Rhetorical Appeals in Just Mercy
Greetings, Word Nerds! So delighted to have you back in the classroom! Let's apply a little of what we've begun to discuss and you will continue to learn.
Today's challenge is to analyze the ways in which Stevenson is appealing to ethos, logos, and pathos in his book. Choose TWO of the appeals and find specific moments in the book that support your assertion that he is intentionally making these appeals as part of his argument. Quotations, please! Let's get three response threads going, one for each of the appeals, so whoever gets in first on each one will start a response and everyone else should reply to that post. I think it'll work!
See you in class!
Today's challenge is to analyze the ways in which Stevenson is appealing to ethos, logos, and pathos in his book. Choose TWO of the appeals and find specific moments in the book that support your assertion that he is intentionally making these appeals as part of his argument. Quotations, please! Let's get three response threads going, one for each of the appeals, so whoever gets in first on each one will start a response and everyone else should reply to that post. I think it'll work!
See you in class!
Preston
ReplyDeleteEthos
"I do what I do because I'm broken too," this is the line that truly brings out Bryan credibility and reasoning to why he works with death-row cases. He's bringing honest with the reader by saying he didn't just accept the internship to work death-row/mass incarceration cases. Stevenson understands the brokenness because he's lived in a world where he experienced stories similar to the ones mentioned in Just Mercy. It's not everyday that a lawyer decides to work on death-row cases at a law firm, "have something to do with the lives of the poor," you have to have some sort of inspiration to do this kind of work. Stevenson's inspiration is that fact that he is also broken. This gives Stevenson his credibility on telling these stories and expresses his true character in one line.
Ethos: I agree. The reason Stevenson is so credible is because he can relate on a different level to some of the backgrounds of the prisoners he tried to save. The fact that Stevenson was so honest about the way he grew up also shows that he’s an honest man. When Stevenson was talking about different careers, he said his job choice would have “ something to do with things I’d already seen in my life so far.” This refers to how he took into account his experiences with segregation and it also shows he wanted to improve the world in some way.
DeleteAnother way he proves to be credible is by how many cases he’s handled, how hard he tried to save his clients from execution, and his credentials. Bryan Stevenson was fortunate enough to attend Harvard Law School and graduate. He then went on to work for the Equal Justice Initiative where he helped/attempted to help prisoners get off of death row. Towards the end of the book, when Walter is proclaimed free, Stevenson makes a final statement saying “ Your Honor, I just want to say this before we adjourn. It was far too easy to convict this wrongly accused man for murder and send him to death row for something he didn’t do and much too hard to win his freedom after proving his innocence.” The way Stevenson talks about how it was hard to earn Walter’s freedom back shows that he stuck with him through the whole case, because he was by Walter’s side the whole time. Bryan Stevenson proved himself throughout the whole book to be an honest writer, an intelligent lawyer, and a dedicated man.
Ethos
DeleteI agree with both of you on all points. Bryan Stevenson proves his credibility by simply being himself. He's honest, direct, empathetic, and real. He handles his cases with as strong sense of empathy that is distilled from his background, a part of which he wishes to mend with all the hopeless and seemingly lost cases. He's "broken too"; he knows how it feels, and that alone is a reason why we can trust Stevenson's philosophy and story.
I'm the comment after Preston
DeleteJulian Kim:
DeleteEthos, I feel the closeness to the defendant is a double edged sword. Although his attachment to his clients shows that he cares for them, but it could be too much. The implication is that his bias towards the client could tear down his own ethos, credibility is blind and unweighted, unlike modern day justice. The very fact of him having personal conversations with them of things unrelated to the trial shows a personal aspect that shows great favour and bias.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteJulian
DeleteOh i forgot to relate to text, well here it is
"my instinct was to comfort him; his pain seemed so sincere" this shows that Stevenson inherently takes favour to him and he just met the man, in this moment he sacrifices his ethos to pathos in order to strengthen that part of his argument
Ethos:
DeleteOne way that Stevenson really shows his credibility is by showing exactly what he is feeling in every moment. He doesn't just state the facts and only the facts. He shows his emotions and his empathy. One moment that really stuck out to me was when Stevenson expressed to the readers how he felt during the case of Herbert. Stevenson says "I hadn't thought about how difficult this moment would be. It was surreal in a way I hadn't anticipated." In this moment he was explaining what he felt when Herbert was saying his goodbyes forever and walking towards the electrocution chair. While some may argue that this is more pathos, I see that him expressing his feeling are his way of getting the audience to trust him and to establish his credibility.
Preston
ReplyDeletePathos
During the case of Mr. Dill is whenever I found a moment of Bryan's pathos being expressed during Mr. Dill's final phone call. Stevenson recalls a memory of a boy he had met nearly 40 years ago. He begins to cry, "Why couldn't they see it, too," and argues about the courts unfair ruling. Stevenson after experiencing an emotion connection with the boy he had only met once allows himself to connect to Mr. Dill. Being unable to save Mr. Dill makes him sad and angry at the court for not even bothering to put in consideration Mr. Dill's intellectual disability. He's showing his pathos from the shortest of encounter from the past to a man with similar problems but with an unfortunate fate. He wants the reader to feel Bryan's sadness and relation to that boy he met once and how life changing it had been for him.
Pathos: Not only does Bryan Stevenson show emotion through the book, but he shows pathos by the way he tells stories and by the way he makes the reader feel. Throughout the whole book Bryan Stevenson shows that prisoners are judged by the mistakes they’ve made, how they grew up, or what happened to them when they were children. One of Stevenson’s points is how we as people need to stop judging and expect better of people. You can’t judge a book by it’s cover.
DeleteOne story in the book that shows you shouldn’t judge people by their actions or someone else's actions towards them is actually about a prison guard. The prison guard is very rude to Stevenson. When Stevenson shows up at the prison to go visit a client the prison guard makes Stevenson sign the book when he comes to the prison, he refers to the prison as “my prison”, and he will only let Bryan into the prison once he searches him. Since Bryan is a lawyer, he should not be required to do this, but the guard feels he is entitled to a lot of power.
When Bryan Stevenson comes back to the prison for another visit, the same guard already signed Bryan’s name in and doesn’t perform a search. When the guard heard what Stevenson was doing for one of his clients he came to appreciate what he was doing. It turns out the guard was placed in foster care during his childhood and he realized some people had it worse than him.
Bryan Stevenson said something very powerful when he was talking to the guard. He stated “The bad things that happen to us don’t define us.” Stevenson is trying to show that guard that judging someone for something they did isn’t who that person is. Just like foster care doesn’t define who the guard is. This puts emotion into the book, because the guard actually understands what these prisoners go through. He feels for them and can connect with them. Not only does Bryan Stevenson tell stories that show emotion, but he makes the reader feel emotion.
DeleteBoth excellent responses to pathos, I am particularly interested in the Confederate guard/ Mr.Jenkins part in this book. Throughout the book, Stevenson brings us through all his unfortunate and heartbreaking cases, but this case stood out to me the most. This was because not only did Stevenson establish pathos to the reader by talking about the sad story of Mr.Jenkins and how “the prison wouldn’t let him bring Mr.Jenkins a milkshake”, but also how he changed the mind of a die-hard Confederate(the guard) to be more kind and understanding through his court speech. Keeping in mind as listened above the guard was quite rude to Stevenson and had little or no respect for the prisoners. After Stevenson's speech, the guard states “I wanted you to know that I was listening” and “ I didn’t think anybody had it as bad as me. But listening to what you were saying about Avery( Mr.Jenkins) made me realize that there were other people who had it as bad as I did.” This was extremely powerful to me because I could almost feel a weight being lifted off the guard chest, he was finally able to relate to something/someone, and therefore feel less alone in the world. The guard ends his speech by saying one of my favorite quotes in this book, one in which brought tears to my eyes, “ Oh, wait. I’ve got to tell you something. I just wanted you to know that I took an exit off the interstate on the way back. And, well, I took Mr.Jenkins to a Wendy’s, and bought him a chocolate milkshake.”
Rhetorical Appeals in Just Mercy:
DeleteLucy Tarpley
Pathos:
“Charlie had been slowly stroking his mother's hair, desperately hoping she would open her eye. The blood from her head had saturated the towel and was spreading onto Charlie’s pants. Charlie thought his mother might be dying or was maybe even already dead. He had to call an ambulance. He stood up, flooded with anxiety, and cautiously made his way to the bedroom.” (pg 118)
Chapter Six, “Surely Doomed” is packed with pathos. Throughout the chapter, Charlie’s story is explored. He had been placed on death row for killing his mother’s abusive boyfriends who was also a police officer.The above quote exemplifies a moment of solidarity between Charlie and his mother who was barely alive at the time. This moment forced me as the reader to become fully submerged in Charlie’s emotions. The most important person in Charlie’s life was lying cold before him and he was fearful that if he took any action to help her he would be next. However, when the opportunity to change his fate arose, Charlie was quick to take action.As a result of this example of pathos, I am able to better understand Charlie’s reaction when faced with the decision to murder George or spare his life. I also am compelled to feel a deeper sympathy for him being placed on death row as if he is truly a hardened criminal.
Very thorough and thoughtful responses! :)
DeleteI was caught by the guard story as well. Stevenson conveys so much emotion in that chapter that I was going from angry to sympathetic to sad to more anger and so on!
In the beginning, the guard was so cruel and rash. I felt such fury when he scorned at Stevenson as if he was some reptile, insisting that had to be searched, making him sign some book, and calling the jail repeatedly "my prison". I thought, twisted arrogance is prime in this man. He shouldn't be a guard.
But, really, what got me going was when he snatched Stevenson's arm and whispered about the Confederate flag-ridden truck outside. As he spoke, "his face hardened". He said, "I want you to know, that's my truck." A shudder went down my back. Who would've known it was YOUR truck? WHO?!
After the hearing, we return to the jail. He is different, "earnest and sincere". What has happened? He even "place[s] a hand on [Stevenson's] shoulder." He explains his past, raised in foster care. Almost instantly, we feel some sort of empathy/sympathy. The tone has changed. He has changed. The courtroom 'brought back memories", he's "still angry."
Stevenson says some inspiring words to the guard, that "the bad things" in our life "don't define us", and that sometimes its "important" for people to "understand where we're coming from." Its true. We feel we can forgive the guard, and that its not so bad. Maybe he turned his life around, as he "quit not long after that last trip". We can wonder.
I'm the comment after Preston
DeletePathos:
DeleteI feel that throughout the whole book, Stevenson is trying to make us understand the conditions of life in the justice system, understand what is happening throughout the story both emotionally and literally, and to feel empathy with the people who were characters in his story. He uses empathy to express that "we are all implicated when we allow other people to be mistreated". One particular place that Stevenson showed pathos is in the story of Charlie. Charlie was only fourteen years old, yet he was sitting on death row. In his time in the prison, Charlie experienced more than just unfair treatment, he was abused and raped. Stevenson was really trying to make us feel what Charlie was going through.
Julian Kim
DeletePathos:
During a visitation with Joe, Stevenson pulls on the heart strings and has Joe, a mentally disabled man in a wheelchair, like a child, although 33 years old, Joe recites a poem in which just shows the pure and utter innocence. During the time he forgets a line, he laughs even after being in prison for more of his life than he lived free, this shows utter astonishment with Stevenson, in which he is just purely amazed about him having an "unhappy" life, and still being able to laugh. All of this is used to have the reader sympathize with Joe and give them a taste about what Joe has lost in his life due to his time in prison.
Logos:
ReplyDeleteAt the beginning of the book, Stevenson starts to talk to us, the readers, about the horrible conditions in these prisons. This is to make us understand what each prisoner he represents will have to go through and establishes the evidence on why there is a need for change. He first talks about how “ the conditions of confinement for prisoners were getting worse and worse,” and prison riots were drawing national attention for horrible prison abuses. He goes on to tell us about the vulgar practices used in these prisons such as a “sweatbox,” a cassette sized hole or a box situated where the inmate would be forced to endure extreme heat for days or even weeks.” “A hitching post where a prisoner's arms would be fastened above their head in a painful position where they'd be forced to stand for hours” and “electric cattle prods which were used for torture if the prisoners violated the rules.” Although all horrible and unethical ways of treatment were being used in these prisons, these didn’t even come close to the worst one, the electric chair. Stevenson will bring you through a case in this book which will indeed show you the horrors of this offensive machine. The points in Stevenson’s explanations about the conditions of prisons were by far some of the most gruesome in this book, but also some of the most compelling for change.
Rhetorical Appeals in Just Mercy:
DeleteLucy Tarpley
Logos:
Stevenson also uses logos, building his reliability as well as providing readers with solid evidence. When Stevenson discussed the interracial affair between Karen Kelly and Walter McMillian, he explains why it was such a big topic in Alabama. He says that “the state ban on interracial marriage in Alabama continued into the twenty-first century,” and McMillian and Kelly met in 1986, (pg 29). Thus, this helps the readers to understand key concepts of the book, as well as acknowledge that Stevenson is a trustworthy author and lawyer. Additionally, when Stevenson shares that “In 2002, there were about a hundred people with mental retardation facing execution when the Court banned the death penalty for people with intellectual disability,” (pg 269). This allows the readers to grasp the amounts of people that had disabilities but still were put under death row. Thus, it makes a reader question the government and its tactics for how to put people on death row, and whether they are innocent or not, as in McMillian’s case.