Structure has the ability to make or break a speech regardless of the speaker. There are many ways to structure a speech from topical structure to sequence which has many sub-structures underneath each overall arching structure types. Wallace leaves his audience with a sense of completion through the way Wallace seamlessly connects his early example of the the two young fish and older fish to his overall claim and evidence. He speaks in a conversational tone which appeals to broader audiences, yet his use of rhetorical devices reveals a complex argument that reveals convincing evidence as a certain system. Wallace uses the sequence: narrative structure to tell a story. Story telling is a very effective tool because it can bring a a concept …show more content…
The more I analyze Wallace’s speech I fall more in love with the concept of this is water and feel deeply connected to him as he gives this commencement speech. There is a reason that this speech has an effect on me as well as many of the listeners of this speech. David Foster Wallace’s speech structure and the overall purpose help convey his messages in such a way that ties himself with the students, almost as if he steps out if his shoes and into the shoes of the graduates. Wallace beautifully focuses his central argument around the idea of selfishness that we are all hard wired with – “There is no experience you have had that you are not the absolute center of. The world as you experience it is in front of YOU, or behind YOU, to the left and right of YOU, on YOUR TV or YOUR monitor. And so on” (Paragraph 9). During this portion of the speech his vocal tone changes and his use of enthymemes help his audience realize that this issue of selfishness is strictly our problem and how we must correct that is through “self awareness”. I believe that the tone of the entire speech is vital to understand if one wants to take in Wallace’s ideas and further practice them. I argue that many humans learn through repetition thus Wallace, in his speech, emphasizes his
In the book Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer wrote about Christopher McCandless, a nature lover in search for independence, in a mysterious and hopeful experience. Even though Krakauer tells us McCandless was going to die from the beginning, he still gave him a chance for survival. As a reader I wanted McCandless to survive. In Into the Wild, Krakauer gave McCandless a unique perspective. He was a smart and unique person that wanted to be completely free from society. Krakauer included comments from people that said McCandless was crazy, and his death was his own mistake. However, Krakauer is able to make him seem like a brave person. The connections between other hikers and himself helped in the explanation of McCandless’s rational actions. Krakauer is able to make McCandless look like a normal person, but unique from this generation. In order for Krakauer to make Christopher McCandless not look like a crazy person, but a special person, I will analyze the persuading style that Krakauer used in Into the Wild that made us believe McCandless was a regular young adult.
In addressing the Wellesley High School class of 2012, David McCullough, Jr., uses rhetorical devices such as logos, pathos and literacy devices to argue the uneasy fact to the grads that every person is not special and thus should not try to accomplish everything in life.
Hosseini’s purpose of writing the Kite Runner was to teach the readers the different ethnic groups in Afghanistan. The main character, Amir, is a Pashtun and Pashtuns are Sunni Muslims, then there are Hazara’s that the Pashtuns do not get along with. Hazara’s are not welcomed by the Pashtuns because they are different social classes.
It is common for human beings, as a race, to fall into the comforts of routine – living each day similar to days before and days to come. Unfortunately, it is often too late before one even realizes that they have fallen into this mundane way of living in which each day is completed rather than lived, as explained by David Foster Wallace in “This Is Water”. This commencement speech warned graduating students of the dangers of submitting to our “default settings” of unconscious decisions and beliefs (Wallace 234). However, this dangerous way of living is no new disability of today’s human race. Socrates warned the people of his time: “A life unaware is a life not worth living” and who is to say he wasn’t completely right? A topic of long debate also includes the kind of influence that consciously-controlled thoughts can have on the physical body. A year after Wallace’s speech, neurobiologist Helen Pilcher, published “The New Witch Doctor: How Belief Can Kill”, which explains the influence of the mind and individual beliefs on the quality of one’s life. Together, both authors illustrate how detrimental a life lived unaware of one’s own thoughts and beliefs can be on the body and spirit. And though it is easy to live by
In his letter dated January 30, 1801, Charles Lamb efficiently utilizes a variety of rhetorical techniques to eloquently and politely decline William Wordsworth’s invitation to visit him. Mr. Lamb is an especially well-equipped individual in the field of composition, as indicated by his efficient use of rhetorical devices (Latinate word choice, sentence structure, and other aspects of syntax). He is able to deliver his message of decline politely and eloquently while at the same time avoiding the offense of the reader, Mr. William Wordsworth. He is able to explain why he is unable to accept the offer without giving the impression of being off-put. And he does so with class, sophistication, and skill.
In the book David and Goliath by Malcolm Gladwell, the author investigates the correlation between success and the circumstances involved in achieving such favorable outcomes. The argument that Gladwell forms states that despite what the societal norms are, those with less skill and noticeable setbacks can actually have an advantage over the naturally gifted. He then uses this argument to try and convince others that having talent doesn’t necessarily mean that you will always win or come out on top. To construct this argument and inform others of what he believes, Gladwell uses rhetorical strategies such as comparison/contrast, and studies/statistics to help validate his opinions and strengthen the argument at hand.
In his essay, “Deciderization; 2007,” David Foster Wallace Argues: Part of our emergency is that it’s so tempting to do this sort of thing now, to retreat to narrow arrogance, pre-formed positions, rigid filter, the ‘moral clarity’ of the immature. The alternative is dealing with massive, high- entropy amounts of info and ambiguity and conflict and flux; its continually discovering new areas of personal ignorance and delusion. In sum, to really try to be informed and literate today is to feel stupid nearly all the time, and to need help. That’s about as clear as I can put it. What Wallace is trying to say that the people of today’s world are either Objective or subjective and nothing in between; therefore, the objective type of people are all
In This is Water, Wallace effectively uses logical reasoning and the parable of the religious man and the atheist man to explain how consciousness is a choice, not an unalterable state. To do this, Wallace states that in many cases, “A huge percentage of the stuff that I tend to be automatically certain of is, it turns out, totally wrong and deluded.” Using logical reasoning, Wallace’s own admission reminds his audience that they are also often wrong, as, logically, humans are not perfect and make periodic mistakes. Once he establishes that people can be wrong, he returns to the parable of the two men and claims “…the exact same experience can mean two totally different things to two different people, given those people's two different belief templates and two different ways of constructing meaning from experience.” This idea is familiar to his educated audience, as he claims it is one of the primary foundations of a liberal arts education. Thus, Wallace uses his audienc...
In this essay I am going to compare the similarities and differences between the Terry Eagleton book and the David Wallace’s commencement address. This articles both different and aimed at a different audience, offers an interesting similarity in some aspects and differences in other to one another. The main ideas that we will be looking at are how love and happiness conflict with one another; and how we need to learn what to worship through the meaning of experiences. Then I will relate these concepts to my personal thoughts of how these concepts can be interpreted.
The philosopher is presenting complex image with many aspects to illustrate relatively simple problem which makes his writing appealing only to narrow circle of people usually enough educated to find an absolute truth by themselves. His style is too complicated to be appropriate for masses; complicated vocabulary and syntax that is not used anymore. Plato’s relating to the real problem right in the end of his work giving no time to think about it throughout his argument. Basically what he is doing is explaining the problem and then presenting it. In the end he just leaves the reader all alone without further explanation. David Foster Wallace has also tried to convince people that there is something more to the world that can be seen. However, Wallace’s Commencement Speech is very different from Plato’s allegory. I his speech Wallace is presenting his ideas in a simple manner by short stories that anyone can relate to and because of this it makes him more convincing and persuasive. Right in the beginning of the speech he relates to the main topic by story about fishes that allows his audience to think about the main problem along his speech. This move is undoubtedly more effective because it lets audience focus and contemplate on what is important, on what relates to the main topic during whole
John M. Barry is successful with his use of rhetoric because of his varied forms of the art. He makes the Mississippi River seem not only like a body of brown water in the middle of the continental U.S. but like a whip, a live snake, a living being, and a whirlpool all at the same time. Not only does he build his ethos, he also uses elevated diction, varied forms of sentence structure, or syntax, and different types of figurative language. Because of this, Barry is able to successfully achieve his purpose: communicate his fascination with the complex mechanics of the Mississippi River. The reader ends up being just as fascinated with a river that they may have never seen before but are now just as amazed with.
In the same also different way, the coach in Marshall speech also using pathos when he said “ They don’t know your heart. I do. I’ve seen it. You have shown it to me...You have shown just exactly who you are in here.” This is pathos because the coach bring up how good the team have become. Whether they’re losing or winning, the only thing will matter is no one will have a great heart as the players have. They don’t need to win the championship to show that they’re the best, they just need to show how much passion they have with football to show that they’re the best team. The coach also said: “ When you take that field today, you’ve gotta lay that heart on the line, men. From the souls of your feet, with every ounce of blood you’ve got in your body, lay it on the line until the final.” He doesn’t put pressure on the players that they have to win, he speaked how he feel, he speaked from his heart, he just wanted that when the team take the field today, they just need to put all their effort and passion on the field.
Creative Section Prompt: Write a scene where an “unlovable” character is involved in a surprising or unexpected hobby or appreciation for something.
The subject of death is one that many have trouble talking about, but Virginia Woolf provides her ideas in her narration The Death of the Moth. The moth is used as a metaphor to depict the constant battle between life and death, as well as Woolf’s struggle with chronic depression. Her use of pathos and personification of the moth helps readers develop an emotional connection and twists them to feel a certain way. Her intentional use of often awkward punctuation forces readers to take a step back and think about what they just read. Overall, Woolf uses these techniques to give her opinion on existence in general, and reminds readers that death is a part of life.
He immediately brings himself down to their level. "If anybody feels like perspiring [cough], I 'd advise you go ahead, because I 'm sure going to"(Wallace 1). Like Rowling who in her speech at Harvard in 2008 who had mentioned she was so fearful and had nausea that she lost weight, he poked fun at himself by showing that he was nervous. Unlike a conventional speech however, Wallace seems to bring himself down even further by imploring a didactic story about fish. In his first story he talks about two younger fish who are swimming along and come across an older fish. The older fish says "Morning boys, how 's the water?" however, when the younger fish keep swimming along, one turns to the other and says "What the hell is water?"(Wallace 1). Wallace tells the audience to not see him "wise, old fish". This is unorthodox in comparison because at a commencement, usually they would require a person who is seen as wise to give the graduates words of wisdom. Chiefly, It is important to note that while he is masking the obvious, he is trying to be relatable to the audience. It is at this point in his speech when the conventions start to take a turn, as he tries to guide the graduates to what he is getting