Open this link and scroll to page 9.
https://apstudents.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/2019-05/ap19-frq-english-language.pdf
Read the prompt and the excerpt that follows.
You many want to print it out so you can annotate it before beginning to write.
Set a timer for 35 minutes and begin writing in response to the prompt. Do your best. We will be using the blog in class on Tuesday, so write something of which you are proud.
“If I have equal love for your people with mine, it will not long remain hidden.” This is a quote from Ghandi’s letter protesting the monopoly and taxation on salt. In his letter, he uses a great deal of pathos. His letter is very emotional, describing his fight with his people, and how he blindly served for the people of India. He also uses ethos, as he tells Viceroy Lord Irwin, the recipient of the letter, that he desires to be peaceful and is not attempting to make a threat. Lastly, he shows logos. He states facts, such as the effect the monopoly and taxation is having in the country of India. He says that from a poor mans view, he will “disregard the provisions of the salt laws.” He has clearly stated his standpoint on this topic. He wants his country to be fair towards all people, rich and poor.
ReplyDeleteWhile using pathos, he wants to reach the human side of Viceroy Lord Irwin. He speaks of love, sacrifice, and freedom. He is very clear about his dedication as well. He knows he could easily go to jail for making this kind of statement and leading the protest, but he makes it known that this cause is so important he is willing to be locked up for it.
By using ethos, he claims the people of India have put up with the salt monopoly for far too long. He speaks for all of the Indians that it us unfair and cruel, and to add taxation on top will only hurt the country. He tells the recipient that he has blindly supported his country, he he has been awakened to how the country does not cooperate. And while he does not agree with many laws and ideas, his main purpose is still to serve the people.
Ghandi makes an example of logos by bringing up the effects of the new laws. It is obviously the bad impact this is having. People are rioting and revolting on the new laws. No one wants to pay tax on such an important item. It is far too common and necessary to be taxed.
Ghandi proves to Viceroy Lord Irwin that the taxation and monopoly shall be removed. He knows the risks involved and continues to allow himself to be in harms way. He stands up for his country and fights with his words, using emotion and logic to make himself clear.
I agree with your view on the pathos used in the letter. Gandhi truly cares about the people in his country and will help them anyway he can. Your explanation of how Gandhi has served his country even though they do not cooperate is very good.
DeleteThis is really good, Mary. I love the quote that you used, and you were able to tie it in with your analysis of the letter very well. You explained his message and purpose in a way that was easy to understand, and that made your blog very enjoyable to read.
Delete“Conversion of a nation that has consciously or unconsciously preyed upon another, far more numerous, far more ancient, and no less cultured than itself, is worth any amount of risk,” Gandhi’s hallow message rings out. This small excerpt comes from Gandhi’s 1930 letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin regarding the injustices of the British government to the Indian people. Gandhi expresses his civil unrest through true rhetoric and non-violent acts. All statements Gandhi makes in his letter are heavily based in pathos, ethos, and logos.
ReplyDeleteLogos is the backbone of the conclusion of this letter. The word “truth” is said explicitly time after time, specifically the “victories of truth.” The truths Gandhi highlights regard the maltreatment of the Indian people. Logic helps develop the letter, it is used to highlight the intent, planned action, and the desired results. The intent is to rid the taxation of salt by the British Empire, the planned action is to protest through non-violent civil disobedience, and the desired results are the abolishment of salt taxes and to remove the “evils” of the British occupation.
Gandhi states his ethos by establishing a sound character, incorruptible. The letter reads, “victories of truth have never been won without risks, often of the gravest character.” He is risking ridicule of and potential dispute of his character. Humility, involvement in his community, and desire to serve reenforce Gandhi’s character. Gandhi indirectly suggests that he has the “gravest character” through his acts and involvement with his fellow Indian citizens.
Pathos, the emotional charge of rhetoric, calls upon personal experiences and projects those emotions and feelings at the audience, in this instance, Viceroy Lord Irwin of British representation. Gandhi desired to cause the viceroy to feel a longing to help the Indian people due to the injustices that the British had caused. Gandhi suggests that he has a love for the British occupants reminiscent of his love of his own people, but that it may diminish if he is not accommodated. The letter is an appeal to the heart of Viceroy Lord Irwin, invoking an emotional understanding.
“This letter is not in any way intended as a threat, but is a simple and sacred duty, peremptory on a civil resister. Therefore, I am having it specially delivered by a young English friend who believes in the Indian cause and is a full believer in non-violence [...],” this ending statement of the letter by Gandhi ties everything together. It forms an alliance between the English and the Indian, stirring the opinion of the viceroy. The conclusion conjures all aspects of rhetoric in two brief sentences.
Great job! I appreciated your attention to Gandhi’s repetition of truth in the logos aspect of your analysis. I also liked that you used a quote as your conclusion because, like you said, it tied everything together.
DeleteAnge, this is a really great blog! I loved the section in which you described Gandhi’s use of pathos. You really shed light Gandhi’s description on the feelings of the Indian peoples. However, I did not necessarily agree with the statement that logic is the “backbone” of the argument. Although, I did enjoy your word choice. It was very colorful and intelligent.
Delete“I know that in embarking on no-violence, I shall be running what might fairly be termed a mad risk.” This quote is taken from the first line of Gandhi's letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin. This sentence is setting the tone for the entire letter. He is using pathos and ethos to show that even though this plan is very drastic and dangerous he is still going to execute it. Gandhi has good intentions in everything that he describes to the representative of the British crown. Through nonviolence he wanted to lead the country through a conversion that would benefit the people.
ReplyDeleteGandhi’s main objective in life is to serve his people. He explained that he served them very blindly until 1919. Even after the country had refused to change for the benefit of the people he still served them. He used strong pathos to tell Britain that when the message of this peaceful revolt spread, people would gather around him. The people would not have an easy time, though, their suffering would be very great. By sending this letter, Gandhi knew the dangers that will await him. He had the best intentions in mind for the people of his country. If people do choose to follow him then they would be put in danger, but Gandhi was willing to do anything in his power to protect and help them.
Ethos is mainly used in this letter to show that Gandhi knew how the taxation was badly affecting the people. He did not approve of the decisions that the government was making in regards to piling excess stress upon the people for a profit. If the government failed to see the solution to the problems that they had created then Gandhi would continue on with his plan to lead the people to a change. His enduring strength would prove to be a source that would help the people fight on.
Pathos was a major objective in achieving for Gandhi in order to get into the mind of Irwin. I liked your explanation of how he established his pathos aspect of the letter, good job! However, I think in order to grasp exactly how Gandhi grew on his ethos, you should have used clues,such as through direct quotations, as evidence. Show, don't tell. Great job though, all around!
DeleteWhat makes a good speech? This is the question Gandhi answers in his final excerpt of the letter to the British Crown of India. The goal of this speech was to protest the monopoly and taxation of salt . He certainly got this point across by using the rhetorical appeals, pathos, ethos, and logos, along with the techniques that go with them.
ReplyDeleteWhile is it clear Gandhi was trying to appeal to the readers emotions, as a rhetor he knew the way to Viceroy’s emotion was logic, as he was a ruler. He did this by using logos techniques such as enthymemes, maxims, and also by simply stating the facts of the situation. One of the first points he brings up in the letter is a maxim. It states” But the victories of truth have never been won without risks”. This maxim states the truth of the situation and shows that victories for his goal will only be accomplished with great risks, such as writing this letter. Another point he brings up later in the letter, around the second paragraph, is an enthymeme. It states “ If I have equal love for your people with mine, it will not long remain hidden” This enthymeme can be assumed that he is stating that if you love something it can not remain hidden. While this may appear as pathos at first, it uses logic to show the effects of all types of love.
For most of this letter, Gandhi relied on pathos to convince his readers of the need for a “conversion” of that nation. He used words and emotions all throughout the letter to inspire anger and a want for change to his reader. For example, in this letter he uses words such as evil, stress, and unhappy repeatedly. This repetition really gets his point across and makes the reader also feel these emotions. For example, the letter states “ You have unnecessarily laid stress upon communal problems that unhappily affect this land”. This quotation is directed at Viceroy and the way he wants to handle civil disobedience. Gandhi also brings the emotion of love into question in this letter to affect Viceroy’s emotion towards his plan.
Finally, the third and in some people’s opinion the most important rhetorical appeal, ethos. Without Gandhi incorporating ethos into this argument, Viceroy would have no valid reason for even reading his letter, let alone agreeing to what it’s asking. He establishes ethos by bringing up that he has severed the people of India since 1919. By saying this he makes himself seem dedicated to his people and that he won’t leave them, even when nobody wants to cooperate with him. He also establishes his character by reassuring the reader that he only wants to help, and not make him feel shame. He proves this by writing “ I have no desire to cause you unnecessary embarrassment, or any at all, so far as I can help.” By including this point at the very end he makes sure after making all his arguments that Viceroy will still consider his ideas.
Megan, I thought your essay was very complete in how well you covered the various rhetorical tools Gandhi used. One thing that stuck out to me was how well you employed the use of quotes. I especially liked that even though you did use lots of quotes, you didn’t start your essay out with one like everybody else did. It set you apart and made your essay seem much more unique right off the bat. One piece of constructive criticism I would give is to remember that rhetorical tools are used to boost ethos, pathos, and logos, but they are not the tools themselves.
DeleteMegan, I found your blog to be very insightful. The way you explained each of your points had unique perspective and were very easy to understand. Your use of quotes throughout your blog really strengthened the points you made.
Delete“For my ambition is no less than to convert the British people through non-violence, and thus to make them see the wrong they have done to India,” Mohandas Gandhi states in his letter to Lord Irwin, imploring him to remove the Salt tax. Gandhi and his fellow Indian residents had dealt with the oppressive British imposing unfair taxes for too long, and Gandhi was making a stand. Through the use of common grounds and other rhetorical tactics to build his credibility, and his use of pathos(more specifically fear),Gandhi successfully gets his message of peace driven change across to Irwin.
ReplyDeleteGandhi devotes a great deal of ink and paper to building his ethos and establishing a firm and trusted authority. Mohandas says,“For my ambition is no less than to convert the British people through non-violence, and thus to make them see the wrong they have done to India. I do not seek to harm your people. I want to serve them even as I want to serve my own. I believe that I have always served them,”(Line 10). Gandhi clearly shows Irwin that he wants peace, he wasn't justice in a peaceful way. Again in line 37 he says, “Interested only in promoting the common good of mankind through voluntary fellowship.” Over and over again Gandhi states his desire for the good of both parties, and attempts to inject a sense of fear in Irwin.
Gandhi knows that Irwin is gonna need more than a logical explanation as to why the Salt tax should be dissolved. He knows that a man’s greed is like a veil to the eyes. So he shows Lord Irwin what will happen if he doesn’t listen, or if he arrests or kills Mohandas. “It is, I know, open to you to frustrate my design by arresting me. I hope that there will be tens of thousands ready, in a disciplined manner, to take up the work after me, and, in the act of disobeying the Salt Act, to lay themselves open to the penalties of a law that should never have disfigured the statute book.”(Line 56) Again he shows the widespread support he’s gained, and simultaneously instills fear in Lord Irwin by explaining what will happen if Gandhi's letter is not seriously considered and accepted, ”But if you cannot see your way to deal with these evils and my letter makes no appeal to your heart, on the eleventh day of this month, I shall proceed with such co-workers of 50 the Ashram as I can take, to disregard the provisions of the salt laws.” Gandhi manages to menace Irwin over and over again, without violence, and in such a manner that it feels more like a casual mention rather than a bold threat.
Gandhi starts his letter by showing Irwin that he’s the real deal, that he is serious, and that his word can be trusted. He then devotes a lot of the remaining letter to showing his serious and devote mission which will be successful, the easy way or the hard way. Mohandas uses ethical development and pathologic persuasion to successfully drive his point home: I want justice, and I want peace, and I’m gonna get it, whether you comply or not.
Well done, John! You explained the means of creating a strong ethos and pathos to how Gandhi hammered that into Lord Irwin, and you explained well how Gandhi was aggressive in pursuing justice through his letter. Your conclusion was really good, too! You explained the letter well through just a few sentences, and put it in basic terms, nice job!
Delete“But the victories of truth have never been won without risks, often of the gravest character.” Mohandas Gandhi was surely a grave character indeed. Gandhi writes this marvelous piece to Viceroy Lord Irwin in order to dissolve the Salt Act, in which Gandhi uses primarily pathos in a bold and daring way to such a leader, for the common good of the Indian nation.
ReplyDeleteGandhi presents himself first and foremost by explaining his means of writing. He shows how he has served his people saying, “I served them up to 1919, but when my eyes were opened... the object still was to serve them.” Here, Gandhi establishes a credible ethos in order to gain the trust he needs to present this letter. Gandhi’s ethos is a crucial and essential part to this whole letter, in which he finds himself receiving the support of the people to protest this salt taxation.
Pathos, on another note, comes in extremely handy for Gandhi, as he uses this to drive home his argument to a authoritative person, in Lord Irwin. “If the people join me, as I expect they will, the sufferings they will undergo,... will be enough to melt the stoniest hearts.” Gandhi basically states to Irwin, ‘I’m going to get these people on my side against you, and their troubles will hit you so hard you will be changed.’ Obviously this has to play with Irwin’s emotions, but of course that’s not all. Gandhi then communicates he will rally a group of Hindus, and together they will break laws regarding the Salt Act, for the common good, “... on the eleventh day of this month, I shall proceed with such co-workers of the Ashram as I can take, to disregard the provisions of the salt laws.” By now this strikes a bit of fear in Lord Irwin’s heart, seeing what capabilities the people have. Finally, the dagger Gandhi finishes his pathos with is through, “I have no desire to cause you unnecessary embarrassment, or any at all, as I can help.” Gandhi does a good job in playing with the emotions of Irwin, showing who is in charge of the situation, by stating how he could make Lord Irwin look like a fool if he does not take action to the laws. How so? By establishing his pathos early in the letter, Gandhi creates a powerful connection to being the one in charge, and makes Irwin seem to be the one in danger, by later closing the previous sentence mentioned by challenging Irwin to “man up,” and discuss the problem face to face with the man himself.
The logos is credited briefly throughout the letter, but being particularly important to the case. Gandhi speaks of how cruel this Salt Act has been to citizens everywhere, and the effects its bestowing on the people. He states all throughout the letter of how this does not promote the common good of the people. He ends his letter with symbolic statement, saying “I am having it (the letter) specially delivered by a young English friend who believes in the Indian cause and is a full believer in non-violence...” This goes to show how Gandhi really does not want to become violent, and he passively shows that through saying this “non-violent” man will deliver the very letter to you.
Gandhi completely executes a powerful rhetorical piece that thoroughly pushes his argument into Irwin’s thoughts, ideas, and most importantly, his emotions. Gandhi was a heroic character of the past, and was the perfect man to give this historic letter for the common good.
“The victories of truth have never been won without risks,” as quoted by Mohandas Gandhi in his letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin. Gandhi’s goal in writing this letter to the British crown was to challenge the unjust monopoly of salt taxation. His rhetorical appeals to character, logic, and emotion seem effortless. This is due to his word choice and the approachable mood Gandhi created in his letter.
ReplyDeleteGandhi opens his letter speaking about risk. He says that the conversion of a nation that has preyed upon another nation is worth any risk that must be taken. Not only does he say this, but he explains his word choice as deliberate. By explaining that he uses the words he does to show his desire for not only reform but for Britain to understand their injustices, he makes his intentions more than clear. He follows this with affirmations that he seeks no harm for Britain, but to serve the British people just as he serves his own. He revisits this concept several times throughout his letter. Gandhi also makes it clear on more than one occasion that his intentions are for nothing more than peaceful civil disobedience, and that he does not desire conflict. In doing so, Gandhi builds up his character. It shows that he understands the inner workings of Britain and its people, and that his virtues led him to put himself in potential harm’s way for the good of both Britain and India’s peoples.
Gandhi continues on to explain how he hopes the situation can be resolved, including that he desires the path to friendly negotiation to become open. He highlights the evils (primarily the salt tax) that are damaging the Indian people. Gandhi acknowledges that these aforementioned evils may have relevance to Britain’s government, but adds the truth that their importance to Britain cannot compare to the suffering that they cause for India. His logical approach to solving the issues at hand make his offers seem very approachable.
While Gandhi’s appeals to ethos and logos are tactfully constructed, the driving force behind them is pathos. Emotion is present throughout the entire letter. However, its presence is especially noted towards the end of the letter. It is obvious that Gandhi intends sympathy to be produced by his audience, but at the same time to subtly engender fear. As Gandhi states early on, “the sufferings they will undergo… will be enough to melt the stoniest hearts.” Gandhi goes on to say, specifically to Irwin, that if no appeal to his heart is made, the independence movement will proceed nonetheless. Gandhi states that he has no desire for embarrassment or or ill will toward the British people, so far as he can help. This implies that while he wishes for a peacefully handled situation, he cannot speak for the rest of his nation. He also states that if measures are taken to stop him, tens of thousands will be ready to step into his place. These statements alone create enough uncertainty to subtly pressure the audience, without directly threatening them.
Through his skilled use of rhetoric, Mohandas Gandhi protests the salt taxation among other injustices. His superior word choice creates an approachable solution that is hard to deny. Gandhi’s appeals to the rhetorical values of logos, ethos, and pathos are achieved successfully. This letter alone played an influential role in India’s eventual independence, thanks to Gandhi’s application of logic, well developed character, and powerful use of emotion.
I really liked your explanation of how Gandhi was willing to do anything for his people. You also do a good job of describing Gandhi's thought process for how he will get the government to remove the tax.
DeleteViv, I really enjoyed your thorough explanation of the letter. Your post introduced a deeper meaning, and the severity, of the salt taxation. I also agree, Gandhi is a very skilled rhetor and associates a lot of power to a rather simple issue.
Delete“Conversion of a nation that has consciously or unconsciously preyed upon another, far more numerous, far more ancient, and no less cultured than itself, is worth any amount of risk,” says Mahatma Gandhi in his letter addressed to Viceroy Lord Irwin. A quote in which Gandhi challenges Britains inequitable monopoly on salt. This passionate message, apropos to the salt tax, is a display of Gandhi’s character, logic, and emotion.
ReplyDeleteEthos, or the establishment of character, is used heavily by Gandhi in the 1930’s letter. He begins this “establishment of character” by stating, “...For my ambition is no less than to convert the British people through non-violence, and thus to make them see the wrong they have done to India.” (Lines 9-12), and “I served them up to 1919, blindly. But when my eyes were opened and I conceived non-co-operation, the object still was to serve them.” By using such strong words, Gandhi is attempting to prove to Lord Irwin that he does not seek violence, but only justice. He also speaks of his long-time love and devotion to his followers. Thus demonstrating his determination to strive for what is fair and just, as a strong and unwavering leader of the Indian people.
Although ethos is crucial in any argument, emotion is what really attracts the attention of readers. For this reason, Gandhi utilizes pathos for the majority of his plea to Irwin. These passionate words and statements show his drive and longing for change or, more simply, for the removal of these laws. Gandhi appeals to fear, specifically, in order to (hopefully) rattle Irwin. For example, in line 46-51 he states “But if you cannot see your way to deal with these evils and my letter makes no appeal to your heart, on the eleventh day of this month, I shall proceed with such co-workers of the Ashram as I can take, to disregard the provisions of the salt laws.” This powerful statement is a cautionary remark to push Irwin to, at least, consider Gandhi’s proposal of compromise and discussion. Although, the strongest use of pathos in his letter happens to be his cry for conversion of the British people. This theme, stated both implicitly and explicitly, is scattered all throughout his letter. By consistently pronouncing that Britain’s unjust treatment of the Indian people has caused unrest and hardships for the population, he instills a sense of guilt within the reader.
Amidst the emotion, however, Gandhi’s appeal to logic is not lost. While he does indeed, include far more cries for justice and impassioned remarks to prove his devotion to India, Gandhi displays a plethora of logical statements to strengthen his argument. One way he displays said logic, is by discussing the unfair treatment of the Indian people by the British government. He sheds light on the many situations in which the Indian people got the “short end of the stick” so to speak, of the British law. In line 51 he says, “I regard this tax to be the most iniquitous of all from the poor man’s standpoint.” This quote allows Gandhi to highlight the absurdity that is the salt tax, as it is undoubtedly a necessity, not meant for only the wealthy. Through this, his logic is able to shine through and add structure to his argument.
Gandhi’s letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin is a prime example of strong rhetoric. He is able to convey a rather riveting message to the reader (in this case Lord Irwin and the British), all while supporting his emotional claims with factual evidence in regards to the discriminatory behaviors of the British government towards the Indian population.
First off, this essay was well written and clearly well thought out. I especially liked your paragraph about how he used his philosophy of non-violence to strengthen his ethos because this was something that really stuck out to me as well. However, I disagree with the idea that he wished to invoke fear in lines 46-51. After all, he explicitly states that “this letter is not in any way intended as a threat.” Overall, excellent work.
DeleteGreat post! I enjoyed the depth of your points with logos, ethos, and pathos. Your inclusion of many quotes and lines were very clarifying to the explanation.
Delete“But victories of truth have never been won without risk” This quote from Ghandi’s letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin says that there is never a victory without risks. In the passage, Ghandi uses the rhetorical appeals of ethos, pathos, and logos to try and encourage peace and non-violence during the time of The Salt March.
ReplyDeleteGhandi establishes his ethos by speaking upon non-violence. He says in the letter “My ambition is no less than to convert the British people through non-violence, and this to make them see the they have done to India”. Ghandi uses his words to establish trust among the people he is writing to by showing that he means to harm, and he wants to promote peace instead of violence.
Ghandi establishes his ethos by showing his passion towards his country. He talks greatly about his people, and shows how he truly cares about them. He makes an attempt to connect with the reader emotionally through his letter, and show that he truly cares about making peace among those involved in The Salt March.
Finally, Ghandi uses logic to reach out to his audience and make an understanding with them. He uses logical appeals to try and help his audience reach an understanding about what he is trying to say. By using logic, he is able to establish logos and reach out to his audience.
In conclusion, Ghandi’s letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin about The Salt March is a strong letter that shows great examples of the. of the rhetoric appeals. By using these methods, he is able to make a connection with his readers and inspire peace among the people.
Good job Lizzy! I liked how in your blog you spent the most time on the ethos, which in this letter, was definitely the most important. Gandhi had to establish his ethos so that viceroy would listen to him. I also liked that you mostly focused on how the letter was written and not specifically what it was about.
DeleteGreat work lizzy! I really like how you continuously tied in the Salt March specifically to every appeal you discussed. This blog was a very good read as I found you picking out points I hasn’t thought of or talked about. Although, I wish you would’ve hit upon all the appeals Gandhi used since your description of ethos was so well done! Overall, really great work!
DeleteLizzy, I think this essay was very well written. It wasn’t very long, but I think you got your point across. Well done!
Delete“Non-violence...” What more could you need in a quote to understand the mission, goal, and lifestyle of Mahatma Gandhi, the leader of a movement demanding justice for those in India affected by the Salt Act. There is no debate the Gandhi was one of the most well spoken men of his time, and after reading his letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin, it is clear how he came to lead the Salt March and the movement surrounding it in the first place.
ReplyDeleteThe most important as well as the most impressive thing that Gandhi does is actually not what he does, but the way he does it. All throughout his writing, he uses his words to cast the shadow of non-violence over everything that he says. He uses the word non-violence over and over, drilling into his audience’s mind. It’s almost as it every argument that he makes is coupled with a reminder that he does not wish to invoke violence. He says, “I do not seek to harm your people,” “This letter is not intended as a threat,” “I want to serve them [Britain],” and “I have no desire to cause you unnecessary embarrassment, or any at all.” He uses the idea of non-violence constantly, and it gradually paints his goal as a just one. In addition, it paints him as a just person, therefore boosting his ethos. After all, who can oppose a man who strives for non-violence above all else.
Still under the umbrella of non-violence, Gandhi continues to work his rhetorical skill as he employs the use of enthymemes to illustrate to Lord Irwin what his goal is and what the various consequences will be if he does not comply. Lines 29-40 are packed with logical if-then enthymemes explaining what Gandhi wants and how the wrongs done can be repaired. Later, in lines 46-51, Gandhi uses another if-then statement to explain to Lord Irwin that the Salt March will take place if he does not “make his way to deal with these evils.” Next, Gandhi employs enthymemes to tell him that if he is arrested, tens of thousands are waiting behind him to take up the cause, leading logic to tell Irwin that arresting him won’t help. Lastly, Gandhi enthymemactically walks him through how he can respond to the letter and end all of this.
Yet another rhetorical achievement Gandhi accomplishes during his letter has to do with his dialect. He is well known for his speeches being well thought out and well executed, and this is well illustrated throughout his letter. Gandhi is very careful and systematic in his use of his dialect, and he words everything in a way that helps his cause without the audience noticing. He uses certain words like love, serve, non-violence, justice, truth, fairly, equally, sacred, and humility in a way that highlight the things he values and strives for. In addition, he uses other words, such as risk, harm, sufferings, evils, iniquitous, problems, threat, violence, greed, difficulty, and cruel to contrast his own values, making them seem that must more just. He employs these words in specific ways at specific times, and in the end, he has established a strong, black and white, clear cut line that divides good and evil like night and day with India’s cause on that of the just side.
Through his stress on non-violence and justice, his employment of enthymemactic reasoning, and his use of a skillful dialect, Gandhi creates a well-rounded argument that is very strong, yet it doesn’t shove itself down your throat. He calmly and peacefully presents himself and his ideas in a way that is altogether separated from emotions. This not only accomplishes his goal of using peaceful methods at all times, it actually highlights that this non-violence is the goal itself, making Gandhi something of a rhetorical genius.
I absolutely love how there are so many complex messages creating the backbone of this seemingly simple blog. You were so concise and particular about each part of the letter, but still interpreted the message in a way that was easy to follow. Awesome work, Joe!
Delete“I do not seek to harm your people. I want to serve them even as I want to serve my own.” Even while maintaining his incredible humility, Mahatma Gandhi was an incredible rhetoric. In Mahatma Gandhi’s letter protesting the salt tax to Lord Irwin, he showed great skill in the art of language. By appealing heavily to the pathos in the beginning, he was able to make his logical appeal pack more of a punch later on.
ReplyDeleteThe way he was able to communicate his intentions was an important aspect of his argument. He presented himself as completely selfless and humble. His desire to change the situation came entirely from the love in his heart and the immense love he had for all people. His presentation of the injustice himself and his people were experiencing in paired with the loving humble character he showed was an effective means to target the emotions of his audience.
After creating this strategic setup, he went in with the facts, and the heart of his appeal. By ordering his argument the way he did, he set up the audience to take on a “why not?” mindset. He made his claim even more powerful by logically presenting his ideas and tying them in with various ways that they would result in a good outcome for his audience.
Additionally, he gave the audience a unique option with the way he went about his composition of the letter. In most cases with a specific goal in mind, the person or group being presented the argument has two options. One, they agree, and along with that comes a blow to their pride or perhaps some embarrassment. Their other option is to say no, and keep all the pride they began with instead. Gandhi, however, created a convincing compromise. By maintaining his kind nature throughout the letter, he was very clear about he fact that they would not be subject to any of the aforementioned downsides to complying. He gave them a chance to become “good guys” in their own light while maintaining their pride. By successfully combining all of these components, he was able to produce a truly genius argument.
Nice job Kara! You clearly linked all three rhetorical appeals in a manner that flowed very smoothly. I see how you focused primarily on pathos and ethos—emotion and authority. The way you described how Gandhi utilized pathos was very moving; you used a lot of rush adjectives such as “loving” and “humble”. It was super easy to follow you along with your essay!
DeleteMohandas “Mahatma” Gandhi wrote a very intriguing letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin about something that seemed slightly trivial. When digging deeper into the matter, it was a real issue, the tax on salt was unfair. Gandhi wrote this letter, in which we are focusing on the conclusion, and it is very impactful. Mahatma Gandhi's suave use of logos, ethos, and pathos make his intention very clear.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the portion we read, Ghandi’s attitude comes off as very “take it or leave it.” By using this attitude, his argument comes off stronger and more confident. He starts off with some logos by stating how the salt tax is affecting others and is unjust. This comes up many times in the writing, Gandhi makes it clear that this salt tax is unethical and problematic.
Gandhi slightly taps into ethos and pathos towards the beginning, he says how he wants to serve Britain’s people and that he has love for them. Gandhi states how he has served them and his people are not getting the same in return. Again hinting to the unfairness towards the Indian people because the the Salt Act. Gandhi does not spare his aggressiveness, he flat out tells Lord Irwin about how unnecessary and pointless the act is. Gandhi's impactful words make his message loud and clear, while also building him up as a rhetor. He writes in such a matter-of-factly way that is very admirable.
Pathos is not as fully apparent as the others, although it is present. The emotions that Gandhi puts forth are of him being dealt a disservice. This is exactly what Gandhi describes to Lord Irwin, that the salt tax is unfair and unjust. Gandhi does not use emotion as a cop out, he still maintains his tact and does not spiral away.
Although not so applicable today, Gandhi's letter to Viceroy Lord Irwin is highly interesting and an interesting perspective on hardships that people faced nearly 100 years ago.
It’s really interesting how you tackled this blog Alex. I didn’t pick up on how Gandhi didn’t actually use a whole lot of pathos; I actually thought he used a hefty load of it. The terms you use, for instance, suave, are also really interesting and show you ability to convey your message in a varied format. This was excellent, and I had a really enjoyable time reading it!
DeleteThis blog is very well done, Alex! While your analysis of Gandhi's rhetoric varied from mine, I could easily understand and agree with your points. You did a great job of speaking to your point.
DeleteGreat job this week Alex! I think your essay clearly analyses what and how Ghandi is portraying. It’s simply written, yet very insightful.
Delete“But when my eyes were opened, and I conceived non-co-operations, the object was still to serve them [the British people],” remarked Mahatma Gandhi in the third conclusion paragraph of his 1930 letter addressed to Viceroy Lord Irwin—a fellow whom stood as a representative of the British royal crown stationed in India. Gandhi’s message within the parchment folds of his letter oozed with the remnants of a determined man’s battle for peace. Peace and the freedom from a hazardous tax on India’s salt. This simple seventeen-word statement by Gandhi could tell its reader a lot about its author. The case is simple here: a person with agreeable attributes is more likely to be favored than a person with disagreeable attributes. Ghandi knew the British’s intentions with the “Salt tax”. The enlightenment of character concerning the man—Ghandi— includes how he continually stood by his narratives of experience. He utilized personal story-telling devices, such as describing the times—up until the year 1919– he put his trust and dutifully followed what the British had been commanding of Indian citizens. Gandhi sets himself up to deliver a powerful argument to his British representative, Viceroy Lord Irwin, through the usage of rhetorical appeals. These ever-familiar choices in rhetoric—ethos, pathos, and logos— made him a strong contender for winning over the recipient of his letter.
ReplyDeleteHere he is, Gandhi, dabbling with a significant quantity of adherence to making his ethos clearly present. He is known to be a civilian belonging to the country of India, that much is already true, even with the absence of direct allusion. Ghandi flat out states that he wishes not to bring harm to Viceroy’s people—the people of Britain. This point in established quite clearly and furthers this point by stating in Line 15, “I want to serve them [the British people] as I want to serve my own [India’s people]”. Gandhi goes back and forth between reassuring his reader that both the Indian and British people are important variables to him; neither ethnicity is more valued to him than the other. On top of that fact, as an inference from the first couple paragraphs, it can be easily deduced that Gandhi desired to entail the word “conversion” into the mind of his reader. It is general consensus that the last few paragraphs or the conclusion of an essay is what readers take most from, so the fact that Gandhi kept repeating this word “conversion” throughout his conclusion makes it seem as though Gandhi really did just want to alter the British’s mindset of forcing the Indian citizens to pay a tax on a substance that has a hefty amount of essentialness to them is unjust. This really makes the letter seem more genuine as he makes it known to his audience that he is taking into account as many varied needs as he can fit.
In Line 41, Gandhi reaches out Viceroy in a way that seems a tad accusatory. He makes known to Viceroy that he “unnecessarily laid stress upon communal problems that unhappily affect this land [India]”. Gandhi is using a great deal of pathos in his argument by bringing Viceroy up from the surface to become accountable for his party’s actions, which were supporting the tax on salt
(Continued)
ReplyDeleteGandhi referred to many “evils” done by the British towards the people of India. Earlier, prior to the previously mentioned quote” Gandhi specified that he would like to invite Viceroy to vanquish those evils with him. He is imploring his reader to see the matter from his point of view, how the salt tax causes harm to the country—India— that makes a lot of money for Britain. The tone of Gandhi neat the end, at about Line 30, is serious and assertive. He makes his point more legit and attractive by requesting Viceroy to either avoid confrontation that would lead to the shut down of the Salt March or to give in to the demands of the Salt Act. Neither probably sounded appealing to Viceroy.
Now, of course, the most effective and critical rhetorical appeal to Gandhi’s argument is the logos he ended up stitching into his letter. A logical explanation is required to get his point across. Gandhi describes in detail the repercussions of his arrest or death. In Line 56 Ghandi remarks “I hope that there will be tens of thousands ready, in a disciplined manner, to take up the work after me,”. After remarking this statement he notifies Viceroy that many will be there to resist the Salt tax and fight, although peacefully, for change. He warned Viceroy that others would be lined up to disobey the law and fight for what they believed. It was a rather bold move, but logically, it made sense. Gandhi couldn’t just walk on egg-shells whilst speaking to Viceroy, otherwise the representative of Britain would have never taken him seriously.
Ghandi was no fool. He knew how to construe an argument with the outside appearing peaceful, while the inside was lined with a hidden defiance. Mahatma Gandhi used his words in the start of his conclusion to prove to Viceroy that he could be trusted, what he said was meant, and that the means of his desires were to be obtained through the tranquil signing of a new law—the Salt Act. Much of his time spent with the last few paragraphs of the letter were commuted to reinforcing his serious argument. He didn’t want his reader to take him for a joke to be simply laughed at. In the end, it wouldn’t have mattered if Viceroy was down to agreeing with Gandhi or not because Gandhi had already proved himself a fighter for what he believed. He cared too much about his people and wasn’t going to allow them to be stepped on any longer.