Critique for “The Last Will and Testament of Edward P. Unum”

I’d like to begin this critique by looking at the title of this piece. This is Edward P. Unum’s last will. Have there been previous wills? How are they different, how are they similar? The name Edward P. Unum plays off of the latin E pluribus unum (from many, one), which Wikipedia calls one “de facto motto of the United States,” dating back to the 18th century. Given this title, expectations are set that this piece will invoke a sense of American history or ideals.

This is written as a will, though I must admit I have never read an official will before, so I do not know how they are structured. It would be interesting to look at this alongside one and note similarities and differences. The second paragraph calls Edward Unum’s death an ‘unthinkable’ occurrence, though given the fact that this is a will, that occurrence seems very thinkable, even likely. The piece proceeds from the opening anecdote through an addressing of Unum’s loved ones and relatives (and his doctor, to whom he leaves a curious 13%). At the end, he addresses his son, tells his son that he loves him and then ends the will without leaving his son anything. I found this strange because he doesn’t take any resentful tones toward his son, and it would seem logical that he would leave his son money.

This piece appropriates a nonfictional form for fictional use. This form is the will, which reads like I would expect a will to. I must admit I expected there to be more experimentation with the form of the will. The piece largely stays true to the form, or at least as far as I can tell. That said, there is undoubtedly a ton of room for experimentation with this piece. What would the previous wills look like when placed alongside this last one?