Rough Draft of Comparison Essay: Theatre of Good and Evil

The twisted and manipulative minds of individuals bring society to a stir. Authors John Connolly and Arthur Miller through their respective works The Book of Lost Things and The Crucible use culture and social factors to help portray and develop characters according to good and evil. Cultural and social factors help deprive the goodness of several characters, leaving the protagonist and state in a mist of confusion.

Lucifer known as the devil plays a significant role as a reference to tempter of mankind. Depending on the impact of the shedding may be, the roles of The Crooked Man, and Abigail Williams are both portrayed as the chief spirit of evil or the devil. The Crooked Man, whom desires every matter for himself, through his selfish and manipulative works, endeavours to corrupt the protagonist mind, David. Crooked Man tries to achieve this throughout the novel in such way so that David can build up hatred towards his newborn step brother, Georgie, whom had been causing conflict ever since his arrival, so that David would sell his soul to The Crooked Man (devil). The persuasiveness of The Crooked Man is the same as how the devil would take an individuals soul, granting, promising and tempering mankind, by all means, using any force; mentally and physically. It is shown throughout the novel, that The Crooked Man mentally attacks David, after his mother’s dead, sparking confusion and loneliness in David’s life. In the play, Abigail Williams and her friends are seen as dancing, drinking chicken blood, and chanting spells, all worshiping black magic to Lucifer (the devil) which is forbidden in their strictly followed Christian community. After being caught, Abigail Williams influences the high Christian morale community into believing that it was the entire devils fault, freighting the girls and corrupting society. Abigail Williams uses black magic for her own desires as she wants John Proctor, as she cast a spell to kill his wife, Elizabeth Proctor.

John Connolly and the producer of the play, Nicholas Hytner, through their works of art, do not directly distinguish the evil being referenced to the devil. Reading and viewing the novel and play in depth, the audience slowly starts to understand the works that show the characters of the evil being showed through The Crooked Man, and Abigail Williams. Therefore, the evil isn’t introduced as evil at first, but further on the development, the audience will start to understand who are evil and good. Events that build up in the The Book of Lost Things, The Crooked Man is viewed as an outsider, who follows David on his journey to escape the dilemma he is trapped in, and helps David on several obstacles facing death. The handiness and kindness of The Crooked Man are only motives so that he can eventually get what he wants, thus making The Crooked Man act in a certain way. Abigail Williams through her attitude and mentality display her two sides of evil and goodness. Her goodness is shown as her trying to get the society understand that the devil has been playing with the girls mind, and her evil is shown through varies events such as threatening the girls if they tell what they did in the forest and blaming the Barbados slave, Tituba for being possessed by the devil. In both the novel and play, costumes and attires don’t give away the characters personality, but the lighting and setting, displays some factor. Where the Crooked Man is seen and talked about, are at the times of dusk, and night, where David at first gets a glimpse of this small dark figure watching him through his window. The description and the setting where he The Crooked Man is seen, gives a show case of his ideology.


In the play The Crucible, Arthur Miller based it on the past events that occurred in 1622 Massachusetts, where it was known as the Salem Witch Trials. This setting through the respective lightings foreshadows the play according to the Salem Witch Trials. The Salem Witch Trials were country court trials to prosecute people accused of witchcraft, and in the play, several cast members throughout society are accused of witch crafting and possessed by the devil. The ones that practise black magic, are shown as evil, as they have a motive to kill or want something, hence practising black magic will get them what they desire. Abigail Williams tries to use the setting of the Christian believed community to bring fear and anxiety for her advantage, as the town fears this type of disturbance. Lighting is incorporated where the practice of black magic was taken place at a dark, night forest. The Book of Lost Things, the setting of darkness prevails as a time of evilness, where the protagonist is always being bombarded with obstacles facing evil.

In the novel and play, the culture and social factors help develop the characters according to good and evil. Depending on the circumstances, the views upon evil can be discovered later on, as at the ending of both the play and novel, the audience discovers what characters are evil and which are good.

Good vs. Evil: How does film deal with these questions?

Films relatively deal with the theme of good vs. evil, differently depending on whom the movie is intended for. Again, the audience, whom novels or films are made for, affects the complete storyline and the theme regarding good vs. evil. Depending on the target audience, the good and evil characters are often compared by the setting, lighting, and special effects in the film. The author or director may use special colours, or effects to make one side stand and make obvious.
Usually evil is represented by a much larger force, darker setting, corrupt people, and ugly faced, while on the other hand the good is represented by more lighting, clearer image, more focused, handsome, beautiful and basically the opposite of evil.

Even though in many of these graphical novels these so called heroes sometimes use violence as a mean to get what they want or information, this gives off a bad example and image of the character. This example is seen in the beginning of Watchmen, after The Comedian being killed, the guy with the moving ink mask (cannot remember the name, but I believe Ian was playing his role in the presentations), goes to Comedian’s arch enemies house and demands for some answers or clues. He uses violence, such as breaking the fingers off slowly, inflicting pain to the arch enemy of Comedian. Sometimes, the good, in films, use many forms, whether peacefully or painfully, to get what they want, and similar applies for the villains or evil. Such examples of evil are by luring innocent people with wealth, respect, and power in order for some answers. This is seen in many films, based on the theme of good vs. evil, where the “good”, such as police officers, governments are lured by higher, powerful, rich, “evil” organizations.

However, in the end, the actions that are produced by the good are generally intended and result in positive outcome for the society in the movie, and the good always comes out on top, defeating the evil. Morales of being good in the film are meant to teach to the audience, so that they can see the outcomes from the film of being and associating with evil, which results in being caught by justice.

Films deal the same as literature does, but in films, the actions and transitions are better, as the audience can see for themselves. Comparing to a reader, where they can easily get bored, or misread the text, in films the theme of good vs. evil can be displayed so that the audience can clearly view what’s happening, and see in front of their eyes the result.

Good vs. Evil: How does literature deal with these questions?

Literature deals with “Good vs. Evil”, in a variety of ways that both show the postive and negative outcomes. Most literature deals with the theme and concept using ‘good vs. evil’ as their main plot, following this theme though conflict and ending with morals. Authors of literature use this theme of "good vs. evil", with varies complexity for different readers at different levels, to entertain, enhance and capture the audience attention and create an image.

Authors enhance the situation where it comes down to the protagonist (good) vs. agonist (evil), using emotional settings, light effects (day/night), different shades of colour & symbols (dark alley ways and etc), and the intensity of the battle. The best way an author enhances the situation is by using rhetorical devices and the way they describe in depth detail the action from transition to the next transition.

For most cases, literature deals with good and evil, as the good defeating the evil presences, and overcoming any obstacles. The evil are dealt as the ones that lose, suffer, and die, if not change into good nature. With Aladdin, the villain/ the king I believe, is defeated by Aladdin, and gets to marry his love. The good is represented by Aladdin, while the king is represented as the villain, showing that good always win. In some cases, in more novice level literature, good does not always overcome evil; evil sometimes is on top, or the good character turns into evil.

This all depends on the type of literature you read, as for different literature depending on the context can have different outcomes for the good and evil characters, meaning that literature sometimes deals differently depending on the circumstance.

Good vs. Evil: How do various religions/philosophies deal with these questions?

Religion and philosophy plays and affects our lives greatly. For most of the part, religion and religious figure guide and set out our lives for us, such as what to do, and what not to do. Flaw for religion and religious figure telling us how to live and cooperate with our lives, can be seen as a wrong and unacceptable to other people in various society. Religion and philosophy are very influential and ideal to us humans, whether we are considered “good” or “evil”. However both religion and philosophy agree on as to what is considered “good” and “evil” throughout teachings, stories, morals, principles, ethic, lessons, and texts.

Although there are many different religions and philosophers with different style of thinking and literature, they all in the end conclude that acting good/positive is better yourself and others vs. acting all evil creating negative essences for yourself and society. This is not true if your masterminded by the illuminate or the freemasons as they have different philosophies and if you worship the devil, which both are the on the same boat.

In Muslim countries that are not democratized, they still follow the Code of Hammurabi, the oldest written code of law. This is considered a harsh set of laws, defining that the action you commit, such as cutting off someone’s arm, or steal, the same thing happens to you, so you would get the same arm cut off, and if you steal you would get your fingers chopped off. This is seen as a harsh and un-justice, but in fact countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran all have low crime rates, and theft rates. So, by having strict and harsh laws and religion supporting these laws, do these laws turn society into behaving good and positive?

As said in previous blogs, defining “good” and “evil” is vague, in which different religion, society, culture, philosophies have different meanings, view, which can differ vastly or be similar. Therefore, religion and philosophies both deal with the concept of “good” and “evil” in different ways, as there are many flaws and different types of thinkers and religions.

Can good characters engender Judgments?

Yes, I believe that good characters can engender judgment. Judgment is based on how a person acts, talks, behaves in society. A good character can be seen as a person, whom does good deeds in society, such as Robin, from Robin Hood. Even though he steals from the higher and upper class families in society, Robin Hood re-distributes that money to the poor. His actions may seem as bad, but when you look at this action as a whole, you can judge that there is more and creates positive then negative. The assumption that the rich gets upon Robin Hood is that he is a filthy thieve, robbing their hard earned money, but the assumptions made upon the rest of society, is as a glorifying hero.

For say, if Robin Hood had pocketed some of the money which he stole from the riches, then we can say that due to his actions, his good, positive image of him, will be vanished and diminished. His society will be ashamed and disgraced for his small pity action. It only cost a small wrong doing to change the assumption and image of you in society. If you take a look at Simba from the Lion King, when his father dies, and the blame is placed on him, their lion society starts to hate and leave him out of their society and the lion hierarchy is placed on his uncle, Mustafa.

Whereas in films or novel, the good character tends to start becoming and evolve into evil, or his actions become worse, and their inner negative force starts to take over, this is usually the case of an external force. External force can be the nature of society, black magic, painful loss, and negative influence from peers, which would fall under nature of society. With these circumstances listed above, the protagonist, or good character, has external forces, which makes them do bad things. Examples would be redemption. Even in real life, if your neighbour killed a family member or your animal, then you would most likely; you would go and do something bad in return. This same application applies for most novels and films, where redemption would be a cause for the protagonist, or good character, conduct evil actions. Thus, the case for redemption can also destroy the judgments made by society and the reader of the good character.

Therefore, good characters can engender judgment. The protagonist or good character must then watch how he acts in society, if they want to keep their good reputation in society. As said before, it only takes a small wrong doing, to diminish that image, and takes a long time for that image or judgement to build back.

Can evil characters engender sympathy?

I believe that not all evil characters are always entitled evil. With good characters or people, they always have an inner evil mood, that generates, when their mad, or aggressive. Again, not all people are completely evil or good, they contain have some of both traits in them.

Evil characters actions are provoked by their past presences. Evil characters have motives from background situation which leads them for their actions of committing wrong doings. At once, these so called villains or evil characters, were average, normal characters living their lives, until a tragedy occurs, which then, they turn into the dark side (evil) for revenge. In Batman: Dark Knight, you can see Joker, whom goes by the story of, his alcoholic father beating him, and causing the cuts near his mouth, but also killing his mother. (Not sure about the death of the mother, but pretty sure about the cut near his mouth). Jokers abusive father, lead Joker, into evolving to the monster he is, causing chaos and destruction in the city.

In many or all circumstances the evil characters engender sympathy, as said before not everyone is fully evil. Even Hitler, whom killed millions of Jew’s, and the Sri Lankan government whom are killing thousands of Tamil’s currently, still had sympathy for several some Jews, and Tamils. In the Tamil’s case, the government still in turn, provide insufficient food and shelter for the Tamils. By providing less then minimal food for endangered people, they still have a soft side, for this people. Relating to Hitler he allowed several Jewish children to live, as he could have been evil, and have slaughtered them. Even thought that Hitler and the Sri Lankan government are considered evil to many, they still have a soft side, for their evil and selfish motives.

Such examples of sympathy exists, whereas in movies, where the villain usually gives the person being harmed or killed another chance to live, or ease their actions, resulting in lessen pain. In real life situation in our society, average/normal civilians would most certainly have engendered sympathy. If it were robbers first time robbing a person or store, the next time he does it, they may regard it or back out, after the feelings learned and being affected from first robbery done.

Therefore, an evil character whom at a time can be seen as a good character, then become evil, can still engender sympathy from their past morals.

Are There Clear Defined Roles? (Good & Evil)

In many circumstances the roles of whether being of good natured or evil, are anonymous. Whether the reader or audience is reading a book, or watching a movie, the roles are not clearly defined until later on. Depending of the type of book or film, this can vary, as in some; the roles are clear and defined.

Depending on the type of book your reading, or the type of movie you’re watching, the author is to define the roles of each character, depending on the difficulty of the book but also for whom the book is intended to. If it were a book that was intended for the audience of minors, and children, then the roles are clear and defined for the reader, as of which character is the villain and hero, the bad ones and good ones. At a novice level book or movie, the villains are usually hidden, creating a suspense, which adds clarity and emphasizing the villain by making him mysterious, which overall is the ingredients for a perfect scene. In a less complicated book or movie, the villain would already be identified and described meaning that the roles are clear and defined. But, the protagonist, nevertheless is always given a clear, heroic, good natured role, meaning that we the audience and reader can identify the good with ease.

This is also presented in the graphical comics and novels we study and analyzed in class. Comparing ‘V for Vendetta’ and ‘Batman: The Dark Knight Returns’, we seen that the roles of the villains are blurred and not defined. The Dark Knight Returns gives out a clear idea of this, as Joker, and especially Two-Face, whom is revealed as villain later on. Two-Face, earlier on the novel is considered as a man of good, fighting for the city against crimes, and the mobs, but later on Two-Face turns out to be an villain, as the audience didn’t expect this transition.

Not in every book, novel, comic, or movie are you going to find out that the roles are clearly defined. Again, it depends on the type, and difficulty of the book, whereas in a easy to read, targeted for teens and under, the roles of the characters are to be clear, and defined. In a more novice book targeted for more advance reader, the roles are going to be reveal much later on, as there will be several twists.

What is Nature of Evil?

To define the nature of evil, it is complex, as in society certain people have different views/thoughts/opinions on the nature. In the 21st century, evil can is described as anything that society doesn’t expect and want. Thus, ‘evil’ is something that is viewed as negatively moral act. Evil is intended, as it consists of both Mens Rea, and Actus Reas, meaning that the action or deed has a motive behind it. Nevertheless, what is truly ‘evil’ in our world is already agreed upon.

Evil can be found applied mainly through novels, books and scripts whereas an author tries to deliver a message or moral to the audience. There are universal ‘evil’ that are viewed as morally bad and unacceptable, such as murder, rape, theft, genocide, and dishonesty. As you can see the examples given above, all need intent and a motive for their actions. For instance, the Sri Lankan government and its forces of army and navy are known of murdering, raping, committing genocide, robbing freedom and stealing privilege of survival from the minority of Tamils. Not only do they commit these actions, but they also tend to hide/restrict the facts and not allow any journalists and foreign aid helpers in these war zones, which ironically is in the Tamil populated area. In their evil nature government, in which they are being dishonest to themselves and for the international world’s eyes, causes the international world to believe that their actions is morally correct, thus encouraging them. Another instance is the infamous ‘BTK’ killer, Denis Rader, whom murdered countless amounts of individuals, but to make matters worse, also tortures them. These are clear examples of where crimes, with motive and intent, are considered universally ‘evil’ natured. Can a society or the World operate without any evil natured presence? It’s like the saying, ‘There is no Peace, without War’.

In novels, comics, and etc, evil nature is portrayed as dark, black. The society in which the themes of these books and comics takes place, evil appears where there are dark alleys, usually after evening, where the black sky starts taking over. Acts of evil are shown as robbery, murder against the citizens. In Dark Knight comic, you can see that the hero (good), Bruce Wayne, disguised as Batman, appears at the night time of Gotham City, where crime is highly likely to occur. Even here in Toronto, acts of evil prevail as the dark clouds rolls in. Most of the shooting, stabbing, gang related activities occur once the sun vanishes.

The nature of evil is described as unacceptable actions, negative moral actions, and the unwanted in society. Why do we still have people that are of nature of evil, in a world where we are progressing towards peace? Some say that we need evil, in order to balance out peace and good. Without evil, there would no need of cops, army, and other enforcement agents, but unfortunately the world still needs them and superhero's such as Barrak Obama and many more.

What is Nature of Good?

From the ancient ritually of religion, ethics, and philosophy, the phrase good and evil deprive from the meaning of location of objects, desires, and behaviours. With good and evil, one side would be considered morally positive (good), while the other side would be morally negative (evil). To define both good and evil are broad, had have a vast amount of meaning and definition. Thus, in our society good and evil differ throughout the region of this world, as different parts of the world have different aspects and perspective on determining the nature or good or evil.

Good can be considered as a person contributing and producing positive outcome for the society. Acts of good can be considered as someone giving back to the community or helping the society become prosperous, better, and healthy. A great example would be the founder of Microsoft, Bill Gates. With all the riches and wealth he possesses, he manages to give back a portion of his wealth through charity to the needed ones in society. But, is this act of good nature? Sure, but we would have to look at the other side and the full concept of his actions. Why would a rich, wealthy person, whom can control a state if he wanted to, help out the poor and needed? This is a guy that makes more money than the GDP of come countries. Some say to the nature of good, there are also motives behind it. In Bill Gates case, by him donating a portion his personal wealth or earning back to a charitable organization, he can receive a tax relief or tax credit. So are his kind hearted charitable donations, a nature of good, or is there a motive or perspective behind the curtains? Nevertheless he still contributed to a needy and good cause.

People like Martin Luther King, Mohandas Ghandi, Harriet Tubman, Malcolm X, Nelson Mandela, can be considered as the ones whom have the nature of good in their heart, thus producing and contributing positive outcomes towards society in their time. These people listed above have tired nevertheless to bring peace, freedom and liberty and defeat slavery in society. Even though these people, didn’t possess wealth like Bill Gates, with there own heart and soul, they fought and contributed for this peace, freedom, liberty that we have today. These people with there own actions that produced positive outcomes for society, can truly be said that there actions were nature of good. There motives were positive and they wanted to help other people, not because they can get an tax break, or recognition, they did it for the future scholars of the world. These future scholars are us, and we should appreciate the hard fought battles and obstacle these people, mentioned above have gone through.

In today’s society good and evil are already pre-decided. Meaning that whatever action you do, it will either produce a good deed or an evil. If your nature is good (positive) or evil (negative), in society, the consequences are already known, and society will reflect upon your decisions. Say, if a student cheats on a test, then in society that is known as evil or negative. At the same time, if the student came in continuously for help, days before the test, then it is the nature of good that the student came in, forfeiting cheating or getting a low mark on the test.

Is it subjective or a universal truth about what constitutes “good” and “evil”?

I believe it is subjective as to what constitutes as “good” and “evil”. Depending on the perspective your looking from an action can be classified as a good or evil. In society, if a kid steals a loaf of bread, then from people’s perspective they would consider this kid as evil or bad. If you viewed the kid from his background, and you find out that the kid have ill parents, whom are homeless. Would this act constitute as a good or evil?

There are many factors that make one evil or good. Depending on nature or nurture, it all influences you, and depending on how you are brought up or taught, many things can be considered evil, but for others in society, it can be seen as good. Religion, morals, and values mainly rely on the individual and how they interpret things. If a person doesn’t follow, what should be followed by there society, it may seem good for them, but from others perception this is seen as an evil or disgrace.

Therefore, when trying to constitute what is good or evil, a person must analyze the concept. Without understanding the background to a person act, one action may see as evil, but to the person committing the act, it can be constitute as a good deed/action. Although with all mankind, there are already the set morals, values in society. If you commit murder, or anything to harm a living thing, is already known to as an act of evil. Any charitable or good will, towards people, person and etc. is known as an act of good. So, with set evil and good, they are already pre-determined, so it also is universal truth.

Is it subjective or a universal truth about what constitutes “good” and “evil”?

I believe it is subjective as to what constitutes as “good” and “evil”. Depending on the perspective your looking from an action can be classified as a good or evil. In society, if a kid steals a loaf of bread, then from people’s perspective they would consider this kid as evil or bad. If you viewed the kid from his background, and you find out that the kid have ill parents, whom are homeless. Would this act constitute as a good or evil?

There are many factors that make one evil or good. Depending on nature or nurture, it all influences you, and depending on how you are brought up or taught, many things can be considered evil, but for others in society, it can be seen as good. Religion, morals, and values mainly rely on the individual and how they interpret things. If a person doesn’t follow, what should be followed by there society, it may seem good for them, but from others perception this is seen as an evil or disgrace.

Therefore, when trying to constitute what is good or evil, a person must analyze the concept. Without understanding the background to a person act, one action may see as evil, but to the person committing the act, it can be constitute as a good deed/action. Although with all mankind, there are already the set morals, values in society. If you commit murder, or anything to harm a living thing, is already known to as an act of evil. Any charitable or good will, towards people, person and etc. is known as an act of good. So, with set evil and good, they are already pre-determined, so it also is universal truth.

Persuasive Writing Samples: Adolescents and the Media (Informal Tone and Structure)

This informal toned persuasive writing seems more like a fact/information paper, rather than trying to persuade the reader or audience. It was dull and the author would have put in more emotion into his writing, which could have improved this dull writing.

The author, Victor C Strasburger, had materials that were relating to Australian research. He quoted extensively throughout this work, meaning that his work can be is legit and the information can be true and persuading. Comparing with the previous essays where the authors haven’t quoted their work, as many as Victor has, his work seems well researched. In the first paragraph, last sentence, you can see that he directly address the readers and audience by asking, “Why”. The style of this writing flowed, and with the sub-heading used, it makes it easier for the readers to understand that particular paragraph being talked about. The content compared with the previous samples, they were more essay written than this one. But, this piece I believe is better thought-out and better structured, with the use of sub-heading, which overall felt more like a report or research paper.

Overall, I don’t think this can be registered as a good example of an informal toned essay. If anyone follows this example, there work will seem more like a report, rather than trying to persuade your audience. Not saying that having plentiful information is bad, it bores the reader, and the reader or audience losses interest. The author could of used more rhetorical devices so that it can equal out the information, and not turn off the reader.

Persuasive Writing Samples: Debunking Media Violence

Travis Ryan, persuasive essay, on Debunking Media Violence is both rich and diverse. This glorified piece of writing is unexceptional perfect, as he masters the usage of rhetorical and literary techniques in his work, which overall creates the blend of professionalism and punctuality.

Travis Ryan kept a consistent formal tone throughout his persuasive writing essay. He brought up several points, which amazed me. He brings up Hollywood, which barely comes into the spotlight when talking or relating the consequences to violence. No one blames or points at Hollywood when talking about media violence, as Hollywood creates movies; where violence is shown to children, especially in their favourite action fighting movies. Thus, you can see and experience yourself that children are to re-in act the scenes from movies, which showcased their favourite superstar. Although, I would say that Professor Henry Jenkins used better and efficient diction, Travis Ryan can also be credited on his formal tone, and style for being scholarly and effective. He was able to stick with the content throughout the essay, by often relating the material to what he is trying to get across the impacts on media violence.

The mistake he made, was he that he included reader inclusions, by saying to the reader, “We, I, Our”. This makes it less effective, but at the same time, I think he uses reader inclusion, to get the audience or reader to get involved and get his points to them. A rhetorical device that caught my eyes was he mentioned, “Politicians are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to people who are attacking the media.” This is mentioned as Senators in the U.S are trying to regulate the legislation for the media contents. This which then brings to the next problem, which the author uses all this researches, materials, and resources from the American studies.

The conclusion sounded dull, and the author could have used rhetorical devices or could have had a stronger conclusion to conclude his strong essay. Travis Ryan could have reiterated the point where the V-chips and rating system for games aren’t enough to stop media violence, which could of strengthen his overall essay and conclusion. Taken as a whole, I would say that this in general is an excellent example of a formal essay, although with revision and additional material, this has the potential to be superior as Hercules.

Persuasive Writing Samples: Media Violence - Informal Tone

The informal toned essay written by Henry Jenkins is a diverse and excellent example of an informal toned piece of work. He begins his work by using a logical fallacy, appeal to ridicule, emphasizing the Virginia Tech shooting, and relating it to how it doesn’t relate to media violence. He also gives statistics to prove his point. In general this persuasive writing example of an informal tone is very significant as it set the standards for future informal toned piece of writing, and acts like a skeleton for us to follow.

He used many statistics and examples to persuade and prove his points. There is an error in the first paragraph, where he says, “On average college students spend more time each playing that (than) reading recreationally, watching television, or going to the movies”. The word “that” should have been replaced by “than”, and the consequence of this, is that it made a bad impression of his work. People will think his writing is not professional and scholarly, and may feel that he’s just a normal citizen, not a professor, writing this opinion piece. But, later on with his rich use of tone, content, and style, he proved that it was just a small mistake, and which overall provided a well written informal toned essay. He proved that a small mistaken, shouldn’t allow a reader to underestimate the rest of the writing, and so should other reads and teachers in society.

The style of this persuasive writing flows as smoothly as ocean tides at night. His paragraphs follow as from one huge well informed paragraph, to a paragraph that is more opinion winged, shorter sentences, which then reiterate his points, from the previous information filled paragraph. He uses high dictions to improve and deliver his piece with passion, and scholarly. He doesn’t use any slang, street language or any colloquial words, even though this is an informal toned essay, thus proves that we don’t necessarily have to use slang or colloquial words in informal toned piece of writing.

Overall, this is a well written informal toned persuasive essay regarding the media violence. He clearly stated his posing points and reasoning to back up, how media violence does not evoke violence in real life. Henry Jenkins has successfully written an informal toned piece of writing that of which can be used as a good example for us to look back, review, help and give some ideas and feedback for us, when we write an informal toned writing.

Persuasive Writing Samples: Media Violence- Formal Tone

Reading this article about T.V, Violence, and Censorship, it has shown me an example of what a formal tone essay looks like. It uses content, tone, style and both rhetorical and literary devices, to show how a formal paper is done. This essay is consistent, punctual, and straight-forward. It has extensive information which overall flows between paragraphs, one onto the next.

Regarding the content of this article was fabulous, as it had lots of information to back up the points. The author included several facts, which are from researches. The tone and style of this article felt like it was boring to read. The author could have used more and better linking words, which could have made it easier and understandable to read. Also, the paragraphs don’t flow from one point to the next; rather, the ideas are scattered, and confusing when reading it. Although this is a formal tone, it felt that the author did address the audience about his topic, which is ironic, because in a formal tone, the author doesn’t address the audience. The tone used sounded professional, and a matter of fact the author didn’t use any slang, street language, or abbreviations, which made this, essay a formal toned piece. Generally, the author used rhetorical devices to enhance his essay, such as using; cause and effect, definition, exaggeration, and reader inclusion.

Overall, this was my first example of reading a formal tone essay. There are three more to read, and this essay isn’t so bad. Although it can be improved, it overall satisfies me. Diction and the style of this essay can be changed, so that it doesn’t bore the reader. In the future, this author can add in more linking and connecting words that will connect one idea to the next, so that it will flow. I would give this essay a three star out of five, but with improvements in some areas, it has the potential to become a four star essay.

- Dusiy

Reflections

The art of writing a persuasive piece is that the writer must write in a fashion where, he sticks to a side, and tries to convince the reader. Trying to convince a reader is the hard part, where it requires you to have facts to support your point. This is where many fail, and without the proper formal teaching of how to write a persuasive piece, it can affect the writer. Therefore, many obstacles and difficulties are presented when writing a persuasive piece.

The obstacles lie as we tend to use opinion as facts, and not actually facts to backup our writing. Writers, like us students, should first take some time to disguise the difference between an opinion piece and a fact. Also, difficulty lies as teachers each teach different styles, thus as we progress, we get confused as which style to use, and what is expected of us. Although having an outline is the first step, most of us skip this, and go directly into typing, followed by spell-check, and hand in the next proceeding day. Preparation is also a difficulty that occurs when writing a good persuasive piece. When the writer researches in depth and understands their points at which they are arguing for, it can result in a better persuasive piece, with hard added facts. After preparation, the writer must write in a fashion, at which they can persuade their audience, and lure them into believing them. Not only after finishing writing the persuasive piece, we should also edit it. Reading it a couple of times, and have a friend editing it, can help.

For a decent persuasive piece, the writer should follow SESICU format thought in class yesterday. SESICU is structured as; stating, explaining, supporting, illustrating, connecting, and uniting. Following SESICU can benefit your persuasive piece, if it is followed properly. Using several types of rhetorical devices can also enhance your persuasive piece. Looking at U.S President Barrack Obama, where he uses a lot of rhetorical devices to connect and persuade his audience, you can learn out of tricks.

I believe it is too late for any support from teachers at this stage of the course. The burden is on the students. I believe they should do their own research and try to understand the material on their own. In university the professors wont be there to spoon feed you, and teach you the material you should already been taught.

Inauguration Speech

Yet again, the Shakespeare of Presidency delivers an effective yet enduring speech to his fellow humble followers and believers. Not only did he advocate this Inauguration speech for this fellow Americans, but also to World leaders, people of different culture, religion, ethnicity, believes, from poor struggling people to rich, wealthy and high class society, and to extremists. With clear, simplified ambitions of a future America and the World, he concisely delivers all his speech with punctuality and with positive energy. With the tremendous usage of rhetorical devices and techniques delivered in all three of his speeches, he is able to persuasively achieve his points, with the audiences understanding, sympathetic, and is shown by the reactions of the audience by applauding, supporting and cheering. Although his Inauguration speech was much shorter than the others, he still brilliant was able to give out this speech with the same attitude as the others.

In this speech he thanked everyone that was with him from the first day. He stated his difficulties as his party wasn’t like the Republicans where money was poured in through executives and endorsed by the filthy wealth. He also says that this victory was not only his, but the victory for the nation. "But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to - it belongs to you." Not only did he thank the nation, he also thanked the pioneers that helped shape America, as he describes the struggle of these pioneers as, “For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life….For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth….For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sanh”. He also is willing to work and create a bridge with the Muslim world, which the bridge was bombed and hatred by both the Americans and the Muslim society, in the past. “To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect… but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist”. Barrack Obama sinks my heart as with this caring and passionate heart and peaceful thoughts, I hope he can truly achieve world peace, connect with the Eastern governments, and help restore, respect and acknowledge the Humanitarian Rights and Freedom, as they are constantly being violated throughout the world.
Obama truly uses the rhetorical devices to the fullest extent. The one rhetorical device that I enjoyed reading was the anecdote when brought up the past about America’s birth. “So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood”. Whether it was him or his script writer who wrote this, it was very touching. The rhetorical device, anecdote, was used effectively, in my opinion.
Overall all three speeches by Obama were very intriguing and with his high level of charisma. He had used the rhetorical device perfectly. I enjoyed all his speeches with great gratitude, and I appreciate his future goals for a new America and World peace. I hope he can deliver what he says.

Speech Analysis Part 2: Obama’s Victory Speech in Chicago

U.S President Barrack Obama, a man that can be watched and admired for his intriguing style of positive charisma, can address to an enormous group of supporters and voters, with confidence that will lift your soul from upheaval. You can consider this man as the Shakespeare of Presidency because his plans for America are just brilliant; he thinks “outside the box” rather than having a very narrow mind. He sees how to solve problems from all different angles and then analyzes what way is the best for America, even though they might not be perfect like he says himself, but his plans are better than any other president I seen so far. Comparing Obama’s two speeches I noticed that in his acceptance speech he made promises of what he can bring to America and how the Bush administration lost jobs and what his role was going to be to bring the Americans’ growth, especially in the financial sector. In the second speech about his victory he talks about the tasks ahead and how to create more jobs back and have more people working again without worrying about losing their jobs. The Acceptance speech felt more prepared, inspiring, profound than the Victory speech because he felt a bit dim and having a less hostile impact. For some reason it also seemed to me that he came well-built in the first speech as if he came very aggressive like “a gun with bullets” and in the victory speech he came like “a gun without bullets.” I think the reason for this is because in the first one he was persuading people to believe in him and in the second one he already knew he had the upper hand so he didn’t have to make a lot of persuasive points since he already gained victory. Overall to me reading this speech was much easier, enjoyable, and much more relatable to me because I see people losing jobs here in Ontario’s manufacturing sector everyday and it seems to be a vicious cycle that tends to repeating itself because of America’s unhealthy economy

Obama’s unique form of speech writing is straightforward and isn’t “sugar-coated”. In both of his speeches he uses rhetorical devices to enhance his points and arguments and engage the audience. Due to his fatigue, or a problem, Obama failed to use the rhetorical devices efficiently in his Victory speech, compared with the audience reactions from his Acceptance speech, where the crowds would applaud constantly and cheer him on. You can see the signs of fatigue when he says his powerful phrase, “Yes, we can!”, as he says this phrase a couple of times (Repetition) without any putting emphasis or emotions (Exaggeration) for that phrase, which is a powerful symbolic phrase he used to get to where he is today. We can clearly see Obama’s intellectual skills in English as he is able to incorporate most if not all of the common rhetorical devices.

Overall the rhetorical devices used were very effective. Obama really engaged his audience, and even persuade the whole world. I hope now that Obama can deliver his promises, and make this world a better and peaceful world. I hope he can be like Abraham Lincoln, and bring focus on human rights, as human rights in Sri Lanka and in many other parts of the world are being limited and restricted.

Obama’s Acceptance Speech

From watching Obama’s acceptance speech I felt that he has somehow has melted my heart, like chocolate fondue. I was sitting down and analyzing this passionate speech for the first time and I felt that President Barrack Obama was actually making sense and saying it from the heart rather than jus reading a transcript. His speech has motivated me and a lot of people and made their spirits glow with bliss. His voice alone is so catchy since it’s so demanding and to the point rather than sloppy and boring such as former president George W. Bush. The attitude of this exceptional man’s towards building a new America under a new stimulus package is phenomenal because he wants the American people not to feel the pinch anymore and get everyone back to working and keeping them busy, thus helping the economy grow naturally.

Barrack Obama’s eye contact with his voters and his followers is also good because when you peer into his eyes it seems as if there is hope and he shows that by staring at the crowds quite frequently. With Barrack Obama there is a new America coming which will stabilize financial sectors across the world and better help the Americans, with his youthful looking face and his immaculate choice of words used in speeches he will make an impact indefinitely into their hearts, and that’s something all Americans will remember for years to come.

What impresses me the most about Barrack Obama are the various methods of rhetorical and literary devices he used in this speech. He uses rhetorical device successful, that each time he states an important point; he gets an emotional response from the audience. He uses literary device as an art to which he expresses his ideas through language, which we the audience and reader can recognize, interpret, and analyze it. Also deeper in his speech, he starts attacking the Republicans strategy by comparing his administrations with George Bush’s and John McCains. This really impressed me as in the beginning I thought he was a soft person, but deeper in his speech he attacks his opposing party, and I think this is a brave move by him. Throughout the entire speech he addressed he seemed be well prepared with enormous confidence streaming through his voice, and didn’t even have to look through at his speech, as most politicians look for referral.

It is completely different watching the video from reading the script. When you read the script it’s very easy to follow and read, but, when you see the video, it’s completely different. Watching Obama is very intriguing, as with the pauses and interruptions by the audience applauding, it makes watching the video better than reading the script. When you read the script you read it as a plane simple text, but when you translate that text and compare it with the video, the video easier to understand, and enjoy.

Review

Rhetorical Devices

A rhetorical device is a technique of using language that will increase the persuasiveness of a piece of writing.
Some examples of rhetorical devices are: Rhetorical question, Emotive language, Contrast, Hyperbole, etc.

An example of a Hyperbole (using exaggeration for effect) would be: "while we await your decision, the whole school holds its breath"

Structuring an Arguement

Creating an outline is the first important step in preparing an argument.
Follow the outline by a catchy introduction sentence.
Next step is to have a supporting section that includes background information regarding your argument.

The second supporting section should include supporting points.
The next section discusses the opposing arguments and counters them.
Summarize your argument / topic efficiently in your conclusion.

MLA Citation

MLA stands for Modern Language Association
Two styles of citation - MLA and APA.
It's most commonly used to write papers.

Literary Devices

Literary devices help express ideas through language that we can understand.
Authors of nonfiction, fiction, poetry and drama use a variety of tools to create emotional mood, an attitude, a setting, and characterization.
Some examples of literary devices are: Allusions, Alliterations, Flashbacks, Irony, Metaphors, etc.

Dramatic Devices
dramatic devices are elements of the play, which allow the writer to build tension or other intended effects.

These effects influence the action of the play and the response of the characters and audience.