Mark Edmundson’s “On the Uses of a Liberal Education: Lite Entertainment for Bored College Students” was published in 1997 in Harper’s Magazine. Edmundson’s thesis is that the value of a liberal education is decreasing due to the devotion to consumerism and entertainment on college campuses. In supporting this thesis he, put simply, he uses name-dropping to impress his audience and sway them to his side. Evidenced in this article, the use of historical, political, and cultural figures in writing can be an effective rhetorical device that builds one’s credentials and effects the way the audience perceives the argument at hand.
Early on in the article, Edmundson establishes that he does not view modern cultural elements, such as T.V., in a
…show more content…
positive light. He states that “The T.V. medium is inhospitable to inspiration, improvisation, failures, slipups. All must run perfectly”(Edmundson 41). Pertaining to Edmundson’s argument that students are lacking the inspiration of genius and the boldness to make mistakes because of consumer culture and cool removal, this is a very negative statement. Because of this setup, readers are not very likely to have a positive response when Edmundson brings up characters and people such as Kermit the Frog, Yogi Bear, Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Oprah Winfrey on page 46. In fact, because of the way Edmundson has been building his argument, it is easy for a reader to shake their head in disgust at the idea that, rather than intellectuals, celebrities and pop-culture icons are speaking at commencement ceremonies. On the other hand, this negative view that Edmundson paints of pop culture makes it easy for an audience to support him when he says “But why should a worthy administrator contract the likes of Susan Sontag, Cristopher Hitchens, or Robert Hughs- someone who might actually say something...”(46). While the common reader may not know who these people are, they sound much better than lowly Kermit the Frog or Yogi Bear. In examining these names, though, we gain a deeper understanding of Edmundson’s argument. Susan Sontag, an author, director, and activist, is referenced by Margret Eby as part of “Mount Rushmore of female cultural critics” in a review of Terry Castle’s The Professor. It is easy to understand how someone who is proclaimed as a cultural critic would be a desirable choice in commencement speaker. Cristopher Hitchens is a slightly more controversial, if still understandable, choice.
Hitchens was an American author and journalist who had many ideas and beliefs that went against the norm. “He cannot, and will not, be easily labeled as either left or right, democratic or republican, or indeed capitalist or communist… His views on abortion… capitalism, anti- Americanism, humanism, antisemitism, and Zionism all illustrate this complexity” wrote Glen Wilkinson of Troy Media, referring to Hitchens.
Whether or not they would be good commencement speakers or not, though, the name-dropping achieves a purpose. Edmundson succeeds in supporting the pathos of his argument by making his audience feel chagrined that college students are sitting through commencements with pop-culture icons when they could be hearing from literary geniuses.
What it means for Edmundson’s argument as a whole, however, is far more interesting. Throughout the entire article, he alludes to people. Everyone from Oscar Wilde to Chinua Achebe to David Letterman to “the gloriously named Bambi Lynn Dean” (Edmundson 45). Each name is mentioned to feed the pathos of the
…show more content…
argument. The connotation associated with the celebrities and authors mentioned, and with the amusingly unusual name of Bambi Lynn Dean, are designed to make the reader feel something. In the case of the celebrities, it is chagrin, disappointment at the idea that the future generations of America will be fashioned in the likeness of TV heroes. In the case of the authors and historical figures, it is awe. The audience is expected to be dazzled by Edmundson’s knowledge of genius, and be taken aback by the contrast between the celebrities and said genius. However, the use of these names may actually shake the credibility of Edmundson’s argument.
If you remove them from the picture, there are very little credentials to establish the author as a credible source. The fact that he works at a university is the only thing that suggests he is knowledgeable about his topic.
The names- or, in this case, removal of names- shake the pathos of Edmundson’s paper, too. Without the emotions brought on by the names’ connotations, there is very little in the article that would make the reader care about what he is saying. Why does it matter that Oprah Winfrey is inspiring students or graduation day, rather than Susan Sontag? Why should anyone care that students would rather hear from Arnold Schwarzenegger than some so-called ‘genius’ that they have never heard of?
The truth is that it doesn’t. The connotation given to the names by Edmundson’s distaste convince the audience that there is an issue at all, and that something must be changed. The use of famous names in Edmundson’s rhetoric is an effective way to manipulate his audience into taking his side, but it ultimately is a way to make a mountain out of a
molehill.
In an article originally published in May 2003 in USA Today called “College Isn’t For Everyone,” by W.J. Reeves combined these rhetorical devices to make a compelling argument that although colleges are easily accessible, higher education lacks students with the capabilities of academic success. To validate this claim, Reeves uses persuasive appeals to convey an effective argument by influencing the audience, however, he limits his reach because of the excessive pathos and condescending tone used to present his argument.
Worthern has created a sincere and serious tone to persuade her audience the importance of etiquette. The use of word choices like “stand up”, “vigilant defense” and “protect” shows her passion of establishing etiquette to include the “disempowered minorities” as well as to be the “guardians of civilization” due to the positive and protective connotation of the words. She also adopts a calming and informative tone to explain the significance and historical background of maintaining a respectful environment for both students and professors instead of creating an authoritative tone to doctrine and warn the students to discontinue their improper behavior. On the other hand, Wade adopts a demanding and sarcastic tone insisting upon the reader the proper behaviors of college students through colloquial language. The use of colloquial language although is effective because Wade’s intended audience is direct to students, she begins her list of “10 Things Every College Professor Hates” by the admonitory word “Don’t” which creates a satiric mood for the whole article. Wade coerces the reader to admit and accept her argument by appealing to the audiences’ guiltiness and criticizing the audience’s behaviors in academic environment. For example, “No, you didn’t miss anything
Bird, Caroline. "The Case Against College." 1975 Power of Language;Language of Power. New York: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2009. 15-18. Print.
Howard Zinn: On History by Howard Zinn (2011) is a collection of previously published essays ranging from Freedom Schools in the 1960s, issues in scholarship, to the American Empire. Even though the essays were written over several decades there is a constant theme throughout the work—the activist scholar. Zinn feels that scholars should not be passive citizens concerned with their research alone, but active citizens that use their research to change society. Zinn, unlike other historians, is not afraid to place what he views as right and wrong into his scholarly work. In fact he sees nothing unethical about inserting his opinion or politics into his writing. The society of higher education teaches historians to be objective by removing the person from the reading—removing opinion from writing. Zinn feels that this is a fruitless enterprise, for in the end opinion and politics will enter writing. In Howard Zinn: On History the case is made that for a different kind of historian. Zinn challenges the traditional notion of an historian a more passive scholar that endlessly tries to remove himself, or herself, from their research. Zinn sees this as an impossibility and instead argues for a more active scholar. This is the central theme that runs through Zinn’s book, a theme that should run through scholarship itself.
Mark Edmundson, In the use of a Liberal Education, Edmundson observer’s his work place and peers with a long of his students he noticed how the evaluations was not up to date, Edmundson discuss with his students about how the consumerism has an impact on the college’s around the world and also talk’s about how some are financial supported by the “G.I. Bill and how the population dramatically increased after the Second World War “(44). Edmundson argues over the evaluations and how some students don’t always make them interesting and how he would commend them to be more interesting, than what has been written in the past years; Edmundson talks about how grading has gotten so much easier because the teachers are afraid of the students making
“Intellectuals and Democracy” by Mark Kingwell (2012) captures the essence of the commonality between higher education and philosophy and democracy. The author, who is a philosopher expresses his notion of the connection between the democratic system and that of the education system. Often, as the article expresses there is a preconception regarding the validation of careers promised with certain university degrees where other programs result in uncertainty or questioning from others. The use of rhetorical appeals used by the author throughout the article works towards building his article. I argue that through rhetorical appeals the author works his audience to grasp his personal stance of the education system as he attempts to persuade
In the editorial “Coddling of the American Mind,” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt examine the political correctness on college campuses and how it may be hurting students’ mental health. They explain by allowing campuses to discuss words, ideas, and subjects that can cause discomfort or give offense can provide positive attributes like helping students to produce better arguments and more productive discussions over differences. Does Lukianoff and Haidt provide sufficient evidence about how college campuses should raise attention about the need to balance freedom of speech to help students in their future and education to lead the reader to agree with their argument? The answer is yes,
Throughout the article “The New Liberal Arts,” Ungar masks an unsound argument with emotion and perceived credibility. Ungar presents himself as a credible source due to his interaction and experience as a presidents at a liberal arts institution. Though he presents himself with knowledge, the arguments he draws attention to are poorly developed and lack any solid background information to why he is right over the opposing
Graff, G., Birkenstein, C., & Durst, R. K. (2009). The Growing College Gap. "They say/I say": the moves that matter in academic writing : with readings (p. 379). New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
Wilson, Robin. “A Lifetime of Student Debt? Not Likely.” They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter In Academic Writing. Ed. Gerald Graff. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2012. 256-273. Print.
In recent years, many have debated whether or not a college education is a necessary requirement to succeed in the field of a persons’ choice and become an outstanding person in society. On one hand, some say college is very important because one must contribute to society. The essay Three Reasons College Still Matters by Andrew Delbanco shows three main reasons that students should receive their bachelor’s degree. On the other hand, many question the point of wasting millions of dollars on four years or maybe more to fight for highly competitive jobs that one might not get. Louis Menand wrote an article based on education titled Re-Imagining Liberal Education. This article challenges the main thought many americans have after receiving a secondary education. Louis Menand better illustrates the reasons why a student should rethink receiving a post secondary education better than Andrew Delbanco’s three reasons to continue a person’s education.
Dean's (mis)use of language can be somewhat redeemed by his intellectual virginity and his genuine desire to be like his high-browed friend; indeed, being earnest is important, and can excuse almost anything. But what should one think about the way Carl...
Obama, Michelle. "Remarks to the NAACP National Convention." "They Say/I Say": The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing: With Readings. By Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstein, and Russel K. Durst. Vol. 2e. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2012. 417-33. Print.
I found O’ Brien’s speech to be extremely educational as well as entertaining. He used his profession as a comedian to incorporate pathos (humor), which positively affected the graduates. “When I got the call two months ago to be your speaker, I decided to prepare with the same intensity many of you have devoted to an important term paper. So late last night, I began (O’Brien, 2011)”. O’Brien is making a joke, based on the common stereotype that college students procrastinate on papers till the day before the deadline. “Behind me sits a highly admired President of the United States and decorated war hero while I, a cable television talk show host, have been chosen to stand here and impart wisdom. I pray I never witness a more damning example of what is wrong with America today (O’Brien, 2011).” O’Brien regularly uses humbling humor that supports the delivery of his speech. O’ Brien portrays himself as humble because he feels as if he isn’t worthy of giving a commencement speech due former president Bush, a decorated war hero was sitting behind him. O’Brien seems puzzled that they choose a television comedian, over a president and war hero because he is arguably much more qualified and respected. O’ Brien then jokingly states, that there’s a problem with America if the...
Studying a university degree is one of the biggest achievements of many individuals around the world. But, according to Mark Edmunson, a diploma in America does not mean necessarily studying and working hard. Getting a diploma in the United States implies managing with external factors that go in the opposite direction with the real purpose of education. The welcome speech that most of us listen to when we started college, is the initial prank used by the author to state the American education system is not converging in a well-shaped society. Relating events in a sarcastic way is the tone that the author uses to explain many of his arguments. Mark Edmunson uses emotional appeals to deliver an essay to the people that have attended College any time in their life or those who have been involved with the American education system.