Labor Union and Civil Rights Leader Cesar Chavez writes a wonderful piece in honor of the tenth anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination. In this article, Chavez writes to those in need and exemplifies what it means to fight for the rights, however by doing so nonviolently. By stressing the value of life, helping the audience understand the effects of violence, and proving the positive effects of peaceful protests and demonstrations, Chavez leads the audience down a peaceful road to choose nonviolence over violence when it comes to fighting for their own beliefs. Chavez, early in his own letter, describes how important it is to value the life of humans in order to fight for nonviolence. Chavez explains that “human life is a very special possession given by God to man..” (Lines 8-9) By alluding to God, Chavez points out that people’s lives are not for us to decide what happens to them, but we must respect one another to learn from one another. He guides those in need so that they can understand that violence is not the answer by understanding where their lives come from. Respect comes before anything. Chavez continues along these lines and demands again that no person can decide what happens with a person’s life (Lines 9-10). He knows that when people begin messing with the lives of free humans, they lose the value in life, and look at people as objects they can use, rather than respecting their lives as human beings. He warns the people in this magazine that if they choose violence over nonviolence, then more and more anniversaries like that of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination anniversary will take place. Cesar Chavez uses credible sources in order to back up his argument that peaceful demonstrations are the only way to experience freedom for those who are fighting for it. “The boycott, as Gandhi taught, is the most nearly perfect instrument of nonviolent change,...” (Lines 61-63). He mentions Gandhi here to enhance his credibility, since Gandhi knows quite a lot about peaceful demonstrations, since he led them in the past. Using such a knowledgeable source, He boosts his ethos and gives those in need the trust that they can believe his word; nonviolent protests will create a world of free people. Chavez also explains that freedom is best lived when people are actively engaged together and determined for a cause. (Lines 54-55) Chavez appeals to the pathos of the audience because this gives them a chance to “do,” rather than “wish.” They now feel motivated to rally together to further help their cause. Chavez leads by example of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s doctrine, and helps those in need actually complete their own dream.
Finally, Chavez also repeatedly cautions the audience and explains the negative aspect of violence. He does this by pointing out it could mean death. He places his audience’s minds on history, explaining that from past years, violent protests have led to death for the one’s trying to revolt; the working class. (Lines 78-80) He knows that even if those in need try to revolt for themselves, they just will not have what it takes to win their cause. They must fight with their peaceful protests, not their violent revolts, just as King Jr. taught. Chavez also explains that “when you lose your sense of life and justice, you lose your strength.” (Lines 71-72) He attempts to teach his audience that they should never lose sight of justice, because that is what they are fighting for. If those in need choose violence over nonviolence, they will forget what they are fighting for, and only worry about degrading those they are fighting against, which is not what Martin Luther King Jr. told the civil rights movement to do. Dr, Martin Luther King Jr. led by word and deed as he guided the civil rights movement nonviolently through their mission. Cesar Chavez does the same here, and he reminds those in need that the only way to win the battle is peacefully. Chavez explains that if the people choose violence as their answer, they will lose sight of the value of human life, something they are fighting for in themselves. He wants to make sure that they are coming together to actively demonstrate peaceful protests in order for people to hear their needs. Though it can be a challenge, Chavez’s argument places everything they need to know into perspective; valuing life, understanding the negative effects of violence, and the positivity of peaceful protests.
OKay, yes. Approach your essay just like this on the exam. You used the high level thesis and it set you up to write a really, really good rhetorical analysis! I would give this a 1-4-0 which would have to passing this exam with flying colors. Fantastic!
In a time where inequality between races ran rampant, peace was at the forefront of most minds. Putting aside any opposition, leaders of the African American civil rights movements strove to instill harmony, while advocating for much needed societal changes. Cesar Chavez does just that in his tenth anniversary speech in remembrance of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr’s assassination. By employing repetition of descriptive words such as “powerful” and “nonviolence”, changing tones, and plural first person pronouns, Chavez successfully crafts his argument regarding nonviolent resistance in the fight for equality. Diving headfirst into his speech, Chavez opens with a reminder to the people of what Luther’s life exemplified. Nonviolence was one of Luther’s top priorities in his fight. “Powerful” and “nonviolence” are used together often in Chavez’s speech. For example, the opening sentence states, “Dr. King’s entire life was an example of power that nonviolence brings to bear in the real world” (lines 1-2). The word “power” is used to describe the effect Luther’s philosophies held. He believed it was important to not cave to violence, despite any anger towards inequality in the United States. These words are repeated over and over again all throughout the speech. What this does is it drives the point that keeping the peace, or “nonviolence” is the strongest, most effective, most “powerful” way to gain respect and open the ears of all people. Besides playing on repetition, Chavez also changes his tone to create depth and meaning in his speech. In the first half of the piece, Chavez uses a proud, yet mourning tone. Referring back to Luther’s life and impact draws a feeling of remembrance which can bring mourning in the case of his untimely death. However, the tone allows for resounding pride regarding Luther’s work. Lines 4 through 7 state, “This observance of Dr. King’s death gives us the best possible opportunity to recall the principles with which our struggle has grown and matured.” This sets the tone for the rest of the speech as it brings the audience together as one in the push for equal rights, while remembering Luther. Another notable tone change occurs at the start of line 73. It begins to pick up; a rhythm builds and Chavez’s diction becomes more assertive. Phrases such as, “The greater the oppression, the more leverage nonviolence holds” (lines 73-74) assert dominance through a common understanding, while showing the oppressors that although the fight for equality is not yet finished, they will continue to fight with peace in mind. This angry yet respectful tone shows just how important Chavez finds nonviolence in the face of resistance. Naturally, a first person point of view is used, since it is a speech. Although, Chavez makes an apparent choice to avoid using the word “I.” Instead, he resorts to the word “we” and “our” as his pronouns of choice. For example, Chavez says “We are also convinced that nonviolence is more powerful than violence” (lines 12-13). He could have just as easily stated “I am also convinced…”, but he did not. By using plural pronouns Chavez furthers the sense of togetherness created by his tone and word choice. This technique builds both pathos and ethos for Chavez, which allows his argument to be even more successful than it would be otherwise. In short, Chavez’s use of repetition, tone change, and plural pronouns help develop and strengthen his argument in his speech for the tenth anniversary of civil rights leader, Martin Luther King Jr’s assassination. By employing the techniques as previously mentioned, Chavez not only builds upon his argument, but he successfully rallies people to join him. His rhetorical choices allow for a moving speech, laced with a beautiful, passionate cause. Nonviolent resistance was at the heart of many largely victorious civil rights leaders, so despite what one may think, peace is always the answer to any fight.
You nailed it! Totally nailed it. This is a great approach to the essay. Your thesis is fantastic which set you up to write a really good, well supported body. I'm giving this a 1-3-1 which means you would pass this exam with flying colors! The only thing you might consider is talking more about the rhetorical situation and addressing that his audience is farmers. That could be added to the paragraph about "we". It is "we" because they are bonded by the fact that they are farmers, right? That is just a little thing, but worth noting. Always try and incorporate the rhetorical situation.
Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, Malcom X, Susan B. Anthony, and every other activist for civil rights wanted one thing -- equality. Equality is fascinating in the sense that so much conflict can arise from the simple fact that every human innately desires peace and acceptance. By providing a sympathetic voice, and controlling the emotion in his writing, Cesar Chavez displays his rightful place among the great leaders of civil rights with a compelling message urging his fellow farm workers to pursue nonviolence in their efforts for equality. One way Chavez conveys sympathy and unity in his message is his word choice. Throughout the article, he far more often uses the word, “we” rather than, “I” or, “you” when speaking of the struggles they have faced as well as how they should respond. This is a subtle way of providing his audience with a feeling of genuine solidarity. By constantly reiterating that he expects no more of his fellow workers than he does of himself, he makes a significant increase to his credibility, therefore making his message more effective. He expresses the same sympathy in more than just words, he uses entire sentences and phrases to appeal to his audience’s shared beliefs. For example, he states, “Our conviction is that human life is a very special possession given by God to man and that no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause, however it may be.” (lines 8-11). This allusion to God is very powerful, especially regarding the context that this article was published in a religious magazine. He simultaneously supports the reverence they should view their own lives and values with, while also deepening his message that no one else deserves to be treated with violence. Often, great writing seems to have an extremely passionate tone to inspire the audience and light a fire within them for whatever the writer desires. Chavez goes against the grain in this respect. By not evoking passion, but rather demonstrating a tone of self-control and logic, he encourages his audience to sit back and reflect before proceeding, not become emotional and lash out. He does in a few ways, one of which is creating logical comparisons and cause/effect relationships between ideas. One example of this is, “If we resort to violence then one of two things will happen: either the violence will be escalated and there will be many injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides, or there will be total demoralization of the workers.” (lines 17-21) He does not glamorize either side, but rather says it exactly how it is. By maintaining this throughout the article, he leads his audience to think with their heads, not their feelings, which is exactly what they need to see the value of a nonviolent approach. On the more subtle side of things, his repetition of the word, “nonviolence” through the article is another way he kept his work, and therefore his audience, grounded. By constantly referring back to the one word that summarizes his message, he kept his argument on the right track no matter what he was saying. Maintaining a voice of sympathy paired with a no nonsense tone were two ways Cesar Chavez was successful in making his case for nonviolence. The voice of a calm, confident, yet concerned leader was what the workers needed, and the way he was able to provide them with that is exemplified very clearly through the rhetorical choices in his article.
YES KARA!!!!! This opening is amazing, and in particular the thesis! You include the rhetorical situation, and the fact that you include the unifying piece of info about them being farmers really makes it a next level thesis. This, of course, sets you up to write a fantastic essay. Do this exact thing next Wednesday. I'm going to say this is a 1-4-1. For real. So good.
One missed opportunity is the fact that it was written for a religious magazine! Always think of the rhetorical situation. But it does not impact the score, just an observation.
On the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr.Martin Luther King, America is reminded of the violence and hatred that clouded the country that day. It impacted the civil rights movement viciously and attacked Dr.Martin Luther Kings very cause of bringing about change without violence. Cesar Chavez recognized that the fight for nonviolent change was far from over, which is why he wrote an article honoring King’s methods of change. By Cesar Chavez crafting an article with shifts in tone, cause and effect, and varied sentence structure for emphasis, he was able to develop an argument that re inspired the fire surrounding nonviolent protests. Early in the letter, Chavez addresses the ideas of what will happen if people resort to violence. He says “ either the violence will be escalated and there will be many injuries and perhaps death on both sides, or there will be total demonization of the workers” (lines 17-21). In making this comment, the writer is able to almost scare the audience with the idea of total disaster. By showing the horror of what will happen with violent protests, he is able to spark an urgency that nonviolent protests must be utilized. This tactic of cause and effect makes the ideas of disaster seem logical to the audience, and makes them see the true effects of what will happen if people don’t change their ways. Chavez once again utilizes the tool of cause and effect when he says “ if we beat the growers at the expense of violence, victory would come at the expense of injury and perhaps death.” ( lines 66-68). This quotation appeals to the pathos of the readers. It makes them see that they have no other choice but to leave violence behind, as with it they will fall to misery and death. Beyond showing the readers the consequences of violence, Chavez further emphasizes the urgency of the matter through sentence structure. Throughout the majority of the text, the sentences are lengthy and give context. However, when Chavez is eager to make a point the structure shifts. He writes “ People suffer from violence” ( line 77). This quotation follows a discussion of oppression and power succession, both of which are complex topics. By writing such a simple sentence, he ensures the readers will understand the overall message that no matter how people go about it, violence will hurt someone. In order to show the readers that nonviolence needs active change, Chavez structured his shifts in tone around this idea. In the beginning of the passage, it is mournful and speaks about what Dr.King did for the movement. This tone shifts at the end of paragraph 4 when Chavez writes “ It is to that yearning we appeal”(lines 31-32). This line introduces an active and prepared tone to the rest of the essay. Chavez starts to speak about the ways Americans can practice nonviolent protests. He speaks about marches, strikes, and boycotts. By giving examples of ways every American can participate in nonviolent movements , he is able to once again re spark a way for people to make active and real changes. Dr.King’s life gave a perfect example on the principles of nonviolent resistance. He showed Americans that all human life was wroth fighting for. On the tenth anniversary of his death, Cesar Chavez wanted to recall his movement and make Americans want to once again follow these practices. By using an urgent tone, and showing the consequences of what will happen if nonviolent resistance is not utilized, Chavez successfully showed the audience that using this form of resistance will make a positive change.
Love that you analyze his use of logic in the either/or allowing you to point out the cause and effect. Fantastic! A really pro move Megan! and to follow up with an awesome transition! WOOHOO! One more example in the paragraph about sentence structure would have been good. I think you could have used a quote to back up your general comment about the complexity of the sentences that follow. But, it is good.
Great move again when you discuss the shift. In what other ways is the shift evident? One more piece of evidence there would be great.
Love the conclusion. Try to pay attention to the rhetorical situation. The two dead ringers are that they are all farmers, and that is who is uniting with and calling on, and also that it was published in a religious magazine.
But, this is good. Great approach, especially on the thesis. Maybe try and include a little more evidence, but an essay like this has you passing this exam! 1-3-0
Chavez writes to those who are in need of help, and also highlights the importance of nonviolence throughout his piece. By highlighting the effects of violence, his tone in his writing, and using a sentence variety and syntax, he is able to successfully promote peace and connect with his audience. Right away, Chavez begins speaking about Dr. King and how he was a prime example of how nonviolence is a very powerful thing. He opens by stating, “Dr. King’s entire life was an example of power that nonviolence bring to bear in the real world” (lines 1-2”). The tenth anniversary is his death is the perfect time to bring to light the need for nonviolence in order to live in a more peaceful world. He also spoke about how nonviolence is much more powerful than nonviolence, and how nonviolence would attract more support from others. He also stresses the importance of human life and freedom. He states “freedom is best experienced through participation and self-determination, and free men and women instinctively prefer democratic change to any other means” (lines 5 -57), proving that freedom is the best when everyone works for it. Secondly, Chavez uses a passionate tone to convey his message to his audience. By using a tone that is both passionate and serious, he ignites a fire inside of his readers, and inspires them to help support the change that is so greatly needed. During this time, there was still a great amount of inequality, and although he knew that this change could not be mad overnight, he used this peace to try and spark something inside of his readers and inspire them to open their eyes to the changes that need to be made. He accomplishes this just by the tone in which he is using. Finally, Chavez uses a variety of sentence structure to add emphasis to his piece. He incorporates both short and long sentence to vary in the structure of his paragraphs. For example, he uses both short and long sentences in the second to last paragraph (lines 78-86) when talking about history and how violence effects people. The combination of both short and long sentences outs emphasis on how violence effected people, especially the poor and the workers. He also uses sentence variety in lines 73-77 when he states “ The greater the oppression, the more leverage non-violence holds. Violence does not work in the long run and it is temporarily successful, it replaces one violent form of power with another just as violent. People suffer from violence.” He empathizes the effectiveness that nonviolence through the use of different sentence structure. Dr. King was a great man who wanted only what was best for his people and the country. This piece greatly highlights this and shows that Dr. King’s ideas of nonviolence are still very useful and should be followed in order to gain the peace that is so very deserved by everyone. By voicing the importance of nonviolence, using a passionate and serious tone, and varying in sentence structure for emphasis, Chavez reaches out to his readers and ignites a flame within them in order to promote peace.
This is good. You do a good job providing lots of evidence. Be SURE to pay attention to the rhetorical situation. YOu do a good job with that when you point out the publishing this on the 10th anniversary was smart, and that it was a choice. Also relevant are two things, he is speaking to farmers and trying to unite them just like King did with the African Americans, and that the article is being published in a religious magazine. You do a nice job with the thesis, but try and address the rhetorical situation somewhere in the introduction.
Good use of evidence, make sure to relate it back to thesis. You are doing GREAT! 1-3-0
The tenth anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s death came at a difficult time for human rights activists. This is demonstrated through a compelling piece written by Cesar Chavez, who was working to gain support for a nonviolent resistance in support of neglected farm workers. Through his utilization of tone and appeals to shared values, Cesar Chavez is able to stake an irrefutable claim in support of the benefits of nonviolent resistance. Cesar’s appeals to the shared values of his audience can be seen almost immediately in his argument. He begins with a statement that honor’s Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s life and his groundbreaking, nonviolent actions. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. made history with his amazing leadership and became a star figure of the Civil Rights Movement. This is beneficial because it allows his audience to feel connected to his argument immediately, even if they were not personally affected by the injustice of the agriculture industry. Chavez then moves on to discussing the value of human life, stating: “Our conviction is that human life is a very special possession given by God to man and that no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause, however just it may be.” This powerful statement would likely resonate deeply with his original audience, the readers of a religious magazine published by a religious order dedicated to helping those in need. By displaying the fact that he values human life above any cause, Chavez both strengthens the audience’s trust in him and prepares them for the rest of his argument. In addition to his appeals to shared values, Chavez creates a motivational and respectful tone that is essential to the influence of his argument. This tone, which strongly appeals to logic, was created using multiple rhetorical tools, but most distinguishable is syntax. All throughout Cesar’s writing, short and fairly simple sentences can be seen, as well as a few long and complex sentences. The shorter sentences provide insight in a matter-of-fact manner, such as “We would lose regard for human beings,” and “People suffer from violence.” These short sentences distinguish the effects on violence from the benefits of nonviolence, which are mainly discussed in longer, more complex sentences, such as “Thus, demonstrations and marches, strikes and boycotts are not only weapons against the growers, but our only way of avoiding the senseless violence that brings no honor to any class or community.” These variations of sentence structure in correspondence to their subject matter create a rhythm in the passage. This rhythm contributes to the call for nonviolence that Chavez presents to his audience. In supporting this call to action, the syntax also contributes to Chavez’s overall goal, respect for all human life. As an important figure in the fight for human rights, Cesar Chavez worked to convince people to nonviolently demand change. His abilities to do so are greatly demonstrated in this passage about nonviolent protests for neglected farm workers. Through his creation of a motivational and respectful tone and his appeals to shared values, Chavez constructs an influential argument on the benefits of nonviolence.
YES!!!!!!! You hit every single nugget of the rhetorical situation here!!! OMG Vivian! Amazing! Do this during the exam. 1-4-1. Seriously, this is so good.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. spent his life fighting for the equality of the people that were treated unfairly. On the tenth anniversary of his death Cesar Chavez is still in the fight for equality and to honor the people that are in need he wrote an article explaining that nonviolent protest will help them win their rights. Cesar states strong facts about protest and the repercussions that can come from them when they are both violent and nonviolent. By using evidence to support the strong facts Cesar Chavez lifts the spirits of people in need and explains to them why nonviolent protest will bring a better response to their cause. The article starts by paying respect to Dr. King and his passion of fighting for minority groups rights through nonviolent acts. Following this statement, Chavez gives evidence that the power of nonviolence that Martin Luther King Jr. taught many people has spread through the country and helped form many activist groups for people in need. The second paragraph then focuses on the importance of human life and how it has helped the group's efforts. This evidence on how Dr. King has instituted a new method of protesting adds some sadness but also pride for the people that the article was meant for. After the first two paragraphs there is a shift in the writer's tone. The focus is moved more to why nonviolence is a better method. The paragraph begins with a strong statement that simply states that the group knows that nonviolence is more powerful than violence. The writer then explains the reason why his opinion is true by giving evidence that nonviolence will support the person if the cause they are fighting for is just. Evidence is also given as to why resorting to violence is the wrong decision. So the main point is supported while also explaining why the other option is wrong. Throughout all of the evidence that is given the word choice of Chavez makes the reader feel as though they are a part of the group. The pronoun we is used very regularly to include the reader into the article's purpose. Every act that is talked about in the article is not done by a single person, everyone is a part of the fight that Cesar Chavez is writing about. For example line 45 states, “We advocate for militant nonviolence as our means of achieving justice for our people, but we are not blind to the feelings of frustration, impatience and anger with seethe inside every farm worker.” In that sentence the pronoun we is used to show that Cesar recognizes the struggles of the people who are not given their rights. He also makes it known the feelings that the people are going through because they are being ignored and denied their requests. Cesar Chavez was able to make a strong argument for protesting nonviolently by giving strong points and supporting them with evidence. He also changed his word choice so that the readers of the article felt like they were heard and someone was fighting for them.
LOVE the introduction! You make great points, but you need more evidence. You only have one quote in there. Try to get at least 2 quick pieces evidence, on can be situational, but the other should be a quote from the text. Even if it is just a word. Who was the article meant for? You come so close to nailing a major appeal to the rhetorical situation. It is a religious magazine. King was a very, very devout christian. And who is he talking to, farmers, right?
I like the conclusion a lot. YOu clearly understand the basis of his argument and his approach. Nice work. More evidence in next practice. Then you'll be golden for Wednesday! 1-2-0.
Nonviolent resistance has been proven tried and true by countless humanitarians. It was a decade after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. when civil rights leader Cesar Chavez published his nonviolent agenda. Chavez recalls the principles of King and speaks about his own conviction to protect and improve human lives without acts of violence. The observance of Dr. King’s death capitalizes on the opportunity to explore the ideas of Chavez.
Chavez shifts gears in the second paragraph, stating, “Our conviction is that human life is a very special possession given by God to man and that no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause, however just it may be,” (lines 8-11). He blatantly lays out the mission of his organization, the preservation of human life. This philosophy is rooted in theology and references to God. Chavez’s mention of God ties his interest with his audience by appealing to their fundamental beliefs and morals. He is not only stating that life cannot be taken away, but quality of life cannot be taken away. Chavez is convinced that “when people are faced with a direct appeal from the poor struggling nonviolently (lines 27-29),” they will be in support of his message. Response to violence with nonviolence is not simply a tactic, though, it is a clear mindset.
Chavez explains he believes violence stems from “the deep concern” is “frustrated, and when they are faced with seemingly insurmountable odds,” (lines 42-44). He claims that every migrant worker feels the same impatience and anger, but they resist violence. Boycotts, strikes, and other demonstrations are the weapon of choice for nonviolent change.
GREAT introduction!!!! You point out the rhetorical situation of the anniversary. Yes. That was a choice on the part of Chavez, and pointing that out is excellent.
YOu come so close to hitting another major point in regards to the rhetorical situation in paragraph 2. It was published in a religious magazine. One more sentence there and the connection would have been great, and super high level. But, you do a great job using evidence and developing commentary there. Nice! If you had time, and had included an additional paragraph with that level of evidence and commentary, this would be more than enough to pass the exam. You can do it. So much potential! I think with more practice, you'll hit it perfectly on Wednesday!!!! So close. Just keep at it. You are thinking the exact right way!!!
Civil Rights activism was propelled by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., but his untimely death ushered in a sense of hopelessness to struggling minorities. On the tenth anniversary of this tragic day, Cesar Chavez, a labor union organizer and civil rights leader, published a hopeful and inspiring article influenced by the great Dr. King. Chavez writes an article with such integrity and empowerment, all regarding the long and painful fight for basic human rights. By stressing that human life trumps any trivial dispute, Chavez convinces his audience that nonviolence will never bring anything of value to fruition. Chavez immediately begins his argument by using Martin Luther King Jr. as a prolific example as to why human life and nonviolence is sacred. Chavez highlights the importance of the gift of human life and how violence is able to destroy that gift. With using Dr. King as a symbol of nonviolence, Chavez is able to significantly build up his ethos. Chavez continues to build up the ethos of his argument by telling his audience that only good can be garnered by being nonviolent. Chavez describes that, with violence, also comes pain, damage, and death. This relates directly to Chavez’s proclamation of the sacredness of human life. Chavez convinces the audience, beginning in line 33, that those of nonviolent nature have the upper handed strategy. Chavez successfully drives the point of violence being useless by using language that shames anyone of resorting to it. We lose sensibility when instinctively resorting to something as demoralizing as violence. In line 51, Chavez says, “If we fail, there are those who will see violence as the shortcut to change.” Chavez convinces his audience that violence is never an admirable or proactive choice to make. As Chavez says in line 24, “We respond with nonviolence, we attract people’s support.” He highlight’s the inviting quality of nonviolence, as it offers the opportunity of conveying a point and retaining one’s dignity. Chavez uses diction in a way to describe the use of violence as being silly and pitiful, but serious and damning as well. Chavez warns his audience of the tremendous impact of using violence. In lines 62-64, He uses Gandhi’s teaching as a great example as to how nonviolence works to allow change and remain inclusive. Later, on Chavez continues warning the effect of violence, he makes readers feel the reckless rambunctiousness of using violence as an answer. Chaves never strays or rationalizes uses of violence to compensate, his repetition and circling back to the point that violence is terrible gives immense strength to his message. By enforcing the notion of the sacredness of life, and also how violence can destroy that life, Chavez joins the two points and illustrates a powerful message. Chavez spends time telling readers why human life is of such value, as it is a special gift from God, which is a strong allusion. After pushing the message about the importance of life, Chavez dramatically describes how violence can severely harm the gift of life. Cesar Chavez successfully informs his audience of the dangers of violence and enforces the idea that no great leader or activist assumed their nobility by being violent.
THe writing is beautiful. It flows really well and you march through the passage pointing out really strong rhetorical strategies. The thing I would say is missing is your attention to the rhetorical situation. Three things that are significant, one, which you touch on in the introduction, is the anniversary and how that was a strategic move. ANother is his use of God and religion which is important because of the audience, right? It was published in a religious magazine. The other thing is that he connects with the farmers. If those, or some of those, were woven in here, it would be perfect. So on the next practice, try to pay CLOSE attention to the rhetorical situation. That will put you in the right place for Wednesday. 1-2-1
In Chavez’s article, the main point is that nonviolent approaches work. Through remaining peaceful, we spare the possible one life. He writes to honor the late Martin Luther King Jr., still fighting for civil rights ten years later. He uses facts and details to show that King’s tactics were effective, and still are today. He also uses his belief that human life is a gift and is sacred to show the good effect nonviolent protests concur. Through facts and detail, word choice, diction, and beliefs, we are shown through Chavez’ work why and how nonviolence is an effective form of battle. Through details and facts of Martin Luther King Jr.’s life, Chavez proves how nonviolence has a positive outcome. He begins the article with King’s story, which ropes the readers in. He doesn’t only talk about his life as a civil rights leader, but the entirety of his life as an example of the nonviolence power in this world. In the twelfth paragraph, Chavez encourages us to “examine history”(line 78). He refers back to previous instances to prove his points. Through these past details and facts, he is portraying to the audience the effectiveness of the idea of nonviolence. He uses examples in the text to show how it works. ‘Weapons’ that are used by nonviolent fighters are demonstrations and marches, boycotts, strikes. He gives ways that show it works. Not only are details used, but also word choice and tone. He says “We can gather the support of millions who have a conscience” (lines 24-25). In this line, he uses a sense of mockery, saying anyone else who believes otherwise does not have a conscience. Since everyone does have a conscience, it is inclusive of every person, as in there is no one who wouldn’t support a nonviolent cause. This type of wording hooks the reader, as they themselves realize that this cause is one worth supporting. Lastly, he uses his beliefs, and is able to back them up and convince his readers that they are correct. He says no cause is worth losing a human life over. Misery, poverty and exploitation all exist and are struggled with daily, but they are not more important than the life of a human. Why risk the life of someone for a cause that could be resolved without violence? Chaves’s article for the ten year anniversary of King’s assasination is used to continue the fight for rights. His recognition of King, along with his own experiences and the effects of the past create an airtight argument for nonviolence. His values for human life is shown in his work, and helps provide credibility that he does what he does for the sake of others.
Your introduction is eloquent and accurate! Way to go on that! You could use more evidence. If you say his word choice is important, tell the reader which words you are talking about and how he is using them. Think two pieces of evidence per point. Also, pay really, really close attention to all three gifts given about the "rhetorical situation". YOu get one, the date of the article being the ten year anniversary. But you miss the fact that it was published in a religious magazine, and that he was talking to farmers. Both ways to tie in the "so what" of the piece and to tie it back into the great introduction you crafted. One more practice. Try and apply these changes to the practice on Friday and you'll be all set for Wednesday! 1-2-0
For as long as people have been oppressed, division has existed between those who resort to violence to bring about change, and those who use peaceful, nonviolent methods. During the civil rights and worker’s rights movements of the 1900’s, there were certainly advocates on each side, but Cesar Chavez was one such leader during who believed in the power of nonviolence. Such was his message in an article published in a religious magazine on the tenth anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s death. In the article, Chavez uses comparison and contrast as well as appeals to shared values of morals and great leaders to convey to his audience that nonviolence is far more powerful than violence. Throughout the passage, Chavez uses strong logic to compare the effects of violent protests and nonviolent protests in various contexts, with nonviolence clearly being the best option. In the fourth paragraph, he says that resorting to violence only escalates the cause, leading to more injuries and deaths or the “demoralization” of the people involved. However, he gives nonviolence as the alternative, saying that it has “exactly the opposite effect.” Instead, responding with nonviolence “attracts people’s support.” In other words, people are turned off by violence, but if a method of change is brought peacefully, people are much more likely to listen. Likewise, he later repeats Gandhi’s brilliant point that nonviolence allows “masses of people to actively participate in a cause” (lines 61-64). This example highlights the fact that not everyone is willing to risk being killed, injured, thrown in jail, etc. for a cause. But in contrast, a boycott is much easier to participate in. In fact, this is something that many of his readers may have related to, convincing them them that perhaps violence isn’t quite as widely applicable as peaceful methods. Aside from strong appeals to logos through comparison and contrast, Chavez also appeals to several values that his readers share. One of the most important is the value of human life, an indisputable commonplace. Right from the start, he states that, “...human life is a very special possession given by God to man and no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause, however just it may be” (lines 8-11). Here, he clearly states that life is the most important thing of all, but he states it in a way that would make anyone who disagreed sound heartless. However, he uses this commonplace idea to show that violence approaches to change are simply not worth the cost, if life is truly important to us. He appeals to the morals of his audience; after all, it’s being published in a religious magazine. These are not the only values he appeals to, as he also speaks of how “Dr. King’s death gives us the best possible opportunity to recall the principles with which our struggle has grown and matured.” What he means is that, they’ve gotten as far as they have in their cause through nonviolence, so clearly it is effective. Appealing to Dr. King is effective because anyone at that time would agree that Dr. King was an effective leader. By appealing to the shared values of his audience, Chavez is able to get their attention and help them to see the benefits of nonviolent approaches to change. Ultimately, by appealing to the audience’s values of life and leaders of the time as well as using logical comparisons, Caesar Chavez illustrates to his readers that nonviolence can be a powerful tool while violence is a destructive one. These appeals to ethos and logos helped shape a message that swayed a tumultuous nation in favor of nonviolent change. And today, decades later, we are living in a nation that was shaped by the very nonviolence that Caesar Chavez proclaimed.
YES!!!!!! The introduction is amazing! You hit the rhetorical situation and set yourself up to write an amazing analysis!!!! Then, pointing out the logic of CHavez is so smart, especially since you found great evidence and developed the commentary. Very, very good!
Then the appeal to common values, you hit the rhetorical situation again! Yes. Take this approach on the next practice and on Wednesday. This is fantastic! 1-4-1
By the tenth anniversary of American minister and civil rights icon Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s passing, people needed to be reminded of the power of nonviolence. Nonviolence won equality for a race that had been thirsting for civil rights for centuries. Similarly to equality, nonviolence deserves to be advocated, and it has been the responsibility of leaders to do just that. Cesear Chavez, a civil rights leader and labor union organizer, strived to fulfill this responsibility in an article he wrote for a religious magazine. By interpreting Dr. King Jr.’s life and Ghandi’s life as examples of the power of nonviolence, deconstructing nonviolence through imagery and logic, and writing in a sympathetic tone, Chavez delivers a thoughtful message to the equally as thoughtful people reading the article in order to promote nonviolent resistance in the fight for equality. Chavez opened his article with a solid ploy to remind readers of what the nonviolent route can achieve. Although brief, his mentioning of Dr. King Jr.’s life, provided a strong example of the power in a nonviolent approach. “It [Dr. King Jr.’s life] is an example that inspired much of the philosophy and strategy of the farm workers’ movement (lines 2-4)”. This sentence demonstrates the power that Dr. King Jr.’s life had because it notes how his life influenced the decisions the farm workers made and how they carried out their movement. Since peace and an absence of violence was the center of King’s movement, it can be assumed that peace would also be the center of the farm workers’ movement. Near the passage end, lines 62-64 describe a strategy of Ghandi’s. Ghandi’s nonviolent strategy was to boycott salt, and it is one that “allows masses of people to participate actively in a cause”. Chavez touches upon two famous movements led by nonviolent leaders: King and Ghandi’s. This is to provide some credibility to the strategy of nonviolence and to prove that it does work and can have massive effects. Chavez employs logic to break down nonviolence and contrast it with violence. In lines 17-21, Chavez provides two outcomes that result from violence: potentially fatal escalation or demoralization of those involved. Then he contrasts violence with nonviolence from lines 22-24 by stating how more support can be attracted through nonviolent acts. Lines 73-75 mention how violence never works in the long run and that nonviolence holds more power when oppression is greater. His tone is quite sympathetic and soft, rather than demanding or harsh. He never demands nonviolence, instead, he simply tells his reader the benefits of it. By writing in a sympathetic tone, he parallels his own argument of nonviolence being better than violence. In line 37, Chavez points out how one human life is worth more than the importance of the struggle. He turns optimistic in line 40 by saying “men and women who are truly concerned about people and nonviolent by nature”. He uses logic again when making this statement. It seems obvious that a person seeking peace or justice would also be one that dislikes lashing out. Chavez’s audience is most likely religious people that seek to help others. This can be assumed because the article he publishes is in a magazine run by a religious organization that states how they enjoy being devoted to others. His sympathetic tone, deconstruction of nonviolence through logic and imagery, and his acknowledgement of the successful results of Ghandi and King’s nonviolent moment set him up to successfully deliver his own message. He was able to build his argument and encourage people to join him. His calm tone made his intentions seem pure and his argument more solid.
Oh the introduction is amazing! Fully developed, plus you hit the rhetorical situations! Chelsea, this is so good! YOu embed the quotes and then develop excellent commentary. This is the approach you should take on Wednesday. POinting out his use of Ghandi AND King really drives home his appeal to ethos! And then pointing out his logic! I'm so proud of you! 1-3-1 Keep doing this!
Labor Union and Civil Rights Leader Cesar Chavez writes a wonderful piece in honor of the tenth anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination. In this article, Chavez writes to those in need and exemplifies what it means to fight for the rights, however by doing so nonviolently. By stressing the value of life, helping the audience understand the effects of violence, and proving the positive effects of peaceful protests and demonstrations, Chavez leads the audience down a peaceful road to choose nonviolence over violence when it comes to fighting for their own beliefs.
ReplyDeleteChavez, early in his own letter, describes how important it is to value the life of humans in order to fight for nonviolence. Chavez explains that “human life is a very special possession given by God to man..” (Lines 8-9) By alluding to God, Chavez points out that people’s lives are not for us to decide what happens to them, but we must respect one another to learn from one another. He guides those in need so that they can understand that violence is not the answer by understanding where their lives come from. Respect comes before anything. Chavez continues along these lines and demands again that no person can decide what happens with a person’s life (Lines 9-10). He knows that when people begin messing with the lives of free humans, they lose the value in life, and look at people as objects they can use, rather than respecting their lives as human beings. He warns the people in this magazine that if they choose violence over nonviolence, then more and more anniversaries like that of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination anniversary will take place.
Cesar Chavez uses credible sources in order to back up his argument that peaceful demonstrations are the only way to experience freedom for those who are fighting for it. “The boycott, as Gandhi taught, is the most nearly perfect instrument of nonviolent change,...” (Lines 61-63). He mentions Gandhi here to enhance his credibility, since Gandhi knows quite a lot about peaceful demonstrations, since he led them in the past. Using such a knowledgeable source, He boosts his ethos and gives those in need the trust that they can believe his word; nonviolent protests will create a world of free people. Chavez also explains that freedom is best lived when people are actively engaged together and determined for a cause. (Lines 54-55) Chavez appeals to the pathos of the audience because this gives them a chance to “do,” rather than “wish.” They now feel motivated to rally together to further help their cause. Chavez leads by example of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s doctrine, and helps those in need actually complete their own dream.
Finally, Chavez also repeatedly cautions the audience and explains the negative aspect of violence. He does this by pointing out it could mean death. He places his audience’s minds on history, explaining that from past years, violent protests have led to death for the one’s trying to revolt; the working class. (Lines 78-80) He knows that even if those in need try to revolt for themselves, they just will not have what it takes to win their cause. They must fight with their peaceful protests, not their violent revolts, just as King Jr. taught. Chavez also explains that “when you lose your sense of life and justice, you lose your strength.” (Lines 71-72) He attempts to teach his audience that they should never lose sight of justice, because that is what they are fighting for. If those in need choose violence over nonviolence, they will forget what they are fighting for, and only worry about degrading those they are fighting against, which is not what Martin Luther King Jr. told the civil rights movement to do.
ReplyDeleteDr, Martin Luther King Jr. led by word and deed as he guided the civil rights movement nonviolently through their mission. Cesar Chavez does the same here, and he reminds those in need that the only way to win the battle is peacefully. Chavez explains that if the people choose violence as their answer, they will lose sight of the value of human life, something they are fighting for in themselves. He wants to make sure that they are coming together to actively demonstrate peaceful protests in order for people to hear their needs. Though it can be a challenge, Chavez’s argument places everything they need to know into perspective; valuing life, understanding the negative effects of violence, and the positivity of peaceful protests.
OKay, yes. Approach your essay just like this on the exam. You used the high level thesis and it set you up to write a really, really good rhetorical analysis! I would give this a 1-4-0 which would have to passing this exam with flying colors. Fantastic!
DeleteIn a time where inequality between races ran rampant, peace was at the forefront of most minds. Putting aside any opposition, leaders of the African American civil rights movements strove to instill harmony, while advocating for much needed societal changes. Cesar Chavez does just that in his tenth anniversary speech in remembrance of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr’s assassination. By employing repetition of descriptive words such as “powerful” and “nonviolence”, changing tones, and plural first person pronouns, Chavez successfully crafts his argument regarding nonviolent resistance in the fight for equality.
ReplyDeleteDiving headfirst into his speech, Chavez opens with a reminder to the people of what Luther’s life exemplified. Nonviolence was one of Luther’s top priorities in his fight. “Powerful” and “nonviolence” are used together often in Chavez’s speech. For example, the opening sentence states, “Dr. King’s entire life was an example of power that nonviolence brings to bear in the real world” (lines 1-2). The word “power” is used to describe the effect Luther’s philosophies held. He believed it was important to not cave to violence, despite any anger towards inequality in the United States. These words are repeated over and over again all throughout the speech. What this does is it drives the point that keeping the peace, or “nonviolence” is the strongest, most effective, most “powerful” way to gain respect and open the ears of all people.
Besides playing on repetition, Chavez also changes his tone to create depth and meaning in his speech. In the first half of the piece, Chavez uses a proud, yet mourning tone. Referring back to Luther’s life and impact draws a feeling of remembrance which can bring mourning in the case of his untimely death. However, the tone allows for resounding pride regarding Luther’s work. Lines 4 through 7 state, “This observance of Dr. King’s death gives us the best possible opportunity to recall the principles with which our struggle has grown and matured.” This sets the tone for the rest of the speech as it brings the audience together as one in the push for equal rights, while remembering Luther. Another notable tone change occurs at the start of line 73. It begins to pick up; a rhythm builds and Chavez’s diction becomes more assertive. Phrases such as, “The greater the oppression, the more leverage nonviolence holds” (lines 73-74) assert dominance through a common understanding, while showing the oppressors that although the fight for equality is not yet finished, they will continue to fight with peace in mind. This angry yet respectful tone shows just how important Chavez finds nonviolence in the face of resistance.
Naturally, a first person point of view is used, since it is a speech. Although, Chavez makes an apparent choice to avoid using the word “I.” Instead, he resorts to the word “we” and “our” as his pronouns of choice. For example, Chavez says “We are also convinced that nonviolence is more powerful than violence” (lines 12-13). He could have just as easily stated “I am also convinced…”, but he did not. By using plural pronouns Chavez furthers the sense of togetherness created by his tone and word choice. This technique builds both pathos and ethos for Chavez, which allows his argument to be even more successful than it would be otherwise.
In short, Chavez’s use of repetition, tone change, and plural pronouns help develop and strengthen his argument in his speech for the tenth anniversary of civil rights leader, Martin Luther King Jr’s assassination. By employing the techniques as previously mentioned, Chavez not only builds upon his argument, but he successfully rallies people to join him. His rhetorical choices allow for a moving speech, laced with a beautiful, passionate cause. Nonviolent resistance was at the heart of many largely victorious civil rights leaders, so despite what one may think, peace is always the answer to any fight.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYou nailed it! Totally nailed it. This is a great approach to the essay. Your thesis is fantastic which set you up to write a really good, well supported body. I'm giving this a 1-3-1 which means you would pass this exam with flying colors! The only thing you might consider is talking more about the rhetorical situation and addressing that his audience is farmers. That could be added to the paragraph about "we". It is "we" because they are bonded by the fact that they are farmers, right? That is just a little thing, but worth noting. Always try and incorporate the rhetorical situation.
DeleteI’m not sure why my indents didn’t appear but they are there after the paragraph breaks
ReplyDeleteMartin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, Malcom X, Susan B. Anthony, and every other activist for civil rights wanted one thing -- equality. Equality is fascinating in the sense that so much conflict can arise from the simple fact that every human innately desires peace and acceptance. By providing a sympathetic voice, and controlling the emotion in his writing, Cesar Chavez displays his rightful place among the great leaders of civil rights with a compelling message urging his fellow farm workers to pursue nonviolence in their efforts for equality.
ReplyDeleteOne way Chavez conveys sympathy and unity in his message is his word choice. Throughout the article, he far more often uses the word, “we” rather than, “I” or, “you” when speaking of the struggles they have faced as well as how they should respond. This is a subtle way of providing his audience with a feeling of genuine solidarity. By constantly reiterating that he expects no more of his fellow workers than he does of himself, he makes a significant increase to his credibility, therefore making his message more effective. He expresses the same sympathy in more than just words, he uses entire sentences and phrases to appeal to his audience’s shared beliefs. For example, he states, “Our conviction is that human life is a very special possession given by God to man and that no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause, however it may be.” (lines 8-11). This allusion to God is very powerful, especially regarding the context that this article was published in a religious magazine. He simultaneously supports the reverence they should view their own lives and values with, while also deepening his message that no one else deserves to be treated with violence.
Often, great writing seems to have an extremely passionate tone to inspire the audience and light a fire within them for whatever the writer desires. Chavez goes against the grain in this respect. By not evoking passion, but rather demonstrating a tone of self-control and logic, he encourages his audience to sit back and reflect before proceeding, not become emotional and lash out. He does in a few ways, one of which is creating logical comparisons and cause/effect relationships between ideas. One example of this is, “If we resort to violence then one of two things will happen: either the violence will be escalated and there will be many injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides, or there will be total demoralization of the workers.” (lines 17-21) He does not glamorize either side, but rather says it exactly how it is. By maintaining this throughout the article, he leads his audience to think with their heads, not their feelings, which is exactly what they need to see the value of a nonviolent approach. On the more subtle side of things, his repetition of the word, “nonviolence” through the article is another way he kept his work, and therefore his audience, grounded. By constantly referring back to the one word that summarizes his message, he kept his argument on the right track no matter what he was saying.
Maintaining a voice of sympathy paired with a no nonsense tone were two ways Cesar Chavez was successful in making his case for nonviolence. The voice of a calm, confident, yet concerned leader was what the workers needed, and the way he was able to provide them with that is exemplified very clearly through the rhetorical choices in his article.
YES KARA!!!!! This opening is amazing, and in particular the thesis! You include the rhetorical situation, and the fact that you include the unifying piece of info about them being farmers really makes it a next level thesis. This, of course, sets you up to write a fantastic essay. Do this exact thing next Wednesday. I'm going to say this is a 1-4-1. For real. So good.
DeleteOne missed opportunity is the fact that it was written for a religious magazine! Always think of the rhetorical situation. But it does not impact the score, just an observation.
DeleteOn the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr.Martin Luther King, America is reminded of the violence and hatred that clouded the country that day. It impacted the civil rights movement viciously and attacked Dr.Martin Luther Kings very cause of bringing about change without violence. Cesar Chavez recognized that the fight for nonviolent change was far from over, which is why he wrote an article honoring King’s methods of change. By Cesar Chavez crafting an article with shifts in tone, cause and effect, and varied sentence structure for emphasis, he was able to develop an argument that re inspired the fire surrounding nonviolent protests.
ReplyDeleteEarly in the letter, Chavez addresses the ideas of what will happen if people resort to violence. He says “ either the violence will be escalated and there will be many injuries and perhaps death on both sides, or there will be total demonization of the workers” (lines 17-21). In making this comment, the writer is able to almost scare the audience with the idea of total disaster. By showing the horror of what will happen with violent protests, he is able to spark an urgency that nonviolent protests must be utilized. This tactic of cause and effect makes the ideas of disaster seem logical to the audience, and makes them see the true effects of what will happen if people don’t change their ways. Chavez once again utilizes the tool of cause and effect when he says “ if we beat the growers at the expense of violence, victory would come at the expense of injury and perhaps death.” ( lines 66-68). This quotation appeals to the pathos of the readers. It makes them see that they have no other choice but to leave violence behind, as with it they will fall to misery and death.
Beyond showing the readers the consequences of violence, Chavez further emphasizes the urgency of the matter through sentence structure. Throughout the majority of the text, the sentences are lengthy and give context. However, when Chavez is eager to make a point the structure shifts. He writes “ People suffer from violence” ( line 77). This quotation follows a discussion of oppression and power succession, both of which are complex topics. By writing such a simple sentence, he ensures the readers will understand the overall message that no matter how people go about it, violence will hurt someone.
In order to show the readers that nonviolence needs active change, Chavez structured his shifts in tone around this idea. In the beginning of the passage, it is mournful and speaks about what Dr.King did for the movement. This tone shifts at the end of paragraph 4 when Chavez writes “ It is to that yearning we appeal”(lines 31-32). This line introduces an active and prepared tone to the rest of the essay. Chavez starts to speak about the ways Americans can practice nonviolent protests. He speaks about marches, strikes, and boycotts. By giving examples of ways every American can participate in nonviolent movements , he is able to once again re spark a way for people to make active and real changes.
Dr.King’s life gave a perfect example on the principles of nonviolent resistance. He showed Americans that all human life was wroth fighting for. On the tenth anniversary of his death, Cesar Chavez wanted to recall his movement and make Americans want to once again follow these practices. By using an urgent tone, and showing the consequences of what will happen if nonviolent resistance is not utilized, Chavez successfully showed the audience that using this form of resistance will make a positive change.
Love that you analyze his use of logic in the either/or allowing you to point out the cause and effect. Fantastic! A really pro move Megan! and to follow up with an awesome transition! WOOHOO! One more example in the paragraph about sentence structure would have been good. I think you could have used a quote to back up your general comment about the complexity of the sentences that follow. But, it is good.
DeleteGreat move again when you discuss the shift. In what other ways is the shift evident? One more piece of evidence there would be great.
Love the conclusion. Try to pay attention to the rhetorical situation. The two dead ringers are that they are all farmers, and that is who is uniting with and calling on, and also that it was published in a religious magazine.
But, this is good. Great approach, especially on the thesis. Maybe try and include a little more evidence, but an essay like this has you passing this exam! 1-3-0
Chavez writes to those who are in need of help, and also highlights the importance of nonviolence throughout his piece. By highlighting the effects of violence, his tone in his writing, and using a sentence variety and syntax, he is able to successfully promote peace and connect with his audience.
ReplyDeleteRight away, Chavez begins speaking about Dr. King and how he was a prime example of how nonviolence is a very powerful thing. He opens by stating, “Dr. King’s entire life was an example of power that nonviolence bring to bear in the real world” (lines 1-2”). The tenth anniversary is his death is the perfect time to bring to light the need for nonviolence in order to live in a more peaceful world. He also spoke about how nonviolence is much more powerful than nonviolence, and how nonviolence would attract more support from others. He also stresses the importance of human life and freedom. He states “freedom is best experienced through participation and self-determination, and free men and women instinctively prefer democratic change to any other means” (lines 5 -57), proving that freedom is the best when everyone works for it.
Secondly, Chavez uses a passionate tone to convey his message to his audience. By using a tone that is both passionate and serious, he ignites a fire inside of his readers, and inspires them to help support the change that is so greatly needed. During this time, there was still a great amount of inequality, and although he knew that this change could not be mad overnight, he used this peace to try and spark something inside of his readers and inspire them to open their eyes to the changes that need to be made. He accomplishes this just by the tone in which he is using.
Finally, Chavez uses a variety of sentence structure to add emphasis to his piece. He incorporates both short and long sentence to vary in the structure of his paragraphs. For example, he uses both short and long sentences in the second to last paragraph (lines 78-86) when talking about history and how violence effects people. The combination of both short and long sentences outs emphasis on how violence effected people, especially the poor and the workers. He also uses sentence variety in lines 73-77 when he states “ The greater the oppression, the more leverage non-violence holds. Violence does not work in the long run and it is temporarily successful, it replaces one violent form of power with another just as violent. People suffer from violence.” He empathizes the effectiveness that nonviolence through the use of different sentence structure.
Dr. King was a great man who wanted only what was best for his people and the country. This piece greatly highlights this and shows that Dr. King’s ideas of nonviolence are still very useful and should be followed in order to gain the peace that is so very deserved by everyone. By voicing the importance of nonviolence, using a passionate and serious tone, and varying in sentence structure for emphasis, Chavez reaches out to his readers and ignites a flame within them in order to promote peace.
This is good. You do a good job providing lots of evidence. Be SURE to pay attention to the rhetorical situation. YOu do a good job with that when you point out the publishing this on the 10th anniversary was smart, and that it was a choice. Also relevant are two things, he is speaking to farmers and trying to unite them just like King did with the African Americans, and that the article is being published in a religious magazine. You do a nice job with the thesis, but try and address the rhetorical situation somewhere in the introduction.
DeleteGood use of evidence, make sure to relate it back to thesis. You are doing GREAT!
1-3-0
The tenth anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s death came at a difficult time for human rights activists. This is demonstrated through a compelling piece written by Cesar Chavez, who was working to gain support for a nonviolent resistance in support of neglected farm workers. Through his utilization of tone and appeals to shared values, Cesar Chavez is able to stake an irrefutable claim in support of the benefits of nonviolent resistance.
ReplyDeleteCesar’s appeals to the shared values of his audience can be seen almost immediately in his argument. He begins with a statement that honor’s Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s life and his groundbreaking, nonviolent actions. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. made history with his amazing leadership and became a star figure of the Civil Rights Movement. This is beneficial because it allows his audience to feel connected to his argument immediately, even if they were not personally affected by the injustice of the agriculture industry. Chavez then moves on to discussing the value of human life, stating: “Our conviction is that human life is a very special possession given by God to man and that no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause, however just it may be.” This powerful statement would likely resonate deeply with his original audience, the readers of a religious magazine published by a religious order dedicated to helping those in need. By displaying the fact that he values human life above any cause, Chavez both strengthens the audience’s trust in him and prepares them for the rest of his argument.
In addition to his appeals to shared values, Chavez creates a motivational and respectful tone that is essential to the influence of his argument. This tone, which strongly appeals to logic, was created using multiple rhetorical tools, but most distinguishable is syntax. All throughout Cesar’s writing, short and fairly simple sentences can be seen, as well as a few long and complex sentences. The shorter sentences provide insight in a matter-of-fact manner, such as “We would lose regard for human beings,” and “People suffer from violence.” These short sentences distinguish the effects on violence from the benefits of nonviolence, which are mainly discussed in longer, more complex sentences, such as “Thus, demonstrations and marches, strikes and boycotts are not only weapons against the growers, but our only way of avoiding the senseless violence that brings no honor to any class or community.” These variations of sentence structure in correspondence to their subject matter create a rhythm in the passage. This rhythm contributes to the call for nonviolence that Chavez presents to his audience. In supporting this call to action, the syntax also contributes to Chavez’s overall goal, respect for all human life.
As an important figure in the fight for human rights, Cesar Chavez worked to convince people to nonviolently demand change. His abilities to do so are greatly demonstrated in this passage about nonviolent protests for neglected farm workers. Through his creation of a motivational and respectful tone and his appeals to shared values, Chavez constructs an influential argument on the benefits of nonviolence.
YES!!!!!!! You hit every single nugget of the rhetorical situation here!!! OMG Vivian! Amazing! Do this during the exam.
Delete1-4-1. Seriously, this is so good.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. spent his life fighting for the equality of the people that were treated unfairly. On the tenth anniversary of his death Cesar Chavez is still in the fight for equality and to honor the people that are in need he wrote an article explaining that nonviolent protest will help them win their rights. Cesar states strong facts about protest and the repercussions that can come from them when they are both violent and nonviolent. By using evidence to support the strong facts Cesar Chavez lifts the spirits of people in need and explains to them why nonviolent protest will bring a better response to their cause.
ReplyDeleteThe article starts by paying respect to Dr. King and his passion of fighting for minority groups rights through nonviolent acts. Following this statement, Chavez gives evidence that the power of nonviolence that Martin Luther King Jr. taught many people has spread through the country and helped form many activist groups for people in need. The second paragraph then focuses on the importance of human life and how it has helped the group's efforts. This evidence on how Dr. King has instituted a new method of protesting adds some sadness but also pride for the people that the article was meant for. After the first two paragraphs there is a shift in the writer's tone. The focus is moved more to why nonviolence is a better method. The paragraph begins with a strong statement that simply states that the group knows that nonviolence is more powerful than violence. The writer then explains the reason why his opinion is true by giving evidence that nonviolence will support the person if the cause they are fighting for is just. Evidence is also given as to why resorting to violence is the wrong decision. So the main point is supported while also explaining why the other option is wrong.
Throughout all of the evidence that is given the word choice of Chavez makes the reader feel as though they are a part of the group. The pronoun we is used very regularly to include the reader into the article's purpose. Every act that is talked about in the article is not done by a single person, everyone is a part of the fight that Cesar Chavez is writing about. For example line 45 states, “We advocate for militant nonviolence as our means of achieving justice for our people, but we are not blind to the feelings of frustration, impatience and anger with seethe inside every farm worker.” In that sentence the pronoun we is used to show that Cesar recognizes the struggles of the people who are not given their rights. He also makes it known the feelings that the people are going through because they are being ignored and denied their requests.
Cesar Chavez was able to make a strong argument for protesting nonviolently by giving strong points and supporting them with evidence. He also changed his word choice so that the readers of the article felt like they were heard and someone was fighting for them.
LOVE the introduction!
DeleteYou make great points, but you need more evidence. You only have one quote in there. Try to get at least 2 quick pieces evidence, on can be situational, but the other should be a quote from the text. Even if it is just a word. Who was the article meant for? You come so close to nailing a major appeal to the rhetorical situation. It is a religious magazine. King was a very, very devout christian. And who is he talking to, farmers, right?
I like the conclusion a lot. YOu clearly understand the basis of his argument and his approach. Nice work. More evidence in next practice. Then you'll be golden for Wednesday!
1-2-0.
Nonviolent resistance has been proven tried and true by countless humanitarians. It was a decade after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. when civil rights leader Cesar Chavez published his nonviolent agenda. Chavez recalls the principles of King and speaks about his own conviction to protect and improve human lives without acts of violence. The observance of Dr. King’s death capitalizes on the opportunity to explore the ideas of Chavez.
ReplyDeleteChavez shifts gears in the second paragraph, stating, “Our conviction is that human life is a very special possession given by God to man and that no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause, however just it may be,” (lines 8-11). He blatantly lays out the mission of his organization, the preservation of human life. This philosophy is rooted in theology and references to God. Chavez’s mention of God ties his interest with his audience by appealing to their fundamental beliefs and morals. He is not only stating that life cannot be taken away, but quality of life cannot be taken away. Chavez is convinced that “when people are faced with a direct appeal from the poor struggling nonviolently (lines 27-29),” they will be in support of his message. Response to violence with nonviolence is not simply a tactic, though, it is a clear mindset.
Chavez explains he believes violence stems from “the deep concern” is “frustrated, and when they are faced with seemingly insurmountable odds,” (lines 42-44). He claims that every migrant worker feels the same impatience and anger, but they resist violence. Boycotts, strikes, and other demonstrations are the weapon of choice for nonviolent change.
(Ran out of time)
GREAT introduction!!!! You point out the rhetorical situation of the anniversary. Yes. That was a choice on the part of Chavez, and pointing that out is excellent.
DeleteYOu come so close to hitting another major point in regards to the rhetorical situation in paragraph 2. It was published in a religious magazine. One more sentence there and the connection would have been great, and super high level. But, you do a great job using evidence and developing commentary there. Nice!
If you had time, and had included an additional paragraph with that level of evidence and commentary, this would be more than enough to pass the exam. You can do it. So much potential! I think with more practice, you'll hit it perfectly on Wednesday!!!! So close. Just keep at it. You are thinking the exact right way!!!
Civil Rights activism was propelled by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., but his untimely death ushered in a sense of hopelessness to struggling minorities. On the tenth anniversary of this tragic day, Cesar Chavez, a labor union organizer and civil rights leader, published a hopeful and inspiring article influenced by the great Dr. King. Chavez writes an article with such integrity and empowerment, all regarding the long and painful fight for basic human rights. By stressing that human life trumps any trivial dispute, Chavez convinces his audience that nonviolence will never bring anything of value to fruition.
ReplyDeleteChavez immediately begins his argument by using Martin Luther King Jr. as a prolific example as to why human life and nonviolence is sacred. Chavez highlights the importance of the gift of human life and how violence is able to destroy that gift. With using Dr. King as a symbol of nonviolence, Chavez is able to significantly build up his ethos. Chavez continues to build up the ethos of his argument by telling his audience that only good can be garnered by being nonviolent. Chavez describes that, with violence, also comes pain, damage, and death. This relates directly to Chavez’s proclamation of the sacredness of human life. Chavez convinces the audience, beginning in line 33, that those of nonviolent nature have the upper handed strategy.
Chavez successfully drives the point of violence being useless by using language that shames anyone of resorting to it. We lose sensibility when instinctively resorting to something as demoralizing as violence. In line 51, Chavez says, “If we fail, there are those who will see violence as the shortcut to change.” Chavez convinces his audience that violence is never an admirable or proactive choice to make. As Chavez says in line 24, “We respond with nonviolence, we attract people’s support.” He highlight’s the inviting quality of nonviolence, as it offers the opportunity of conveying a point and retaining one’s dignity. Chavez uses diction in a way to describe the use of violence as being silly and pitiful, but serious and damning as well.
Chavez warns his audience of the tremendous impact of using violence. In lines 62-64, He uses Gandhi’s teaching as a great example as to how nonviolence works to allow change and remain inclusive. Later, on Chavez continues warning the effect of violence, he makes readers feel the reckless rambunctiousness of using violence as an answer. Chaves never strays or rationalizes uses of violence to compensate, his repetition and circling back to the point that violence is terrible gives immense strength to his message.
By enforcing the notion of the sacredness of life, and also how violence can destroy that life, Chavez joins the two points and illustrates a powerful message. Chavez spends time telling readers why human life is of such value, as it is a special gift from God, which is a strong allusion. After pushing the message about the importance of life, Chavez dramatically describes how violence can severely harm the gift of life. Cesar Chavez successfully informs his audience of the dangers of violence and enforces the idea that no great leader or activist assumed their nobility by being violent.
THe writing is beautiful. It flows really well and you march through the passage pointing out really strong rhetorical strategies. The thing I would say is missing is your attention to the rhetorical situation. Three things that are significant, one, which you touch on in the introduction, is the anniversary and how that was a strategic move. ANother is his use of God and religion which is important because of the audience, right? It was published in a religious magazine. The other thing is that he connects with the farmers. If those, or some of those, were woven in here, it would be perfect. So on the next practice, try to pay CLOSE attention to the rhetorical situation. That will put you in the right place for Wednesday.
Delete1-2-1
In Chavez’s article, the main point is that nonviolent approaches work. Through remaining peaceful, we spare the possible one life. He writes to honor the late Martin Luther King Jr., still fighting for civil rights ten years later. He uses facts and details to show that King’s tactics were effective, and still are today. He also uses his belief that human life is a gift and is sacred to show the good effect nonviolent protests concur. Through facts and detail, word choice, diction, and beliefs, we are shown through Chavez’ work why and how nonviolence is an effective form of battle.
ReplyDeleteThrough details and facts of Martin Luther King Jr.’s life, Chavez proves how nonviolence has a positive outcome. He begins the article with King’s story, which ropes the readers in. He doesn’t only talk about his life as a civil rights leader, but the entirety of his life as an example of the nonviolence power in this world. In the twelfth paragraph, Chavez encourages us to “examine history”(line 78). He refers back to previous instances to prove his points. Through these past details and facts, he is portraying to the audience the effectiveness of the idea of nonviolence. He uses examples in the text to show how it works. ‘Weapons’ that are used by nonviolent fighters are demonstrations and marches, boycotts, strikes. He gives ways that show it works.
Not only are details used, but also word choice and tone. He says “We can gather the support of millions who have a conscience” (lines 24-25). In this line, he uses a sense of mockery, saying anyone else who believes otherwise does not have a conscience. Since everyone does have a conscience, it is inclusive of every person, as in there is no one who wouldn’t support a nonviolent cause. This type of wording hooks the reader, as they themselves realize that this cause is one worth supporting.
Lastly, he uses his beliefs, and is able to back them up and convince his readers that they are correct. He says no cause is worth losing a human life over. Misery, poverty and exploitation all exist and are struggled with daily, but they are not more important than the life of a human. Why risk the life of someone for a cause that could be resolved without violence?
Chaves’s article for the ten year anniversary of King’s assasination is used to continue the fight for rights. His recognition of King, along with his own experiences and the effects of the past create an airtight argument for nonviolence. His values for human life is shown in his work, and helps provide credibility that he does what he does for the sake of others.
Your introduction is eloquent and accurate! Way to go on that!
DeleteYou could use more evidence. If you say his word choice is important, tell the reader which words you are talking about and how he is using them. Think two pieces of evidence per point.
Also, pay really, really close attention to all three gifts given about the "rhetorical situation". YOu get one, the date of the article being the ten year anniversary. But you miss the fact that it was published in a religious magazine, and that he was talking to farmers. Both ways to tie in the "so what" of the piece and to tie it back into the great introduction you crafted. One more practice. Try and apply these changes to the practice on Friday and you'll be all set for Wednesday!
1-2-0
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFor as long as people have been oppressed, division has existed between those who resort to violence to bring about change, and those who use peaceful, nonviolent methods. During the civil rights and worker’s rights movements of the 1900’s, there were certainly advocates on each side, but Cesar Chavez was one such leader during who believed in the power of nonviolence. Such was his message in an article published in a religious magazine on the tenth anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s death. In the article, Chavez uses comparison and contrast as well as appeals to shared values of morals and great leaders to convey to his audience that nonviolence is far more powerful than violence.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the passage, Chavez uses strong logic to compare the effects of violent protests and nonviolent protests in various contexts, with nonviolence clearly being the best option. In the fourth paragraph, he says that resorting to violence only escalates the cause, leading to more injuries and deaths or the “demoralization” of the people involved. However, he gives nonviolence as the alternative, saying that it has “exactly the opposite effect.” Instead, responding with nonviolence “attracts people’s support.” In other words, people are turned off by violence, but if a method of change is brought peacefully, people are much more likely to listen. Likewise, he later repeats Gandhi’s brilliant point that nonviolence allows “masses of people to actively participate in a cause” (lines 61-64). This example highlights the fact that not everyone is willing to risk being killed, injured, thrown in jail, etc. for a cause. But in contrast, a boycott is much easier to participate in. In fact, this is something that many of his readers may have related to, convincing them them that perhaps violence isn’t quite as widely applicable as peaceful methods.
Aside from strong appeals to logos through comparison and contrast, Chavez also appeals to several values that his readers share. One of the most important is the value of human life, an indisputable commonplace. Right from the start, he states that, “...human life is a very special possession given by God to man and no one has the right to take it for any reason or for any cause, however just it may be” (lines 8-11). Here, he clearly states that life is the most important thing of all, but he states it in a way that would make anyone who disagreed sound heartless. However, he uses this commonplace idea to show that violence approaches to change are simply not worth the cost, if life is truly important to us. He appeals to the morals of his audience; after all, it’s being published in a religious magazine. These are not the only values he appeals to, as he also speaks of how “Dr. King’s death gives us the best possible opportunity to recall the principles with which our struggle has grown and matured.” What he means is that, they’ve gotten as far as they have in their cause through nonviolence, so clearly it is effective. Appealing to Dr. King is effective because anyone at that time would agree that Dr. King was an effective leader. By appealing to the shared values of his audience, Chavez is able to get their attention and help them to see the benefits of nonviolent approaches to change.
Ultimately, by appealing to the audience’s values of life and leaders of the time as well as using logical comparisons, Caesar Chavez illustrates to his readers that nonviolence can be a powerful tool while violence is a destructive one. These appeals to ethos and logos helped shape a message that swayed a tumultuous nation in favor of nonviolent change. And today, decades later, we are living in a nation that was shaped by the very nonviolence that Caesar Chavez proclaimed.
YES!!!!!! The introduction is amazing! You hit the rhetorical situation and set yourself up to write an amazing analysis!!!! Then, pointing out the logic of CHavez is so smart, especially since you found great evidence and developed the commentary. Very, very good!
DeleteThen the appeal to common values, you hit the rhetorical situation again! Yes. Take this approach on the next practice and on Wednesday. This is fantastic!
1-4-1
By the tenth anniversary of American minister and civil rights icon Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s passing, people needed to be reminded of the power of nonviolence. Nonviolence won equality for a race that had been thirsting for civil rights for centuries. Similarly to equality, nonviolence deserves to be advocated, and it has been the responsibility of leaders to do just that. Cesear Chavez, a civil rights leader and labor union organizer, strived to fulfill this responsibility in an article he wrote for a religious magazine. By interpreting Dr. King Jr.’s life and Ghandi’s life as examples of the power of nonviolence, deconstructing nonviolence through imagery and logic, and writing in a sympathetic tone, Chavez delivers a thoughtful message to the equally as thoughtful people reading the article in order to promote nonviolent resistance in the fight for equality.
ReplyDeleteChavez opened his article with a solid ploy to remind readers of what the nonviolent route can achieve. Although brief, his mentioning of Dr. King Jr.’s life, provided a strong example of the power in a nonviolent approach. “It [Dr. King Jr.’s life] is an example that inspired much of the philosophy and strategy of the farm workers’ movement (lines 2-4)”. This sentence demonstrates the power that Dr. King Jr.’s life had because it notes how his life influenced the decisions the farm workers made and how they carried out their movement. Since peace and an absence of violence was the center of King’s movement, it can be assumed that peace would also be the center of the farm workers’ movement. Near the passage end, lines 62-64 describe a strategy of Ghandi’s. Ghandi’s nonviolent strategy was to boycott salt, and it is one that “allows masses of people to participate actively in a cause”. Chavez touches upon two famous movements led by nonviolent leaders: King and Ghandi’s. This is to provide some credibility to the strategy of nonviolence and to prove that it does work and can have massive effects.
Chavez employs logic to break down nonviolence and contrast it with violence. In lines 17-21, Chavez provides two outcomes that result from violence: potentially fatal escalation or demoralization of those involved. Then he contrasts violence with nonviolence from lines 22-24 by stating how more support can be attracted through nonviolent acts. Lines 73-75 mention how violence never works in the long run and that nonviolence holds more power when oppression is greater. His tone is quite sympathetic and soft, rather than demanding or harsh. He never demands nonviolence, instead, he simply tells his reader the benefits of it. By writing in a sympathetic tone, he parallels his own argument of nonviolence being better than violence. In line 37, Chavez points out how one human life is worth more than the importance of the struggle. He turns optimistic in line 40 by saying “men and women who are truly concerned about people and nonviolent by nature”. He uses logic again when making this statement. It seems obvious that a person seeking peace or justice would also be one that dislikes lashing out.
Chavez’s audience is most likely religious people that seek to help others. This can be assumed because the article he publishes is in a magazine run by a religious organization that states how they enjoy being devoted to others. His sympathetic tone, deconstruction of nonviolence through logic and imagery, and his acknowledgement of the successful results of Ghandi and King’s nonviolent moment set him up to successfully deliver his own message. He was able to build his argument and encourage people to join him. His calm tone made his intentions seem pure and his argument more solid.
Oh the introduction is amazing! Fully developed, plus you hit the rhetorical situations! Chelsea, this is so good! YOu embed the quotes and then develop excellent commentary. This is the approach you should take on Wednesday. POinting out his use of Ghandi AND King really drives home his appeal to ethos! And then pointing out his logic! I'm so proud of you!
ReplyDelete1-3-1 Keep doing this!