In the passage, “Cripple,” by Nancy Mairs, an author with multiple sclerosis. She talk about how she is crippled. The way she presents herself emphasizes how she has gone through with much of the discrimination and hardships, and that it show through her blunt and bitter writing, her word choice mainly using “I,” and “I’m,” to emphasize herself as the main subject in the passage. In the passage, Mairs makes it clear that she is the main subject for the essay. Her word structure makes it so that the audience know this essay is about her, and that she has gone through much pain and suffering on this matter.
Maisie is faced with two mysteries that she is able to solve, and along with that, others, including herself, struggle with issues from the past. Along with this, the book also incorporates the element of gender and how people do not necessarily fit the gender “standards” for their biological sex. Overall, Maisie Dobbs is a book that can be related back to the content of “CAP 226: What is Power?” because of the involvement of the characters in World War One, the PTSD that comes about from the war, and the idea of people not seeming like the gender that they should be according to their biological
In the essay, The Devil’s Bait by Leslie Jamison, Jamison emphasizes her paper about Morgellons Disease. Throughout her essay, Jamison introduces the urgency of the disease by going to a location that is known to have many people asking the doctors to believe them. The reason Morgellons Disease is an urgent topic that must be discussed is because many people feel like their voices are not being heard and ignored. Many have a disease whom they see as needing emergency treatment, however they are being told it is their brain playing tricks on them. The rhetor is compelled to speak about this issue for it gives those whom she interviewed a sense of voice and a call out to doctors to be more understanding of their patients.
While her writing is more sophisticated and it delves deeper into the emotions of The Book Thief; the tools she uses are too clouded by her complex sentences for them to be successful. The very first line Chhabra’s review is a rhetorical question aimed at the audience which sets the stage for the rest of the review (Appendix B). A skillful and attention grabbing start, it is then buried under a thirty-eight word sentence. The first stylistic decision to include the rhetorical question was a smart one but after which she undermines. Chhabra also utilizes parenthesis throughout her review to insert more information into her sentences.
In her article,”Hearing the Lost Sounds of Antiquity”, journalist Adrienne LaFrance effectively uses all of the rhetorical elements in order to appeal to her audience in a specific way. LaFrance applies these elements to thoroughly explain the importance of a complicated discovery about recreating lost sounds. Even though this is an informative article, part of Adrienne LaFrance’s purpose is to intrigue readers and convince them that they are reading something worthwhile. LaFrance effectively reaches her intended purpose, mainly by keeping a balance between information and emotion, logos and pathos. LaFrance begins her article with the one sentence paragraph, “History is mostly silent to us now,” in order to draw readers in right away.
The first running from 1 through 6 Ascher was very descriptive with what was happening and kept it in third person perspective. She asked the readers, “Was it fear or compassion that motivated the gift?” Reading the first section in her perspective it was fear that motivated the gift. The second part from paragraphs 7 through 9 she change her view to first person and
From the very start in the essay’s thesis, Ehrenreich uses the image of “chin-strokers” and “morality-mavens” to describe her opposition to the pretentious, lowering self-proclaimed experts who suggest that more formality is necessary (Ehrenreich par. 1). These negative visual metaphors make the reputation of the opposite argument less appealing to the general audience and thus strengthening her point. Also in the first paragraph, the colloquial language in the essay was established
Walker refers to her scar as a “glob of whitish scar tissue” (48) rather than just a scar in order to give a concrete image to the readers. This description aids the reader’s understanding of how her physical appearance was her way of defining her beauty and the “glob” (49) was a constant reminder that she was not beautiful enough. The author also exploits descriptive language to demonstrate the pride she took in the materialistic items that made her pretty (“[N]ew t-strap patent leather” 47). These descriptions add to the rhetor’s purpose because the phrases define the denotative meanings behind the imagery created; Walker is able to create a very specific image of each scene in the narrative to help show her priorities were directed by her vanity (“[L]ooking at my recent school picture, which I did not want taken, and on which the ‘glob’, as I think of it is clearly visible”49; “I do not pray for sight. I pray for beauty”49).
O’Connor’s medical history is also critical background information because it serves as an explanation to the firm religious perspective from which this story is told. She struggled with the detrimental effects of lupus disease which rendered traces of violence and anger entwined throughout her literature written during this dark period (Gordon). Her waning health can be argued to account for her rather extreme change in religious portrayal in comparison to the other stories written around the same time. Although religious content was generally present in her earlier short stories, it tended to be much more concealed allowing her readers to perceive the material from a strictly secular basis if chosen to do so. In contrast, her final stories, including “Revelation,” portray Christian beliefs in a much more bleak and overt manner, as if O’Connor were attempting to ensure her ideologies were understood out of fear of them being misconstrued in previous context before she passed away (“O'Connor's Short Stories”).
The short story “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?” by Joyce Carol Oates can be interpreted in a multitude of ways due to its ambiguity. A psychological lens, however, provides the most accurate viewpoint for analyzing the story as it clarifies certain obscure scenes and actions of Connie. One psychological issue of Connie that is easily inferred from the beginning of the story is her insecurity about her looks. Connie constantly worries about the way that she looks and takes any opportunity to do so, “craning her neck to glance into mirrors or checking other people's faces to make sure her own was all right” (1). Connie does this because she needs to be reassured that she is in fact pretty.
Skloot 's personal relationships with the family members further detract from the unbiased, informational theme the book once had when Skloot herself enters the story as another character. Her intimacy with Deborah leads Skloot to not only greatly sympathize with her, but also to move the whole focus of the latter half of the book to their shared experiences. Chapter 34, for instance, focuses mainly on the emotional and even physical upheavals between her and Deborah when Skloot attempts to include Henrietta 's medical records in her book. Although Skloot 's intended purpose was to capture Deborah 's sensitivity concerning her mother, at this point in the story it had already been well established that the subject of Henrietta was not easily dealt with by the Lacks family. From this chapter on, the story has completely lost the engaging scientific ethos it once described and concludes as one about Skloot and her dealings with Deborah.
I noticed that Kingsolver use the idea of language to demonstrate the distinct character. For example Rachel consistently misuses of words reveals a lot about her character. In book three looking at the last paragraph of one section where Rachel says, “But I won’t tell her. I prefer to remain anomalous” (270). In this line Rachel probably meant to say, “I prefer to remain anonymous.” But instead she misuses the word anomalous.