Thomas Jefferson-Declaration of Independence

1.) the truths are the unalienable rights that should be guaranteed to all men.  Under a democracy, these truths would seem self-evident, but considering the multiple dictatorships that have existed in the world, they are not present in all areas of the world.  This belief of self-evident truths is real but idealistic, as there will always be someone who will want to stifle others' rights.  

2.) I think the charge against the king of establishing judges based on his will alone is the most serious.  In early America, society was ruled by the law.  Thus depriving Americans of fair judiciary cut off all opportunities for a democratic government.  Judges' words were the law, so by installing partial judges to simply carry out his orders, King George III was really taking away all the colonists' rights, especially the basic right to a fair and impartial trial.

3.) Jefferson feels the the government should be subject to the desires of the people, and that government officials should change frequently to allow for new agendas.  Jefferson also believes that government should protect the rights of its citizens yet stay out of citizens' lives as much as possible.

4.)  From the people (elections).

5.) Jefferson makes a direct appeal to God in the last paragraph when referring to the installation of the new American democracy.  During this time, the mention of Providence carried weight with many people.  This also adds to the "God Bless America" mentality, that America, an ideally democratic and fair government, is watched over and nurtured by God for breaking away from this tyrannical government.  This also establishes America's destiny in breaking away from Britain as a holy mission (God-given right).

6.) The audience is obviously King George III and Great Britain, as well as the American public.  The eloquence that Jefferson used probably inspired confidence in Americans, who now had something concrete that they were committed to.  More subtly, the Declaration of Independence is also directed at other world powers.  It asserts America's will and intention and united strength, which puts America on the world's radar screen and makes Americans their own people rather than British subjects.

7.) I believe that Jefferson's lists show King George's concrete doings against Americans.  It also establishes ethos and logos, because the Declaration of Independence does not rely solely on pathos to assert American ideals.  These lists also show that the separation is firmly rooted in King George's acts against Americans, not a rebellious whim.

8.) Jefferson illustrates through the long lists of King George's acts against the Americans.

He uses capitalization to emphasis important words or phrases and draw the reader's attention to that specific word.

He utilizes parallelism, as well as repetition, through his sentence structure (i.e. "He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people."

Thomas Jefferson, "The Declaration of Independence"

1. The truths are: all men are created equal, they have God-given unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, government is by and for the governed and they have the right to alter it if need be. The people have a right to depose tyrants and create a new government.

2. I think the most serious are a) "he has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people", because he stripped people of representation, and furthermore, by suspending colonial legislatures and instituting his supreme rule b) "he has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power" whereby he essentially ruled tyrannically through the power of arms. And, through other means, "depriving (the colonies), in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury". The right to a fair trial is now the cornerstone of our legal system, and not having that, to me, would be ridiculously unfair and despotic.

3. The purpose of government is to ensure a people's safety and happiness, and be a product of their own making, not something forced upon them or alien to their natural-born rights.

4. The power of government is from the consent of the governed.

5. In his concluding sentence, Jefferson assumes the power of God to be on the Colonies' side ("divine providence")

6. Audience = foreign governments, British government, people of the Colonies

7. Jefferson lists the reasons for independence from Great Britain in order to establish his ethos, the rationale and ability to explain why the Colonies are taking this action: it helps describe their cause to foreign powers and show that the Declaration is not a whim, but the final response to a series of injustices.

8. Illustration is used to demonstrate the oppression and tyranny of Great Britain and add reason to the cause - it backs up the Declaration's assertion. It also explains how the Declaration came to be and why it is in existence. Capitalization adds power to the words, gives them an importance (also serving in some cases as a tool for personification). Ultimately, the Declaration invokes highly philosophical and moral ideals, and Jefferson gives them substantive authority through capitalization. Jefferson's parallelism, predominant in his listing of Great Britain's crimes (and the anaphora in "He...He...For...For"), reinforces King George as a power-hungry tyrant and simply by the length, shows the extent of Great Britain's abuse of the Colonies. His rhetoric gives the Declaration its sweeping power and (pun intended) majesty.

Thomas Paine's "Common Sense"

"In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology there were no kings; the consequence of which was, there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throws mankind into confusion. Holland, without a king hath enjoyed more peace for this last century than any of the monarchical governments in Europe. Antiquity favours the same remark; for the quiet and rural lives of the first Patriarchs have a snappy something in them, which vanishes when we come to the history of Jewish royalty."

Disregarding the raging antisemitism towards the end of the passage, I feel this passage is the most interesting one of T-Paine's theories. I find his ideas would theoretically make the most sense and would help his discourse community the most. I personally agree completely with his remarks(not including the last anti-Semitic part).

The diction of his language is also very easy to follow, while other portions of his text tend to lose the reader. He is very straightforward with his ideas which helps the reader look into the concepts rather than the complexity of the language.

-A.J.P.

I agree with Anna and Justin in that I found it similar to ATSS. After reading ATSS, which was written in such a way as to arouse deep emotion (pathos) from the reader, I found Bookseller to be impersonal, almost cold. Whereas Hosseini pushed the reader along in terms of pathos, Seierstad's retellings are open-ended and subtle; she doesn't lead you either way but rather lets the story speak for itself. In this way, Hosseini's story was much more manipulative and calculated. Bookseller feels more narrative to me in that the purpose isn't as clear as it was in ATSS. I personally like ATSS much more; the story was enthralling and I felt a clear connection with the characters. ATTS's purpose was crystal-clear, and can really only be interpreted in one way. However, in Bookseller there are more subtle implications and I think that you can do more with it in terms of rhetorical analysis because there are so many ways that it can be interpreted.

Bookseller of Kabul

After looking at the comments above ^^, I personally agree with the majority of the group in saying that I enjoy A Thousand Splendid Sun more than The Bookseller of Kabul. While I am only on page 76 and have not gotten deep into the story of the book, I feel that TBK fails to portray a successful anecdotal narrative. I personally enjoy “stories” rather than an article of events. The reason for Seierstad’s struggle in succeeding to my personal standards may be due to the non-fiction aspect of the book, while ATSS was merely the story of all Afghan women.

Bookseller of Kabul

I feel like this is just more of the same that we read for summer reading. I feel like once you read one of the books, you become desensitized and it no longer can have legitimate pathos. With that in mind, I feel like the Bookseller of Kabul is better written because it doesn't seem as extreme, and is more relateable. However, I feel that in total the books are too similar for the second one to have as much of an impact.

Bookseller of Kabul

At this point, the book seems very jaded. Seierstad's intent to develop personal experiences among her characters (ethos) seems lacking. Her book tends to seem repetitive in its events, creating a massive similarity to A Thousand Splendid Suns by Hoessini. In her attempts to portray a new, enlightening novel, she finds herself tied up in the hackneyed examples of many authors intent on bringing light to the commonly known issue of oppression based on culture around the world. So far I have not been hit by a real monumental scene of the novel that would really make me sympathize (based on the story!!, of course in reality I think it is awful that such oppression can exist, yet who am I to judge based on my own perceptions of democracy) with the characters in the novel. Excitement seems to escape the pages of A Thousand Splendid Suns, resulting in my diminished interest and appeal of the characters who strive to persevere, endure, and breakthrough the fettering fates that society sends their way.