In the passage “Learning to Read and Write”, Frederick Douglas was a very determined young man. As explained, he was a slave that was to be enslaved for the rest of his life. Douglas was also on a mission: a mission to become literate. In this article, Douglas pertains to his audience at all times in several different ways.
One way in which Douglas focused on his audience is by the diction he has used. In the piece, the words used to explain are not complicated in so many different aspects. For example,” When I was sent of errands, I always took my book with me, and by going one part of my errand quickly, I found time to get a lesson before my return.” This sentence, even thought in modern English for that time, it is very understanding. It is also very simple.
Pathos is the appeal to emotion: according to the rhetoric triangle. Even though this piece of literature isn’t for the audience, it stills appeals to them emotionally. By Douglas being a slave that hits home right away. Many people, almost matter no culture, has ancestors who have been enslaved. Blacks, Native Americans, Germans, and even whites as indentured servants. By this being a fact, it draws the audience in because they have something to relate.
Douglas’s main purpose was to inform the audience, and that was achieved. In this work, audience was the main priority. Douglas made them his focus by his diction and by his simplicity.
About Me
Facebook Badge
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
mrs brown made an uh oh...
im real mad.. .. you know how me you and chelsey and the other nice girl were running our mouths today.. well when she took a piece of paper out of my notebook all of my papers fell out.. desirea's baby... aint i woman.. everything.. it should all be on your desk.. so tomorrow i will do 2! of them im real sorry.... i promise will do two... maybe three!
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Phillis Wheatley
Rosie Charles
AP English III
9/15/09
Phillis Wheatley was a slave girl from Boston, who wrote and published her own book of poems. In the poem On Being Brought from Africa to America, Wheatley wrote amazingly. Her mood was calm, yet intense. The meaning was heartfelt, but still strong. The poem itself was simple in writing style, yet elegant in diction, like figurative language.
“Twas mercy brought me from my pagan land,” This is the first line in the poem written by Wheatley. If you break the sentence into modern day English, it might read “It was mercy that brought me from my pagan land”. In this quote, I believe Wheatley was trying to express that God’s mercy and grace brought her from where she once was. She also explains that where she once was, was a place that believed in many Gods (see pagan) The reason why I believe she is referring to God is because words in the poem signify this. Word like: God, Savior, Cain, and angelic train.
The word diabolic means: “in degree of wickedness or cruelty; characteristic of the devil; satanic”. In the quote “Their color is a diabolic dye”, Wheatley is expressing that race, color, and/or ethnicity is an evil covering of the true individual. I believe she brings this into her poem because, as most slaves have, Phillis has surely experienced discrimination. In Wheatley’s day, and modern day, the color of a person’s skin is the main reason why someone would be discriminated against, besides religion.
“May be refined, and join the angelic train. The people that the author is referring to are people of every race, color, and ethnicity. It seems, to me, that the main purpose of this poem is for the author to express their personal views. Her views are that all people, even people as black as Cain, may get into heaven. She uses “as black’, because she is referring to herself. Slaves were not considered worthy enough for basic moral rights, so I’m sure people believed that they didn’t deserve to go to heaven. I believe she uses Cain as the prime example because Cain, according to the bible, was suppose to behold the mark of the beast. Wheatley is trying to concur that anyone can make it to heaven, no matter what.
AP English III
9/15/09
Phillis Wheatley was a slave girl from Boston, who wrote and published her own book of poems. In the poem On Being Brought from Africa to America, Wheatley wrote amazingly. Her mood was calm, yet intense. The meaning was heartfelt, but still strong. The poem itself was simple in writing style, yet elegant in diction, like figurative language.
“Twas mercy brought me from my pagan land,” This is the first line in the poem written by Wheatley. If you break the sentence into modern day English, it might read “It was mercy that brought me from my pagan land”. In this quote, I believe Wheatley was trying to express that God’s mercy and grace brought her from where she once was. She also explains that where she once was, was a place that believed in many Gods (see pagan) The reason why I believe she is referring to God is because words in the poem signify this. Word like: God, Savior, Cain, and angelic train.
The word diabolic means: “in degree of wickedness or cruelty; characteristic of the devil; satanic”. In the quote “Their color is a diabolic dye”, Wheatley is expressing that race, color, and/or ethnicity is an evil covering of the true individual. I believe she brings this into her poem because, as most slaves have, Phillis has surely experienced discrimination. In Wheatley’s day, and modern day, the color of a person’s skin is the main reason why someone would be discriminated against, besides religion.
“May be refined, and join the angelic train. The people that the author is referring to are people of every race, color, and ethnicity. It seems, to me, that the main purpose of this poem is for the author to express their personal views. Her views are that all people, even people as black as Cain, may get into heaven. She uses “as black’, because she is referring to herself. Slaves were not considered worthy enough for basic moral rights, so I’m sure people believed that they didn’t deserve to go to heaven. I believe she uses Cain as the prime example because Cain, according to the bible, was suppose to behold the mark of the beast. Wheatley is trying to concur that anyone can make it to heaven, no matter what.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Huswifery
Rosie Charles
AP Eng III
09/09/09*
Huswifery
In the poem Huswifery, Edward Taylor is a man with many restrictions on his writing. As learned in class, everything but sermons had to be plain in some type of context. Yes, it is true; Taylor was very simple and straight forward. Yet, he still managed to use one specific rhetorical concept: figurative language. While still marinating its “plain-ness’, the poem also reflects upon pathos.
Figurative language is the use of words to describe, sometimes, a completely different meaning. One thing I must point out is that most figurative language can not be taken literally. Readers should not hold on to each and every word to analyze the phrase. “My Words and Actions, that their shine may fill My wayes with glory and thee glorify.” In this phrase, the author is explaining that with the help of his God, his ways and actions will be a positive resemblances of his true self. And he will be glorified by the Lord. Another example of Taylor’s plain yet sophisticated manor in rhetorics is this quote: “then mine apparel shall display before yee That I am Cloathd in Holy robes for glory.” What I understood from this phrase is that Taylor believes that with all this help from God, he can become saved and that his outside appearance will show that he is saved. This can also be worded more simply as He believes that he can be recognized as an “elect” person of the Puritan church.
This entire poem is related and dedicated to the rhetoric form of pathos. As we know pathos is emotions. As a Puritan writer, the purpose is “supposed” to be to influence others of the Puritan way. That is emotion. People are highly emotional about their religion. If they weren’t, Puritanism would have never been created. In this poem, emotions are meant to be set as humble yet intense. Humble because Puritans should be humble when speaking of God, or when Puritan. Intense because, well, its GOD! Puritans love their God with a love so fierce that they believe other religions do not compare.
I believe the poem Huswifery follows the Puritan rules to the teeth. The poem was, for one, about God. Their entire writings are supposed to be about God and God only. Also, the text isn’t too complicated. It is simple because the only complex writings are sermons because they are so intense and heartfelt. Lastly, he uses figurative language. Even though figurative language is a concept of rhetorics, Taylor kept it plain and simple while using metaphor like phrases.
AP Eng III
09/09/09*
Huswifery
In the poem Huswifery, Edward Taylor is a man with many restrictions on his writing. As learned in class, everything but sermons had to be plain in some type of context. Yes, it is true; Taylor was very simple and straight forward. Yet, he still managed to use one specific rhetorical concept: figurative language. While still marinating its “plain-ness’, the poem also reflects upon pathos.
Figurative language is the use of words to describe, sometimes, a completely different meaning. One thing I must point out is that most figurative language can not be taken literally. Readers should not hold on to each and every word to analyze the phrase. “My Words and Actions, that their shine may fill My wayes with glory and thee glorify.” In this phrase, the author is explaining that with the help of his God, his ways and actions will be a positive resemblances of his true self. And he will be glorified by the Lord. Another example of Taylor’s plain yet sophisticated manor in rhetorics is this quote: “then mine apparel shall display before yee That I am Cloathd in Holy robes for glory.” What I understood from this phrase is that Taylor believes that with all this help from God, he can become saved and that his outside appearance will show that he is saved. This can also be worded more simply as He believes that he can be recognized as an “elect” person of the Puritan church.
This entire poem is related and dedicated to the rhetoric form of pathos. As we know pathos is emotions. As a Puritan writer, the purpose is “supposed” to be to influence others of the Puritan way. That is emotion. People are highly emotional about their religion. If they weren’t, Puritanism would have never been created. In this poem, emotions are meant to be set as humble yet intense. Humble because Puritans should be humble when speaking of God, or when Puritan. Intense because, well, its GOD! Puritans love their God with a love so fierce that they believe other religions do not compare.
I believe the poem Huswifery follows the Puritan rules to the teeth. The poem was, for one, about God. Their entire writings are supposed to be about God and God only. Also, the text isn’t too complicated. It is simple because the only complex writings are sermons because they are so intense and heartfelt. Lastly, he uses figurative language. Even though figurative language is a concept of rhetorics, Taylor kept it plain and simple while using metaphor like phrases.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Anne Bradstreet: To My Dear && Loving Husband ^_^
Rosie Charles
To My Dear and Loving Husband
9/3/09
AP English III
In the sensual poem, To My Dear and Loving Husband, Anne Bradstreet is doing what no other woman in her time has. She was loving her husband…publicly. When this poem was written, women were supposed to be pure, sacred, and ultimately silenced. Not Bradstreet. She felt that there wasn’t a thing wrong with loving her “man”, and everyone knowing about it.
To start, Bradstreet was BOLD. Obviously, she did not care about what others thought and/or felt. Anne felt that love is an amazing thing, so why can’t it be shared with others? On this expression is something I do agree upon. Bradstreet’s boldness isn’t just cool though. It’s absolutely phenomenal. The hardest thing to do sometimes is the right thing. The right thing is this situation was to stand up and proclaim her rights as a human being, and a woman. In my opinion, if anyone should have rights it should be women, but that is beside the point. The point is that she did stand up. She was different. She was bold.
Secondly, this poems appeals the all the angles of the rhetoric triangle in different ways. The main point is the appeal to pathos. The whole science of poetry is based upon feelings and emotions: pathos. Anne expresses emotions of not only love, but of passion, which I’m sure is NOT allowed. I believe Anne’s purpose was to express her feelings, whether it was directly to her husband or to the public.
“Nor ought but love from thee, give recompense. My love is such that rivers cannot quench.” This is a prime example of the figurative language used in this poem. Most of all poems have figurative language within them. Just as emotions were, figurative language is an important part of poetry. One thing I also noticed is that Bradstreet actually knew the correct way to write a poem. This gives me sense to believe that she had a purpose. She was not writing just to be writing.
To conclude, Anne Bradstreet isn't only an great example of women standing up for themselves, but she is an example of women with a purpose. Anne made herself stand out and made herself different. Not because she wanted to be a rebel though, but because she felt that she didn’t have limits and restraints. She also was just writing to her husband. Nothing is wrong with that.
To My Dear and Loving Husband
9/3/09
AP English III
In the sensual poem, To My Dear and Loving Husband, Anne Bradstreet is doing what no other woman in her time has. She was loving her husband…publicly. When this poem was written, women were supposed to be pure, sacred, and ultimately silenced. Not Bradstreet. She felt that there wasn’t a thing wrong with loving her “man”, and everyone knowing about it.
To start, Bradstreet was BOLD. Obviously, she did not care about what others thought and/or felt. Anne felt that love is an amazing thing, so why can’t it be shared with others? On this expression is something I do agree upon. Bradstreet’s boldness isn’t just cool though. It’s absolutely phenomenal. The hardest thing to do sometimes is the right thing. The right thing is this situation was to stand up and proclaim her rights as a human being, and a woman. In my opinion, if anyone should have rights it should be women, but that is beside the point. The point is that she did stand up. She was different. She was bold.
Secondly, this poems appeals the all the angles of the rhetoric triangle in different ways. The main point is the appeal to pathos. The whole science of poetry is based upon feelings and emotions: pathos. Anne expresses emotions of not only love, but of passion, which I’m sure is NOT allowed. I believe Anne’s purpose was to express her feelings, whether it was directly to her husband or to the public.
“Nor ought but love from thee, give recompense. My love is such that rivers cannot quench.” This is a prime example of the figurative language used in this poem. Most of all poems have figurative language within them. Just as emotions were, figurative language is an important part of poetry. One thing I also noticed is that Bradstreet actually knew the correct way to write a poem. This gives me sense to believe that she had a purpose. She was not writing just to be writing.
To conclude, Anne Bradstreet isn't only an great example of women standing up for themselves, but she is an example of women with a purpose. Anne made herself stand out and made herself different. Not because she wanted to be a rebel though, but because she felt that she didn’t have limits and restraints. She also was just writing to her husband. Nothing is wrong with that.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God
Rosie Charles
AP ENG III
Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God
This article/passage, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, there is a complete and utter appeal to pathos, which is emotion. This whole article’s purpose, it seems, is to ignite emotions in people who reads and/or hears the speech/article. In this article, two different kinds of emotions seem to ignite. The emotions are both positive and negative. Certain things in this article, readers would totally agree upon. With other items in the piece of literature, most people would disagree.
There are some very positive things to this article. The most positive and repetitive piece of information was that God was “The Almighty”. Most people that believe in God and Jesus Christ know and believe that God is the one and only God. They know that God is like no other and that no other force and even challenge God. That is exactly what is expressed in this passage. For example, “…if your strength were ten thousand times greater that it is, yea, ten thousand times greater than the strength of the stoutest, sturdiest devil in hell, it would be nothing to withstand or endure it.” “It” meaning the power and grace of God.
“Whose wrath it is” it is the wrath of the infinite God.” This is a quote that myself, and other readers, would disagree about. In the passage, through everything God is angry. This seems very wrong because, according to the bible, God is a loving, caring, and forgiving God. Yes, he has a wrath. Yet, the wrath is only taken upon someone when God becomes angry. In this article God is mad at all times, it seems. Another thing that spikes up negative emotions is that the writer believes that God shall “laugh and mock.” This is very controversial for the same reasons as the fact above. My last example that the writer spikes bad emotions is that believing that God shows no mercy. That is not true. No one on the earth is perfect, which makes us all sinners. If God Almighty had no mercy, wouldn’t we all been in hell by time we sinned the very first time?
This article is a wonderful article for analysis and annotation. For one is it spikes a lot of emotion. But not just any kind of emotion. It brings out both agreement and disagreement. Even though I disagree, I admire the writer. Most writers can’t establish two completely opposite emotions in one passage. Yet, at the same time, I somewhat “despise” the writer because some information that was stated just contradicts itself, and doesn’t make since at all. So what side are you on?
AP ENG III
Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God
This article/passage, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, there is a complete and utter appeal to pathos, which is emotion. This whole article’s purpose, it seems, is to ignite emotions in people who reads and/or hears the speech/article. In this article, two different kinds of emotions seem to ignite. The emotions are both positive and negative. Certain things in this article, readers would totally agree upon. With other items in the piece of literature, most people would disagree.
There are some very positive things to this article. The most positive and repetitive piece of information was that God was “The Almighty”. Most people that believe in God and Jesus Christ know and believe that God is the one and only God. They know that God is like no other and that no other force and even challenge God. That is exactly what is expressed in this passage. For example, “…if your strength were ten thousand times greater that it is, yea, ten thousand times greater than the strength of the stoutest, sturdiest devil in hell, it would be nothing to withstand or endure it.” “It” meaning the power and grace of God.
“Whose wrath it is” it is the wrath of the infinite God.” This is a quote that myself, and other readers, would disagree about. In the passage, through everything God is angry. This seems very wrong because, according to the bible, God is a loving, caring, and forgiving God. Yes, he has a wrath. Yet, the wrath is only taken upon someone when God becomes angry. In this article God is mad at all times, it seems. Another thing that spikes up negative emotions is that the writer believes that God shall “laugh and mock.” This is very controversial for the same reasons as the fact above. My last example that the writer spikes bad emotions is that believing that God shows no mercy. That is not true. No one on the earth is perfect, which makes us all sinners. If God Almighty had no mercy, wouldn’t we all been in hell by time we sinned the very first time?
This article is a wonderful article for analysis and annotation. For one is it spikes a lot of emotion. But not just any kind of emotion. It brings out both agreement and disagreement. Even though I disagree, I admire the writer. Most writers can’t establish two completely opposite emotions in one passage. Yet, at the same time, I somewhat “despise” the writer because some information that was stated just contradicts itself, and doesn’t make since at all. So what side are you on?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)