3/30: Third Reading
Hi everybody!
I'm now on page 175 of Race, and up to Chapter 13. To be completely honest, I found this reading section very difficult to get through. I'm not sure why that is, but I have a feeling it is because of how dense this part was with all of the names, dates, and information in general. However, there were parts here and there that really stood out to me among all of the statistics and facts, and that was due to Aronson's rhetorical style. That is what I will be analyzing today.
The first part in which Aronson's rhetorical style was evident was right at the beginning of Chapter 9, in which Aronson describes an experiment that teacher Jane Elliot performed the day after Martin Luther King Jr. was shot. He describes how Elliot tells her students "A new study has shown that blue-eyed people are stupid and lazy..." and "Because they have more melanin in their blood, brown-eyed people are naturally superior." (115). Sure enough, the brown-eyed children immediately took on a superior position and cast the blue-eyed people out. Aronson explains that this experiment was done multiple times with children and adults and there was always a similar result. Aronson's use of this specific example and anecdote set the stage effectively for the rest of the chapter and communicated one of his main points: once "scientific" evidence is supplied about different races, it simply aligns with and encourages prejudices that have been present the whole time. By starting the chapter with this, Aronson uses a specific example to effectively communicate his argument.
Throughout the section that I read, Aronson sprinkled effective metaphors and similes in here and there that helped tell a story, comment on a fact, or explain a mindset of the time. I have come up with two of them that were my personal favorites. One of them was on page 122 when Aronson explains the irony of the Enlightenment Era, which focused on scientific discovery and logic. Although the era brought about significant changes in how people perceived the reason and ethics behind intolerance, it also provided what some considered scientific evidence that contributed even more to the problem that was supposedly being solved. Aronson describes this perfectly using this metaphor: "...even as Enlightenment thinkers broke the chains of superstition, they forged the iron bonds of race." (122). In the literature that I've read and in society in general, chains have always symbolized the pain and opression of racism. When Aronson used this as a metaphor, he effectively communicated that these strong, powerful bonds of pain were being created as science and Enlightenment came about.
An example of a simile that Aronson used effectively was in the beginning of Chapter 10 when he discusses the spread of racial prejudice. While reading this book, I have found that Aronson consistently lets his literary shine through at the beginnings of each chapter, as a way to preface the ideas to come in a creative way. In this case, Aronson writes: "You could paint a picture of world history starting in 1775 with race prejudice spreading like a dark cloud, until, in the 1940s it covers the whole planet" (131). I found the use of the dark cloud covering the planet very effective because, especially with a book like this one, it is easy to get lost in all of the facts and figures that explain what is happening. However, by using the very powerful image of a black cloud covering the globe, Aronson provides an abstract idea of how racism affected (and still affects) everyone from every country in a negative light.
In the same section, Aronson says that "... World War II finally cracks the gloom and lets in sunlight." (131). I have learned a little bit about how WWII affected racial views, but I am interested to see how Aronson addresses this later on. Although this section was a little hard to get through (maybe I shouldn't have read it all in one sitting!) I am excited to see what comes next.
Types of Mankind Table. The Charnel House, 19 Mar. 2017, i0.wp.com/
thecharnelhouse.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/
typesofmankind_table-copy1.jpeg?ssl=1. Accessed 30 Mar. 2018.
I'm now on page 175 of Race, and up to Chapter 13. To be completely honest, I found this reading section very difficult to get through. I'm not sure why that is, but I have a feeling it is because of how dense this part was with all of the names, dates, and information in general. However, there were parts here and there that really stood out to me among all of the statistics and facts, and that was due to Aronson's rhetorical style. That is what I will be analyzing today.
The first part in which Aronson's rhetorical style was evident was right at the beginning of Chapter 9, in which Aronson describes an experiment that teacher Jane Elliot performed the day after Martin Luther King Jr. was shot. He describes how Elliot tells her students "A new study has shown that blue-eyed people are stupid and lazy..." and "Because they have more melanin in their blood, brown-eyed people are naturally superior." (115). Sure enough, the brown-eyed children immediately took on a superior position and cast the blue-eyed people out. Aronson explains that this experiment was done multiple times with children and adults and there was always a similar result. Aronson's use of this specific example and anecdote set the stage effectively for the rest of the chapter and communicated one of his main points: once "scientific" evidence is supplied about different races, it simply aligns with and encourages prejudices that have been present the whole time. By starting the chapter with this, Aronson uses a specific example to effectively communicate his argument.
Throughout the section that I read, Aronson sprinkled effective metaphors and similes in here and there that helped tell a story, comment on a fact, or explain a mindset of the time. I have come up with two of them that were my personal favorites. One of them was on page 122 when Aronson explains the irony of the Enlightenment Era, which focused on scientific discovery and logic. Although the era brought about significant changes in how people perceived the reason and ethics behind intolerance, it also provided what some considered scientific evidence that contributed even more to the problem that was supposedly being solved. Aronson describes this perfectly using this metaphor: "...even as Enlightenment thinkers broke the chains of superstition, they forged the iron bonds of race." (122). In the literature that I've read and in society in general, chains have always symbolized the pain and opression of racism. When Aronson used this as a metaphor, he effectively communicated that these strong, powerful bonds of pain were being created as science and Enlightenment came about.
A table of sorts from the Enlightenment Era, in which it was being proven that people from different places with different features were different species, like with animals (Types of Mankind Table).
An example of a simile that Aronson used effectively was in the beginning of Chapter 10 when he discusses the spread of racial prejudice. While reading this book, I have found that Aronson consistently lets his literary shine through at the beginnings of each chapter, as a way to preface the ideas to come in a creative way. In this case, Aronson writes: "You could paint a picture of world history starting in 1775 with race prejudice spreading like a dark cloud, until, in the 1940s it covers the whole planet" (131). I found the use of the dark cloud covering the planet very effective because, especially with a book like this one, it is easy to get lost in all of the facts and figures that explain what is happening. However, by using the very powerful image of a black cloud covering the globe, Aronson provides an abstract idea of how racism affected (and still affects) everyone from every country in a negative light.
In the same section, Aronson says that "... World War II finally cracks the gloom and lets in sunlight." (131). I have learned a little bit about how WWII affected racial views, but I am interested to see how Aronson addresses this later on. Although this section was a little hard to get through (maybe I shouldn't have read it all in one sitting!) I am excited to see what comes next.
Types of Mankind Table. The Charnel House, 19 Mar. 2017, i0.wp.com/
thecharnelhouse.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/
typesofmankind_table-copy1.jpeg?ssl=1. Accessed 30 Mar. 2018.
Hi Meg!
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you about this part being hard to get through. Although the individual sections were manageable, there was an overwhelming amount of historical information.
Similarly, I decided to analyze Aronson's rhetorical devices in my third blog, and my first topic of conversation was the example of Jane Elliott's experiment. One of my favorite parts of Aronson's writing has been the anecdotes that he begins each chapter with. This particular example struck me as more powerful, given the scientific aspect of it. I was wondering if you felt that this was more effective than the fictional stories he uses?
Hi Clara-
DeleteUsually, I would say yes- normally I find true stories and facts to be more effective than fictional stories. However, in this book that involves such a complex topic as race, I find some of those fictional stories easier to relate to and understand. I remember one of the chapters was started with a story about a teenage girl who had some sort of eating disorder (I'm not sure if that was the exact situation) and Aronson somehow compared that to the mindset of the "elite Christians", instead of just spouting out facts and dates that probably would have gone in one ear and out the other. So, when it involves a concept that is harder to understand, I usually can comprehend the subject a little bit more if it's a fiction story.
I totally understand why this section was difficult to get through -- I personally enjoyed it but I definitely had to take a few breaks to process while in the midst of reading.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though your analysis of the section about the Enlightenment era was very strong, and I noticed a lot of similar details while reading. The duality of using science to fortify discrimination whilst discrimination affects the nature of the science itself is something that I worry still seeps into our society.
Greetings Megan!
ReplyDeleteI congratulate you on getting through the reading in one sitting. Personally, I fell asleep every few pages (no exaggeration there). From reading your post, It seems to me that you have a good handle on the topics he goes into. You say that the section was dense with "names, dates, and information". I have to say I agree, but my guess is this is because modern history has a lot more to be said about it. I think that if you read the section and understand what the enlightenment era was about and it's impacts on today's society, you're fine. And clearly you do.
Also... thanks for including the image. I spent a good few minutes looking at that trying to understand what thoughts went into it being arranged the way it is. You gave me the chance to have a second look.
-Simon S. Page
Despite how information dense this section is, I find Aronson's writing pretty manageable because of his storytelling style. I always felt as though he was telling me a story and pulling me along. He has a clear voice. I've thought about his style a lot as I've been reading The New Jim Crow, as Alexander also includes a lot of information, but her style is less story-teller and more lecturer, which I attribute to her argument being less accepted and so she has to make more of an argument. It's interesting to compare the different styles as I read all three books.
ReplyDelete