A Modet Proposal (rewrite) Precis

Jonathan Swift wrote a satirical persuasive essay “A Modest Proposal” (1729) to claim that people need to focus on the ever pressing issue of the overpopulation and poverty of Ireland. Swift illuminates the necessity for change through the use of satire; he used a persona that deeply believed, and was persuading for, the benefits of feeding the impoverished one year olds of the nation to the elite class, solving not only the overpopulation rate, but also their economy. Jonathan Swift’s purpose in this piece is to persuade readers, not to follow his persona’s example of killing babies, but to use only Irish manufactured goods (to boost the economy), to join together (to boost nationalism), and to instill honesty in shopkeepers; this would improve Ireland as a whole and bring it out of it’s current state. Swift’s audience is fairly narrow; he is speaking directly to the indifferent people of Ireland (he uses the word “our” as in the Irish) to tell them that they need to focus on and help their Nation.

Why I Went to the Woods (rewrite) Precis

David Thoreau, a philosopher who spent roughly two years living “simply”, wrote “Why I Went to the Woods” (1851); he claims that living simply is the only way to fully experience life. Thoreau illuminates the unnecessary qualities of what we consider necessary in life through rhetorical questions "Why should we live with such hurry and waste of life?”(paragraph 3) parallelisms “Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity!"(paragraph 2), and varying sentence lengths to emphasize ideas “It lives too fast.”(paragraph 2). He emphasizes the need for simplicity in life to encourage his readers to break out from their normal detailed life to experience everything around them; only in this way will they truly live. Thoreau's audience is broad; he is reaching out to the entire world’s population because these are the people that are bogged down with a cluttered living routine and cluttered life; they need to simplify not only their possessions, but also what they consider necessary and important in their actions. 

Why Do We Crave Horror Movies (re-write) Precis

Stephen King's, a science fiction/horror writer, expository essay entitled “Why We Crave Horror Movies” (1982) asserts that humanity is mentally ill. King renders three reasons for why we go to the horror films to prove that “If we share a brotherhood of man, then we also share an insanity of man”; We go to show that we are not afraid, to become children again, to “give exercise to” or appeal to the worst inside of ourselves. King uses these reasons to justify his claim that everyone has a piece of insanity in them, some are simply able to hide it better.  “Why We Crave Horror Movies” is addressed to “you”; it speaks to the reader on a personal level, but in a larger sense it is actually addressing all of humanity and diagnosis them with the mental instability that resides within each of us.

Kincaid vs. Orwell (Revision of the Revised) Draft # 3

“On Seeing England for the First Time” (Jamaica Kincaid) and “Shooting an Elephant” (George Orwell) are both centered around the negative effects of British Imperialism. Both Kincaid and Orwell use techniques such as anecdotes, and their papers are similar in in that they are primary sources. They differ, however, in their point of view and subtlety in expressing their views of British Imperialism. 

           Kincaid and Orwell were both at the scene of what they were writing about. This affects how emotionally invested they are in their pieces. Kincaid, as a young girl, was raised in Antigua, the setting of her essay. She was taught to revere the British Empire, but as she grew up and traveled she realized that her and her neighbors were actually getting brainwashed. George Orwell could not maintain his grades so he dropped out of school and enrolled to go to Burma as a police officer. It was there that Orwell discovers his distaste for British Imperialism. Kincaid was one of the oppressed whereas Orwell was a part of the oppressors. George Orwell not only critiques the British Government, by comparing it to a rampaging elephant destroying everything in it's path, but also the Burmese people. He groups the burmese people into a "sea of yellow faces" that are simple minded and only interested in the "magical" rifle; this description makes the Burmese people sound like little children excited for a magic trick, it does not show their individuality or culture. The negative view of both the British and Burmese cancel each other out allowing the reader to make their own decision about Orwell's thesis rather than have an author’s bias affect their opinion.

            Kincaid and Orwell use anecdotes to back up their  thesis. The anecdotes uses the appeal to pathos as they are both personal moving stories. Kincaid’s story is more direct and denotative, outright condemning the British empire for sticking their noses where they did not belong. “They wore it well and they wore it everywhere…in places where they were not welcome, in places they should not have been.” The British Empire masked the Antiguan culture with their own; Kincaid wrote, “I had long ago been conquered”. Looking back on her childhood life Kincaid realizes that the British Empire had suppressed her culture. “I did not know then that this statement was part of a process that would result in my erasure”. Orwell. however, in "Shooting an Elephant", is more subtle in his anecdote.  On the surface “Shooting an Elephant” is simply a moving story of how one man was pressured into shooting a magnificent beast. The connotative meaning of the story, however, is the elephant represents the British Empire; it’s rampage is the stirring of chaos in the Indian’s society. Orwell realizes the destruction that the Elephant has done to the community, as well as Britain’s destruction, and if they (the British)  were to simply maintain distance and not bother each other there would be no reason for harm.

The timing on these essays are different, affecting the setting that the speakers are placed in. Most of the Caribbean was conquered by the English in the 1600s. By the time that Kincaid comes around (1950’s) Antigua has already been under British rule for centuries. “On Seeing England for the First Time” is written after the people of Antigua have already assimilated into the English culture. “Shooting an Elephant”, however, was written during the first years of British presence in Burma. The Burmese people were still rebelling and giving the British a harsh time. The stage of assimilation effects the troubles that the authors had to go through. 

Kincaid vs. Orwell

“On Seeing England for the First Time” and “Shooting an Elephant” have two things in common; their point of view and supporting details for their thesis. They also differ slightly on their point of view, way they use the supporting details, and when the essays were written.

            Both essays are a primary source. Kincaid and Orwell were both at the scene of what they were writing about. This affects how emotionally invested they are in their pieces. The point of view differs slightly, though, Kincaid was one of the oppressed whereas Orwell was a part of the oppressors. Both authors look unfavorably upon Imperialism.

            Both Essays employ anecdotes to support their thesis. Kincaid’s story is more direct and denotative, outright condemning the British empire for overbearing the Antiguan culture. The shooting of the elephant, however, is more subtle, and connotative.

            The timing on these essays are different. Most of the Caribbean was conquered by the English in the 1600s. By the time that Kincaid comes around (1950’s) Antigua has already been under British rule for centuries. “On Seeing England for the First Time” is written after the people of Antigua have already assimilated into the English culture. “Shooting an Elephant”, however, was written during the first years of British presence. The Burmese people were still rebelling and giving the British a harsh time.