Some of the first colonists in America were puritan. Before setting foot on land the puritan already knew that everyone, from England to the world, would be watching. If they failed, their religion would be mocked. If they failed, the none believers would have all the more reason to shame them. Worst of all, if they failed, their failure would be remembered throughout the ages as idiotic and full of incompetent people. John Winthrop, one of the first puritan, uses the fear of the colonists failure to motivate them to be "good" and succeed.
Throughout the text, John Winthrop tells the colonists that they are being used as an example by God. He says that God has gifted them with this opportunity to prove themselves. He then says that if they do something wrong God will withdraw that gift and let them rot to show everyone else that they were wrong. He lets everyone in the boat now that if they fail, their country, their enemies, and God himself will laugh at them and shame them to the end of time.
What John Winthrop is doing in this speech is what many parents do to their kids: scare them into behaving. Instead of using the threat of getting beat though he instead uses their worst fear: going to hell. Another way this could be seen is that Winthrop is making them nervous by letting them now that they are being watched, which should make them behave as their best self. John is trying to make them be an example through their fear and it worked.
Many people rule others in many ways. Some people rile through the love of their people, others rule through shear power, and John Winthrop choose to rule through fear. The reason many people use these methods is because they work, however, other methods are sometimes more or equally effective. Sometimes it is better to treat your people well and have them listen to you than to scare them into listening.
Wednesday, January 23, 2019
Friday, January 11, 2019
Assertion analysis #9:Henry David Thoreau
Every person has things that they are good at and thing that they aren't good at. People develop these talents at their own pace and eventually reach what can be considered as their best self. However, more often than not, people chase things that they arent meant to be. Instead of pursuing they're own talents, people try to conform to the standards set upon them by others. According Henry David Thoreau, conforming to these standards is useless and should be avoided. Thoreau show this by using imagery to exemplify the struggle between newer and older generations and why the there is no such as the best generation.
Throughout the text, Thoreau tells the audience about all the standards that have been set upon them. Society wants them to be like the previous generations because they are supposedly better. Thoreau contradicts this and proves that it is stupid to try to be like someone else and that it distracts you from finding your true self. He tells the audience that it is better to follow their own pace and path as long as it will lead to their success.
Honestly, there isn't very many things Thoreau uses in this text, it's quite simple but there is two things that get used a lot, and that's metaphors and imagery. The author uses very simple to understand imagery so that the audience can visualize his point and understand what he is saying; which is that the older generation is not better than the new one. An example of this is when he compares a dead lion to a living dog to show the audience that despite the Lion being fiercer, it is powerless if it's dead and the dog is the opposite but is living.
Thoreau made people realize that it is futile to try to fit new generations into the mold of the old ones because they have a different pace to things. Back then everything was super slow and took eons to do but nowadays people live in a society where things get done almost instantly. It is better to use they're own methods than to conform to the old ones; better to be themselves than to be fake.
Monday, December 10, 2018
Assertion Analysis #8:Cotton Mather
Throughout the ages, people have been afraid of those who are different in anyway from themselves. People believed in the purity of white blood and therefore thought that having one drop of black ancestry on you made you impure. This fear manifested in puritan america in the form of the witch hunts. The puritans considered themselves to be the purest worshipers of Christianity. This led to Cotton Mather's "Allegory of Hybridization", which explains, through allegory, how things can become pure and impure.
From beginning, Mather is being extremely literal but slightly symbolic with what he wants to show the audience. He describes a cornfield with three types of corn: red, blue, and yellow corn. he tells the audience that there is only one row of blue/red corn and 7 other rows are described to be completely composed of yellow corn. Then he describes how the "infected" corn makes all the other corn slowly like itself but not completely because the last rows don't turn completely blue and /or red.
Judging from the title, Mather is clearly making an allegory out of this. This is further reinforced by the second word in the title and what it means. Hybridization pretty much means "when two different creatures combine with one from a different species or variety". What Mather seems to be referencing here with the corn is the combination of races and/or beliefs. The yellow corn represents the common majority, while red and blue represent the minority that is asserting itself over the minority. Mather is telling the audience that the minority (witches, blacks, puritans) will slowly corrupt the majority (Christians, whites, Indians) and make them in the image of themselves.
Mather is giving the audience his idea that minorities and the way that they sometimes change the system is bad for the majority. He calls the minority of the corn "infected", to make the audience realize that they should like this change. This makes a lot of sense considering his background of witch hunting. Mather was teaching the puritans to not trust change, and/or anyone different.
From beginning, Mather is being extremely literal but slightly symbolic with what he wants to show the audience. He describes a cornfield with three types of corn: red, blue, and yellow corn. he tells the audience that there is only one row of blue/red corn and 7 other rows are described to be completely composed of yellow corn. Then he describes how the "infected" corn makes all the other corn slowly like itself but not completely because the last rows don't turn completely blue and /or red.
Judging from the title, Mather is clearly making an allegory out of this. This is further reinforced by the second word in the title and what it means. Hybridization pretty much means "when two different creatures combine with one from a different species or variety". What Mather seems to be referencing here with the corn is the combination of races and/or beliefs. The yellow corn represents the common majority, while red and blue represent the minority that is asserting itself over the minority. Mather is telling the audience that the minority (witches, blacks, puritans) will slowly corrupt the majority (Christians, whites, Indians) and make them in the image of themselves.
Mather is giving the audience his idea that minorities and the way that they sometimes change the system is bad for the majority. He calls the minority of the corn "infected", to make the audience realize that they should like this change. This makes a lot of sense considering his background of witch hunting. Mather was teaching the puritans to not trust change, and/or anyone different.
Friday, October 26, 2018
Assertion analysis #5: chief Joseph
During the American expansion of the 19th century, thousands of natives were killed by the Americans and many more died due to their environment. At first natives tried to fight back and reclaim their land, but as shown in the surrender speech titled "I'm tired of fighting" made by chief Joseph in 1877. In his speech, chief Joseph talks about the native's lack of enthusiasm to fight and how they just want to survive. Chief joseph shows us how exhausted of fighting he is through the use of parallelism and lots of pathos.
In the surrender speech, chief Joseph tells the audiencw just how bad the circumstances are for the natives. Many natives are dead, others are freezing to death, children are fleeing and have gone missing, people are starving and many other bad things. He stated that the natives dont have the strength or the will to fight anymore because they're barely surviving as it is. For his last words chief Joseph emphasizes how done he is fighting by stating, "From where the sun now stands I will fight no more."
There are very few devises being used in this powerful speech, One of them being parallelism. At the start of the speech, chief Joseph states he is tired of fighting and tells the audience all of the people whom are dead already. This helps clarify to the audience just how bad the situation is for the natives. However, one of the techniques he uses in this speech a lot is pathos. He tells the audience many things that are supposed to appeal to their sense of empathy and pity. He talks about all the natives that have died, all the children that have perished and the ones that are freezing to death, and the many children that are missing. All of these things together make the audience feel bad for the natives and helps them see his exhaustion.
The surrender speech, "I'm tired of fighting" shows the audience the native struggle to survive in a land that was once theirs but was taken away by people that didn't care about them. Chief joseph does an excellent job of showing the audience this struggle and sadness through his use of pathos and parallelism. This speech helps people be more empathetic towards the natives and understand that they aren't just savages, they are human.
In the surrender speech, chief Joseph tells the audiencw just how bad the circumstances are for the natives. Many natives are dead, others are freezing to death, children are fleeing and have gone missing, people are starving and many other bad things. He stated that the natives dont have the strength or the will to fight anymore because they're barely surviving as it is. For his last words chief Joseph emphasizes how done he is fighting by stating, "From where the sun now stands I will fight no more."
There are very few devises being used in this powerful speech, One of them being parallelism. At the start of the speech, chief Joseph states he is tired of fighting and tells the audience all of the people whom are dead already. This helps clarify to the audience just how bad the situation is for the natives. However, one of the techniques he uses in this speech a lot is pathos. He tells the audience many things that are supposed to appeal to their sense of empathy and pity. He talks about all the natives that have died, all the children that have perished and the ones that are freezing to death, and the many children that are missing. All of these things together make the audience feel bad for the natives and helps them see his exhaustion.
The surrender speech, "I'm tired of fighting" shows the audience the native struggle to survive in a land that was once theirs but was taken away by people that didn't care about them. Chief joseph does an excellent job of showing the audience this struggle and sadness through his use of pathos and parallelism. This speech helps people be more empathetic towards the natives and understand that they aren't just savages, they are human.
Friday, October 12, 2018
Assertion analysis #4: Lame Deer
Native Americans are always portrayed as uncivilized savages, specially before the colonists got here. We're they really savages? They didn't have jails, delinquents, dishonesty. According to lame deer, the native Americans were perfectly fine before the colonists got here and he uses verbal irony, satire and sarcasm to show his audience his point.
Throughout the text lame deer tells the audience about the state in which native Americans were in before the colonists came. He says the native Americans didn't have most of the things that are considered "bad" in a society", such as jails, criminals and property. Although He doesn't say this directly but instead chooses to say it ironically. At the very beggining and at the end of the text it is obvious that he doesn't mean what he is saying about native Americans when he calls them "uncivilized".
Lame Deer is being ironic and sarcastic throughout the whole text. He calls native Americans "uncivilized" because they don't have the bad parts of a society. He calls white people his "brothers" despite the dact they decimated one third of the native American population. What really shows that he is being sarcastic is the first sentence of his conclusion, where he says, "we were in really bas shape before the white men arrived". He says his people were doing badly despite the fact he has been telling the audience what makes native American society better, which proves he is being satirical.
Lame deer isnt trying to put white society down. He isn't trying to make native American society seem perfect either. He is using sarcasm and irony to show the audience how blind we are being for saying native Americans are "uncivilized" which is why the title of the text is "lame deer: seeker of visions". He is telling the audience to seek to see the truth, instead of just believe what we are told.
Throughout the text lame deer tells the audience about the state in which native Americans were in before the colonists came. He says the native Americans didn't have most of the things that are considered "bad" in a society", such as jails, criminals and property. Although He doesn't say this directly but instead chooses to say it ironically. At the very beggining and at the end of the text it is obvious that he doesn't mean what he is saying about native Americans when he calls them "uncivilized".
Lame Deer is being ironic and sarcastic throughout the whole text. He calls native Americans "uncivilized" because they don't have the bad parts of a society. He calls white people his "brothers" despite the dact they decimated one third of the native American population. What really shows that he is being sarcastic is the first sentence of his conclusion, where he says, "we were in really bas shape before the white men arrived". He says his people were doing badly despite the fact he has been telling the audience what makes native American society better, which proves he is being satirical.
Lame deer isnt trying to put white society down. He isn't trying to make native American society seem perfect either. He is using sarcasm and irony to show the audience how blind we are being for saying native Americans are "uncivilized" which is why the title of the text is "lame deer: seeker of visions". He is telling the audience to seek to see the truth, instead of just believe what we are told.
Monday, October 8, 2018
Assertion analysis #3: Trump
Donald Trump, 45th president of the United States, is well known for his ambition with building a wall to keep people out of the country. Despite this ambition he gives an ironic speech called "American dream: perseverance". Throughout the speech he talks about overcoming obstacles, represented by walls. This is verbally ironic because through his campaign he talks about building a wall to stop people from coming to America. Trump tells the audience to overcome their obstacles while using simple diction and literary devises such as anaphora and epiphora to create a simple and ironic, yet interesting speech.
In his speech "American dream: perseverance", Trump talks about the obstacles in life and how we must overcome them. He refers to these obstacles as "walls". Then he tells the audience to overcome those "walls" in many different ways, such as to jump over them, go around them, and to destroy them. At the end of his speech he even contradicts himself by saying to "keep a balance" and then saying "let the positive outweigh the negative". His speech is very simple in diction and some of the things he says are either ironic or nonsensical. One of the main reason the speech is deemed ironic, and a little idiotic, is because he talks about overcoming "walls" even though most of his campaign was based upon building an anti-immigrant wall.
Throughout many parts of his speech he uses epiphora and anaphora. He uses it so much that it is present in more sentences than not.he he uses this to make his words, and therefore his idea, stuck to the reader. The whole text is also very ironic. Trump talks about overcoming walls, but he wants to put up a wall.
Trump uses anaphora and epiphora to get his message to his audience. Along with those literary devises he also uses very simple diction in order to widen his audience. Despite all of this is message is ironic and borderline idiotic considering he tells us to do the exact opposite of what his career stands for, keeping people out.
In his speech "American dream: perseverance", Trump talks about the obstacles in life and how we must overcome them. He refers to these obstacles as "walls". Then he tells the audience to overcome those "walls" in many different ways, such as to jump over them, go around them, and to destroy them. At the end of his speech he even contradicts himself by saying to "keep a balance" and then saying "let the positive outweigh the negative". His speech is very simple in diction and some of the things he says are either ironic or nonsensical. One of the main reason the speech is deemed ironic, and a little idiotic, is because he talks about overcoming "walls" even though most of his campaign was based upon building an anti-immigrant wall.
Throughout many parts of his speech he uses epiphora and anaphora. He uses it so much that it is present in more sentences than not.he he uses this to make his words, and therefore his idea, stuck to the reader. The whole text is also very ironic. Trump talks about overcoming walls, but he wants to put up a wall.
Trump uses anaphora and epiphora to get his message to his audience. Along with those literary devises he also uses very simple diction in order to widen his audience. Despite all of this is message is ironic and borderline idiotic considering he tells us to do the exact opposite of what his career stands for, keeping people out.
Friday, September 14, 2018
Assertion Analysis Blog #2: Barak Obama
On September 7, 2018, the 44th president of the united states, Barack Obama, stood before an audience of a University of Illinois with one purpose, to inspire them to take action and vote. Obama's writing style is very interesting and used by him in a very effective way. Obama uses things such as hope, encouragement, and inspiring words to help his intended audience not only understand his message, but get behind it. Obama uses sophisticated literary devises such as anaphora, tricolons, POV shifts, and allusions to entangle his audience, which in this case was youth and new voters, in his message and call for action.
In his speech, Obama tells us that he is hopeful, encouraged, and that he sees a great awakening of citizenship. He the uses active verbs such as "they're marching", "they're running", and "they're organizing". He does this to show actions and tell the audience what we should be doing. Throughout most of the speech Obama does this in many ways, appealing to the audience's sense of duty, responsibility and patriotism.
Obama uses a lot of the same literary devises many times across the speech. When giving an example, he will almost always use tricolons. When giving an anecdote, he will often use allusions. Another thing he does very often is change point of view. Obama will go from first person, to third person, to second person. He uses those changes in perspective to first unite himself with his audience, then uses third person to address the people individually and make them feel special, unique, and empowered.
In conclusion, Obama uses his set of literary devises such as allusions, anecdotes, tricolons, and changes in perspective in order to get is audience's attention and get them to do what he says. This is very effective, specially in the audience he used it on, because he appeals to pathos and the sense of responsibility in everyone. All of these things are what make Obama an effective speaker.
In his speech, Obama tells us that he is hopeful, encouraged, and that he sees a great awakening of citizenship. He the uses active verbs such as "they're marching", "they're running", and "they're organizing". He does this to show actions and tell the audience what we should be doing. Throughout most of the speech Obama does this in many ways, appealing to the audience's sense of duty, responsibility and patriotism.
Obama uses a lot of the same literary devises many times across the speech. When giving an example, he will almost always use tricolons. When giving an anecdote, he will often use allusions. Another thing he does very often is change point of view. Obama will go from first person, to third person, to second person. He uses those changes in perspective to first unite himself with his audience, then uses third person to address the people individually and make them feel special, unique, and empowered.
In conclusion, Obama uses his set of literary devises such as allusions, anecdotes, tricolons, and changes in perspective in order to get is audience's attention and get them to do what he says. This is very effective, specially in the audience he used it on, because he appeals to pathos and the sense of responsibility in everyone. All of these things are what make Obama an effective speaker.
Friday, August 31, 2018
Assertion analysis #1: Tupac
Tupac was a famous hip hop artist/activist who was well known for using strong language to get his message across. However, in his quote "Rose from concrete" he uses very sophisticated techniques to appeal to his audience. Tupac portrays the struggles of being stereotyped for having originated from poverty with the use of connotation, imagery and metaphors.
In "Rose from concrete", Tupac tells us about a rose that grows from the street and although flawed, is still marvelous and special. Then he chooses to compare this rose to a "ghetto kid". He attempts to showcase the virtues of this ghetto kid but as Tupac states, "all you can talk about is my dirty rose". Tupac does this to show that although a person may be good, people only concentrate on their origins.
Throughout the quote Tupac uses many literary devises that not only helps him get his point through, but also aid in adding depth and meaning to his words. A way that he does this is through the use of connotation and metaphors. The title itself is an example of Tupac's use of connotation; "Rose from the ground", if taken metaphorically, means a Rose growing from concrete, which is a metaphor for beauty from the harshest conditions. On the other hand, if the title is taken literally, Tupac is talking about someone who comes from nothing and tries to achieve more.
Another literary tool used extremely well by this artist was imagery. At the start of the quote Tupac tell us to imagine a rose growing on concrete. This gives you a very obvious mental image. But then he describes set rose in order to add depth and reality to the image. Tupac says the rose is "crooked", and is overall "dirty". This allows us to create a clear picture of what he's trying to portray, he is trying to show us "tainted beauty".
In "Rose from the ground" Tupac uses complex literary devises and simple syntax to show his idea of "tainted beauty" and stereotypes of origins and try to appeal to the audience that these stereotypes are wrong. Through the use of imagery and connotation, Tupac shows us that beauty and talent can come from anywhere. Tupac tells the audience that it is not your origin that makes you who you are, but it is you whom decides who you want to be.
In "Rose from concrete", Tupac tells us about a rose that grows from the street and although flawed, is still marvelous and special. Then he chooses to compare this rose to a "ghetto kid". He attempts to showcase the virtues of this ghetto kid but as Tupac states, "all you can talk about is my dirty rose". Tupac does this to show that although a person may be good, people only concentrate on their origins.
Throughout the quote Tupac uses many literary devises that not only helps him get his point through, but also aid in adding depth and meaning to his words. A way that he does this is through the use of connotation and metaphors. The title itself is an example of Tupac's use of connotation; "Rose from the ground", if taken metaphorically, means a Rose growing from concrete, which is a metaphor for beauty from the harshest conditions. On the other hand, if the title is taken literally, Tupac is talking about someone who comes from nothing and tries to achieve more.
Another literary tool used extremely well by this artist was imagery. At the start of the quote Tupac tell us to imagine a rose growing on concrete. This gives you a very obvious mental image. But then he describes set rose in order to add depth and reality to the image. Tupac says the rose is "crooked", and is overall "dirty". This allows us to create a clear picture of what he's trying to portray, he is trying to show us "tainted beauty".
In "Rose from the ground" Tupac uses complex literary devises and simple syntax to show his idea of "tainted beauty" and stereotypes of origins and try to appeal to the audience that these stereotypes are wrong. Through the use of imagery and connotation, Tupac shows us that beauty and talent can come from anywhere. Tupac tells the audience that it is not your origin that makes you who you are, but it is you whom decides who you want to be.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)