The Minister’s Black Veil is a kind of eerie tale about a pastor named Mr. Hooper. He was well known and widely loved. Nathaniel Hawthorne depicts this story very well and with a lot of description. He gives you a good idea of what the people at the time really thought about a religious leader in the Puritan community doing something so taboo. I’m going to go over how he used his diction, rhetoric, and other ways that he appealed the audience.
The era in which this story takes place is very important in English and well as History. Many historical events happened at this time. Many of those historical events have to do with literature by different authors and writers. People in this area are mainly Puritans, a largely religious and tightly knit society. When this Mr. Hooper comes out and displays himself with a black veil over his face, it creates quite a ruckus and disturbance among the religious community. Hawthorne does a good job of explaining and describing the effect it has on his congregation. It sends people into a bit of a fit.
With the community being Puritan, religious plays a major role in their everyday life and society. By the clergy covering his face in such a terrible and depressing way, it throws everybody into a fit. Nobody knows why he is wearing the veil. Mr. Hooper does not talk to anybody about it, nor tell them as to why he wears it. It remains a sacred object of sorrow and terrible things that he is shading himself and/or others from. He refused to ever take it off until the end of his life, which causes him to lose his wife. Adding these little things proved the seriousness and the devotion that Mr. Hooper had towards this new notion of his. As this was well depicted by Nathaniel Hawthorne.
The author put a true sense of creepiness on the story by using certain words to describe how Mr. Hooper looked and appeared to other people. Also by using certain diction to describe the vibe he gave when he came in a room. He described him as “walking with the souls of those he laid to rest.” Hawthorne also described him as being cold, pale, and with a melancholy smile at all times. This makes the people wonder what is going on through his head and continues to press the questions of why is he wearing the black veil.
The author could have possibly appealed the different ethos, pathos, and even logos in this story. The audience’s ethos could have been appealed to by the fact that Hawthorne mentioned different actions that Mr. Hooper did and how everybody in the community reacted. Mr. Hooper didn’t exactly say or do anything but walk into a room and have his presence known, and it effected how people were acting. This described the scene and vibe that was being given off. Pathos could have played a part with people having sympathy for the clergyman. He was just living what he felt he needed and had to do with his life to take responsibility for the sorrow and terrible things of others’ souls. He felt he was doing the right thing, while other people thought he was going crazy and a mad man. Nathaniel partially brought logos into the picture by being realistic about the situation when it comes to religion and how the society was. With them being a society focused mainly on religious and beliefs, they would all have reacted in the same way.
All in all, Nathaniel Hawthorne did a good job of depicting this tale of his. He applied his personal sense of diction as well as good use of rhetoric to appeal to most audiences. It keeps you interested and makes you think more into it than just a plain old story. In a way, it makes you want to think about what it would be like if you were there and how you would act if you were in the shoes of the people there. It get’s the audience to think, and that’s exactly what the author would want. He wants them to consider different views and options when it comes to perceiving his story.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
The Story of An Hour
Kate Chopin tells a fairly simple tale of a woman who has lost her husband in a train accident. She has strange, mixed feelings throughout the process of her grieving and is never quite sure what to make of it. The author makes good use of this and turns it into interesting diction and dialect. It has an eerie feel to it, as would it actually if you were there. I will go over these things and try to explain them in detail for your better understanding.
When the woman (Mrs. Mallard) was first informed of her husband’s death, she immediately started weeping. She didn’t go into a state of shock or utter disbelieve as most people would upon receiving this kind of news. She went directly into her room after that and stayed in there alone. This shows that she already had different feelings than others might have and that she might not have wanted anybody to see this and get suspicious. This appeals to the audience’s ethos because of how she acts and how it could make the viewer feel and/or think about her. The way that Chopin describes that exhaustion “haunted her body and seemed to reach into her soul” makes it seem very eerie and like there is something more that you want to know to better understand this feeling.
Mrs. Mallard would sit by herself in an armchair staring outside of the window at the tree tops and roofs of houses. When the weeping subsided, the author describes a different sensation coming over her. She feels like it is going against her will and that she is “powerless to beat it back with her will.” Chopin helped push the audience’s thoughts along with curiously by stating that one word was uttered out of her mouth. “Free, free, free!” Then it was followed by how she had a “vacant stare and look of terror in her eyes” which implies that she was surprised to have these feelings a well as anybody else observing this would be.
Why did Mrs. Mallard think this way? What made her think that she was “free”? Appealing to the viewer’s pathos, by describing how she is released by any kind of physical or spiritual bond that they may have shared in the physical world, makes them feel attached to the story in some ways. Those ways may be from personal experience or knowing of somebody that has dealt with something similar in the past or even going through this right now.
Now getting to a big part of the story, “the joy that kills.” This could be taken many different ways. In this case, the author describes it by showing that the woman has been hurt, discouraged, and ultimately overcome her feelings of sudden terror. She has become somewhat satisfied with what the rest of her life is going to be. When she suddenly and unsuspectingly sees her husband come in through the door, she is sudden awe and shock that (due to her preexisting heart condition) she had a heart attack. She was so joyous to see her husband alive, but yet everything she had been thinking about and looking forward to had been crushed at the very instant. It was a big blow that was too much Mrs. Mallard to handle, as Chopin describes.
All in all, the “joy that kills” seems to be some what of bitter-sweet type of phenomena. It is a sudden rush of joy and pain all at the same time that one’s mind and body might not have the complexity to handle. These types of things must be lead into a bit more slowly. Kate Chopin describes it in ways that are vivid and strong appealers to pathos and even ethos. The mood of the scene makes people have sympathy, empathy, and even sadness and/or anger (pathos). But the way that she reacts, thinks and what she says (ethos) allows people to see a new perspective and side of the story that many people may not even recognize on their own.
When the woman (Mrs. Mallard) was first informed of her husband’s death, she immediately started weeping. She didn’t go into a state of shock or utter disbelieve as most people would upon receiving this kind of news. She went directly into her room after that and stayed in there alone. This shows that she already had different feelings than others might have and that she might not have wanted anybody to see this and get suspicious. This appeals to the audience’s ethos because of how she acts and how it could make the viewer feel and/or think about her. The way that Chopin describes that exhaustion “haunted her body and seemed to reach into her soul” makes it seem very eerie and like there is something more that you want to know to better understand this feeling.
Mrs. Mallard would sit by herself in an armchair staring outside of the window at the tree tops and roofs of houses. When the weeping subsided, the author describes a different sensation coming over her. She feels like it is going against her will and that she is “powerless to beat it back with her will.” Chopin helped push the audience’s thoughts along with curiously by stating that one word was uttered out of her mouth. “Free, free, free!” Then it was followed by how she had a “vacant stare and look of terror in her eyes” which implies that she was surprised to have these feelings a well as anybody else observing this would be.
Why did Mrs. Mallard think this way? What made her think that she was “free”? Appealing to the viewer’s pathos, by describing how she is released by any kind of physical or spiritual bond that they may have shared in the physical world, makes them feel attached to the story in some ways. Those ways may be from personal experience or knowing of somebody that has dealt with something similar in the past or even going through this right now.
Now getting to a big part of the story, “the joy that kills.” This could be taken many different ways. In this case, the author describes it by showing that the woman has been hurt, discouraged, and ultimately overcome her feelings of sudden terror. She has become somewhat satisfied with what the rest of her life is going to be. When she suddenly and unsuspectingly sees her husband come in through the door, she is sudden awe and shock that (due to her preexisting heart condition) she had a heart attack. She was so joyous to see her husband alive, but yet everything she had been thinking about and looking forward to had been crushed at the very instant. It was a big blow that was too much Mrs. Mallard to handle, as Chopin describes.
All in all, the “joy that kills” seems to be some what of bitter-sweet type of phenomena. It is a sudden rush of joy and pain all at the same time that one’s mind and body might not have the complexity to handle. These types of things must be lead into a bit more slowly. Kate Chopin describes it in ways that are vivid and strong appealers to pathos and even ethos. The mood of the scene makes people have sympathy, empathy, and even sadness and/or anger (pathos). But the way that she reacts, thinks and what she says (ethos) allows people to see a new perspective and side of the story that many people may not even recognize on their own.
Desiree's Baby
It may be a point of conflict depending on how you view the topic, but back in the south when slavery was around race was a very big issue (of course). People being confused about who their parents were, where they were front, and did they have any African American blood in them. Such theories have come about such as the “One-Drop” rule by Thomas Jefferson, which states that if a person has even one drop of “black” blood in them they are considered black and can be treated thusly. People feel very differently about them and especially now since that era is long and gone. I will go over a few ways that these things were an issue as well as what “Desiree’s Baby” was trying to prove.
The author, Kate Chopin, wrote about a white woman who had a child with a white man, or so he thought. The child was born and appeared to be white but eventually grew to have darker skin. This appalled the mother and the father. The father automatically assumed that it was the mother that was partially black because he was supposedly guaranteed to be fully white, being a “high head” at the plantation they stayed at. The mother refused to believe that it was her that was partially black but also didn’t accuse the father. She was just confused and didn’t know what to do with herself or the baby.
Now that you know the main part of the story, I’ll go over how the author used certain diction and rhetoric to get your attention and appeal to you in certain ways. She described how the father was so excited to have a child, specifically a son, so that they could carry on the family name. The mother was excited and was so happy to have a healthy baby, which the Chopin describes when she says “”And the way he cries,” went on Desiree, “is deafening. Armand heard him the other day as far away as La Blanche’s cabin.”” This shows that they were excited over something that most parents now-a-days find annoying and would much rather not have to deal with. But they take pride and joy in the fact that the child is healthy and doing well.
When the child’s skin began to darken and they determined that he was mixed with black, they were shocked couldn’t figure out what was going on, basically in disbelief and awe. The author described their reacting very vividly and precisely by using such phrases as “The blood turned like ice in her veins” and “a clammy moisture gathered upon her face.” The father (Armand) felt that he had been “dealt cruelly and unjustly” by God. This implies that he feels that he did nothing to deserve such a “punishment” as receiving a black child. This appeals to people’s pathos by having them feel sympathy for the child and the mother. Armand became bitter and cold towards the mother (Desiree) after this all was discovered. The author proves that Armand wants nothing to do with her since she is thought to have some black somewhere along her bloodline now.
The author makes good work and points of all of this drama. What makes it even better and more intense is that Armand was a slave owner and once he thought this way of his wife, he immediately turned cold towards her and didn’t want anything to do with her. That makes people think about how it really was back in slavery times and how strongly people felt about such issues. Chopin did a good job of proving this with facts and quotes and by making it into a very personal and intimate. This lets people feel like they are personally peering into the lives of these people and looking in on issues that they deal with, as well as allowing them to think about how this is only one situation out of many that have come out in this time.
The author, Kate Chopin, wrote about a white woman who had a child with a white man, or so he thought. The child was born and appeared to be white but eventually grew to have darker skin. This appalled the mother and the father. The father automatically assumed that it was the mother that was partially black because he was supposedly guaranteed to be fully white, being a “high head” at the plantation they stayed at. The mother refused to believe that it was her that was partially black but also didn’t accuse the father. She was just confused and didn’t know what to do with herself or the baby.
Now that you know the main part of the story, I’ll go over how the author used certain diction and rhetoric to get your attention and appeal to you in certain ways. She described how the father was so excited to have a child, specifically a son, so that they could carry on the family name. The mother was excited and was so happy to have a healthy baby, which the Chopin describes when she says “”And the way he cries,” went on Desiree, “is deafening. Armand heard him the other day as far away as La Blanche’s cabin.”” This shows that they were excited over something that most parents now-a-days find annoying and would much rather not have to deal with. But they take pride and joy in the fact that the child is healthy and doing well.
When the child’s skin began to darken and they determined that he was mixed with black, they were shocked couldn’t figure out what was going on, basically in disbelief and awe. The author described their reacting very vividly and precisely by using such phrases as “The blood turned like ice in her veins” and “a clammy moisture gathered upon her face.” The father (Armand) felt that he had been “dealt cruelly and unjustly” by God. This implies that he feels that he did nothing to deserve such a “punishment” as receiving a black child. This appeals to people’s pathos by having them feel sympathy for the child and the mother. Armand became bitter and cold towards the mother (Desiree) after this all was discovered. The author proves that Armand wants nothing to do with her since she is thought to have some black somewhere along her bloodline now.
The author makes good work and points of all of this drama. What makes it even better and more intense is that Armand was a slave owner and once he thought this way of his wife, he immediately turned cold towards her and didn’t want anything to do with her. That makes people think about how it really was back in slavery times and how strongly people felt about such issues. Chopin did a good job of proving this with facts and quotes and by making it into a very personal and intimate. This lets people feel like they are personally peering into the lives of these people and looking in on issues that they deal with, as well as allowing them to think about how this is only one situation out of many that have come out in this time.
Sojourner Truth
People even now-a-days edit essays, papers, and interviews before they are published. Whether it is for what they think the public will want, or for their own personal satisfaction. Or it could possibly be just so that the audience better understands the work. I will explain why they might have changed the way that Sojourner Truth’s speech was edited so. How it may have appealed to certain people or just personal satisfaction.
In the original, Sojourner used mostly southern slang of the time. Of course the people who both surround her and live in that region will clearly understand what she means. Other people might not though. They may be completely confused and not able to understand the subject. This can cause confusion and many misunderstandings. The editor may have wanted to avoid all of these confusions and such things. That may have been the reason that they edited it so.
Another thing that they could have possibly thought is that nobody would take it seriously if they began to read a paper and saw that it was all completely in southern slave slang. By changing it to more proper terms, the author may have thought that they were allowing it to appeal to more audiences than it would by leaving it original. Choosing certain words over others allowed the editor to greatly control the audience and the way the audience perceived the message.
In the original speech, Sojourner Truth uses a lot of different comparisons to what other people say to prove her point. She compares her personal experiences to what people have said to her. For example, when she said that she can eat as much as a man and work as much as a man, if not more. This was a good use of hard facts that Truth used to help back up her side of the story and how she views everything. It can help people to actually see the other side of the story so that they are not just one-sided on the topic. This can force people to be open-minded and this gives room for other’s opinions to get inside and alter their judgment.
Another thing that she did was use that fact that somebody else brought religion into it. Many people were very passionate about religion back then and when the one man said, “Women can’t have as many rights as a man, because Jesus Christ was a man.” She stated that Christ came from God and a woman (the virgin Mary). Since, like I said, religion was a big part of the community and society back then I’m sure it influenced many people greatly. This may have been more comprehensible after it was changed to the more proper version in later years. Editing it may have made it more understandable to the certain crowds and audiences. Also, Sojourner Truth’s was of putting it was just her way of speaking. Without proper education or anything like that, she learned her form of language from her peers. So maybe when they edited it, they thought that they were only doing truth a favor and serving her justice by “transforming” what she has previously said and making it more understandable to the audience.
Women deserve equal rights as men do, and Truth did a very good job of standing firm and strong on this point. She stood strong on her opinions, facts, and points. She used good facts and evidence and appealed to all of the things that the people would have wanted to hear if they were on the fence. The editor may have edited the text in such way to appeal to the current times audience and may have been looking back into history. Back in the time when this was written, it probably made more sense to the people of the south than it would have the edited way. It made the points and helped dictate how different people perceived the message in different ways.
In the original, Sojourner used mostly southern slang of the time. Of course the people who both surround her and live in that region will clearly understand what she means. Other people might not though. They may be completely confused and not able to understand the subject. This can cause confusion and many misunderstandings. The editor may have wanted to avoid all of these confusions and such things. That may have been the reason that they edited it so.
Another thing that they could have possibly thought is that nobody would take it seriously if they began to read a paper and saw that it was all completely in southern slave slang. By changing it to more proper terms, the author may have thought that they were allowing it to appeal to more audiences than it would by leaving it original. Choosing certain words over others allowed the editor to greatly control the audience and the way the audience perceived the message.
In the original speech, Sojourner Truth uses a lot of different comparisons to what other people say to prove her point. She compares her personal experiences to what people have said to her. For example, when she said that she can eat as much as a man and work as much as a man, if not more. This was a good use of hard facts that Truth used to help back up her side of the story and how she views everything. It can help people to actually see the other side of the story so that they are not just one-sided on the topic. This can force people to be open-minded and this gives room for other’s opinions to get inside and alter their judgment.
Another thing that she did was use that fact that somebody else brought religion into it. Many people were very passionate about religion back then and when the one man said, “Women can’t have as many rights as a man, because Jesus Christ was a man.” She stated that Christ came from God and a woman (the virgin Mary). Since, like I said, religion was a big part of the community and society back then I’m sure it influenced many people greatly. This may have been more comprehensible after it was changed to the more proper version in later years. Editing it may have made it more understandable to the certain crowds and audiences. Also, Sojourner Truth’s was of putting it was just her way of speaking. Without proper education or anything like that, she learned her form of language from her peers. So maybe when they edited it, they thought that they were only doing truth a favor and serving her justice by “transforming” what she has previously said and making it more understandable to the audience.
Women deserve equal rights as men do, and Truth did a very good job of standing firm and strong on this point. She stood strong on her opinions, facts, and points. She used good facts and evidence and appealed to all of the things that the people would have wanted to hear if they were on the fence. The editor may have edited the text in such way to appeal to the current times audience and may have been looking back into history. Back in the time when this was written, it probably made more sense to the people of the south than it would have the edited way. It made the points and helped dictate how different people perceived the message in different ways.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
