike. London set out with thousands of others to add gold prospector to his resume.  He had little idea that his experiences in the northern brutal cold would inspire him to write his greatest works. In “To Build a Fire” Jack London pits man’s wisdom, or lack of, against the dangers of nature by fictionalizing experiences he had in the Yukon, through use of fable style writing, and an omniscient detached point of view.

Jack London relied on his own wisdom before he took his first step into the Klondike. He was a young man, twenty-one, with a string of difficult low-earning jobs behind him and looking to make a fortune. When he landed on the Dyea beachhead, three thousand men were already there. Tenderfoots, who had not realized that they were still five hundred miles from the Yukon and that the native porters were charging ridiculous amounts to carry all the supplies needed to survive for a year (McKay and McKay 1). Jack, however, was prepared. He had gotten hold of a miner’s account and studied the geography of the area. According to Brett and Kate McKay, Jack London “knew that the first leg of the journey was a 28-mile uphill hike to Lake Lindeman” (1) and that he would not be able to afford a porter’s high charges but would need to pack all his food and equipment himself.  Wisdom and preparation prevailed for Jack. He had already devised a method beforehand to get up the Chilcoot Pass to divide “his half-ton kit into around a dozen smaller loads, and would take each load a mile, cache it, and then return for another…Jack simply bore down in determination, put one foot in front of the other, and ignored the burn in his legs and back as he carried a half-ton of supplies to the summit, 100 pounds at a time” (McKay and McKay 1). Conversely, in his story “To Build a Fire” the main protagonist does not share in Jack’s wisdom to prepare for the harshness of the Yukon.

The story takes place in the same area that Jack London had traveled where the man turns off of the main trail “that led south five hundred miles to the Chilcoot Pass, Dyea, and salt water; and that led north seventy miles to Dawson” (London 47). Just as the majority of the three thousand men at Dyea beachhead were not prepared and had to turn back before ever starting their journey to the goldrush, the man in “To Build a Fire” did not prepare for his day long journey either, even when he had been given instructions by those who understood the dangers of the land. The man rejected the wisdom of others by first going out on the journey alone, a situation that London also experienced for himself. London had staked a claim in Henderson Creek, and then went to Dawson to register the claim. The hike back by himself turned out to be demanding through the snow just as “winter had thoroughly set in, and there was nothing left to do but ride it out” at his little camp on his claim. According to Brett and Kate McKay, it was this hike through what London called “White Silence” that “he would later draw on to write his best short story, “To Build a Fire” (47). The man in “To Build a Fire” did not prepare in other ways as well. He brought a limited amount of food, only a sandwich which he carried inside his coat so it would not freeze. He did not have the proper facial protection to cover his nose, and his final mistake was that in his rush to build his fire after he got wet, he did not heed the wisdom to build the fire out in the open, but instead built it beneath a snow-laden tree. That final unwise act sealed his fate when the snow fell and put out his fire. Because of London’s actual time in the Yukon and his personal experience with the dangerous aspect of the nature of the place, the setting of “To Build a Fire” is alive with hidden dangers and risks, from the white cold and quiet that a “sharp, explosive crackle” (London 47) of his own spit in the air startles the man, to the moisture of the dog’s breath crystallizing in its muzzle (London 48), to “the bulge of the earth intervened between it and Henderson Creek, where the man walked under a clear sky at noon and cast no shadow” (London 50).  London had experienced all of these aspects and put it in his writing with an economy of words that only someone who had been there could capture. Also during the winter London was in the Yukon, he learned a great deal from the miners he was with to draw on for his stories.

Snowstorms in the winter would last for weeks. The temperature would drop to sixty degrees below zero and everyone would remain inside. Because of his friendly nature, Jack London’s cabin became a place to trade stories and discuss the larger questions of the universe (McKay and McKay 1). According to King Hendricks, Head of the Department of English and Journalism of Utah State University, Jack London wrote that he had “learned to seize upon that which is interesting, to grasp the true romance of things and to understand the people I may be thrown amongst” (10). Hendricks further states that “’To Build a Fire’ is Jack London’s short story masterpiece. It is a masterpiece because of the depth of its irony, and its understanding of human nature, the graphic style of the writing, and the contrast between man’s intelligence and the intuition of the animal” (11). Recounting tales with other miners, old-timers, and the locals of the Klondike while snowbound was a wealth of rich characterization that London had to draw on. However, with the abundance of personalities surrounding him, “To Build a Fire” was written like a fable with a more narrow characterization to convey universal truths and morals.  

While wintering in the cabin at Dawson, London and his frequent visitors would spend “the time trading stories and debating life’s big questions” (McKay and McKay 1) One of these visitors was W. B. Hargrave, who said of London that “he had a mental craving for the truth. He applied one test to religion, to economics, to everything. ‘What is the truth?’ ‘What is just?’ It was with these questions that he confronted the baffling enigma of life” (McKay and McKay 1). With these types of questions in mind, London  wrote “To Build a Fire” in the style of a fable. Some argue that in his earlier works like “To Build a Fire” the fable aspect was done unconsciously, although it remains present. In his article “Jack London: The Problem of Form” Donald Pizer seeks to establish that London “is essentially a writer of fables and parables” (Pizer, Form 3). He explains that fables “seek to establish the validity of a particular moral truth by offering a brief story in which plot, character, and setting are allegorical agents of a paraphrasable moral” (Pizer, Form 3). Fables are universal stories shared for the purpose of explaining morals or lessons. In “To Build a Fire” the lesson conveyed is as simple as this: don’t go out in the harsh wilderness unprepared or nature will blindside you. Or be wise when dealing with nature. The strong and wise win the day. This is a universal theme to every man, so much so that London did not name the character. He is simply known as “the man” and his companion is known only as “the dog” as in most fables where the character is a moral type. Moral types represent ideas such as honesty, fear, or laziness. In this case the man represents ignorance while the dog is instinct, and nature itself represents danger (Pizer, Form 6).  Pizer states that the “success of the story, as in the successful fable, stems from our acceptance of its worldly wisdom while simultaneously admiring the formal devices used to communicate it—in this instance, the ironic disparity between our knowledge of danger and the newcomer’s ignorance of it, and the brevity and clarity of the story’s symbolic shape” (Pizer, Form 8). The moral of the story is stated directly within the story’s third paragraph as the man thinks about being cold and uncomfortable. London writes “it did not lead him to meditate upon his frailty as a creature of temperature, and upon man’s frailty in general, able only to live within certain narrow limits of heat and cold; and from there on it did not lead him to the conjectural field of immortality and man’s place in the universe” (London 47). As readers, we see the danger clearly as learners of this moral fable where the unwise newcomer does not see beyond his own unpreparedness. This moral lesson is conveyed to readers exactly as London intended. While writing in the style of a fable, London also places the narration in an uncaring all-knowing viewpoint.

The viewpoint of “To Build a Fire” echoes the cold detachment of the freezing landscape of the Yukon. Written in the third person omniscient point of view, the narrator knows the thoughts and feelings of both the man and the dog, yet also places distance between the reader and characters. The narrator seems cold and almost monotone, like nature who doesn’t care if the man and dog lives or dies. Nature doesn’t care if the fire is built or not. It does nothing to help them, yet also does nothing to harm them either. It is a quiet observer or chronicler of the events, especially in the form of the fable. As nature, the narrator is not invested in the events, except to pass on the moral tale to those who will hear and learn the universal wisdom it is making a point of. In fact, in this story, it shows that the Yukon can be survived. The man did not survive due to his ignorance of how harsh the cold could be after he was warned not to go out alone. He did not follow the wisdom handed down to him. He represented foolishness, yet the dog who represents instinct (or knowledge passed down) did survive. However, at the end, the man does learn from his mistakes. His ignorance has been turned around to wisdom. As death overtakes him, his final thoughts turn to the old-timer who told him not to go out alone. The man says in the only dialog of the entire story, “’You were right, old hoss; you were right.’” (London 57). Unfortunately, the man gained his wisdom too late and this fable becomes one of being a cautionary tale. It is interesting to note that there was an earlier version of “To Build a Fire” that was published in Youth’s Companion six years prior to this version (Hendricks 16). In the original version the man, although still ignoring the wisdom of not going out alone, is named, Tom Vincent, and actually survives when he, with great luck, “came upon another high water lodgement. There were twigs and branches and leaves and grasses, all dry and waiting for fire” (Hendricks 14). It was the second version, written with the fable qualities that launched Jack London into one of the greatest Northern area writers of our time.     

By bringing his own experiences of his time during the goldrush in the Klondike into his story “To Build a Fire” Jack London relayed the universal theme that man’s lack of wisdom has no place in nature. He accomplished this through use of fables and casting the impartial attributes of nature as the narrator. In his article “Jack London’s ‘To Build a Fire’; How Not to Read Naturalist Fiction”, Donald Pizer points out that “the world, under certain conditions, can be an extremely dangerous place. If through ignorance, inexperience, false self-confidence, and the ignoring of what others have learned and told us (all weaknesses shared by the man) we challenge these conditions, we are apt to be destroyed by them” (223). I wonder if London had never rewritten the story where the man dies, if the earlier version would have ever become as beloved a story as the version that stands as a classic today. I think not. King Hendricks points out that “Jack London loved life and he lived it as fully and as completely as any man. He admired men who cling or have clung to life in times of adversity” (18). London made less than five dollars in his gold prospecting, but the insight, knowledge of the setting, and characterization he gained during that short time brought him fame and riches, and we readers are the wealthier for it.

 


 

Works Cited

Haig

HHai, Haight, Ken. “The Spell of the Yukon: Jack London and the Klondike God Rush.” The Literary Traveler, July 13, 2006. www.literarytraveler.com/articles/jack_london_klondike.

Hendr, King. “Jack London: Master Craftsman of the Shorty Story.” USU Faculty Honor Lectures. Paper 29. www.digitalcommons.usu.edu/honor_lectures/29

Lond,on Jack. “To Build a Fire.” Lost Face, edited by David Price, Mills & Boon, Limited, 1919, pp. 47-70. The Project Gutenberg, www.gutenberg.org/files/2429/2429-h/2429-h.htm#page47.

McKay, Brett and Kate McKay. “The Life of Jack London as a Case Study in the Power and Perils of Thumos--#7: Into the Klondike.” The Art of Manliness, March 31, 2013.  www.artofmanliness.com/articles/the-life-of-jack-london-as-a-case-study-in-the-power-and-perils-of-thumos-7-into-the-klondike/

Pizer, , Donald. "Jack London: The Problem of Form." Studies in the Literary Imagination, pp. 107–115.

-- "Jack London's 'To Build A Fire': How Not to Read Naturalist Fiction." Philosophy and Literature, vol. 34, no. 1, Apr. 2010, pp. 218-227. EBSCOhost, ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=2010791039&site=eds-live&scope=site.

Image: "Jack London Territory." by Anita & Greg is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

Getting Into Literature: My thoughts on The Book of The Dead



The Book of the Dead by Edwidge Danticat. 

Edwidge Danticat. Image from Wikipedia

Annie's father has lied to her her entire life. Her parents told her he was a prisoner of war, when in fact he was a guard. The theme of coming to realize that your parent isn’t who you always believed him or her to be is a huge adjustment, which is amplified by the fact that the narrator Annie, a Haitian sculptor, went from believing that her father was a victim to knowing that he was actually the tormentor. In not such a dramatic event, I do remember the first time I realized that my father was just a human being. As a child I had placed him on a very tall pedestal and when through an incident that showed me that he was wrong, I remember very well that feeling when I came home and looked at him again. In The Book of the Dead this realization is shown through a tactile object of a sculpture that Annie created that represented the prisoner that she believed her father had been. She bonded over it with the buyer of the sculpture who was also the daughter of a prisoner.
The sculpture also represented something to the father. It tangibly showed him the man his daughter believed him to be, which he knew was a lie. He felt ugly, which was why he would not allow pictures of himself either. He was too ugly. Even though in truth he had never been a prisoner, he was in actually a prisoner to his daughter not knowing the truth of who he really was.  Before Annie knows the truth there is a description of the sculpture: “a two-foot high mahogany figure of my father, naked, crouching on the floor, his back arched like the curve of a crescent moon, his downcast eyes fixed on his short stubby fingers and the wide palms of his hands.” After she knows the truth about what he did she looks at her father and describes: “If I were sculpting him, I would make him a praying mantis, crouching motionless, seeming to pray while waiting to strike.” 
The very first line of this story is also powerful. “My father is gone.” It at first seems that Annie is talking about how her father went missing for hours from the hotel room, but after he reveals the truth of his past, the father she believed him to be really is gone. This line and the theme also play into the title The Book of the Dead, not only for his love and allusions to Egyptian lore, which was something they shared, but the symbolic death of both the daughter and father. It is almost as though they changed places. By finally telling the truth, he was lighter and happier, freed from his prison, while the truth appeared to make Annie fall into her own prison of knowing who her father was and having to deal with it, even letting the lie lay between her and Gabrielle.  
The Book of the Dead is a thought-provoking story that we can all relate to even when we don't want to. 

Minchin and Pearse: Rousing Younger Generations Nearly One Hundred Years Apart

For my Linguistics course, I compared two very different speeches. (links to speeches at bottom) Tim Minchin and Patrick Pearse are two speakers who have very little in common.  Minchin is a musical comedian who relishes in social satire while Pearse was an activist who was killed for his part in the Irish uprising. Tim Minchin’s speech is a graduation speech given at the University of West Australia in September 2013 titled UWA 2013 Graduation Ceremony. Minchin uses humor to share nine life lessons that he has learned. I found those life lessons to be truly inspirational, especially in their simplicity. 

Patrick Pearse gave a striking speech on August 1, 1915 at the graveside of Jeremiah O’Donovan Rossa who was a leader in the Fenian movement. It is known as “Ireland Unfree Shall Never Be At Peace.” Even though his speech was a graveside service to honor an individual, Pearse took the opportunity to rouse the hearts of the Irish, especially the younger generation, to free Ireland from British control. The speeches were given nearly one hundred years apart, however Minchin and Pearse both addressed the rising generation of their time as the audience they desired to inspire and rally. Both men chose the words they used to great effect, which is what I focused on. 

Graveside Service. Picture from Wikipedia. 

    Tim Minchin begins his speech with a bold statement that life is meaningless. He uses forceful sentences that seem to crescendo and then are chopped off into short sentences that end almost like a punchline. For example, he says that “arts degrees are awesome and they help you find meaning where there is none. And let me assure you . . . there is none”.  He also makes use of the harder stopping sound you get with the phoneme /t/ of bat. These sentences are generally found at the end of paragraphs for emphasis, again like a punchline to his comedic sense of timing, for example: “Be hard on your beliefs. Take them out onto the verandah and hit them with a cricket bat”. Where Tim Minchin used humor and common words to get his points across, Patrick Pearse used his words to strike hearts to the importance and seriousness of the Fenian movement. 

Like Minchin, Pearse used the /t/ stop sounds of but and let very powerfully when repeated in this long forceful sentence: “But, friends, let us not be sad, but let us have courage”. Pearse also strings several morphemes together in a powerful urging when he says, “I propose to you, then, that here by the grave of this unrepentant Fenian, we renew our baptismal vows; that, here by the grave of this unconquered and unconquerable man, we ask of God, each one for himself, such unshakable purpose, such high and gallant courage, such unbreakable strength of soul, as belonged to O’Donovan Rossa”. Pearse begins at least two sentences with the adverbs fiercely and deliberately in a flowy, yet strong pattern. The final line of “Ireland unfree shall never be at peace” works better with the word unfree instead of saying it differently like “Ireland without freedom shall never be at peace.” Unfree makes it so much stronger.  

REGISTER LEVELS

Tim Minchin
Tim Minchin image from UWA

In Tim Minchin’s speech, he employs register effectively by simply speaking in the type of common language used by everyday “blokes” going to art school. He begins talking about doing a “corporate gig” where they “forked out twelve grand for an inspirational speaker who was this extreme sports guy who had had a couple of his limbs frozen off when he got stuck on a ledge on some mountain. It was weird,” Minchin said. to great laughter. Rather than start the speech with a commanding sophisticated type of presence, Minchin becomes relatable to the group of graduating students he is speaking to. However, that does not mean he doesn’t use sophisticated words. He is speaking to graduates after all, art students and science students alike, but he does it in such an easygoing, effortless manner that he truly is speaking to his own kind of people. In one phenomenal sentence, he interweaves slang on a lower register and in the next breath fixes to a different register that shows, although he is funny and common, he is no slough in the mental department either. The paragraph goes as follows: “We must think critically and not just about the ideas of others. Be hard on your beliefs. Take them out onto the verandah and hit them with a cricket bat. Be intellectually rigorous. Identify your biases, your prejudices, your privileges. Most of society is kept alive by a failure to acknowledge nuance. We tend to generate false dichotomies and then try to argue one point using two entirely different sets of assumptions. Like two tennis players trying to win a match by hitting beautifully executed shots from either end of separate tennis courts”. Another paragraph uses the denotation of dreams. Minchin says, “I never really had one of these dreams and so I advocate passionate dedication to the pursuit of short-term goals . . . be aware the next worthy pursuit will probably appear in your periphery . . . you won’t see the shiny thing out the corner of your eye”. With the word dreams, the connotation of a person’s passion and pursuit, the chasing of a dream comes to mind, yet Minchin somehow takes those connotations and flips them on their head as he advises to not hold onto one dream so forcefully that another great thing is never seen. Minchin’s voice has so many great nuances that it is difficult to pick just a few examples of semantic perspective. For example: “Exercise. I’m sorry you pasty, pale, smoking philosophy grads arching your eyebrows into a Cartesian curve as you watch the human movement mob winding their way through the miniature traffic cones of their existence” and “I don’t care if you’re the most powerful cat in the room, I will judge you on how you treat the least powerful. So there!”. The “So there!” at the end structurally does not need to be tacked on, yet it finished the entire thought with a purposeful exclamation.

Patrick Pearse cph.3b15294.jpg
Patrick Pearse image from Wikipedia

Patrick Pearse has a much more serious register in his eulogy. It is the type of register used for Christian religious ceremonies. In fact, the entire speech is layered with the freeing of Ireland being like death and resurrection of the country. Pearse says, “Let us not be sad, but let us have courage in our hearts . . . Let us understand that after all death comes resurrection and that from this grave and the graves surrounding us will rise the freedom of Ireland”. The very words death and resurrection are used throughout the speech as denotations that connect to other phrases and words Pearse uses such as “sacred dead” and “life springs from death; and from the graves of patriot men and women spring living nations”. He speaks of being “re-baptised [sic] in the Fenian faith” and “strength of soul”. “Let no man blaspheme the cause” and “the holiness and simplicity of patriotism” rally the Christians at the gravesite service to look toward their faith as not only part of their religion, but as a holy cause and “sacred to the dead” . I can barely imagine how their Irish hearts must have been thrumming as Pearse ramped up his speech, crying that “they cannot undo the miracles of God, who ripens in the hearts of young men the seeds sown by the young men of a former generation. And the seeds sown by the young men of ’65 and ’67 are coming to their miraculous ripening today”. The speech seems to pull Ireland from the grave to a glorious resurrection, at least within the hearts of the Irish. Pearse became known as the voice of the rising, although he would not live to see Ireland free.

STYLISTIC ELEMENTS AND USE OF LANGUAGE

One of the styles both men utilized is repetition of certain words. Minchin used the word lucky and its variations no less than eight times within one paragraph. “Remember it’s all luck. You are lucky to be here. You are incalculably lucky to be born and incredibly lucky to be brought up by a nice family . . . or if you were born into a horrible family that’s unlucky . . . but you are still lucky”. In the same way, Pearse repeats splendid seven times within his speech: “Splendid and holy causes are served by men who are themselves splendid and holy”. Within this same sentence, Pearse also stylistically repeats words that he has coupled together. The words splendid and holy both begin the above sentence and end it. He repeats groupings of words together in this sentence as well, “Our foes are strong and wise and wary; but, strong and wise and wary as they are, they cannot undo the miracles of God”. The use of and instead of commas makes the phrase stronger and more pleasing to the ear as well. The words used this way and then repeated is more rhythmically enhanced than if he would have said, “Our foes are strong, wise, and wary; but strong, wise and wary as they are . . . ”  

COUNTRIES AND HISTORIES

Minchin and Pearse understood the history of their audiences and what language devices to utilize to inspire the younger generations of their countries. In 2013 Western Australia, politics inserted its way into Tim Minchin’s graduation speech. Five months previous, the liberal party won the seat majority in the legislative election, a majority the liberals hadn’t had for close to two decades. There had been hostility among the Australian parties concerning global warming. Minchin knew the audience he was speaking to when he uttered:

The idea that many Australians . . . believe that the science of anthropogenic global warming is controversial is a powerful indicator of the extent of our failure to communicate. The fact that 30 percent of the people just bristled is further evidence still. The fact that that bristling is more to do with politics than science is even more despairing. 

One hundred years earlier, 1913 Ireland was close to civil war between two factions, those who supported the Anglo-Irish union, and those who were in opposition to any involvement from Great Britain in Irish government. The country was further divided as WWI broke out and Patrick Pearse, a member of the Irish Republican Brotherhood, “came to believe that the blood of martyrs would be required to liberate Ireland” (Britannica). It was with that premise and the hope of rallying the Irish who were weary of British rule to take action against their opposers that Pearse created his graveside service oration. Pearse’s intent for Rossa’s eulogy was less about the deceased man and more about shaping his memory and others in the Fenian movement into types of martyrs for the cause of liberation. He speaks about the valiant and splendid dead throughout the speech.

The speech did have the intended effect and did rally the younger generation of Irishmen as a few short years later in 1915, Pearse led a revolt called the Easter Rising. It failed and Pearse was court martialed and shot, fulfilling his desire that the cause had more blood, becoming one of the greatest martyrs of Ireland. With the knowledge of who they were speaking to and what their audience had been through as a nation, Minchin and Pearse were able to make what they said and how they said it touch the hearts of those listening. Understanding the cultural influences of their audiences also enabled them to establish credibility and a rapport by the strength of the words they drew upon.

INTENDED MESSAGE

The speeches of Minchin and Pearse were given to inspire the rising generation to take action. Both men understood the culture that their target audiences were dealing with. Minchin understood his audience of young graduating college students, ready to embark in great things. They were young; they were art students and philosophy students in a largely liberal country and university. They were celebrating their success at completing their degrees so they were joyful. And Minchin spoke with them in a celebratory tone where he wove in his commonsense lessons in a fun and inspiring way, his voice speeding up in long sentences as his joy for them heightened his speech like a waterfall dropping over the edge that can’t be slowed or stopped. He said, “Life will sometimes seem long and tough and God it’s tiring. And you will sometimes be happy and sometimes sad and then you’ll be old and then you’ll be dead. There is only one sensible thing to do with this empty existence and that is fill it”. The laughter and joy practically springs from his speech.

For Pearse, he and the younger generation a decade behind him never knew a free Ireland. They had seen uprisings come and fail. Many were going or had returned from fighting in World War One, fighting for the freedom of other countries while they had no political say in their own. As Pearse spoke about the valiant fighters who came before them, he included the younger men in their company, passing on the torch to free Ireland, stating that he spoke “on behalf of a new generation that has been re-baptised [sic] in the Fenian faith, and that has accepted the responsibility of carrying out the Fenian programme [sic]”. He knew exactly what he was doing as he cried out, voicing for them all “we pledge to Ireland our love, and we pledge to English rule in Ireland our hate”. Anyone listening would feel that responsibility pumping through their hearts, pumping in sync with the crowd around them as they silently made their own pledge as Pearse said the words out loud.

These were two audiences meeting for different purposes nearly one hundred years apart. One audience met to celebrate their achievements upon graduating college, the other group met to mourn a life of one of their stalwart champions for their own country. The two speakers had the same purpose: to inspire the younger generation listening to them to be better people for their country and for others. Tim Minchin’s UWA 2013 Graduation Ceremony speech and Patrick Pearse’s Ireland Unfree Shall Never Be at Peace oration were enhanced through the language of their respective time periods, and the knowledge each speaker had of what was happening in their countries and culture. They utilized the power of words to relate to the younger generations of their time.  

 

Sources used: 

Donovan, David. “The Bitter Struggle Between Turnbull and Minchin.” Independent Australia, www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/the-bitter-struggle-between-turnbull-and-minchin,2991

Minchin, Tim. “UWA 2013 Graduation Ceremony.” News.Uwa, www.news.uwa.edu.au/201309176069/alumni/tim-minchin-stars-uwa-graduation-ceremony

“Patrick Pearse: Irish Poet and Statesman.” Encyclopaedia Britannica, Accessed Feb. 9, 2019, www.britannica.com/biography/Patrick-Henry-Pearse

Pearse, Patrick. “Ireland Unfree Shall Never Be At Peace.” The Century Ireland Project, RTE. Boston College, Aug. 1, 1915. www.rte.ie/centuryireland//images/uploads/further-reading/Ed59-GravesideOrationFinal.pdf

“Western Australian State Election 2013.” Parliament of Australia,

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/WAElection2013


Patrick Pearse images: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Pearse

Tim Minchin image: http://www.news.uwa.edu.au/201309176069/alumni/tim-minchin-stars-uwa-graduation-ceremony