Close Reading #3

50 Years of Progress Should Not Be Erased With One Ruling        

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-al-sharpton/50-years-of-progress-shou_b_1939774.html

Whether affirmative action among higher education institutions is legal or not is an issue that is currently being debated. This is partly due to the upcoming Supreme Court case, Fisher v. University of Texas. Reverend Al Sharpton makes his position on the matter quite clear in his article “50 Years of Progress Should Not Be Erased With One Ruling.” He argues that affirmative action is crucial; that the case must uphold it. Fischer creates this strong message through his use of diction, details, and syntax.

Fischer is careful with his use of diction to frame the issue of affirmative action. First off, he makes sure the upcoming Supreme Court case seem important to everyone, by saying it will have “national repercussions.” This appeal to the people is even more apparent with his use of the word “we.” For example, Fischer writes “we cannot allow,” “it’s vital for us,” and “we cannot blame” throughout the article. Using the pronoun “we” instead of “I” obviously sounds more inclusive, and makes readers feel like they have a connection with the issue, that maybe it’s more important to them than they initially thought. Another important point is how Fischer associates the words “inclusion and diversity” with affirmative action. Obviously, those words make the opposite (getting rid of affirmative action) seem like exclusion/racism/conformity. Since “inclusion and diversity” is what most strive for in this melting pot nation, the diction here paints affirmative action in a very favorable light.

Fischer’s choice of details also helps affirmative action seem like a very important issue. For example, Fischer open with a story about James Meredith, “the first black student to enroll at the [University of Mississippi].” He argues that the progress Meredith made will be erased with this one ruling. This creates anxiety and urgency among readers because almost no one wants to return to the days of segregation. Meredith later includes the fact that there is a danger of “black and Latino students [falling] behind.” This also lends a feeling of urgency to affirmative action because certain ethnic groups are already poorer on average than whites; it would obviously be very bad for these gaps to worsen. Blacks and Latinos being less educated would lead to them being less financially successful, which would lead to these worsening gaps.

Finally, Fischer’s use of syntax helps him create a stronger argument for keeping affirmative action. First off, his sentence structure is well thought-out and scholarly. For example, he writes “That’s precisely why it’s vital for all of us to be there in Washington, D.C. next week and let our voices be heard.” These longer sentences make up the majority of the writing. This style makes Fischer sound much more educated than if he had written his article using sentence fragments or short, choppy phrases. Writing in a more educated style makes Fischer’s argument sound more credible, and therefore stronger. All of this is not to say that there is no sentence variety. There are some shorter sentences interspersed, which helps to emphasize some of Fischer’s bigger points. For example, he writes, “far too much is at stake for us to remain silent.” This comparatively shorter sentence helps his point that people need to take action stand out, which therefore makes Fischer’s message stronger.

Overall, Fischer uses diction, details, and syntax to create a message that is both urgent and powerful. Even if one had no idea what affirmative action was before this article, it would be impossible to come away from reading it without at least believing that it was an important, relevant issue. 

Open Prompt #3

1996. The British novelist Fay Weldon offers this observation about happy endings. "The writers, I do believe, who get the best and most lasting response from their readers are the writers who offer a happy ending through moral development. By a happy ending, I do not mean mere fortunate events -- a marriage or a last minute rescue from death -- but some kind of spiritual reassessment or moral reconciliation, even with the self, even at death." Choose a novel or play that has the kind of ending Weldon describes. In a well-written essay, identify the "spiritual reassessment or moral reconciliation" evident in the ending and explain its significance in the work as a whole.

Most people would think of a man marrying a woman he does not love, and allowing the love of his life to leave, as a very sad ending. This is what occurs in Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence, a story that centers on a man named Newland Archer living in upper class New York society during the 1870s. While this might not be a classic fairytale ending, it can nonetheless be deemed happy. This is due to the moral growth that Newland goes through, and due to the fact that the event highlights the brighter aspects of New York society.

 During the story, Newland is not the most honest person. He has a conflict of interests—he’s married to a proper woman named Mary, yet he is not in love with her. On the other hand, he is extremely attracted to her cousin, Countess Ellen Olenska (who happens to be married to a Polish Count). At one point he lies to Mary about having to go on a business trip, and instead goes to Boston to see Countess Olenska. After a while, Ellen agrees to begin an affair with Newland. However, she then decides that New York Society isn’t for her and makes plans to return to Europe. By this point, Newland has lost all interest in maintaining any form of a relationship with Mary, and informs Ellen that he too is leaving New York to come with her to Europe.

                  

Despite this intention, Newland ultimately decides to stay in New York and remain married to Mary. A huge factor in his decision is his discovery that Mary is pregnant. Obviously, him remaining in New York is not the desired ending. He does not love Mary, even hates her at times. Plus, he forces himself to let go of Ellen, the love of his life, for good. However, it shows a great amount of maturity and moral development. By remaining with Mary, Newland is finally acknowledging that his actions have consequences, and that he has a duty to support his wife and unborn child. After all, nobody forced him to marry Mary. However, it is not until the conclusion of the book that he truly takes responsibility for these actions.

                  

This moral reconciliation is significant because it finally shows the better aspects of the New York society. Throughout The Age of Innocence, the reader becomes disillusioned with the society just as Newland does. After all, Newland feels pressured to marry Mary because of this society. On top of that, Mary, who is seen as a true upper class New Yorker, is extremely boring and unimaginative. However, it is this same society that helps lead Newland to the right choice at the end of the book. In fact, it was Mary who got Ellen to return to Europe (in hopes of separating the two) to remove the temptation. Most of the women in this society knew about these actions, and approved of them. Manipulative, yes, but Newland was manipulative too when he was trying to have an affair with Ellen. Removing this temptation helped lead Newland to his decision to end the affair once and for all. New York society helped lead him to this decision. While the values might be old and the crowd stuffy, the book finally revealed that not all their values need change.

                  

Over all, Newland is a dishonest man, unwilling to take responsibility for most of Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence. While he chooses to let go of the woman he truly loves in the end, the moral growth and reconciliation he finally achieves makes the ending happier. This conclusion is significant to the work as a whole because it highlights the better side of New York Society, after the author has disillusioned readers from it from the very first page. So, the ending might not be a storybook, idealistic ending, but it is happy nonetheless.

Response to Course Material 11/4

If possible, the characters in Death of a Salesman are frustrating me even more than the characters did in The American Dream. First off, the mom tries to pretend everything is okay and puts up with her husband's crap, and the sons are slackers who never grew up. By far and large, however, Willy is the person who I hate the most. I mean, HE FREAKING CHEATED ON HIS WIFE. There is no excuse for that. He's so fragile, and unable to accept the fact that he's not the most rich or successful person in America. It's like he never grew up, which is ridiculous. I mean, he turns down a job offer or two because he feels it's "beneath him." He needed to put his big-boy pants on and DEAL WITH IT. I don't view him as a victim; I believe what happened to Willy was his own fault.

Anyway, I noticed that this play is still very much focused on capitalism and the american dream, just like The American Dream. I guess this is different, though, because the Loman family is struggling financially and aren't tearing children apart. This coursework is starting to feel a little repetitive, though. Even the reading in our textbooks dealt with similar topics. I understand that I'm gaining different perspectives on capitalism, and this idea of the "american dream," but I would like to move on to a different issue, please.