Rhetorical Analysis Of Margaret Walker's For The Sioux People

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is fed up - their descendants lived on reservation land and the surrounding areas in North and South Dakota prior to 1700, before the white men arrived. Yet they are still fighting to live on their rightful land without interference from the US government. A few years ago, the government authorized TransCanada Corporation to build an oil pipeline through many cultural sites sacred to the Sioux people, as well as beneath the source of reservation drinking water, Lake Oahe. Since then, Native activists have tirelessly protested the implementation of the DAPL. Finally, in late 2016, at the end of Obama’s presidency, he sided with the Sioux people. It was a historic victory for the Tribe, but as soon as Trump took

office, he reinstated the project and that has been the final word regarding Dakota Access.
The Native groups protesting feel like no one cares about their problems, much like the speaker in Margaret Walker’s poem about black struggles “For My People.” Frustrated with the lack of concern, both the Native protesters and the speaker in “For My People” use a pathos approach in an attempt to compel the audience to recognize and change the way society unjustly treats their people. However, their approaches to pathos differ in a few key aspects. First, the pathos approach in Walker’s poem is quite evident, while the pathos approach of the Native protesters is tucked beneath an outward logos appeal. Second, Walker appeals to both “her people” and non black people, while Native protesters appeal strictly to non natives. Finally, Walker uses pathos as a more general expression of black strength and resilience, and Native protesters use pathos with the specific political goal of attaining respect for the sovereignty of Tribal nations. Although these differences are present, their approaches are still recognizably similar because they are asking for the same things. Both Walker and Native protesters want the general public to listen and care about their problems and correct the flawed system which treats their people as second-class citizens.
In “For My People,” Margaret Walker writes about the experience of being black in America, highlighting some of the everyday struggles which make life harder for African Americans.

She appeals to the audience’s emotions through her use of repetition and impactful run on sentences. Specifically, she begins almost every stanza with “For my people.” This repetition shows that her message is important, and meant for a wide audience. By repeating “for my people,” Walker is of course writing to her people, but she is also writing a subtle message to people who could aid in the fight of her oppressors, asking them to help end her peoples’ stresses. For example, the line “For my people… sleeping when hungry, shouting when burdened, drinking when hopeless…” protests the fact that so many of her people are going hungry at night and drinking to cope with their problems, but also asks for someone to put an end to hunger and alcoholism for her people’s sake. In addition to repetition, she uses run-on sentences to highlight the volume of problems her people face as a result of their identity. To illustrate, “For the cramped bewildered years we went to school to learn to know the reasons why and the answers to and the people who and the places where and the days when, in memory of the bitter hours when we discovered we were black and poor and small and different and nobody cared and nobody wondered and nobody understood.” Essentially, the long, crowded sentence gives readers an opportunity

to understand the amount of serious problems her people face. It conveys that because they are black, they are considered insignificant, and nobody cares enough to fix the many problems within their society. Unsatisfied with this status quo, Walker fights back.
Although Walker spends most of the poem giving insight into the somewhat bleak existence of her people, she ends the poem with “Let a new earth rise. Let another world be born.” This hopeful ending conveys the strength and resilience of her people. Even though they have faced discrimination and been “distressed and disturbed and deceived and devoured by money-hungry glory-craving leeches,” they still long for a future that leaves those problems behind, and believe it is possible. Through the sense of hope, she pushes back against centuries of discrimination, and declares her people worthy of a brighter future.
The idea of a brighter future is one Native protesters have also been working towards for some time. They have long fought for their right to sovereignty and urged the US government to make amends for the way Native Americans have been treated throughout history. However, this emotional appeal is sometimes hidden. Through the DAPL protest, Native protesters outwardly present a logos approach by urging politicians and citizens to take a stand against the exploitation of the environment by using slogans like “Water is life.” Logically, water is a source of life for the Tribe, and causing damage to the earth is wrong because it means future generations will suffer. Obviously, Native groups wholeheartedly agree with environmental protection, but their disdain for the pipeline mostly stems from the violation of their rights and the continual mistreatment of their people. Therefore, the logos approach does not accurately reflect why Native American groups are upset.
It is instead a subtle use of pathos which reflects the true source of Natives’ dissatisfaction. Generally speaking, Native protesters aim to evoke a feeling of disgust for the injustice perpetrated towards them over the years. For instance, in an interview, the founder of Sacred Stone Camp, LaDonna Brave Bull Allard, said:
I am unsure if this is a top environmental problem for Native People, we are saying we have the right to live in our own country, we have the right to preserve our land for the future generations. We are the original landowners, we put our history, our spirit in the land. Our prayers, our footprint is in the land. I ask what did I ever do to have these settlers come into my country destroy it, I ask why did they massacre my people at Whitestone in 1864 when we did nothing, I ask you what did we do when the the Army Corp of Engineers came in the 1940s and 1950s and flooded our land took away our gardens and homes. Now they come with a pipeline what did we do to have this done to the original people of the land. No this is not about an environmental issue it is about our lives and the right for my grandchildren to live.
The language she uses compels her audience of non native people to feel revolted at the thought of the injustice that has always plagued her people. By referencing specific historical events of injustice, she illustrates the way her people were victimized, creating an emotional appeal to side with the victims instead of the perpetrators. Her repetition of “our” in “our history,” “our spirit,” “our prayers,” and “our footprint,” appeals to pathos because she conveys the sentimental and cultural value of the land. It persuades readers that the land truly does belong to them because it is their history that unfolded there. Definitely, this appeal to pathos regarding the DAPL is less evident, but it is present.
Despite their differences in appeal, common ground can be found between Walker and Native protesters.

Both are fed up with the public’s lack of concern for the problems that continually plague their people, and call for fair treatment. In “For My People,” Walker explicitly says how “no one cared” about her people’s problems. Similarly, Native protesters feel the lack of concern for their problems in the way they successfully organized such a large and visible protest, yet nothing changed for their people. Both Walker and protesters push back against this lack of concern by hoping for a new generation that will act as the catalyst for change. Both hope for the flawed system in place, which treats their people as second-class citizens, to be disbanded and replaced by one where their people share in the freedom experienced by those who are not oppressed. Walker writes, “let a people loving freedom come to growth,” and Native protesters would agree: a more passionate, new generation must be the ones to bring justice to their

people.
Ultimately, the appeal in Margaret Walker’s poem and that in the DAPL protest are more similar than different. Although they have different audiences, different approaches, and different goals, both fundamentally call for the improvement of American society so that discrimination becomes history and the errors in America’s past treatment of African Americans and Native Americans are corrected.