Washington And Audre Lorde Analysis

1851 Words8 Pages
Booker T. Washington and Audre Lorde, what do these individuals have in common? Undoubtedly it is easy to see that these individuals are both African American, they both write, and they both are considered powerful American icons. Beyond that, though, Washington and Lorde don’t have much in common. They weren’t related in gene of their works, both were motivated to write for different reasons, and their styles of articulating are different as well. Although Washington and Lorde may have many differences they do have similarities on how they build their case in writing pieces. Both shares similarities in their use in metaphors, specific word choice, pathos, and repetition. This use of rhetoric and figurative language brings Washington and Lorde together as fundamental writers. In Washington’s speech, Atlanta Compromise Speech, and Lorde’s poem, From the House of Yemanja, both use metaphors to help structure in the argument in the beginning of their work and at the end. In Atlanta Compromise Speech, Washington states the metaphor “Congress or…show more content…
Washington and Audre Lorde may be from two different worlds in their genes of writing, they both use rhetoric and figurative language to make them icon figures in modern day literature. Yes, both Washington and Lorde may be from figuratively different worlds in the gene they write in, the motives for their works, and many other differences, they do come together under the way they use metaphors, specific word choice, the use of pathos, and repetition. Their similarities in the way they structure their argument could even compare to Socrates and they way he structured philosophies, it’s this complex development of writing that sets the bar for authors be considers masters of their craft. In total, although two individuals may be completely different in styles of writing then can always be compared through their level of mastery in the use of complex figurative language and rhetoric
Open Document