Grade my AP Lang essay

<p>Prompt:</p>

<p>Write a well-organized essay that evaluates the elements of rhetoric and style found in the passage. Explain how the writer uses these elements to communicate with his audience and to achieve his purpose.</p>

<p>The passage:</p>

<p>“Addressing the Graduating Class”
University High School
Oxford, Mississippi, May 28, 1951</p>

<pre><code> Years ago, before any of you were born, a wise Frenchman said, “If youth knew; if age could.” We all know what he meant: that when you are young, you have the power to do anything, but you don’t know what to do. Then, when you have got old and experience and observation have taught you answers, you are tired, frightened; you don’t care, you want to be left alone as long as you yourself are safe; you no longer have the capacity or the will to grieve over any wrongs but your own.

So you young men and women in this room tonight, and in thousands of other rooms like this one about the earth today, have the power to change the world, rid it forever of war and injustice and suffering, provided you know how, know what to do. And so according to the old Frenchman, since you can’t know what to do because you are young, then anyone standing here with a head full of white hair, should be able to tell you.

But maybe this one is not as old and wise as his white hairs pretend or claim. Because he can’t give you a glib answer or pattern either. But he can tell you this, because he believes this. What threatens us today is fear. Not the atom bomb, nor even fear of it, because if the bomb fell on Oxford tonight, all it could do would be to kill us, which is nothing, since in doing that, it will have robbed itself of its only power over us: which is fear of it, the being afraid of it. Our danger is not that. Our danger is the forces in the world today which are trying to use man’s fear to rob him of his individuality, his soul, trying to reduce him to an unthinking mass by fear and bribery—giving him free food which he has not earned, easy and valueless money which he has not worked for; the economies or ideologies or political systems, communist or socialist or democratic, whatever they wish to call themselves, the tyrants and the politicians, American or European or Asiatic, whatever they call themselves, who would reduce man to one obedient mass for their own aggrandizement and power, or because they themselves are baffled and afraid, afraid of, or incapable of, believing in man’s capacity for courage and endurance and sacrifice.

That is what we must resist, if we are to change the world for man’s peace and security. It is not men in the mass who can and will save Man. It is Man himself, created in the image of God so that he shall have the power and the will to choose right from wrong, and so be able to save himself because he is worth saving;—Man, the individual, men and women, who will refuse always to be tricked or frightened or bribed into surrendering, not just the right but the duty too, to choose between justice and injustice, courage and cowardice, sacrifice and greed, pity and self;—who will believe always not only in the right of man to be free of injustice and rapacity and deception, but the duty and responsibility of man to see that justice and truth and pity and compassion are done.

So, never be afraid. Never be afraid to raise your voice for honesty and truth and compassion, against injustice and lying and greed. If you, not just you in this room tonight, but in all the thousands of other rooms like this one about the world today and tomorrow and next week, will do this, not as a class or classes, but as individuals, men and women, you will change the earth; in one generation all the Napoleons and Hitlers and Caesars and Mussolinis and Stalins and all the other tyrants who want power and aggrandizement, and the simple politicians and time-servers who themselves are merely baffled or ignorant or afraid, who have used, or are using, or hope to use, man’s fear and greed for man’s enslavement, will have vanished from the face of it.
</code></pre>

<p>—William Faulkner</p>

<p>My essay: </p>

<p>1) Does the opening of the second paragraph sound corny? I don't want to sound like The American Pageant :).
2) I took a little longer than the suggest time (40 minutes) :o.
3) All comments are welcome! Be brutally honest!</p>

<pre><code> The primary purpose of Faulkner’s graduation address is to motivate the students as they trudge on in the long road of life. His speech also reflects the turbulent political climate of his time. Faulkner’s speech establishes a common enemy – the politicians of the world trying to conquer Man’s individuality – and proceeds viciously attack the enemy, hoping to bring the students together in a common cause. The students must maintain their integrity, their individuality, their voice, in the fight against the liberal politics and politicians that he alludes to.

Throughout his speech, Faulkner addresses the audience using personal pronouns. He wishes to relate with the audience, to unite with the audience. He doesn’t wish to talk down upon his audience, but to converse with the audience as if they were good friends. If the atom bomb “fell on Oxford tonight,” as he proposes, all it would do is “kill us,” thus “robbing itself of its only power over is: which is fear of it.” He goes even further, saying that “Our danger is not that. Our danger is the forces in the world … trying to rob [Man] of his individuality.” Those dangers are “what we must resist.” Faulkner and his fellow students are together in this fight against the “robbers” of individuality, the “communist, socialist, or democratic” politicians. In addition, he empowers the audience through his use of personal pronouns, “you will change the earth.” Faulkner’s vision of change means banishing all the “Napoleons and Hitlers and Caesars and Mussolinis and Stalins,” “all the other tyrants who want power and aggrandizement.” Faulkner manages to relate with the audience, empower them, and inject his own political stance all at the same time.

Faulkner’s use of personal pronouns is paralleled by his use of parallel structure. He empowers the audience by flattering them, telling them they “have the power to change the world, rid it forever of war and injustice and suffering.” And what “threatens us today”? “Not the atom bomb, nor even fear of it.” By using the negative twice, he emphasizes the insignificance of the atom bomb itself. What the audience should be afraid of are liberal policies: “giving him free food which he has not earned, easy and valueless money which he has not worked for.” But there is hope. The “communist or socialist or democratic … the tyrants and the politicians, American or European or Asiatic,” are “baffled and afraid, afraid of, or incapable of, believing in man’s capacity for courage and endurance and sacrifice.” Faulkner delivers both a calculated blow to the liberals and a dose of flattery to the audience. In his closing, he couples the imperative mood with his use of parallelism, telling the audience “never be afraid. Never be afraid to raise your voice for honesty and truth and compassion.” And to prove he’s a scholar of Oxford, he alludes to politicians that thrived off obsequious citizens, “Napoleons and Hitlers and Caesars and Mussolinis and Stalins,” and asks the students to “change the earth” – as in eradicating such despots.

Ultimately, Faulkner presents a refreshing take on the college commencement address. He carefully imbues his speech with his own political beliefs. Even if one does not agree with his political views, one cannot disagree with the basic principle on which his political argument lies – “raise your voice for honesty, truth, and compassion, against injustice and lying and greed.”
</code></pre>

<p>you don’t have three distingushed points</p>

<p>you don’t have three distinguished points…you talk about rhetorical devices…but you should talk about his usage of rhetorical devices while talking about the content</p>

Q1:what title would you give this speech if it were written by you?
Q2:cite two examples of repitition in the text and comment and comment on the effect each has on the text.
Q3:what type of expression is a “a head full of white hair”?
Q4:comment on the argument faulhner speech develops.in view of politics in the 21 century Nigeria,is it a convincing one?
Q5:what is the significance of the allusions made to Napoleon,hilter mussolini and stalin?
Q6:comment on the use of semicolons,dash and commas in the text.
Q7:provide synonyms and antonyms for the following words:aggrandizement,glib,baffled,endurance,sacrifice,tyrant
Q8:write a summary of paragraph six.