Rhetorical Analysis Of How To Live Unhappily Ever After

799 Words4 Pages
Rhetorical analysis of How to Live Unhappily Ever After
In the article, “How to Live Unhappily Ever After” written in 2012, by Augusten Burroughs for The Wall Street Journal, he explains his concept of living life without the constant pressure to be happy and healed. In other words, Burroughs addresses the true importance of happiness based on his own life experience, and why our view of happiness may be construed due to misleading societal beliefs. Burroughs supports this conjecture by contrasting the societal view of happiness with a more ethical perspective, describing the possible factors for the differing reality. He suggests happiness is often an unattainable goal due to it’s overly grown standards. The author’s purpose is to advocate that it’s okay to not be happy all the time; You can’t and don’t need to be happy in order to live a fulfilled life. The author writes in a very casual tone, humorous at needed moments while serious and sadly relatable at others. This sincere tone suggests Burrough’s intention is to simply create a comfortable connection with his audience, gradually gaining the reader’s interest in his own ideas and thoughts.
…show more content…
He broadens the societal view of happiness and introduces the idea that, “Being an unhappy person does not mean you must be sad or dark.” By making this conjecture, he enhances his initial purpose, it’s okay to not be happy. Or more relatively speaking, if you have negative feelings, that does not instantly define you as negative. Depressing matters occur in life, some you may never fully heal from, yet the societal expectation to always be happy doesn’t conform well to this fact. Burroughs views these societal standards as having an, “unspoken zero-tolerance policy for negativity.” His words clearly suggesting to not value these unrealistic goals if they do not suit
Open Document