Chapter 1: Higher Ground
One important aspect of our work as readers this year will be to examine the persona of the writer and to determine his or her degrees of credibility and persuasiveness. Listed below are some questions you might consider in determining your first responses to Bryan Stevenson and the story he is telling us. Choose one, a few, or all of them and share your thoughts. Questions in red are required. Remember to be specific and to support your answers with references to the text wherever possible.
1. What kind of a person does Bryan Stevenson seem to be? What is it about his writing choices that creates this impression for the reader?
2. What, if anything, makes Stevenson an authority on the story he is telling? Do you find him credible? Why or why not?
3. Whom does Stevenson seem to be targeting as his intended audience? What makes you think this?
4. What strategies is Stevenson using to make his writing as effective and as persuasive as it can be?
5. What is it about the author's specific writing choices on the first page of "Higher Ground" that make it a rather unlikely beginning to this book? How does the pattern established here continue throughout the first chapter? What could Stevenson's rationale for this choice be?
6. What is the argument of the book, according to this first chapter?
7. Miscellaneous feedback on what you like/notice about this chapter?
1. What kind of a person does Bryan Stevenson seem to be? What is it about his writing choices that creates this impression for the reader?
2. What, if anything, makes Stevenson an authority on the story he is telling? Do you find him credible? Why or why not?
3. Whom does Stevenson seem to be targeting as his intended audience? What makes you think this?
4. What strategies is Stevenson using to make his writing as effective and as persuasive as it can be?
5. What is it about the author's specific writing choices on the first page of "Higher Ground" that make it a rather unlikely beginning to this book? How does the pattern established here continue throughout the first chapter? What could Stevenson's rationale for this choice be?
6. What is the argument of the book, according to this first chapter?
7. Miscellaneous feedback on what you like/notice about this chapter?
2. Stevenson find himself to be the authority to this story because he's worked so long in the law and wanting to help inmates on death-row. He's gone through the Harvard Law School program and began to work in depth with mass incarceration at a very early age. I believe that he is a credible in telling this story because of these reasons. He explains that his main interest in studying law would be to help with the lives of the poor which coincides with racial inequality. He himself lived in situations related to racial inequality which inspired him to help those currently stuck in the same position that he also lived in. Near the end of the chapter, Stevenson also begins to throw in important information related to mass incarceration and even other trial cases related to incarceration and trials. This only proves Stevenson's credibility in that he is able to use information in his benefit to show the reader the true problems and unfair treatment in the court system.
ReplyDelete5. The author's writing choices on the first page of "Higher Ground" expresses brief moments Bryan's concern for meeting a condemned man, eagerness to gain experience as a lawyer in the field, and inexperience in his studies as a lawyer that would eventually become his lifetime career. Bryan has no experience in the field of law and has only been at Harvard for approximately 2 years which is nowhere near enough of the time and experience for a lawyer to be successful in his career. The rest of the chapter continues the tale of meeting Henry (first ever inmate he'd met), then continuing with a brief backstory of his childhood, and ending with logos/ethos themed explanation of mass incarceration in the U.S. I believe he decided to set up the first chapter this way to give the reader different understandings of what this book is about but also Bryan's decisions to become a lawyer defending death-row inmates. He jumps to these three different aspects to grab the reader and allow them to learn and understand what the mass incarceration problem is, his feeling/actions towards them, and hopefully agree to his beliefs through his rhetoric.
6. The argument of this book appears to be based on the critical issues concerning our court system. Issues such as the racial bias/seclusion in the court room, the unfairness of trials based on lack of information on those who can not afford good lawyers, and the threat of mass incarceration growing into an unstoppable force that we the people are unable to contain. Another point is the treatment of inmates being cruel and unjust in ways that leaves most inmates physically and mentally scarred to the point of little to no recovery.
So sorry that I didn't get my name on that one there. But this massive first post was written by my if anyone is curious
DeleteChapter 1: Higher Ground
ReplyDeleteLucy
1. Bryan Stevenson starts this chapter expressing his worry of meeting a condemned man. He describes himself as “an eager and inexperienced” intern who had no idea what he was doing. He goes on to say “ to be honest, I didn’t even know if i wanted to be a layer.” As we learn more about Stevenson through the chapter we find that he is much more experienced than he claims. While he studied law at Harvard he also was pursuing a graduate degree in public policy at the Kennedy School of Government. While he was a little behind on what he wanted to do with law, he was still very accomplished. He ended up deciding to pursue race and poverty litigation. Throughout this chapter his language speaks of a well educated young man, and when it comes to law he knows what he’s talking about.
2. While young, I do believe Stevenson is credible, and can be seen as an authority in telling these stories. As a Harvard Law graduate, and an African American of low beginnings, Stevenson has has an inside look on exactly what's happening.Throughout the book, stories of African American families in poverty are shown to be victims of racial inequality. Near the end of the chapter and still throughout the book Stevenson uses the facts to prove his credibility and to show the injustices of the Judiciary.
5. As I mentioned in #1 Stevenson show’s his lack of experience in this position and his worry of the situation he will face. He goes on to downplay his time at Harvard and his credibility. By doing this I believe Stevenson is trying to draw the reader's attention towards his clients rather than himself. In the the sense that the readers would have been paying him more attention as a hero then really understanding the gravity of the situation for the lives of these people.
6. Although yes, this book is written about the racial injustices in America’s court system, I believe the main theme/argument for this book is Mercy. Stevenson in many chapters uses his stories of EJI of defending the poor, wrongly condemned, those trapped in the criminal justice system to remind us of Mercy. He states on page 18, “ The closer we get to mass incarceration and extreme levels of punishment, the more I believe it’s necessary to recognize that we all need mercy, we all need justice, and -perhaps- we all need some measure of unmerited grace.
5. Stevenson starts the book off by giving the reader, the opposite of what he or she would expect to be heard by saying “I wasn’t prepared to meet a condemned man” as this book is based on him being a successful lawyer. He goes on to explain his inexperience in being a lawyer and how nervous he was about heading to a maximum security prison. Stevenson meets with his first ever condemned man named Henry, and this is when he first realizes why he wanted to become a lawyer in the first place. He continues the pattern of uncertainty throughout the first chapter by using words like “nervous” or “intense.” You can also tell because of his innocence in this field as he seems to be surprised by the prison staffs roughness and the treatment of prisoners overall. As in one part of “Higher Ground” the prisoner, Henry has to calm Stevenson down, while he is being pulled back to a prison cell.
ReplyDelete6. Yes, I agree with Lucy. This book is written about the injustices in the court system. And, I feel the main point is Mercy. But, I believe his main argument is we have to step back before we label people; I think he feels every case should be examined according to their circumstances not just what the court labels them to be. He recalls a passage from his grandmother “ You can’t understand most of the important things from a distance Bryan. You have to get close.” He compares this saying in relevance to himself and how the distance he felt in law school “made him feel lost,” like that of a condemned man. I believe this is why he does what he does because everytime he saves a condemned man he finds his a part of his lost-self.
-Brianna Davenport
Delete2. Stevenson is a major authority figure on the subject at hand; and his education at Harvard University is not the only thing that makes him exceptional. He has empathy. Empathy at its finest. As an African American born in the 60s, he knows what it's like to be discriminated against, to be put down, or to be left in the silent starkness of injustice. He knows the anger, the frustration and the unholy disgrace of prejudice. Many of us have experiences of racial discrimination. Many of us know the pain. Stevenson not only makes it his job to bring justice into the corrupt court systems, he makes it his life goal; his passion, and his beating heart's desire. He is credible in many ways, yes, like his education, but his upbringing, his empathy, his kindness, his mercy, and his desire to make things right, are the key standouts to why he is so believable.
ReplyDelete5. Stevenson chooses to begin the first chapter of Just Mercy, "Higher Ground", with himself as a blank slate, an attorney fresh out of law school with little to no experience and a young mind, jittery with anxiety at his new career ahead. On a social justice work course, he meets Henry, his first ever encounter with a life sentenced prisoner. He is there to instill hope, that jail will not be the last thing Henry sees before he passes on. Throughout the chapter, Stevenson is understandably nervous about the trip to see Henry, and we can feel that through the pages: the stirring determination; the fear of the unknown. I feel as if we can relate to that, a sort of humble, modest beginning: more human-like than stone-faced lawyer. Stevenson pulls you in, letting you see his moments of weakness, showing you the dark instances of his life. He shows us that above all, we are (most of the time) human, and mercy is a necessity we cannot live without.
6. Just Mercy main theme is that we need to cease labeling from afar and look deeper into the subject. For the sake of our humanity, we must feel empathy, open our ears and hearts, get inside everything and everyone, and give chances and give mercy to those that are broken and lost. We are beyond the "worst thing" we've committed, and we must free ourselves from the tyranny of fear and anger. To set aside our prejudices and sick stereotypes is to reach redemption.
1. Bryan Stevenson, as portrayed in the book, seems to be a very passionate man about saving people from execution. He cares about the prisoners he successfully or attempted to get off of death row. He’s also very intelligent, strategically and book smart. He knows as a lawyer which moves to make in cases. We as readers know he’s passionate about the people he helps because of the way he works so hard to help them; he never gives up. In Walter’s case Bryan filed so many motions and persistently encouraged people to speak the truth. We also know he’s intelligent because one, he went to and graduated from Harvard Law School, and two, he made thought out plans about how he was going to free Walter. He got Myers to recant his statement and he got people to come forth and tell the truth about the fact that Walter wasn’t at the cleaners that day.
ReplyDelete5. Bryan kind of works his way around telling the reader what he’s doing in the chapter “Higher Ground”. We know he is going to visit a man in prison, but we don’t know who the man is when he first tells us. He also doesn’t come forth at first about why the man is in prison and what he is going there for. Also, even though Bryan does explain he was intern, he doesn’t tell us who he interns for or what he does.
He goes from talking about himself to talking about what he was doing. Throughout this chapter Bryan goes from giving his personal background, such as the fact he’s an intern and he’s a law student, to what is happening in the story and why he’s going to the prison. It’s almost as if he’s giving us two different stories, but tying them together. Bryan Stevenson’s rationale for doing this could be the fact that he wants us to get to know him just as much as he wants us to understand his passion and his role in this book. Bryan, by introducing himself to the reader, is trying to build a relationship with the reader, while also trying to connect the reader to the case as well. If us, the reader, connect with Stevenson, then it’s more likely we’ll support what he’s doing.
Bryan also goes in between giving us information about the McMillan case and historical contextualization. Historical contextualization can help provide the reader with knowledge about what was going on during this time to help us understand why certain things are being done. Bryan also gives us information about Walter and his background to help the reader build a relationship with Walter too. We (the readers) feel emotion towards Walter’s case throughout the book, and this first chapter is the beginning of our relationship with Walter.
6.I think the argument of the book according to the first chapter is that people and prisoners are treated unfairly based on their past. Just because Walter was in an interracial relationship and it was illegal and looked down upon, doesn’t mean that he murdered someone. Just because prisoners were abused as children doesn't mean they are guaranteed to turn out like their abusers. People who have been accused of committing a crime are treated very unfairly, whether they are actually innocent or not. Cases in this book were not treated properly. Our justice system is so corrupt and the cases in this book, such as Walter’s, go to show you just how true that statement is. The argument is how unfairly prisoners are treated and how people are so quick to judge and assume. People will believe anything that is beneficial to them.
Humans tend to make decisions out of fear and anger that cause injustice for others. The fear and anger we feel affect how we treat others.
Savannah
DeleteJulian Kim:
ReplyDelete4.
Q:What strategies is Stevenson using to make his writing as effective and as persuasive as it can be?
A: Stevenson uses a plethora of assonance and words that sound generally "nice together"(sorry very general can't find the right word") in order to make his argument sound generally better. He also brings in personal information about himself and the person he defends in order to show either credibility or sympathy(or just mercy) for the reader to find very convincing.
5.
Q: What is it about the author's specific writing choices on the first page of "Higher Ground" that make it a rather unlikely beginning to this book? How does the pattern established here continue throughout the first chapter? What could Stevenson's rationale for this choice be?
A: His humility, exemplifies his ethos whilst staying things that would be rather arrogant like "I was
twenty-three-year-old student at Harvard law School... eager and inexperienced and worried that i was in over my head." and "I tried not to let my panic show." Usually, social justice calls are more loud, whilst the first page is very soft and like a beginning to a hero's journey sort of novel, it is oddly self absorbed yet humble. This compares to the rest of the chapter with complete accuracy, although with more depth and a slightly stronger focus on the condemned. Stevenson uses this as a very nice ease into the meat of the argument rather quickly.
6.
Q:What is the argument of the book, according to this first chapter?
A: The book according to the first chapter, argues that the social justice system is flawed due to the nature of "how easily we condemn people." Also, argues that in order to change this we as a collective need to fix it or else it will not only hurt the prisoner, but hurt everyone.\
2. Stevenson seems to be very credible and has a great amount of authority that shows in his writing. The experiences that Stevenson talks about in the book show what he has gone through in his life and how these experiences affected him. Stevenson wanted to help people, especially those on death row who were taking him as their final chance to live. Throughout the book you can feel his passion about his story as he worked hard to help others despite discrimination against himself. He is very credible, and not just from the fact that he Graduated from Harvard Law School and the fact that his book was named best book of the year by the New York Times, but also by his writing style and the empathy that you can feel by reading the book.
ReplyDelete5. He chooses to open the book in the middle of a moment. It doesn't start at the very beginning of the story, but rather in the middle of specific moment that meant a lot to Stevenson. He chose this moment to start the book because he thought that it would impact the reader. He thought that this is the moment that will keep them reading. He tells the story of his first meeting with Henry and continues this story throughout the chapter. It is also apparent that he establishing his credibility throughout this chapter by using ethos.
6. According to this first chapter the argument is that our entire system needs to be fixed. There are critical flaws in the justice system that are causing the unfair treatment of prisoners. This is the message that Stevenson is trying to express throughout the chapter. Racial bias is one of the main focuses, as that caused people to be treated very unfairly. He is trying to appeal to the audience's pathos, and get them to understand what these prisoners are going through and how unfairly some of them are being treated.