I have a draft of a paper due tomorrow in English. The subject is Letter from Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King Jr. Mind reading over it and pointing out any odd wording, awkward phrasing and such? I'm not so much looking for editing of the content of the paper, more along the lines of how it's written. Letter from Birmingham Jail Analysis and Argument At the time of writing, Mr King had been incarcerated for his activist actions, and quite possibly his views. He received letters from various clergymen, men supportive of his cause in word, but lacking in action. He replies with an open letter, addressed to his critics in name, but to anyone and everyone in form and letter. In his essay, he explains many of his actions as well as the motivation for his actions. His reason in writing this letter is to refute certain claims. Many people told him that he’s moving too quickly, to give it time. They also assume that he condones radical means of protest, such as violence. In writing this letter, he denies and explains all these claims. He takes these accusations, brings them in logically, then explains why they are simply not true. His thesis statement is compound. In Martin Luther King Jr’s Letter from Birmingham Jail, he argues primarily against those who are irresolute for his cause, who supposedly support it, but do nothing for it, even sometimes detract from his cause. He also addresses many people who don’t know much about his fight for equal rights. He spells out the tribulations and trials experienced by the black people. In doing so, he aptly illustrates the core of his cause, as well as his motivation. The depth of Martin Luther King Jr’s writing skill lies primarily in his talent in Ethos, or Ethical, and Pathos, Greek for Emotional. His words both stir and inflame you. He tends to use Ethos more than Pathos in this example, though in other works it is swapped. He does use Logos (‘Logical’) from time to time, though in much lesser quantities. In this paper, he uses Ethos to great effect. He paints pictures that appeal to your sense of right and wrong. One of his more moving pieces is as follows: “But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick, and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society.” He goes much further, but this short excerpt throws his points into stark lighting. He asks the reader, ‘put yourself in their shoes. Is it right to treat anyone like this? If not, then why are they treated like animals?’ In doing this, he draws the readers and the audience in. He shows them what’s wrong, what is horribly wrong. Capturing our conscience, he compares his actions, metaphorically, to the Hungarian freedom fighters warring against Hitler and Nazi Germany. He writes: “We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was ‘legal’ and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did was ‘illegal.’ It was ‘illegal’ to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers.”
i think ethos, in the first sentence of the fifth alinea, iisnt supposed to have a capital not my native language though
Here's what I thought: Remove all the contractions - the language of the text just can't take any. I'd also consider writing out all the possessive 'ss in various ways. A few phrases seem too colloquial for this text. Such are "throws his points into", "brings them in", and "it is swapped" (I'd prefer "interchanged"). Because it's an eloquent text, I'd rephrase all the sentences with "you"s in them. "his words both stir and inflame you" to "his words both stir and inflame (the individual, perhaps)". "Appeal to your sense" to "appeal to one's sense". Did you use "..." for longer quotes and '...' for shorter ones on purpose? It's fine if you did and if it's commonly accepted, but to me it looks a bit funny.
The "..." is what he's saying, quoted verbatim. The '...' is when he uses quotations. Anyways, thanks. I was hoping you'd reply to the thread.
I'm not sure it's official grammar, but I've been doing it for years, and no one's called me out for it.
