Post 13 Deegan

After finishing Maus, I realized the rhetoric used throughout the book is highly engaged with the reader’s pathos. Hearing the horrible stories about how the Jews were treated and what they had to endure during the Holocaust makes you feel incredibly sad and depressed. It is absolutely insane that the incredible number of people felt that much physical and emotional pain for as long as they did. Relating this to Eating Animals, I also think Jonathon Safran Foer used pathos to make his book most effective. When reading, you felt guilty for the innocent animals that get tortured, beaten, abused and worse during the course of their life. Like Vladek, their quality of life is incredibly low because of how other people treat them, and for the most part there’s nothing they could do about it.

         Safran Foer uses this pathos to try and change the reader’s mind about what they buy and eat, and make the problem stop. Spiegelman uses pathos as a way to keep survivor’s tales alive. Both make a huge impact. Carr also uses pathos throughout his story, but I personally did not feel as inclined to change because of how the writing style. When reading The Shallows, I felt more attacked than understood. I also felt that he had a generational bias against the people currently growing up with technology, and I still don’t think it’s a bad thing. All three writers use the same rhetoric style in their work, but it is much more effective for Jonathon Safran Foer and Art Spiegelman.