Spencer Burdette - Shame of the Nation Blog Post #3
Spencer Burdette
Blog Post #3 - Rhetorical Analysis
As I continue to read this book, it has become apparent to me that Kozol has been developing a very distinct style of narrative throughout. In this blog post, I will explore the techniques Kozol uses to do so.
One part of Kozol's style is frequently using quotes to bolster his arguments and bring a sense of authenticity to the story he is telling. A particularly effective quote that Kozol uses comes when he describes one of the "themed academies" of East Harlem, and the state of their school:
"Supplies were scarce. 'Three of my classes don't have textbooks,' said the principal. 'I have to fight and scratch for everything we get.'"(Kozol 143).
Kozol's decision to include this quote invokes the feeling of desperation in the reader that is felt so often by school administrators and teachers in the poor schools he was visiting. More specifically, the inclusion of the words "fight and scratch" gives the implication that the inner city is a battleground, where even the most basic of school supplies are something to die for. Kozol is appealing to the pathos of the reader, because fighting for basic supplies is not something typically associated with school, something considered domestic and peaceful. And thus, we reveal the central theme of Kozol's narrative. His message is clear: every day, war is being waged on the children of inner city schools, and they are fighting a losing battle.
The first of many passages that exemplifies this war zone-esque tone comes as Kozol describes lunchtime in an inner-city school that he visited in New York.
"'Lunchroom Hell,' as another New York student once described these periods in which they're herded down for squalid feedings in the basements of their schools, does not come up too often in those intellectual deliberations on the reasons for collapsing motivation among students in these schools."(Kozol 148).
I found this passage striking in a few ways. I was first shocked by the comparison being made between lunchtime, a usually pleasant time of day for me, and Hell. The effect of this choice is that it causes the reader to realize that lunch is a wholly uninspiring and demoralizing time for these students. It also helps to know that this comparison came from a student, and not the author. This gives us the understanding that the students of these schools are perfectly aware of the inhumane conditions they are put into every day, which adds to the pain of reading their stories.
Another line that stood out to me came later on the same page:
"...shameful physical conditions that are almost guaranteed to coarsen the mentalities of children and to manufacture restlessness and discontent and academic apathy among too many of their peers"(Kozol 148).
I think this passage is brilliant, because of its syntax. The choices he makes to include the words "coarsen" and "manufacture" reinforce the idea that these schools are factories, simply churning out students destined for a life of disappointment and frustration. This may be a reach, but I believe the hard "c" in "coarsen" and "manufacture" and the industrial connotation of those words adds to the grittiness of the passage, further incorporating the factory-like image into the reader's mind. I was really intrigued by this passage, and I think you should be too.
The choice by Kozol to include "herded" and "squalid" also add to the feeling of industrial, farm-like routine and rigor that is a central part of the average school day in one of these schools. This is fitting, seeing as how the main focus of this chapter was to examine how students are being forced and jammed into a military-inspired curriculum of standardization and uniformity that crushes all hope of original thought or joy of learning.
Kozol's inflection of war and combat continues as he investigates possible solutions proposed by magazines and newspapers. Kozol suggests that what we need to combat the massive inequalities in our school system is a "...national assault upon the institution of apartheid education"(Kozol 195).
By choosing to use the word "assault", he brings back the warlike tone and the mindset that we need to wage war on inequality. Arguably, one cannot disagree with his thinking after learning the extent to which students in poor districts are mistreated, abused, and neglected by our education system. I imagine that the purpose of his reliance on such language is to prime the reader to align with his opinion that we should think of the struggle to reinstate educational equality as a war: a war on disenfranchisement and apathy among government. And when it comes down to it, I can't help but agree. Kozol has done a truly brilliant job of convincing me that these inequalities are simply untenable if we want to continue to be able to claim that we are a world leader in education and economy.
Blog Post #3 - Rhetorical Analysis
As I continue to read this book, it has become apparent to me that Kozol has been developing a very distinct style of narrative throughout. In this blog post, I will explore the techniques Kozol uses to do so.
One part of Kozol's style is frequently using quotes to bolster his arguments and bring a sense of authenticity to the story he is telling. A particularly effective quote that Kozol uses comes when he describes one of the "themed academies" of East Harlem, and the state of their school:
"Supplies were scarce. 'Three of my classes don't have textbooks,' said the principal. 'I have to fight and scratch for everything we get.'"(Kozol 143).
Kozol's decision to include this quote invokes the feeling of desperation in the reader that is felt so often by school administrators and teachers in the poor schools he was visiting. More specifically, the inclusion of the words "fight and scratch" gives the implication that the inner city is a battleground, where even the most basic of school supplies are something to die for. Kozol is appealing to the pathos of the reader, because fighting for basic supplies is not something typically associated with school, something considered domestic and peaceful. And thus, we reveal the central theme of Kozol's narrative. His message is clear: every day, war is being waged on the children of inner city schools, and they are fighting a losing battle.
The first of many passages that exemplifies this war zone-esque tone comes as Kozol describes lunchtime in an inner-city school that he visited in New York.
"'Lunchroom Hell,' as another New York student once described these periods in which they're herded down for squalid feedings in the basements of their schools, does not come up too often in those intellectual deliberations on the reasons for collapsing motivation among students in these schools."(Kozol 148).
I found this passage striking in a few ways. I was first shocked by the comparison being made between lunchtime, a usually pleasant time of day for me, and Hell. The effect of this choice is that it causes the reader to realize that lunch is a wholly uninspiring and demoralizing time for these students. It also helps to know that this comparison came from a student, and not the author. This gives us the understanding that the students of these schools are perfectly aware of the inhumane conditions they are put into every day, which adds to the pain of reading their stories.
Another line that stood out to me came later on the same page:
"...shameful physical conditions that are almost guaranteed to coarsen the mentalities of children and to manufacture restlessness and discontent and academic apathy among too many of their peers"(Kozol 148).
I think this passage is brilliant, because of its syntax. The choices he makes to include the words "coarsen" and "manufacture" reinforce the idea that these schools are factories, simply churning out students destined for a life of disappointment and frustration. This may be a reach, but I believe the hard "c" in "coarsen" and "manufacture" and the industrial connotation of those words adds to the grittiness of the passage, further incorporating the factory-like image into the reader's mind. I was really intrigued by this passage, and I think you should be too.
The choice by Kozol to include "herded" and "squalid" also add to the feeling of industrial, farm-like routine and rigor that is a central part of the average school day in one of these schools. This is fitting, seeing as how the main focus of this chapter was to examine how students are being forced and jammed into a military-inspired curriculum of standardization and uniformity that crushes all hope of original thought or joy of learning.
Kozol's inflection of war and combat continues as he investigates possible solutions proposed by magazines and newspapers. Kozol suggests that what we need to combat the massive inequalities in our school system is a "...national assault upon the institution of apartheid education"(Kozol 195).
By choosing to use the word "assault", he brings back the warlike tone and the mindset that we need to wage war on inequality. Arguably, one cannot disagree with his thinking after learning the extent to which students in poor districts are mistreated, abused, and neglected by our education system. I imagine that the purpose of his reliance on such language is to prime the reader to align with his opinion that we should think of the struggle to reinstate educational equality as a war: a war on disenfranchisement and apathy among government. And when it comes down to it, I can't help but agree. Kozol has done a truly brilliant job of convincing me that these inequalities are simply untenable if we want to continue to be able to claim that we are a world leader in education and economy.
Spencer,
ReplyDeleteLike you, Kozol's rhetoric has me convinced. Your discussion on how Kozol's arguments are effective because he uses quotes and strong word choice is entirely correct. There are some times, however, that I find Kozol depicts himself as a very radical person. Most times, I agree with the idea that extreme situations are in need of extreme responses. This is why I think the presentation of educational reform as a war is very effective.
Do you ever find yourself disagreeing with Kozol? Although I agree with him, I think there's definitely room for people to say that his ideas for reform will ineffective (as desegregation has been in the past) and do more harm than good. Are there anythings that you feel like he's overlooked so far?
Cate,
DeleteThanks for your insight on my post. I would, however, disagree that Kozol portrays himself as a radical person. In fact, he mentions that the kind of school reforms he is suggesting should be common sense and not shocking to anyone.
To be completely honest, I don't often find myself disagreeing with his arguments, but I do feel like he tends to overlook the cost of all the school reforms that need to be put in place. He has yet to mention a reasonable way to pay for all of it, but that doesn't stop me from agreeing that we do need intense measures to help schools in this country.
Spencer, good discussion of word choice and its effects, particularly in the section about the factory imagery.
ReplyDeleteYou mention that he hasn't supplied any solutions. Do you think that, by the end of the book, he will? Certainly money is a huge aspect of this, as it is with all aspects of education, even for our own school. Why do you think people are unwilling/unable to support the cost of an adequate education?
Nice analysis Spencer. You used good word choice and really dove deep into some key passages. Specifically, I liked your comparison of inner city schools to factories. Inner city schools just churn out students. I only know a little bit about this phenomenon (of just trying to graduate kids) but this seemed nevertheless interesting.
ReplyDeleteOn another point, your author's word choice does at times seem a little too exaggerated. Do you agree with this interpretation? Is school really a war zone? Do we really still have "apartheid education?" (I don't really have enough background information to substantiate anything)
I like how thorough you went through many rhetorical strategies. Your insight into the war toned verbiage is interesting, you made good connections throughout. The only thing is though, I felt like as someone who didn’t read this book your rhetorical strategies jumped back-and-forth and at points I was confused, I think this is mostly in the organization of this blog post, but nonetheless the content was great. Do you think the connection to war enhances his argument or makes it seem like us versus them, being black people fighting against white people; which could create defensiveness in white people.
ReplyDeleteSpencer, I really enjoy all of the ideas and analysis voiced in this post, but I particularly identify with your thoughts about "Lunchtime Hell." When we were young and still in Harold Martin, I remember looking forward to lunchtime every day as a place to socialize with my friends from other classes and enjoy my food. The only time that we were forced to be silent was while we waited to be dismissed for recess, and it was probably only five minutes of silence in total. The thought of these children being served nearly-inedible food, eating in fearful silence for the majority of their meal, and never receiving recess breaks my heart, and stirs my anger at the situations that they are unwillingly entered into. While there is not much that we can do to change these students' lives, it is important that we are voicing our thoughts on this matter, and eventually inspire change.
ReplyDelete