Need to respond to the below two students’ initial posts, and each of these responses should be at least 150 words. The question the students are answering are in bold below.
Withh this forum, you are to discuss one (1) of the “Historical American Works” listed in the “Supplemental Readings” section of the course lessons. This discussion will help you prepare for your essay on one of these arguments due during the next section of this course (week three).
In your discussion, state the purpose of the reading and cite the thesis statement (if applicable). If there is no explicit thesis, state the reading’s claim. Then, lay out the structure of the reading to the class, and let the class know if this structure is organized and logical (you may claim that it is not organized – it’s up to you). Let the reader know how this method of organization helps or does not help the author’s purpose. Then, discuss the style of writing – does the style help the author prove his/her point? Finally, study the introduction and conclusion of your chosen reading. Explain how the author ‘hooks’ the reader in, or, conversely, if the introduction is not strong, explain why. Discuss the conclusion of the essay as well, and point out its strengths and weaknesses. Please answer these questions fully in your response (use thoughtful sentences).
In your response, cite the essay at least once using an in-text citation. (See this link for a good example of how to cite an article inside of an essay: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/2/
Also, create a works cited citation for the essay. This should be in MLA style. Respond to students who chose articles different than your post. Please post a full and rich discussion.
Be careful with your essay choice. Most likely, you will want to use this work for your essay due next week. In addition, remember that the more effort you put into your discussion, the more prepared you will be to write your Critical Evaluation essay.
In your responses, find a student who chose a different essay than yours. Do you agree with your classmate’s interpretation of that essay? Did your classmate pick out the correct thesis statement/claim? Your goal in your responses is to help your classmate strengthen his/her interpretation of the author’s approach to his/her subject matter.
See Forum Topic for forum directions.
(1) State the purpose of the reading.
For this week’s discussion, I will be referencing Mr. Elie Wiesel’s “The Perils of Indifference” speech he gave at the White House on April 12, 1999. Mr. Wiesel was among those invited that would share their personal experience and reflection of the past century during the White House’s Millennium Lecture event. Mr. Wiesel discussed very intimate details of his upbringing as well as his hope for a better tomorrow, with regards to how people and governments should treat others.
(2) Discuss the structure: is the structure organized and logical. Was the author’s method of organization helpful to his/her purpose or not
In all honesty, I don’t think I fully understand “Writing Structure”. However, Mr. Wiesel seemed to have organized and structured his speech in a very understanding way. He first gave the audience background information of himself (enforcing his credibility of the topic – indifference), followed by offering a greater understanding thereof, and ending with the current state of humanity as it relates to the topic.
(3) Discuss the style of writing. Did the author’s style of writing help prove his/her point
I would say that Mr. Wiesel’s speech is that of a descriptive style of writing. Mr. Wiesel discusses in great detail his childhood (if you can call it that) in Hungary. He spoke of how the very blind eye (“indifference”) of society affected him. His accounts of being starved, disciplined, treated inhumanely, and later liberated allowed me to sympathize with him about the people and situations that are often overlooked.
(4-5) Assess the introduction and conclusion. Did the author’s introduction “hook” the reader (you) in, or was it not strong enough. Point out the strengths and weaknesses of the conclusion
Mr. Wiesel’s opening statement instantly “hooked” me. He began his speech with his very vivid memory of the day after he was freed by American troops in 1945. His account of his liberation, in my opinion, was strong enough to encourage the audience to listen intently.
Mr. Wiesel’s conclusion seemed to possess equal, if not greater, strength. Mr. Wiesel concluded his speech posing a number of questions to the audience; asking of each individuals’ personal opinion regarding their and the state of the nation’s empathy. I believe that the presentation of questions Mr. Wiesel asked, further engages the audience as well as aid in the development of empathy (if absent).
Wiesel, Elie. “The Perils of Indifference.” The History Place – Great Speeches Collection: Elie Wiesel Speech The Perils of Indifference, www.historyplace.com/speeches/wiesel.htm.
The Declaration of Independence is a document which holds great importance in the hearts and minds of millions of people throughout the United States and the world. It’s more than just words; it’s a reminder that no one is a slave to their government and the individual shall be able to choose their destiny. The signers of the Declaration of Independence put their lives on the line; Afterall they were committing treason against their government. The Author, Thomas Jefferson, took a huge risk but the end state was a document which triggers emotion and provided facts making it a record which has stood the test of time.
The overall purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to secede from Great Britain ultimately. Thomas Jefferson, in the second paragraph, wrote the words “All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (U.S. 1776). Those words served as the “hook” by making the reader feel an emotional connection. There is very little doubt that many of the colonials believed that they should be in charge of their destiny and didn’t need a king, across the ocean, telling them how to live their lives. The author truly knew how to appeal to his audience.
The thesis provided a precursor for facts which was most likely common fact to the colonials. “The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object of the establishments of an absolute tyranny over these states” (US 1776). The following paragraphs provided evidence of the tyranny by the King which held a hybrid of emotional and fact-based evidence.
Personally, I would have enjoyed a shorter introduction since I believe much of it to be drawn out. I think the “hook” and a few supporting sentences would have been enough. Overall, the Declaration of Independence was well thought out and had a good flow. The opening paragraphs successfully portrayed the message that people have the right to choose their government. The following sections then provided the reasons why the colonies must succeed. This structure allowed a great conclusion which concluded that the thirteen colonies would now be free from Britain and would be its own country.
I look forward to hearing your responses. Please, don’t be shy about giving me some constructive criticism. You probably won’t upset me, and I promise you, I won’t lose sleep.
“Declaration of Independence: A Transcription.” National Archives and Records Administration, National Archives and Records Administration, www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript.