Sandburg Vs Carson

657 Words2 Pages

Carl Sandburg’s Chicago and Rachel Carson’s A Fable for Tomorrow are literatures that both reflect upon two different type of cities, yet their illustration of their city is entirely different. The authors used imagery different tones, and rhetorical appeals to portray their ideas. Chicago is optimistic and celebratory, viewing the city of Chicago as exciting. On the other hand, A Fable for Tomorrow renders a devastating picture of the land, through bleak imagery, of a small town that does not exist but has thousands of counterparts in America. While both authors reflected their passage upon two different type of cities, they had different approaches and opinions about their cities. Carson shows the negativity towards the effects of pesticide …show more content…

Sandburg keeps the tone optimistic and shows more positive aspects to Chicago than Carson’s town. Sandburg’s poem is about the hidden strengths that lie in the city, which includes the industries, railroad system, and most importantly, their confidence. Even though Sandburg portrays the negatives and positives, he sees all of them as an opportunity to grow. An example of having a negative quality seen by Sandburg as exciting is when he explains “Fierce as a dog with tongue lapping for action, cunning as a savage pitted against the wilderness.” Sandburg’s poem is filled with imagery, as almost every other line shows what aspects of Chicago make it great. For example, Sandburg uses cacophony to explain that the city is, “Bareheaded’, Shoveling, Wrecking, Planning, Building, breaking, rebuilding.” Sandburg tries to capture the idea that Chicago is a superior city compared to other towns, especially the type of towns that Carson is …show more content…

For example, Sandburg expresses that Chicago is filled with gun crimes by writing the stanza, “And they tell me you are crooked and I answer: Yes, it is true I have seen the gunman kill and go free to kill again.” The gun crimes, or any other crimes, contribute to the negative aspects of Chicago. Carson’s essay has much more negativity than positive elements. Carson implemented more gloomy, dark tones that help show the devastation of the town. The dark tone could be interpreted as pathos because the author tries to make the audience feel ill to persuade them to stop giving harm to the environment. Another example of the dark tone would be when Carson said, “Even the streams were now lifeless. Anglers no longer visited them, for all the fish had died.” Carson uses words like ‘lifeless’ and ‘died’ to contribute to the gloomy, dark tone which, overall, took upon the negative aspects of the

Open Document