He was three-years-old when he taught himself how to read. Even Though Alexie was reading at the age of three he wasn’t considered a prodigy because he was Indian. His dad would buy a bunch of books and since he loved his dad he decided to love books as well. He first learned how to read with a Superman comic. Throughout the essay Sherman Alexie uses an extended metaphor to describe the connection he has with Superman.
While Alexie also takes on an identity to fortify his argument, it is a completely different identity than Prose. The authors both appropriate a distinctive style and rhetorical devices into their essays, which in turn create strong arguments, captivate the audience, and reveal the writer’s true thoughts and feelings. As stated earlier, Alexie uses numerous rhetorical devices in his essay, Superman and Me. A few of these being: repetition, parallelism, and flashbacks. Alexie poses repetition throughout his essay when he writes, “I was smart.
Anne Elliot proves that the individual is in charge of its own happiness, that all other factors are obsolete, through her friendships, her firm stance in morality, and her triumph of self-doubt. That is what must be taken from the novel: the power of persuasion lies in those who choose to ignore its
In the story, “Superman and Me” by Sherman Alexie, he speaks about his childhood experience and how he taught himself how to read and write. He shares how growing up on an Indian reservation led to him not fitting in at school along with having little support from family and friends due to the fact that he attended public school. Through this story Alexie shows us that everything he achieved rose from personal dedication and self-education. Although Alexie was able to succeed, the message being sent is that without role models, you have to cut your own path to success. Alexie never grew up with many roles models but as he got older he realized that he could be a role model for others.
In paragraph three Alexie uses lots of analogy. “A paragraph was a fence that held words,” this related to his life by demonstrating how he learned to think as a child. He goes on to use several analogies similar to the one just stated. He talked about how he would have been a “prodigy” in other circumstances, but in this case he was just an “oddity”. These two sentences are an example
King repeatedly uses the phrase “when you” –eleven times approximately- in order to resonate with his critics the importance of action in bringing segregation to an end and allowing justice for all people of color. Each time he uses the statement “when you”, his argument builds up with greater fervor and passion giving him greater persuasive power over his audience as the repetition of the phrase cause an emotional effect on the readers as they begin to simulate their own experiences with that of what he is citing. Anaphora is also particularly useful in King’s favor as he employs this towards the beginning of the letter, therefore by repeating the phrase “when you” multiple times, it enhances the likelihood that his reader will remember not only what the read but how they felt by the end of the piece. The audience is actively drawn into King’s arguments due to a perception of membership, by being able to anticipate that the next line will repeat what has been said it builds resonance within the audience. King’s usage of anaphora throughout the essay (not just in this one particular quote) serves to effectively strengthen his argument and persuade his readers to abide by the four steps of peaceful protesting for which he is concerned on behalf of the Civil Rights movement.
Alexie thought that him learning how to read made him smart and he was very proud of doing so. Alexie had all the books in his father’s house. Alexie had positive outlooks. After he learned, he wanted to teach other Indian boys. He was strong mentally with his abilities.
At first she wasn’t sure that Enrique was the best choice to tell the story since he wasn’t the typical person; he was a little too old at 17. However she explained that that may have made the story more relatable for people, having a character that was imperfect that was human. Sonia Nazario talked about some of the challenges associated with writing the book. Having experienced the same challenges as Enrique gave her a unique perspective. One of the most difficult aspects about that was deciding whether or not she was going to intervene for the safety of anyone.
His family was in need by normal standards, but overall he came from a middle class background. The main plot of his essay was that Alexie was different than his fellow other Native Americans due to the fact that he learned how to read and could read very challenging works, such as the Grapes of Wrath at a young age. Has he gets older, Alexie values education and knowledge and does not let preconceived ideas of the stereotypical concepts of how Natives Americans “are” let them get in his way. In this essay Alexie juxtaposes himself in his own essay to demonstrate how he broke the stereotypes against him. However, Sherman is trying to demonstrate to his audience (upper-middle class who now “values diversity”) who are the people who were types to probably doubt him.
This strategy is identified in the rhetorical questions she asks about Cicero and his significant accomplishments. Adams argues that had Cicero not been challenged many times, he wouldn’t have been a hero, and she encourages John to do the same through this ethical implication in the form of advice. Accordingly, to persuade her son to continuously work hard, Adams describes “wisdom and penetration” as “the fruits of experience”. This moral assertion subtly reinforces her advice to maintain his work ethic rather than to be lazy. Consequence of these devices, the distinctive appeal to ethos is important in Adams’ strategies used to give her son