Andrew Orme
Professor SWILUA
Writing 150 H---Fall 2011
Spaceship Earth; We Have a No-Go for Metaphor…
The planet Earth is often referred to as a spaceship. It is, after all, a self sustaining sphere in the vastness of space. Humanitarians particularly like this metaphor because it dictates that all people must equally share the resources available. This idea appeals to their conscience and sense of morality. Despite the good feelings behind the spaceship metaphor, it cannot prove effective in modern times. A different metaphor is needed to dictate efforts with humanitarian aid. In “Lifeboat Ethics” Garrett Hardin explains to an affluent American audience that Earth is better represented in metaphor as a lifeboat than as a spaceship through use of various poetic devices which effectively appeal to the audience’s sense of logos, ethos, and pathos.
Hardin appeals to his audience’s sense of logos first by dissecting and analyzing common metaphors associated with planet Earth. One instance of this occurs in the opening of his essay where he discusses the “Earth as a spaceship” metaphor. For a spacecraft to function effectively, it needs a captain to lead it. He points out that, “Spaceship Earth certainly has no captain; the United Nations is merely a toothless tiger, with little power to enforce any policy upon its bickering members” (308). Earth lacks the essential mortal commander needed to direct policies and ethics. He also explains that in general, “The spaceship metaphor can be dangerous when used by misguided idealist to justify suicidal policies for sharing our resources” (308). As he delves deeper into the spaceship metaphor and points out its flaws, his audience clearly realizes its shortcomings. His discussion reveals that the metaphor is logically unstable in the current situation of the world.
Another example of Hardin appealing to logos through dissection of metaphor occurs when he introduces the idea of Earth being a lifeboat, which he proposes “is the basic metaphor within which we must work out our solutions” (309). He theorizes that, “Each nation can be seen as a lifeboat full of comparatively rich people. In the ocean outside each lifeboat swim the poor of the world” (308). He continues by examining this metaphor from the perspective of those in the lifeboat, who are the rich of society. Since his audience is also rich, they make connections with the metaphor and with the ethics Hardin proposes in his exploration. His thorough discussion of the metaphor convinces his audience of its validity and pertinence to the world’s current situation.
The structure of Hardin’s essay also appeals to the logos of his audience. He follows a clear progression which develops and validates his ideas concerning humanitarian assistance in modern times. A discussion of a potential world food bank illustrates the logical structure Hardin uses. He begins by discussing the concept and ideas behind the food bank, which are connected to the spaceship metaphor, and what it is meant to accomplish. He then discusses the failures of a historical program similar to the proposed food bank. This program is referred to as the “Food for Peace” program (311). He states that it “required the creation of a vast Government bureaucracy, which then acquired its own vested interest in continuing the program regardless of its merits” (311). He continues by discussing future situations that would lead to the failure of the program. As Hardin follows this logical structure, his audience clearly sees the reasoning behind abandoning programs which follow the spaceship metaphor.
Hardin appeals to his audience’s sense of ethos through his selection of statistical and quantitative evidence. As he discusses statistics like populations “increasing at a rate of 3.3 percent per year” (309), taxpayers spending 7.9 billion dollars on welfare programs in the US (311), and India’s population reaching 1.2 billion in 28 years, his audience receives a very strong sense of authority. Hardin has done his research and uses it to back up his argument that the Earth is not a spaceship for all to take advantage of. The statistical evidence used portrays Hardin as an expert on the subject, which greatly strengthens the credibility of his theory in his audience’s eyes.
Hardin also appeals to his audience’s sense of ethos by relating personal experiences which project him as an important figure. While discussing immigration ethics, he relates an experience he had while visiting Hawaii. He relates “At a recent meeting of Hawaiian government officials in Honolulu, I had the ironic delight of hearing a speaker…ask how the country might practically and constitutionally close its doors to further immigration” (315). Having the opportunity to sit in on a government meeting is not a privilege granted to all people. His presence in the meeting suggests that he is important in some way or another and because the meeting was about immigration, his presence suggests he is an important figure in immigration policy. The importance portrayed by this experience strengthens the validity of his ideas.
Hardin uses blunt diction to appeal to the audience’s sense of pathos. As he describes various implementations of the spaceship metaphor, he portrays it as “suicidal,” (308) “complete catastrophe,” (309) “misguided,” (314) and “impossible” (316). These words carry strong negative connotations which effectively appeal to pathos. This leads the audience to agree with Hardin that the spaceship metaphor is no good.
Hardin also appeals to pathos by talking about the audience’s posterity. He argues that living the spaceship metaphor “would guarantee that our grandchildren, and everyone else’s grandchildren, would have only a ruined world to inhabit” (315). Affluent Americans, which make up Hardin’s audience, generally care about their posterity. The thought of leaving posterity an exhausted world appalls them. Connecting the spaceship metaphor to a ruined future effectively convinces his audience to abhor the metaphor’s principles.
Hardin’s strong appeals to logos, ethos, and pathos build a powerful and convincing argument which effectively persuades affluent Americans that while the sharing ethics of the spaceship metaphor seem good, the ethics of the lifeboat metaphor are much better. The lifeboat ethics may not appear as nice as those of the spaceship, but they are needed to preserve the Earth for posterity. If provided with the resources necessary, future generations may be able to build a society in which a common leader guides the world. In that time, society might overcome the flaws preventing us from referring to our planet as Spaceship Earth.
Works Cited
Hardin, Garrett. “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against
Helping the Poor.” Readings for Intensive
Writers. 5th ed. Comp Susan Jorgensen. Provo: BYU Academic Publishing, 2007. 308-316. Print.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Chelsea's Analysis of "The Solitude of Self"
Chelsea Nunez
Kerry Spencer
Writing 150H
31 October 2011
Critical Analysis of “Solitude of Self”: Gentlemen, Let Us Be Logical
If a = b and b = c then a = c
In mathematics this is called the Transitive Property (“ORACLE ThinkQuest”). In matters of persuasion this is pure logic. On January 18, 1892 Elizabeth Cady Stanton took this approach as she addressed the Congressional Judiciary Committee in a speech that would later be titled, “The Solitude of Self” (Stanton). As Stanton stood in front of this group of influential political gentlemen, she effectively and logically conveyed that because every individual carries what she refers to as a “solitude of self”, every individual is entitled to the means necessary to manage that solitude when it arises. Stanton achieves this by pointing out commonly held logical fallacies and then establishing solid logic through the use of analogy and anecdote.
Stanton’s first step in persuading the Congressional Judiciary Committee is to discount common logical fallacies. The first example of this comes within the first page when Stanton states, “In the usual discussion in regard to woman’s sphere, such as men as Herbert Spencer, Frederic Harrison, and Grant Allen uniformly subordinate her rights and duties as an individual, as a citizen, as a woman, to the necessities of these incidental relations, [mother, wife, sister, daughter] some of which a large class of women may never assume.”(Jorgensen 163). Here Stanton is saying that all woman have been limited to the roles some women happen to play. Stanton is pointing out a fallacy of insufficient evidence. Some women find themselves in the role of mother, wife, sister, daughter but that does not justify defining all women and their rights by these roles. By pointing out flaws in this logic early in her address, Stanton clears the path for the sound logic she is about to introduce to the committee.
Another idea Stanton proves to be a fallacy is a matter of false context. Stanton asks, “Is it, then, consistent to hold the developed woman of this day within the same narrow political limits as the dame with the spinning-wheel and knitting-needle occupied in the past?” (Jorgensen 168). Here Stanton is addressing an out of date idea of women; she is pointing out a false context. Again, Stanton is clearing space for the solid logic of her argument by displacing the faulty ideas her audience had to begin with.
Stanton begins constructing her sound logic using analogies that this particular audience will understand. The first example of this is found on the second page of her address when she talks of sailing. “They [women] must make the voyage of life alone, and for safety in an emergency they must know something of the laws of navigation. To guide our own craft we must be captain, pilot, engineer; with chart and compass to stand at the wheel; to match the wind and waves and know when to take in the sail, and to read the signs in the firmament over all.” (Jorgensen 164). This analogy comes after she has established “the solitude and personal responsibility” each individual has for his/her self. Stanton compares life to a sea voyage with the purpose of explaining that as a person wouldn’t go to sea without knowledge of how to sail, a person shouldn’t face life without the means to face trails. She uses this sailing analogy because it is an activity her audience will understand. This becomes the very important b = c step in Stanton’s logic. Every individual is like a sailor. Every sailor requires the navigation knowledge and tools necessary to get him/her safely through a storm. Therefor every individual requires equal opportunity to gain the knowledge and tools needed for his/her success and safety in navigating life’s tempests.
Immediately following the sailing analogy is an analogy of a soldier. Stanton explains that, “In fitting out an army, we give each soldier his own knapsack, arms, powder, his blanket, cup, knife, fork and spoon. We provide alike for all their individual necessities” (Jorgensen 164). She continues to explain that once we have done so, that soldier can take care of himself, but also help care for the group; therefore, it is to the benefit of all to have the “complete development of every individual” (Jorgensen 164). In this way she argues the similarities in how society prepares a soldier to the way each individual on the front of life should be prepared. Here again, is the b = c in Stanton’s logic. Every person is a soldier fighting through life. Every soldier has the right to be properly equipped for life’s battles. Therefore every person has a right to the full development that what will be necessary for success in life’s combat.
Along with analogy, anecdote is key in the construction of Stanton’s logic. Anecdote is first seen on page two in the story of a friendless child who must console herself after finding no present under the Christmas tree (Jorgensen 165). Stanton tells this short story as an example of one having only oneself for comfort in the most sorrowful times of life. This story draws clear parallels to her cause. Just like the child, every individual will face life’s heartaches and be left “wholly on herself for consolation.” (Jorgensen 165). This child would have been better suited to face her solitude had she the navigation skill and personal provisions Stanton has already established as necessary. All have a right to these skills and tools when they find themselves lacking “presents” under their tree.
Stanton gives a second anecdote where she talks of Prince Kropotkin, a Russian who found himself imprisoned for many years. She tells how Kropotkin was cut off from all humanity and how he turned to his “liberal thought and broad culture” for comfort (Jorgensen 166). This short story of Kroptkin’s solitary years explains that when faced with crushing isolation he needed only himself －only his mind for consolation. As she gives the short account of this dreadful time in Kropotkin’s life the audience sees the connection to the times when any individual may find his/herself just as isolated. Many will face a form of solitude near to that of Kropotkin, and it is only logical that they are allowed the same resources that enabled Kropotkin to bare his trial victoriously.
A sailor, a soldier, a child, a Russian prisoner, a judiciary committee, each will face solitude of self, and when such a time arrives “each soul must depend wholly on itself.”(Jorgensen 167). Once flawed logic is cleared away it is obvious that just as a sailor wouldn’t go to sea without the skills of navigation, or a soldier wouldn’t go to battle without his arms, an individual should not have to face personal isolation without the resources to combat it. As a committee member sees the parallels in the anecdote of a friendless child or Russian prisoner, he sees the logic behind Stanton’s argument. This Congressional Judiciary Committee hears Stanton’s address, understands the analogies, connects to the anecdotes, and recognizes that if a = b and b =c logically a = c. It is just that simple.
Works Cited
"Algebra Postulates." ORACLE ThinkQuest. ORACLE ThinkQuest Library, n.d. Web. 31 Oct 2011..
Jorgensen, Susan. Comp. Readings for Intensive Writers. 5th ed. Provo: BYU Academic Publishing, 2007. 163-169. Print.
Stanton, Elizabeth. "Solitude of Self." PBS. Public Broadcasting Service, n.d. Web. 31 Oct 2011..
Kerry Spencer
Writing 150H
31 October 2011
Critical Analysis of “Solitude of Self”: Gentlemen, Let Us Be Logical
If a = b and b = c then a = c
In mathematics this is called the Transitive Property (“ORACLE ThinkQuest”). In matters of persuasion this is pure logic. On January 18, 1892 Elizabeth Cady Stanton took this approach as she addressed the Congressional Judiciary Committee in a speech that would later be titled, “The Solitude of Self” (Stanton). As Stanton stood in front of this group of influential political gentlemen, she effectively and logically conveyed that because every individual carries what she refers to as a “solitude of self”, every individual is entitled to the means necessary to manage that solitude when it arises. Stanton achieves this by pointing out commonly held logical fallacies and then establishing solid logic through the use of analogy and anecdote.
Stanton’s first step in persuading the Congressional Judiciary Committee is to discount common logical fallacies. The first example of this comes within the first page when Stanton states, “In the usual discussion in regard to woman’s sphere, such as men as Herbert Spencer, Frederic Harrison, and Grant Allen uniformly subordinate her rights and duties as an individual, as a citizen, as a woman, to the necessities of these incidental relations, [mother, wife, sister, daughter] some of which a large class of women may never assume.”(Jorgensen 163). Here Stanton is saying that all woman have been limited to the roles some women happen to play. Stanton is pointing out a fallacy of insufficient evidence. Some women find themselves in the role of mother, wife, sister, daughter but that does not justify defining all women and their rights by these roles. By pointing out flaws in this logic early in her address, Stanton clears the path for the sound logic she is about to introduce to the committee.
Another idea Stanton proves to be a fallacy is a matter of false context. Stanton asks, “Is it, then, consistent to hold the developed woman of this day within the same narrow political limits as the dame with the spinning-wheel and knitting-needle occupied in the past?” (Jorgensen 168). Here Stanton is addressing an out of date idea of women; she is pointing out a false context. Again, Stanton is clearing space for the solid logic of her argument by displacing the faulty ideas her audience had to begin with.
Stanton begins constructing her sound logic using analogies that this particular audience will understand. The first example of this is found on the second page of her address when she talks of sailing. “They [women] must make the voyage of life alone, and for safety in an emergency they must know something of the laws of navigation. To guide our own craft we must be captain, pilot, engineer; with chart and compass to stand at the wheel; to match the wind and waves and know when to take in the sail, and to read the signs in the firmament over all.” (Jorgensen 164). This analogy comes after she has established “the solitude and personal responsibility” each individual has for his/her self. Stanton compares life to a sea voyage with the purpose of explaining that as a person wouldn’t go to sea without knowledge of how to sail, a person shouldn’t face life without the means to face trails. She uses this sailing analogy because it is an activity her audience will understand. This becomes the very important b = c step in Stanton’s logic. Every individual is like a sailor. Every sailor requires the navigation knowledge and tools necessary to get him/her safely through a storm. Therefor every individual requires equal opportunity to gain the knowledge and tools needed for his/her success and safety in navigating life’s tempests.
Immediately following the sailing analogy is an analogy of a soldier. Stanton explains that, “In fitting out an army, we give each soldier his own knapsack, arms, powder, his blanket, cup, knife, fork and spoon. We provide alike for all their individual necessities” (Jorgensen 164). She continues to explain that once we have done so, that soldier can take care of himself, but also help care for the group; therefore, it is to the benefit of all to have the “complete development of every individual” (Jorgensen 164). In this way she argues the similarities in how society prepares a soldier to the way each individual on the front of life should be prepared. Here again, is the b = c in Stanton’s logic. Every person is a soldier fighting through life. Every soldier has the right to be properly equipped for life’s battles. Therefore every person has a right to the full development that what will be necessary for success in life’s combat.
Along with analogy, anecdote is key in the construction of Stanton’s logic. Anecdote is first seen on page two in the story of a friendless child who must console herself after finding no present under the Christmas tree (Jorgensen 165). Stanton tells this short story as an example of one having only oneself for comfort in the most sorrowful times of life. This story draws clear parallels to her cause. Just like the child, every individual will face life’s heartaches and be left “wholly on herself for consolation.” (Jorgensen 165). This child would have been better suited to face her solitude had she the navigation skill and personal provisions Stanton has already established as necessary. All have a right to these skills and tools when they find themselves lacking “presents” under their tree.
Stanton gives a second anecdote where she talks of Prince Kropotkin, a Russian who found himself imprisoned for many years. She tells how Kropotkin was cut off from all humanity and how he turned to his “liberal thought and broad culture” for comfort (Jorgensen 166). This short story of Kroptkin’s solitary years explains that when faced with crushing isolation he needed only himself －only his mind for consolation. As she gives the short account of this dreadful time in Kropotkin’s life the audience sees the connection to the times when any individual may find his/herself just as isolated. Many will face a form of solitude near to that of Kropotkin, and it is only logical that they are allowed the same resources that enabled Kropotkin to bare his trial victoriously.
A sailor, a soldier, a child, a Russian prisoner, a judiciary committee, each will face solitude of self, and when such a time arrives “each soul must depend wholly on itself.”(Jorgensen 167). Once flawed logic is cleared away it is obvious that just as a sailor wouldn’t go to sea without the skills of navigation, or a soldier wouldn’t go to battle without his arms, an individual should not have to face personal isolation without the resources to combat it. As a committee member sees the parallels in the anecdote of a friendless child or Russian prisoner, he sees the logic behind Stanton’s argument. This Congressional Judiciary Committee hears Stanton’s address, understands the analogies, connects to the anecdotes, and recognizes that if a = b and b =c logically a = c. It is just that simple.
Works Cited
"Algebra Postulates." ORACLE ThinkQuest. ORACLE ThinkQuest Library, n.d. Web. 31 Oct 2011.
Jorgensen, Susan. Comp. Readings for Intensive Writers. 5th ed. Provo: BYU Academic Publishing, 2007. 163-169. Print.
Stanton, Elizabeth. "Solitude of Self." PBS. Public Broadcasting Service, n.d. Web. 31 Oct 2011.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Shay's Analysis of "The Solitude of Self"
Shay Chestnut
Dr. Kerry Spencer
Critical Analysis
27 October 2011
The Solitude of Self: The Female Condition
In the year of 1867, Mark Twain wrote in a letter to the St. Louis Missouri Democrat his opinion on women suffrage. “Women, go your ways! Seek not to beguile us of our imperial privileges. Content yourself with your little feminine trifles--your babies, your benevolent societies and your knitting--and let your natural bosses do the voting” (Schmidt). So was the thought of many Americans in the 19th century. On the other hand, Elizabeth Cady Stanton fought for equal rights among women. In her speech, “The Solitude of Self,” Stanton uses an appeal to ethos, imagery, and a strong appeal to the emotions of women, as well as the individuality of a human being, to effectively convince her audience that women deserve equality.
Firstly, Stanton appeals to ethos by exercising her own authority to stress her point of women’s rights. Elizabeth Cady Stanton was extremely influential in the 19th century in the fight for the equality of women. Therefore, she has a voice to pay heed to. Although she never voices her stance in politics or her influence on American society in that day, her authority has an influence on her audience simply if the reader knows who she is.
In addition to Stanton’s use of ethos, she uses imagery to describe the cruelty of denying a woman her right to complete an education as well as having political equality. For example, Stanton says, “To throw obstacle in the way of a complete education is like putting out the eyes; to deny the rights of property, like cutting off the hands” (Stanton 165). This vivid imagery forces gruesome images into the readers’ minds. Because Stanton compares the restrictions of a woman to complete an education with the violence of cutting off the hands, the reader’s opinion on women’s education, whatever it may be, is tainted in Stanton’s favor.
Again, Stanton applies imagery by sharing the story of the play, “Titus Andronicus,” written by William Shakespeare.
“Shakespeare’s play of “Titus Andronicus” contains a terrible satire on woman’s position in the nineteenth century. Rude men (the play tells us) seized the king’s daughter, cut out her tongue, cut off her hands, and then bade her go call for water and wash her hands. What a picture of woman’s position” (165).
To reiterate Stanton, what a picture of woman’s position! Stanton’s application of this play is effective in the way that it perfectly expresses her opinion of the woman’s condition. Rather than having her hands cut off, women are robbed of their natural rights by law and custom, and yet, she is left to depend on herself similarly to the girl who is expected to go call for water and wash her hands with no tongue or hands.
Last is Stanton’s strongest tool: her emotional appeal to women, as well as the individuality of a human soul. Her emotional appeal is the meat of her speech. When she addresses women directly, she is highly effective in many ways. Obviously, she does this simply by addressing the rights women wanted to see happen; equality in social life, opportunities for higher education, personal responsibility in her personal life, and independent action. The list goes on, and Stanton does an excellent job presenting her argument and gains the support of her fellow women.
Another way she appeals to the emotion of women is through sharing stories of exemplary women during their day. One of the stories she shares happened during the catastrophic storm in the Bay of Biscay. A tidal wave caused destruction and amongst other buildings, the women’s prison was destroyed. Of the women who escaped, they caught sight of men struggling to reach the shore. Banding together, the women brought six men to shore and carried them further to safety. It’s stories like these that make women proud to be women. This story is also effective because it was a real happening, and therefore, it strongly supports Stanton’s opinion that women are just as capable as men.
Her emotional appeal to women is very clear and although she doesn’t directly appeal to men, she does appeal to the individuality of a human being. Hence the title, “The Solitude of Self.” For example, Stanton shares a story pertinent to all humanity. It’s a story of a young girl who helped decorate a Christmas tree for a family she served. When she found there was no present for her, she slipped away and spent the night crying in a field. Stanton applies the “solitude of self” and says, “No mortal will ever know the thoughts that passed through the mind of that friendless child in the long hours of that cold night, with only the silent starts to keep her company” (Stanton 165). Stanton hits close to home for everyone. Everyone, man and woman, young and old, has, in one way or another, experienced “the awful solitude of individual life” (Stanton 165).
In conclusion, Elizabeth Cady Stanton effectively convinces her audience of women equality by using an appeal to ethos, imagery, and an appeal to the emotions of women and the individuality of a human soul. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, along with many other activists, worked hard to change the opinions of their fellow Americans. Consequently, in 1901, Mark Twain was quoted in The New York Times concerning his new opinion of a woman’s role in the government. He said, “I know that since the women started out on their crusade they have scored in every project they undertook against unjust laws. I would like to see them help make the laws and those who are to enforce them. I would like to see the whiplash in women's hands” (Schmidt).
Works Cited
Schmidt, Barbara. "Mark Twain Quotations, Newspaper Collections, & Related Resources." (1997): n. page. Print..
Stanton, Elizabeth Cady. “The Solitude of Self.” Reading For Intensive Writers. 5th ed. Comp. Susan Jorgensen. Provo: BYU Academic Publishing, 2007. Print.
Dr. Kerry Spencer
Critical Analysis
27 October 2011
The Solitude of Self: The Female Condition
In the year of 1867, Mark Twain wrote in a letter to the St. Louis Missouri Democrat his opinion on women suffrage. “Women, go your ways! Seek not to beguile us of our imperial privileges. Content yourself with your little feminine trifles--your babies, your benevolent societies and your knitting--and let your natural bosses do the voting” (Schmidt). So was the thought of many Americans in the 19th century. On the other hand, Elizabeth Cady Stanton fought for equal rights among women. In her speech, “The Solitude of Self,” Stanton uses an appeal to ethos, imagery, and a strong appeal to the emotions of women, as well as the individuality of a human being, to effectively convince her audience that women deserve equality.
Firstly, Stanton appeals to ethos by exercising her own authority to stress her point of women’s rights. Elizabeth Cady Stanton was extremely influential in the 19th century in the fight for the equality of women. Therefore, she has a voice to pay heed to. Although she never voices her stance in politics or her influence on American society in that day, her authority has an influence on her audience simply if the reader knows who she is.
In addition to Stanton’s use of ethos, she uses imagery to describe the cruelty of denying a woman her right to complete an education as well as having political equality. For example, Stanton says, “To throw obstacle in the way of a complete education is like putting out the eyes; to deny the rights of property, like cutting off the hands” (Stanton 165). This vivid imagery forces gruesome images into the readers’ minds. Because Stanton compares the restrictions of a woman to complete an education with the violence of cutting off the hands, the reader’s opinion on women’s education, whatever it may be, is tainted in Stanton’s favor.
Again, Stanton applies imagery by sharing the story of the play, “Titus Andronicus,” written by William Shakespeare.
“Shakespeare’s play of “Titus Andronicus” contains a terrible satire on woman’s position in the nineteenth century. Rude men (the play tells us) seized the king’s daughter, cut out her tongue, cut off her hands, and then bade her go call for water and wash her hands. What a picture of woman’s position” (165).
To reiterate Stanton, what a picture of woman’s position! Stanton’s application of this play is effective in the way that it perfectly expresses her opinion of the woman’s condition. Rather than having her hands cut off, women are robbed of their natural rights by law and custom, and yet, she is left to depend on herself similarly to the girl who is expected to go call for water and wash her hands with no tongue or hands.
Last is Stanton’s strongest tool: her emotional appeal to women, as well as the individuality of a human soul. Her emotional appeal is the meat of her speech. When she addresses women directly, she is highly effective in many ways. Obviously, she does this simply by addressing the rights women wanted to see happen; equality in social life, opportunities for higher education, personal responsibility in her personal life, and independent action. The list goes on, and Stanton does an excellent job presenting her argument and gains the support of her fellow women.
Another way she appeals to the emotion of women is through sharing stories of exemplary women during their day. One of the stories she shares happened during the catastrophic storm in the Bay of Biscay. A tidal wave caused destruction and amongst other buildings, the women’s prison was destroyed. Of the women who escaped, they caught sight of men struggling to reach the shore. Banding together, the women brought six men to shore and carried them further to safety. It’s stories like these that make women proud to be women. This story is also effective because it was a real happening, and therefore, it strongly supports Stanton’s opinion that women are just as capable as men.
Her emotional appeal to women is very clear and although she doesn’t directly appeal to men, she does appeal to the individuality of a human being. Hence the title, “The Solitude of Self.” For example, Stanton shares a story pertinent to all humanity. It’s a story of a young girl who helped decorate a Christmas tree for a family she served. When she found there was no present for her, she slipped away and spent the night crying in a field. Stanton applies the “solitude of self” and says, “No mortal will ever know the thoughts that passed through the mind of that friendless child in the long hours of that cold night, with only the silent starts to keep her company” (Stanton 165). Stanton hits close to home for everyone. Everyone, man and woman, young and old, has, in one way or another, experienced “the awful solitude of individual life” (Stanton 165).
In conclusion, Elizabeth Cady Stanton effectively convinces her audience of women equality by using an appeal to ethos, imagery, and an appeal to the emotions of women and the individuality of a human soul. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, along with many other activists, worked hard to change the opinions of their fellow Americans. Consequently, in 1901, Mark Twain was quoted in The New York Times concerning his new opinion of a woman’s role in the government. He said, “I know that since the women started out on their crusade they have scored in every project they undertook against unjust laws. I would like to see them help make the laws and those who are to enforce them. I would like to see the whiplash in women's hands” (Schmidt).
Works Cited
Schmidt, Barbara. "Mark Twain Quotations, Newspaper Collections, & Related Resources." (1997): n. page. Print.
Stanton, Elizabeth Cady. “The Solitude of Self.” Reading For Intensive Writers. 5th ed. Comp. Susan Jorgensen. Provo: BYU Academic Publishing, 2007. Print.
Sarah's Analysis of "The Solitude of Self"
Sarah Chestnut
Professor Spencer
Critical Analysis
31 October 2011
The Individual
“To deny political equality is to rob the ostracised of all self-respect.” Elizabeth Caddy Stanton’s farewell speech entitled “The Solitude of Self” marked the end of her twenty years as the president of the National American Woman Suffrage Association in 1892. The speech articulates the ideas of one of our nation’s earliest and most foremost feminists. Stanton herself admitted that this speech was the best piece she had ever written, and nearly 120 years later, I can agree that it is a remarkable piece of writing, despite a few flaws. Stanton is highly effective in convincing her audience by her use of appropriate examples that appeal to pathos, as well as her use of a less offensive argument to promote feminism by sponsoring the individual; however, this effectiveness is undermined by her overwhelming use of a sentimental and abstract idea she calls 'the solitude of self.'
Stanton uses appropriate examples that are wrought with emotion, but not overcome with silly dramatics. For instance, she uses an example to illustrate women’s position in society in the nineteenth century from a scene in Shakespeare's Titus and Andronicus when several men "seized the king's daughter, cut out her tongue, cut off her hands, and then bade her go call for water and wash her hands." This scene depicts how women must often rely on themselves, but are not given the rights or faculties in order to do so.
Stanton then brings up examples of common women in common situations. First she writes of a sixteen-year-old girl who must support herself and find her own respectable place in society, without an education, meanwhile keeping her integrity intact, as society dictates she should do. However, if this girl gives up and "allows herself to drift with the current" then she is humiliated. Stanton then writes of a wife and mother, who must "manage a household, have a deatrable influence in society, keep her friends and the affections of her husband, train her children and servants well... To do all this she needs the cardinal virtues and the strong points of character that the most successful statesman possesses." She adds, "An uneducated women, trained to dependences, with no resources in herself must make a failure of any position in life." Another example Stanton gives is that of a mother giving birth, "Whatever the theories may be of woman's dependence on man, in the supreme moments of her life he can not bear her burdens. Alone she goes to the gates of death to give life to every man that is born into the world." These examples are effective because they are common women in common situations, and are, therefore, without trivial melodrama, which would deter the sensible argument that Stanton gives.
By sponsoring the individual, Stanton is able to promote feminism with a less offensive argument, which is particularly effective, especially in the male-dominated society of the time period that Stanton lived in. Although Stanton is obviously fighting for women's rights, she does not argue for them as opposed to men, but rather, because both men and women are individuals. "The strongest reason for giving women ... a complete emancipation from all forms of bondage, of custom, dependence, superstition; from all the crippling influences of fear, is the solitude and personal responsibility of her own individual life... It matters not whether the solitary voyager is man or woman." Stanton even admits that, "No matter how much women prefer to lean, to be protected and supported, nor how much men desire to have them do so, they must make the voyage of life alone, and for the safety in an emergency they must know something of the laws of navigation." I know so many women who, if they could, they would only be a wife and mother; however, as reality teaches, most women are not able to do so due to monetary issues or other emergencies and tragedies. Therefore, the argument Stanton gives is that women should be allowed to be able protect and provide for themselves, as individuals, in case men cannot take care of them, which is often the case. This is a much less offensive argument to traditional males and females in comparison to many modern feminist arguments, and proves highly effective, since it shows that Stanton is a sensible woman rather than irrational radical.
Stanton is extremely effective in her argument for the rights of the individual; however, if there is one feature that obstructs her argument, it is her overwhelming use of this idea she calls "the solitude of self". Undoubtedly, it is a beautiful and understandable idea; nevertheless, it has little place in an overall sensible piece of writing. A piece of writing that was eventually given before the Committee of the Judiciary of the U.S. Congress on January 18, 1892.
Firstly, Stanton brings up the idea that each person is an individual. "Nature never repeats herself, and the possibilities of one human soul will never be found in another." This argument makes perfect sense. No human is the same, or can make the same contributions to mankind. Therefore, despite gender, all individuals should be allowed the same abilities to develop since it will help the general good of all humankind. This idea is simple, sensible, and understandable enough. Stanton then brings up the story of a little girl who helped dress a Christmas tree, and when she found there was no present for her, she bitterly wept alone, without a soul to help her in her lonely suffering. She then writes, "In youth our most bitter disappointments, our brightest hopes and ambitions are known only to otherwise, even our friendship and love we never fully share with another; there is something of every passion in every situation we conceal." How is this idea supposed to support that every individual deserves the rights and faculties to develop and earn their own happiness? Everyone has a secret part of them that is never revealed to anyone else, but that does not give unalienable rights for every person. People are given rights because they are individuals who to contribute to society, either positively or negatively. Not because of an abstract idea.
Certainly, it is a stunning piece of writing, and her "solitude of self" argument comes to a beautiful conclusion. "Such is individual life. Who, I ask you, can take, dare take, on himself the rights, the duties, the responsibilities of another human soul?" Stanton's last remarks almost atone for the many paragraphs she spent talking about her idea of the "solitude of self"; however, I found most of it to be distracting from the main idea of proving that women deserve the rights to protect and improve themselves as individuals.
Although Stanton’s speech veers somewhat into the theoretical with her idea of the ‘solitude of self’, her speech is indisputably a moving piece of writing written by a passionate woman who gave many years of her life to the cause of Women’s Rights. Her appropriately emotional examples and appeal for the rights of all individuals make her speech a far more enduring piece of work, and makes it effective for a universal audience.
Professor Spencer
Critical Analysis
31 October 2011
The Individual
“To deny political equality is to rob the ostracised of all self-respect.” Elizabeth Caddy Stanton’s farewell speech entitled “The Solitude of Self” marked the end of her twenty years as the president of the National American Woman Suffrage Association in 1892. The speech articulates the ideas of one of our nation’s earliest and most foremost feminists. Stanton herself admitted that this speech was the best piece she had ever written, and nearly 120 years later, I can agree that it is a remarkable piece of writing, despite a few flaws. Stanton is highly effective in convincing her audience by her use of appropriate examples that appeal to pathos, as well as her use of a less offensive argument to promote feminism by sponsoring the individual; however, this effectiveness is undermined by her overwhelming use of a sentimental and abstract idea she calls 'the solitude of self.'
Stanton uses appropriate examples that are wrought with emotion, but not overcome with silly dramatics. For instance, she uses an example to illustrate women’s position in society in the nineteenth century from a scene in Shakespeare's Titus and Andronicus when several men "seized the king's daughter, cut out her tongue, cut off her hands, and then bade her go call for water and wash her hands." This scene depicts how women must often rely on themselves, but are not given the rights or faculties in order to do so.
Stanton then brings up examples of common women in common situations. First she writes of a sixteen-year-old girl who must support herself and find her own respectable place in society, without an education, meanwhile keeping her integrity intact, as society dictates she should do. However, if this girl gives up and "allows herself to drift with the current" then she is humiliated. Stanton then writes of a wife and mother, who must "manage a household, have a deatrable influence in society, keep her friends and the affections of her husband, train her children and servants well... To do all this she needs the cardinal virtues and the strong points of character that the most successful statesman possesses." She adds, "An uneducated women, trained to dependences, with no resources in herself must make a failure of any position in life." Another example Stanton gives is that of a mother giving birth, "Whatever the theories may be of woman's dependence on man, in the supreme moments of her life he can not bear her burdens. Alone she goes to the gates of death to give life to every man that is born into the world." These examples are effective because they are common women in common situations, and are, therefore, without trivial melodrama, which would deter the sensible argument that Stanton gives.
By sponsoring the individual, Stanton is able to promote feminism with a less offensive argument, which is particularly effective, especially in the male-dominated society of the time period that Stanton lived in. Although Stanton is obviously fighting for women's rights, she does not argue for them as opposed to men, but rather, because both men and women are individuals. "The strongest reason for giving women ... a complete emancipation from all forms of bondage, of custom, dependence, superstition; from all the crippling influences of fear, is the solitude and personal responsibility of her own individual life... It matters not whether the solitary voyager is man or woman." Stanton even admits that, "No matter how much women prefer to lean, to be protected and supported, nor how much men desire to have them do so, they must make the voyage of life alone, and for the safety in an emergency they must know something of the laws of navigation." I know so many women who, if they could, they would only be a wife and mother; however, as reality teaches, most women are not able to do so due to monetary issues or other emergencies and tragedies. Therefore, the argument Stanton gives is that women should be allowed to be able protect and provide for themselves, as individuals, in case men cannot take care of them, which is often the case. This is a much less offensive argument to traditional males and females in comparison to many modern feminist arguments, and proves highly effective, since it shows that Stanton is a sensible woman rather than irrational radical.
Stanton is extremely effective in her argument for the rights of the individual; however, if there is one feature that obstructs her argument, it is her overwhelming use of this idea she calls "the solitude of self". Undoubtedly, it is a beautiful and understandable idea; nevertheless, it has little place in an overall sensible piece of writing. A piece of writing that was eventually given before the Committee of the Judiciary of the U.S. Congress on January 18, 1892.
Firstly, Stanton brings up the idea that each person is an individual. "Nature never repeats herself, and the possibilities of one human soul will never be found in another." This argument makes perfect sense. No human is the same, or can make the same contributions to mankind. Therefore, despite gender, all individuals should be allowed the same abilities to develop since it will help the general good of all humankind. This idea is simple, sensible, and understandable enough. Stanton then brings up the story of a little girl who helped dress a Christmas tree, and when she found there was no present for her, she bitterly wept alone, without a soul to help her in her lonely suffering. She then writes, "In youth our most bitter disappointments, our brightest hopes and ambitions are known only to otherwise, even our friendship and love we never fully share with another; there is something of every passion in every situation we conceal." How is this idea supposed to support that every individual deserves the rights and faculties to develop and earn their own happiness? Everyone has a secret part of them that is never revealed to anyone else, but that does not give unalienable rights for every person. People are given rights because they are individuals who to contribute to society, either positively or negatively. Not because of an abstract idea.
Certainly, it is a stunning piece of writing, and her "solitude of self" argument comes to a beautiful conclusion. "Such is individual life. Who, I ask you, can take, dare take, on himself the rights, the duties, the responsibilities of another human soul?" Stanton's last remarks almost atone for the many paragraphs she spent talking about her idea of the "solitude of self"; however, I found most of it to be distracting from the main idea of proving that women deserve the rights to protect and improve themselves as individuals.
Although Stanton’s speech veers somewhat into the theoretical with her idea of the ‘solitude of self’, her speech is indisputably a moving piece of writing written by a passionate woman who gave many years of her life to the cause of Women’s Rights. Her appropriately emotional examples and appeal for the rights of all individuals make her speech a far more enduring piece of work, and makes it effective for a universal audience.
Michael's Analysis of "The Solitude of Self"
In 1848 Elizabeth Stanton played a driving force in Seneca Falls, the first push towards women’s rights. Stanton, from that point on, was a major contributor to the women’s rights movement. In her article, “The Solitude of Self”, she presents an argument to her contemporary audience for women’s rights, by using pathos, logos, and metaphor’s, in an attempt to make them see the importance of a women’s role in society.
From the beginning of the article, Stanton uses logos to appeal to the logic of her audience, in order to convince them to support women’s rights. One of the strongest appeals to logic that Stanton uses is when she says “If we consider her as a citizen, as a member of a great nation, she must have the same rights as all other members, according to the fundamental principles of our government.” (163). by this statement alone, Stanton claims her rights. However, she continues on in her article to then describe how, that just because women have the role of wife, mother, or sister, doesn’t mean that they should be made to act a certain way or do specific things. Women should be allowed to pursue anything that a man can, because she can do it just as well, if not better, than he can.
Stanton also explains that because of the basic need for survival, a woman must be allowed to do, and learn anything she wants. In her description of “Solitude of Self” she describes each person as being alone. No two people are alike, and no two people will every experience the same thing. When the time comes a woman will have to stand alone, without the support of her husband. If when this time comes she must have the necessary skills and experience. The only way to learn and develop these skills and gain experience is to exercise her rights and duties in society, of which, at the time that the article is written, are none.
Pathos, or the appeal to emotion, is also shown in Stanton’s article when she tells a story about a little girl, who on Christmas didn’t receive any presents. The little girl then spent the whole night out in a field, and was found the next day sobbing. Other people, upon hearing about the little girl, sent her many gifts. However, Stanton goes on to explain that “in the hours of her keenest suffering she was thrown wholly on herself for consolation” this appeals to the audiences emotions by making them feel sad for the little girl, and therefore make them more willing to accept Stanton’s argument for women’s rights, because they don’t want to have something similar to the story of the little girl, happen again, when it can be avoided.
Stanton uses many metaphors in her article, which help to give substance to her argument. One such of these metaphors is when she quotes another writer in telling a story of a man who was crossing the Atlantic ocean, and went out on to the deck of the ship at midnight and was utterly “swallowed up in by a tremendous darkness. . . around me lay a huge confusion of rocks, out of which the gigantic ice peaks shot into the measureless blue of the heavens, and against my only feeling was. . . solitude.” This metaphor is a physical representation of “the solitude of self”. That even when you are around people, in the quickness of life, there will be a time, like when he went onto the deck of the ship, where you are utterly and completely alone, and if there is a storm, you need to have the skills to be able to handle it, Skills that you are not able to learn without being able to be an active participant in society.
When first considering the idea of “The Solitude of Self”, it may seem that it isn’t relevant to the argument of women’s rights. However, Stanton, through her use of Logos, Pathos, and metaphors is able to eloquently argue for women’s rights, to give women a place in society, through the idea of “The Solitude of Self”.
From the beginning of the article, Stanton uses logos to appeal to the logic of her audience, in order to convince them to support women’s rights. One of the strongest appeals to logic that Stanton uses is when she says “If we consider her as a citizen, as a member of a great nation, she must have the same rights as all other members, according to the fundamental principles of our government.” (163). by this statement alone, Stanton claims her rights. However, she continues on in her article to then describe how, that just because women have the role of wife, mother, or sister, doesn’t mean that they should be made to act a certain way or do specific things. Women should be allowed to pursue anything that a man can, because she can do it just as well, if not better, than he can.
Stanton also explains that because of the basic need for survival, a woman must be allowed to do, and learn anything she wants. In her description of “Solitude of Self” she describes each person as being alone. No two people are alike, and no two people will every experience the same thing. When the time comes a woman will have to stand alone, without the support of her husband. If when this time comes she must have the necessary skills and experience. The only way to learn and develop these skills and gain experience is to exercise her rights and duties in society, of which, at the time that the article is written, are none.
Pathos, or the appeal to emotion, is also shown in Stanton’s article when she tells a story about a little girl, who on Christmas didn’t receive any presents. The little girl then spent the whole night out in a field, and was found the next day sobbing. Other people, upon hearing about the little girl, sent her many gifts. However, Stanton goes on to explain that “in the hours of her keenest suffering she was thrown wholly on herself for consolation” this appeals to the audiences emotions by making them feel sad for the little girl, and therefore make them more willing to accept Stanton’s argument for women’s rights, because they don’t want to have something similar to the story of the little girl, happen again, when it can be avoided.
Stanton uses many metaphors in her article, which help to give substance to her argument. One such of these metaphors is when she quotes another writer in telling a story of a man who was crossing the Atlantic ocean, and went out on to the deck of the ship at midnight and was utterly “swallowed up in by a tremendous darkness. . . around me lay a huge confusion of rocks, out of which the gigantic ice peaks shot into the measureless blue of the heavens, and against my only feeling was. . . solitude.” This metaphor is a physical representation of “the solitude of self”. That even when you are around people, in the quickness of life, there will be a time, like when he went onto the deck of the ship, where you are utterly and completely alone, and if there is a storm, you need to have the skills to be able to handle it, Skills that you are not able to learn without being able to be an active participant in society.
When first considering the idea of “The Solitude of Self”, it may seem that it isn’t relevant to the argument of women’s rights. However, Stanton, through her use of Logos, Pathos, and metaphors is able to eloquently argue for women’s rights, to give women a place in society, through the idea of “The Solitude of Self”.
Bergen's Analysis of "The Solitude of Self"
Bergen Beesley
October 30, 2011
Professor Spencer
“The Solitude of Self” Critical Analysis
Women at the Seneca Falls Convention sought to change their position in society and secure their rights. While the convention as a whole was not entirely successful, Elizabeth Cady Stanton was very successful in vying for the rights of women. In “The Solitude of Self”, Stanton effectively shows her political audience why women deserve all natural rights through her use of allusion, diction and metaphor.
Stanton uses allusion to provide examples of how solitary humans are. She first alludes to Shakespeare’s play “Titus Andronicus.” This play involves a young girl who is forced to try to “call for water and wash her hands” after having her tongue and hands cut off. Uneducated women in society are in the same position. They are expected to perform tasks and duties with the even more perfection than men but they don’t have the same opportunities and education that their male counterpoints have. Stanton also refers to the New Testament and the man who ultimately suffered the most in solitude, Jesus Christ. Christ is the greatest example of living a solitary life. He had to take on the sins of the world; no one could help Him or ease His burden. His own father could not help Him in His greatest time of need. If Christ, the ultimate example of charity, was solitary, ordinary human beings, including uneducated women, are even more helpless.
Diction is used to explain the nature of this solitude. With words like “bitter” and “immeasurable” describing it, this “solitude of self” does not appear to be something that is enjoyed. It is made to seem as terrifying and almost dangerous. It is also described as “fatal,” implying that it can ruin a life when in that state for large amounts of time. The repetition of the word “wholly” shows just how much of a life is taken up in this isolation. Each soul must give it’s all and use all of its resources to overcome and get out of its solitude; each person can only depend on themselves. No one can “mitigate [their] pangs.” These charged words show that the “solitude of self” is crippling and can be utterly horrific.
Stanton likens the solitude that uneducated women must face to a couple of different things. She first compares it to a boat to which we must be “captain, pilot, engineer; with chart and compass to stand at the wheel; to match the wind and waves and know when to take in the sail, and to read the signs in the firmament over all.” A person must be in complete control of their “craft,” or life, and know exactly how each part functions and interacts with the others. They must have the knowledge of how their craft operates and reacts to different situations. Solitude is also likened to fitting an army, where each soldier is given the necessities for survival. Women are not given all the tools that they need to successfully survive in society on their own. They are expected to rely on men and stay at home in their own sphere. If women were given the same essentials as men, they would be able to “bear [their] own burden” and function in society. Since they are not given the same opportunities, they remain without the necessities to guide their lives and they are stuck in solitude.
Women should be allowed to have the same rights as men. They are expected to perform the same, if not more, duties as men at the same level, yet they are not given the same opportunities to learn and grow so they can accomplish the same goals. By accomplishing these goals and becoming educated, they can leave their solitude and interact in society instead of being shut away in their homes. Stanton effectively shows this through her use of allusion, diction, and metaphor. Women should be given the same rights as men because those rights are essential to functioning normally in society.
October 30, 2011
Professor Spencer
“The Solitude of Self” Critical Analysis
Women at the Seneca Falls Convention sought to change their position in society and secure their rights. While the convention as a whole was not entirely successful, Elizabeth Cady Stanton was very successful in vying for the rights of women. In “The Solitude of Self”, Stanton effectively shows her political audience why women deserve all natural rights through her use of allusion, diction and metaphor.
Stanton uses allusion to provide examples of how solitary humans are. She first alludes to Shakespeare’s play “Titus Andronicus.” This play involves a young girl who is forced to try to “call for water and wash her hands” after having her tongue and hands cut off. Uneducated women in society are in the same position. They are expected to perform tasks and duties with the even more perfection than men but they don’t have the same opportunities and education that their male counterpoints have. Stanton also refers to the New Testament and the man who ultimately suffered the most in solitude, Jesus Christ. Christ is the greatest example of living a solitary life. He had to take on the sins of the world; no one could help Him or ease His burden. His own father could not help Him in His greatest time of need. If Christ, the ultimate example of charity, was solitary, ordinary human beings, including uneducated women, are even more helpless.
Diction is used to explain the nature of this solitude. With words like “bitter” and “immeasurable” describing it, this “solitude of self” does not appear to be something that is enjoyed. It is made to seem as terrifying and almost dangerous. It is also described as “fatal,” implying that it can ruin a life when in that state for large amounts of time. The repetition of the word “wholly” shows just how much of a life is taken up in this isolation. Each soul must give it’s all and use all of its resources to overcome and get out of its solitude; each person can only depend on themselves. No one can “mitigate [their] pangs.” These charged words show that the “solitude of self” is crippling and can be utterly horrific.
Stanton likens the solitude that uneducated women must face to a couple of different things. She first compares it to a boat to which we must be “captain, pilot, engineer; with chart and compass to stand at the wheel; to match the wind and waves and know when to take in the sail, and to read the signs in the firmament over all.” A person must be in complete control of their “craft,” or life, and know exactly how each part functions and interacts with the others. They must have the knowledge of how their craft operates and reacts to different situations. Solitude is also likened to fitting an army, where each soldier is given the necessities for survival. Women are not given all the tools that they need to successfully survive in society on their own. They are expected to rely on men and stay at home in their own sphere. If women were given the same essentials as men, they would be able to “bear [their] own burden” and function in society. Since they are not given the same opportunities, they remain without the necessities to guide their lives and they are stuck in solitude.
Women should be allowed to have the same rights as men. They are expected to perform the same, if not more, duties as men at the same level, yet they are not given the same opportunities to learn and grow so they can accomplish the same goals. By accomplishing these goals and becoming educated, they can leave their solitude and interact in society instead of being shut away in their homes. Stanton effectively shows this through her use of allusion, diction, and metaphor. Women should be given the same rights as men because those rights are essential to functioning normally in society.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Heather's Analysis of "When Nice Ain't So Nice"
A Not So Nice Critical Analysis
Elouise Bell, in her article “When Nice Ain’t So Nice”, tackles the universal problem of bottling up one’s anger. Bell argues that being nice, when a situation calls for the opposite, is a problem that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints specifically have. While her assumptions may be correct, though contradictory to my experience, Bell’s examples fall short when trying to support her opinion. Bell also argues that nice people aren’t always so nice after all; that they are in fact the ones to be cautious of. While Bell’s arguments stem from mainstream thinking, it’s hard for one to agree with her due to her ineffective usage of hyperbole, metaphor, and examples that are not harmonious with her targeted Mormon audience.
Throughout Bell’s article, she lists various examples of nice deeds following them with acts of aggression. When describing how nice students at Brigham Young University are, Bell states that they would “…walk clear across campus to turn in stray Number Two pencils to the Lost-and-Found depository.” While this statement is a clear exaggeration, or hyperbole, it didn’t have to hurt Bell’s argument. However, Bell laid the groundwork of this particular paragraph on the basis that BYU students are nice. Bell’s desire to convince readers that the very same BYU students were writing “…letters dripping with innuendo, invective, and scripture-laden scourging” is not achieved due to her hyperbole. Students do not in reality walk across campus to return Number Two pencils. Readers will most likely question the validity of her argument due to part of it not being believable. This is not the only instance that Bell uses a hyperbole that does not have the desired effect.
Toward the end of Bell’s article, she mentions the Nicene Creed. She changes it into the Nice Creed and lists the beliefs of nice people. Much of the creed invokes laughter at nice people and the lengths they go to, to maintain their composure and niceness. Bell stretches herself too far on the creed though, going as far as to say that they would say “…nothing in response to…being run over by the bus”. This is yet another clear exaggeration calling into question Bell’s validity. If Bell has to exaggerate the points she is trying to make, she then leaves readers questioning how much of her argument is true. Instead of persuading her readers to believe as she does, even possibly to take action and end this fake niceness, Bell has the effect of making a reader question her credibility. Not only does Bell have the tendency to hyperbolize, but she also is also prone to digressing from her argument.
Bell creates a very detailed metaphor about a Queen who awakens to find that her newborn baby has been abducted. While metaphors are typically effective rhetorical tools expanding one’s understanding; this one is not. At first there are clues of the baby but as time passes the mother of the Queen urges her to break off the search, accuses her daughter of being selfish, and then even goes as far as to offer her another child that is much “nicer” than her own. This metaphor is ineffective for two main reasons. The first reason being that if such a situation were to happen in real life, the mother of the Queen would not have behaved at all the way she did. No mother would call her daughter selfish for trying to find her abducted child and then try to force another one upon her. Furthermore, this metaphor is ineffective because the point that Bell is trying to make is unclear. Niceness is not mentioned at all within the metaphor besides saying that the replacement baby is nicer. The resemblance or comparison that Bell tries to make is lost within her ineffectual metaphor.
Lastly, Bell argues that nice people do not like to know about poverty and death, for these are, respectfully, “distinctly not nice” and “unequivocally not nice”. Bell has made it clear that the church and its members are those especially guilty of niceness, which is what makes this argument so very confusing. Poverty is indeed a matter of concern for the church, not because it is un-nice though, but because the Lord has commanded church members to feed the hungry and clothe the naked. When it comes to living amongst those in poverty, Mormons are not alone in this. I would go as far as to say that all people would like to live in better neighborhoods where poverty is not an issue. As for death, LDS religion focuses on it and the afterlife heavily. Bell however states that they are “Not wanting to know, not willing to know, not about to know.” Death is not an occasion that anyone jumps for joy over, whether someone is nice or not does not matter. To say that Mormons are not willing to know about it is a mistaken belief. Here is yet another example of a futile argument made by Bell.
While there may have been some truth to Bell’s statement that “…it is niceness which can corrupt all other virtues”, she does a poor job of convincing her readers. Bell’s ineffective examples, hyperboles, and metaphor are but a few of the rhetorical tools that she failed to take advantage of to assert her view convincingly. After reading this article, I still feel comfortable in saying that I am a nice person, which is clearly not the outcome that Bell was aiming for.
Bell, Elouise.“When Nice Ain’t So Nice.” Readings for Intensive Writers. 5th ed. Comp. Susan Jorgensen. Provo: BYU Academic Publishing, 2007. 170-174. Print.
Elouise Bell, in her article “When Nice Ain’t So Nice”, tackles the universal problem of bottling up one’s anger. Bell argues that being nice, when a situation calls for the opposite, is a problem that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints specifically have. While her assumptions may be correct, though contradictory to my experience, Bell’s examples fall short when trying to support her opinion. Bell also argues that nice people aren’t always so nice after all; that they are in fact the ones to be cautious of. While Bell’s arguments stem from mainstream thinking, it’s hard for one to agree with her due to her ineffective usage of hyperbole, metaphor, and examples that are not harmonious with her targeted Mormon audience.
Throughout Bell’s article, she lists various examples of nice deeds following them with acts of aggression. When describing how nice students at Brigham Young University are, Bell states that they would “…walk clear across campus to turn in stray Number Two pencils to the Lost-and-Found depository.” While this statement is a clear exaggeration, or hyperbole, it didn’t have to hurt Bell’s argument. However, Bell laid the groundwork of this particular paragraph on the basis that BYU students are nice. Bell’s desire to convince readers that the very same BYU students were writing “…letters dripping with innuendo, invective, and scripture-laden scourging” is not achieved due to her hyperbole. Students do not in reality walk across campus to return Number Two pencils. Readers will most likely question the validity of her argument due to part of it not being believable. This is not the only instance that Bell uses a hyperbole that does not have the desired effect.
Toward the end of Bell’s article, she mentions the Nicene Creed. She changes it into the Nice Creed and lists the beliefs of nice people. Much of the creed invokes laughter at nice people and the lengths they go to, to maintain their composure and niceness. Bell stretches herself too far on the creed though, going as far as to say that they would say “…nothing in response to…being run over by the bus”. This is yet another clear exaggeration calling into question Bell’s validity. If Bell has to exaggerate the points she is trying to make, she then leaves readers questioning how much of her argument is true. Instead of persuading her readers to believe as she does, even possibly to take action and end this fake niceness, Bell has the effect of making a reader question her credibility. Not only does Bell have the tendency to hyperbolize, but she also is also prone to digressing from her argument.
Bell creates a very detailed metaphor about a Queen who awakens to find that her newborn baby has been abducted. While metaphors are typically effective rhetorical tools expanding one’s understanding; this one is not. At first there are clues of the baby but as time passes the mother of the Queen urges her to break off the search, accuses her daughter of being selfish, and then even goes as far as to offer her another child that is much “nicer” than her own. This metaphor is ineffective for two main reasons. The first reason being that if such a situation were to happen in real life, the mother of the Queen would not have behaved at all the way she did. No mother would call her daughter selfish for trying to find her abducted child and then try to force another one upon her. Furthermore, this metaphor is ineffective because the point that Bell is trying to make is unclear. Niceness is not mentioned at all within the metaphor besides saying that the replacement baby is nicer. The resemblance or comparison that Bell tries to make is lost within her ineffectual metaphor.
Lastly, Bell argues that nice people do not like to know about poverty and death, for these are, respectfully, “distinctly not nice” and “unequivocally not nice”. Bell has made it clear that the church and its members are those especially guilty of niceness, which is what makes this argument so very confusing. Poverty is indeed a matter of concern for the church, not because it is un-nice though, but because the Lord has commanded church members to feed the hungry and clothe the naked. When it comes to living amongst those in poverty, Mormons are not alone in this. I would go as far as to say that all people would like to live in better neighborhoods where poverty is not an issue. As for death, LDS religion focuses on it and the afterlife heavily. Bell however states that they are “Not wanting to know, not willing to know, not about to know.” Death is not an occasion that anyone jumps for joy over, whether someone is nice or not does not matter. To say that Mormons are not willing to know about it is a mistaken belief. Here is yet another example of a futile argument made by Bell.
While there may have been some truth to Bell’s statement that “…it is niceness which can corrupt all other virtues”, she does a poor job of convincing her readers. Bell’s ineffective examples, hyperboles, and metaphor are but a few of the rhetorical tools that she failed to take advantage of to assert her view convincingly. After reading this article, I still feel comfortable in saying that I am a nice person, which is clearly not the outcome that Bell was aiming for.
Bell, Elouise.“When Nice Ain’t So Nice.” Readings for Intensive Writers. 5th ed. Comp. Susan Jorgensen. Provo: BYU Academic Publishing, 2007. 170-174. Print.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
GW Hunting Part two! (If you don't see this until you get to class and I'm not there, have no fear: Your first step of today's GW Hunt is to get a copy of the GW list from the Honors advisement Center downstairs!)
I hope Friday's MOA hunt was informative for you. But did you know that there are *more* great works categories than just Art? And that you have to write your GW papers on two different genres of Great Works? Yeah. You probably knew that.
Here's the thing. To write a paper about a great work, you have to, like, *be exposed* to great works. But there are a lot of those. How do you pick?
So here's what I want you to do with our class time this beautiful Halloween Monday (if you are wearing a costume while you do this, I will totally give you extra credit):
1) Obtain a copy of the Great Works list. You can get this from the student advisement center in the basement of the MSRB, or you can download it from online.
2) Next you need to *go* somewhere. Use the GW list to guide you. For example:
If you find that you're drawn to the theater/musical options of the list, go over to the HFAC, find out when stuff is playing; choose something you want to watch; maybe even buy your tickets. (You don't have to see anything *right then,* (unless you want to) but you want to be ready.)
If you want to do something sciency, walk yourself over to one of the science buildings. See if they have any special events planned. Talk to department offices or wander the halls looking for flyers. Find a professor and ask them if you can come observe a class. Make arrangements.
If you're interested in film, ask the Honors advisement center which films from the international cinema count this year. Then find a schedule and choose a time you'll go to a movie.
On the other hand, if you are a lover of literature, you could go to the library and find the book you need to read. Find books *about* the book you need to read. Check them out and start reading.
There are other options, right? I can't remember right now because I'm spacey like that. Consult the list and figure out an appropriate place to go.
3) I need to know that you actually *did* this assignment and didn't just use the hour to do your math homework, so I'm going to need proof. Take a picture of yourself wherever you end up and send it to me along with a half a paragraph about what you did.
You can do this alone or in groups or in pairs or even with your girlfriend or a random stranger. Have fun!
Here's the thing. To write a paper about a great work, you have to, like, *be exposed* to great works. But there are a lot of those. How do you pick?
So here's what I want you to do with our class time this beautiful Halloween Monday (if you are wearing a costume while you do this, I will totally give you extra credit):
1) Obtain a copy of the Great Works list. You can get this from the student advisement center in the basement of the MSRB, or you can download it from online.
2) Next you need to *go* somewhere. Use the GW list to guide you. For example:
If you find that you're drawn to the theater/musical options of the list, go over to the HFAC, find out when stuff is playing; choose something you want to watch; maybe even buy your tickets. (You don't have to see anything *right then,* (unless you want to) but you want to be ready.)
If you want to do something sciency, walk yourself over to one of the science buildings. See if they have any special events planned. Talk to department offices or wander the halls looking for flyers. Find a professor and ask them if you can come observe a class. Make arrangements.
If you're interested in film, ask the Honors advisement center which films from the international cinema count this year. Then find a schedule and choose a time you'll go to a movie.
On the other hand, if you are a lover of literature, you could go to the library and find the book you need to read. Find books *about* the book you need to read. Check them out and start reading.
There are other options, right? I can't remember right now because I'm spacey like that. Consult the list and figure out an appropriate place to go.
3) I need to know that you actually *did* this assignment and didn't just use the hour to do your math homework, so I'm going to need proof. Take a picture of yourself wherever you end up and send it to me along with a half a paragraph about what you did.
You can do this alone or in groups or in pairs or even with your girlfriend or a random stranger. Have fun!
Friday, October 28, 2011
Our First BPR papers! (BPR #1 and BPR #2)
I've posted two papers on Blackboard for all of us to peruse. Since these are our first BPR's let me remind y'all of the guidelines.
1) Read each paper, including the comments I made on them. They're under "Course Materials: BPR papers: Fall 2011." If you're having trouble accessing them, let me know in class and we'll see if we can figure out why.
2) Leave a comment on this post with some revision ideas for the authors, or general responses to the papers. The comment doesn't have to be long, you get credit for commenting no matter how short your response is. I mainly just want you to see some examples of papers in the revision-stage with my comments on them; hopefully this will help you as you write and revise your own papers and give you a sense of how I read/respond to papers.
3) The due date for your comments is technically the last day of class, but the sooner you read and comment, the more helpful you'll be to the authors of the papers. And also, you probably don't want to be stuck reading papers at the end of the semester when you'll be wanting to finish writing your own.
I've kept the authors of these anonymous, but don't use that as an excuse to be overly harsh in your comments. I know we've had some responses to the Critical Analysis papers that are less than productive. If you're going to offer advice for the papers, keep it constructive. That means that instead of saying, "I think you really messed this up," or "This just totally sux," you should say something like, "in your next draft, maybe consider adding..." Be Christlike, y'all. Imagine how you would feel if you were the author reading the comment.
And this is just a random point that came up. Remember, a Critical Analysis paper is a paper that 1)splits things into bits (tools) in order to make a 2) critical judgment. It is NOT a "deeper" look at a text. Nor does it necessarily deal with "what the author *really* meant." It simply looks at tools and how they're successfully or unsuccessfully used for a purpose. Make sense?
1) Read each paper, including the comments I made on them. They're under "Course Materials: BPR papers: Fall 2011." If you're having trouble accessing them, let me know in class and we'll see if we can figure out why.
2) Leave a comment on this post with some revision ideas for the authors, or general responses to the papers. The comment doesn't have to be long, you get credit for commenting no matter how short your response is. I mainly just want you to see some examples of papers in the revision-stage with my comments on them; hopefully this will help you as you write and revise your own papers and give you a sense of how I read/respond to papers.
3) The due date for your comments is technically the last day of class, but the sooner you read and comment, the more helpful you'll be to the authors of the papers. And also, you probably don't want to be stuck reading papers at the end of the semester when you'll be wanting to finish writing your own.
I've kept the authors of these anonymous, but don't use that as an excuse to be overly harsh in your comments. I know we've had some responses to the Critical Analysis papers that are less than productive. If you're going to offer advice for the papers, keep it constructive. That means that instead of saying, "I think you really messed this up," or "This just totally sux," you should say something like, "in your next draft, maybe consider adding..." Be Christlike, y'all. Imagine how you would feel if you were the author reading the comment.
And this is just a random point that came up. Remember, a Critical Analysis paper is a paper that 1)splits things into bits (tools) in order to make a 2) critical judgment. It is NOT a "deeper" look at a text. Nor does it necessarily deal with "what the author *really* meant." It simply looks at tools and how they're successfully or unsuccessfully used for a purpose. Make sense?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)