When it comes to civil rights, there are two pieces of literature commonly discussed. One of these pieces is Henry David Thoreau’s persuasive lecture On the Duty of Civil Disobedience. In this work, Thoreau discusses how one must combat the government with disobedience of unjust laws and positive friction to create change. The second piece is the commonly known article Letter From a Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King Jr. This letter covers the ways in which peaceful protest and standing up against injustice can lead to positive results. Both pieces conveyed a similar message of standing up for what is right. The strongest rhetorical methods which Thoreau uses are allusions, logos, ethos and rhetorical questions. However, King’s use of
Thoreau’s piece was written prior to the civil war, and was in response to the Mexican-American war and slavery in some territories. It was intended for US citizens; more specifically, those who are unhappy with the way the United States government is ran. Thoreau spent a night in jail for his belief when he refused to pay a poll tax, which is a main point in his piece. Similarly, King’s piece was written during the civil rights movement in response to him being incarcerated for ‘parading without a permit’, and countless other racially based incidents. After being arrested, King read a newspaper article, by 7 priests and 2 rabbis, that asked African Americans to stop their protests, so he wrote back to them stating his point of view. Both pieces of work are highly regarded to this
An aphorism is a device that sticks out to the reader because of its short length, and often makes the reader question what they believe by presenting a general truth. It gives the reader time to take a step back and examine how they really feel about the argument at hand. King’s aphorisms add strong pathos in his piece and generally sum up what he has previously stated; they always seem to have purpose where they are used. Thoreau uses them in the same way, but with more logic than emotion. Also, Thoreau’s aphorisms are tossed in between his long, rambling sentences, which does provide clarity as to what he is saying, yet gives them the potential of being lost in the clutter. For example, Thoreau’s use of the aphorism “What is once well done is done forever” is packed between several overdrawn sentences (947; par. 21). The reader -or listener in the case of the original lecture- may just skim past them. In this scenario, it would make no difference if some of these short statements were taken out all together. Ignorance of aphorisms does not occur when reading King’s letter. His aphorisms stick out boldly in the midst of his sentences, and the reader definitely pays more attention than normal when they see
In any argument that you come across, you are going to show the audience (if it’s one person or a larger group of people) that you are right and try to change their mind or make then look at the subject of topic differently. If King did not have the reader on his side it would have been extremely difficult to get the outcome he was looking for. The way that king was able to get the clergymen to listen to him was making himself their equals by saying, “I have honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every Southern state with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia." (701). This was one of the strategies King was able to use. This allowed his audience and fellow clergymen to listen ...
As one of the most controversial condoned actions of the time, Thoreau deeply opposed the possession and treatment of slaves. He demonstrated his transgressions with the government’s approval of slavery through the refusal to pay taxes to the state and the church. Thoreau spoke to the people in order to entice them for the banishment of slavery through civil protest in his speech, he wanted to induce urgency within his message to obtain liberties for all and governmental equity. Through the use of rhetorical questions and repetition, both urgency and importance were conveyed in his speech to protest slavery. Thoreau was able to motivate a different, more impactful response from the audience in using rhetorical questions. Likewise, these are used to purposely prompt the audience to think about the point being made rather than elicit an answer. Further provoking the audience’s exploration into the objection to slavery and war, he expedited his own beliefs in the midst of constructing a commonly rejected belief with an urgent antidote for the people. Thoreau asks of the audience why one would allow unjust laws against others to exist: “Unjust laws exist: … transgress them at once? Why is it not more … provide for reform? Why does it not … minority?” It is these questions that support his purpose for change, he provides the audience with questions to elicit a calculated response that correlates with his beliefs. When Thoreau employs rhetorical questions, he applies several one after another. Therefore, it is this structure that sets the stage for his immediate messages to the audience and their need to respond. Also, just as the Mexican-American war was reiterated throughout the speech, slavery is in constant recognition as well. Like how repetition was used for the war, Thoreau presented the audience with a continual exposure to his
Thoreau and MLK use many similar strategies in their writings. One uses these strategies to make their piece more effective, in my observations of the two writing I come to realize MLK's persuasive letter, Letter from Birmingham Jail was far more effective than Thoreau’s Lecture On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, and here is why. MLK’s article was more effective because he strives towards tugging on the audience's heartstrings rather than the logical side, his repetition was used more effective, and he refers back to his audience. Also, because MLK stayed more on topic and was more passionate about his piece, made his writing a more effective disquisition.
King uses his position of being an American clergy man, devout Christian and a leader of the civil rights movement in order to push for civil rights against racial segregation and prejudices and bring more recognition and light towards African Americans. King uses various words and phrases to achieve the emotions of the audience to sympathize his state and to understand the sacrifices he has made towards the civil rights movement. Unlike Martin Luther King, Thoreau did not rule out using violence against an unjust government. When reviewing the rhetorical appeals of logos, ethos and pathos, King achieved a clear, more concise essay with greater emotional depth and a more relatable personality.
...than Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” because its persuasive techniques have more logical points of views. Using logic people can relate to kings views on a more personal stand point. Thoreau’s standpoint is harder to understand, but shows very valid arguments, because Thoreau uses antithesis and the is government is wrong and the virtuous man is right. Also Thoreau has his moral views and believes the government should follow the man for, the government is “We the People.” Thoreau’s abstract style of writing would have most people in the 20th century era finding difficulty interpreting his paradoxical writing. On the other hand King’s philosophy uses many similes, metaphors, and other negro’s view points. Which all work in harmony to stand together and unite as one big group led by Civil Wrights Leaders with a united message to change the future for all mankind.
King’s letter was influenced by “Apology”, The Bible, and The Tanakh, some of the most important pieces of philosophical literature in history. Socrates in “Apology” is known to be one of the founders of Western philosophy because he was successful in challenging and persuading his audience. And it is because of Socrates, the art of philosophy is so successful today. King used this source to justify disobedience and defend his reason for his actions as an advocate of desegregation. The Bible and The Tanakh were used as Christian references to justify the moral justification of his actions.
On August 28th, 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. spoke at the Lincoln Memorial concerning the Civil Rights movement. His speech resonated throughout the nation as his passionate and commanding voice resounded over the fields that lay before the Lincoln Memorial. Many consider this speech the “epitome of modern Rhetoric.” In his speech, King utilizes the three disciplines of Rhetoric, ethos, pathos, and logos, with finesse and skill.
David Henry Thoreau was born on July 12, 1817 and lived nearly all of his life in Concord, Massachusetts, a small town about twenty miles west of Boston. He was the third child with his older siblings John and Helen and younger sister Sophia. His father John was a shopkeeper. John moved his family to Chelmsford and Boston, following business opportunities. In 1823 the family moved back to Concord where John established a pencil-making concern that eventually brought financial stability to the family. Thoreau’s mother, Cynthia Dunbar, took in boarders from rented out sections of the house to help keep ends meet. Thoreau’s older siblings, Helen and John, Jr were both schoolteachers; when it was decided that their brother should further
In the past in this country, Thoreau wrote an essay on Civil disobedience saying that people make the law and have a right to disobey unjust laws, to try and get those laws changed.
History has encountered many different individuals whom have each impacted the 21 in one way or another; two important men whom have revolted against the government in order to achieve justice are Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. Both men impacted numerous individuals with their powerful words, their words carried the ability to inspire both men and women to do right by their morality and not follow unjust laws. “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” by David Henry Thoreau along with King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, allow the audience to understand what it means to protest for what is moral.
Even though they both achieve their goal of captivating their audiences’ attention, they achieve it differently. Whereas X achieves it by using a conversational style, King achieves it by using a sophisticated style. King has respect to the audience to whom he is addressing; therefore, his rhetoric needs to reflect that respect; the respect that the people from God deserve. In order for him to be taken seriously by the clergymen, he must show them that he is one of them through his writing. We can see how King reflects his respect to them when he writes, “Since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth…” His respect is accompanied with a sophisticated tone which makes him stand out and shows his audience the type of person who he really is. As King writes: “On sweltering summer days and crisp autumn mornings I have looked at the South 's beautiful churches with their lofty spires pointing heavenward.” Over all, his rhetoric is focused, addressed, and specifically used towards his audience; to show the clergymen that they all held the same position and
Martin Luther King and Henry David Thoreau each write exemplary persuasive essays that depict social injustice and discuss civil disobedience, which is the refusal to comply with the law in order to prove a point. In his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” King speaks to a specific audience: the African Americans, and discusses why he feels they should bring an end to segregation. Thoreau on the other hand, in “Civil Disobedience,” speaks to a broader, non-addressed audience as he largely expresses his feelings towards what he feels is an unjust government. Both essays however, focus on the mutual topics of morality and justice and use these topics to inform and motivate their audience to, at times, defy the government in order to establish the necessary justice.
Justice is often misconceived as injustice, and thus some essential matters that require more legal attentions than the others are neglected; ergo, some individuals aim to change that. The principles of civil disobedience, which are advocated in both “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King Jr. to the society, is present up to this time in the U.S. for that purpose.
With the statement, “Most men, even in this comparatively free country, through mere ignorance and mistake, are so occupied with the factitious cares and superfluously coarse labors of life that its finer fruits cannot be plucked by them,” Thoreau is saying that many people in the world, including the United States, are not able to enjoy life because they are too preoccupied with working and earning wealth to buy unnecessary goods. Thoreau believes that men only need four things to survive: fuel, food, shelter, and clothing. However, according to Thoreau, people still strive to obtain more and more unnecessary material goods. To obtain these goods, Thoreau writes, “He has no time to be any thing but a machine,” meaning that men are so busy working to make excessive money that work consumes their entire lives. Thoreau, on the other hand, ignores “factitious cares” such as excessive wealth, furniture, and a large home, in order to enjoy his life and not be forced to live his life as a machine.
When thinking about the transcendental period and/or about individuals reaching out and submerging themselves in nature, Henry David Thoreau and his book, Walden, are the first things that come to mind. Unknown to many, there are plenty of people who have braved the environment and called it their home during the past twenty years, for example: Chris McCandless and Richard Proenneke. Before diving into who the “modern Thoreaus” are, one must venture back and explore the footprint created by Henry Thoreau.