We Are Never Alone

Documentary

The Potential Within

After reading chapters 7,8,9 there were various useful tips and strategies of Ethos and Pathos which made me think and make connections with past experiences. One was practical wisdom "the appearance of knowing what to do"(p.67). This is something many politicians use now a day as a mean to try to convince people to follow them, which I find to be really dangerous. What I learned from chapters 7 through 9 is that If you apply ethos and pathos correctly you have the ability to have certain leverage over people to make them do what you want. This was what I found disturbing as its a potential weapon which already has been used by many people one of them is Hitler. He was very clever on his use of rhetoric by knowing how to use it he was able to stir and manipulate peoples emotions on a very big scale, he knew how to use anger, patriotism and emulation correctly.

 After seeing all the tools you can use to make people change their minds I just couldn't keep away the thought that the point of using them is to manipulate people to your own interest. This is what I found unsettling i'm not sure if i am seeing it very radically but Heinrichs is teaching us how to manipulate people. Not only how to do it, but most importantly how to do it well so that there are no flaws. So to be able to manipulate someone we first have to convey practical wisdom which making you seem to share the audience's value "when you seem to share your audience's values, they believe you will apply them to whatever choice you help them make"(p.67). By having practical wisdom you can show yourself as the leader they want. The next step is to show Aristotle's "disinterested goodwill"(p.72). This is the use of selflessness to enhance your likability "make your audience believe in your selflessness-by seeming either wholly objective or nobly self-sacrificing"(p.73). This tools were to perfect your ethos to make people want to follow you, if you have this then you already posses peoples interest and willingness. After this you can use emotions to get them to do what you want either through telling an experience or showing the future, as well as through anger, patriotism and emulation.

By using all this elements you can be able to manipulate people, but I want to make clear that my use of the term "manipulate" is not used in a bad way. After reading I saw the power behind well used rhetoric and how useful it really is. It is able to make people do either good or bad although they may not know like in the Hitler case it made a whole population do heinous crimes and act completely oblivious to what was happening. It took away the moral and ethical as people didn't really know or care if their actions were moral or ethical. Rhetoric is an untamed beast...

Vocab:

delve: research or make painstaking inquiries into something; reach inside a receptacle and search for something.

belittlement: make (someone or something) seem unimportant

bailiwick: one's sphere of operations or particular area of interest

vicarious: experienced in the imagination through the feelings or actions of another person; acting or done for another.

The Aspects of Having Decorum

Decorum: Argument by character starts with your audience's love:You earn it through decorum. Under Jay's definition of decorum the hollywood or athlete star the person whom I choose to represent the characteristics of this word is Falcao. I'm not sure if it's the Colombian pride speaking out loud, but of the athletes who i've known he best fits this category.

 In the football world Falcao's decorum is indisputable he fits in the same in Colombia as he does in Europe "Rhetorical decorum is the art of fitting in- not just in polite company but everywhere, from the office to the neighborhood bar. (p.46) This is a player whose image so far throughout the world is very well seen in difference to other soccer players who have been portrayed in the drug and alcohol world. When I think of Falcao I think of a professional soccer player whose skills on the pitch are irrefutable, but as well as a complete athlete in the sense that of the pitch he is known to be a mature and responsible person in his personal life (being a family man enhances this view of him for me). He does his job at his top capacity and potential and in a quiet manner. He is not known for any scandals made inside or out the pitch his manners are the same in both, for the soccer fans you might contrast the image of Falcao to that of Pepe's or Balotelli's "You persuade a man only insofar as you can talk his language by speech, gesture, tonality, order, image, attitude, idea, identifying your ways with his.
(p.47)"

Jay mentioned with an example he used when his friend and himself both gave a flower to different women calling her "doll" on the doing, and how it worked for his friend but not for him "Cicero would nod his head. He taught that you can't assume a character that strays too far from your own. (p.51)" Most soccer players i've had the chance to see change when seen under the spotlight. Coming from very humble backgrounds soccer players at first when young try with their upmost capacity to become recognized (every soccer players dream). The problem is that when they see this happening they tend to change, as the see themselves with much more money their personalities shift drastically in some cases. They get this feeling that they are untouchable and you can see that their ego is over the roof: unfortunately what happens with Cristiano Ronaldo. Although he is an incredible and hugely talented athlete and soccer player his personality lowers his decorum "persuasion requires sympathy. (54)". With Falcao it's different which is what I want to highlight he came from a humble background, and worked very hard to get where he is today. Even though he probably has a lot of money nowadays he still shows humility and no ego at all. He still carries this genuine love for his country and that is why the Colombian people and me admire him so much.

He represent Aristotles three essential qualities of a persuasive ethos value, practical wisdom and selflessness. The audience does believe he shares their values, he appears to know who to manage his personal and professional life, and his audience interests seem to matter to him in a big part. I am very eager to continue to follow Falcao's soccer career as he truly is a complete soccer player as many others who have existed. Hopefully his participation at the world cup will be satisfactory so that the affection for him by the Colombian people will grow bigger than it is.

Vocab:

Ignoble: not honorable in character or purpose; of humble origin or social status.

Bluenoses: a priggish or puritanical person.

Touted: attempt to sell (something), typically by pestering people in an aggressive or bold manner; attempt to persuade people of the merits of (someone or something).

The Effects of Arguing

After starting to read "Thank You For Arguing" by Jay Heinrichs I have to say that it made me think about various things I've could of done differently. At first he talks about how much his book is going to help us in life through social interaction. He wanted to state the importance of knowing how to argue,  and on knowing how to use the power of argument in life. At first I have to say that I was a little skeptical: as most texts who starts by saying how useful they are going to be usually aren't. But astonishingly I found that most of what he had to say has certain logic and truth to it. One example is when he talks about seductive argument and how effective it is when correctly used: as it implies emotions. The purpose is to manipulate "Seduction is manipulation. (p.9)"it is to stir someones emotions to get what you want. Like with advertising when they display very attractive models on clothing this sort of makes you want to look like them: appealing to your inner insecurity making you want to look better. Although seduction is just part of the process of persuading someone it is a very key part as it drags you in. There was one time when this girl at school whose beauty was breathtaking asked me if I could help her with a project she was doing. Being naturally attracted by her I decided to help her, although it was very time consuming it was worth the sacrifice (that's what I thought). Even though when I finished helping her I still hadn't began my own project I felt that we reached the consensus Jay talks about " It means more than just an agreement, much more than a compromise. The consensus represents an audience commonsense thinking. (p.9)."She got the help she needed I got her to like me and acknowledge me more (win-win).

These are not the only parts which I found useful from the reading there was one which got me thinking: it was the avoidance of having a fight just by knowing how to argue. First he wanted the reader to understand the difference between what was to fight and to argue "The basic difference between an argument and a fight: an argument, done skillfully, gets people to want to do what you want. You fight to win; you argue to achieve agreement.(p.17)" I reflected upon this and its validity, and its very true once you think about it when you fight you try to make yourself get over somebody else: most of the time through aggression. But really what is the result from this, it only inspires revenge or retreat though fighting we can't achieve what we want no consensus can be made. It's like when he talked about the couples and the results from the experiment in which he saw that the happy ones argued and the unhappy ones fought. This reading on knowing how to differentiate fighting and arguing made me think on recent occasions. No so long ago I fought with my parents because they saw that I was not using my full capacities at school: that I was slacking. Immediately this made me furious as they didn't understand that I was challenging myself to a great extent this year. When I get mad my mind gets a little foggy and I don't process well what someone says to me. If I would of argued from the beginning and calmly acknowledge my parents points as well as asking them for some further advice: I wouldn't of been grounded.

Throughout the reading I have felt very connected to what Jay has to say on how to express yourself and to manage interactions. I have to say I feel that it is very important as well because it can help you manage many discussions you have in life. It's something that has a clear use for further situations this is why i've been appreciating it so much. As much as it is informative it is helpful.

Chiasmus: a rhetorical or literary figure in which words, grammatical constructions, or concepts are repeated in reverse order, in the same or a modified form; e.g. ‘Poetry is the record of the best and happiest moments of the happiest and best minds.

Enthymeme: an argument in which one premise is not explicitly stated.

High School Life Skills Rubric Video

Video

Effects of Submission

Since my last blog post not much has changed towards the memoir i'm reading "This Boy's Life" by Tobias Wolff. It's still very controversial, but now it's somewhat to become somewhat frustrating for me. This is mostly because while i've been reading it's hard not to put myself inside Tobias's shoes. A kid who lives with his mom because his parents are divorced, so he just wants his mom to find happiness again. Because of this he allows himself to get run over by people. Mostly suitors to his mom which means that he has to face every time she gets heartbroken, and see guy after guy behind her. Worst of all Rosemary (his mom) had a particular knack of finding the worst and most messed up guys for a relationship. First came Roy whom I mentioned on an earlier post, then came Dwight he sure was a "keeper". At first he seemed to be very polite and quite the gentlemen, but then after his mom made a an agreement to move in with him everything changed. Tobias came to live first in his house while his mom was making some arrangements, so she wouldn't be there for a few days or months. Meanwhile during this time Dwight became this really evil person, he became what had always been. This is when he started to physically and verbally abuse of Tobias in a very cruel and harsh manner. This is where I was very frustrated because Tobias didn't tell his mom what was going on. I'm still not sure if it was out of wanting to see his mom happy or not wanting her to continue to be sad. Still I found this to be a very noble and loyal act from Tobias, but there is a point when not telling her from the beginning backfires. Rosemary moves in and Dwight knowing that he already has her in his grasp brings out his normal self, and the abuse starts towards her as well. This was very controversial as this search for happiness that Tobias and his mom were trying to find became a search for freedom and normality. Out of nowhere that house became a prison for both Dwight was a really volatile person. He just didn't think of his actions. I wish I could write what I really think of him, but there would just be to much cursing (although he deserved every word). This sham continued for many years it just got worse.

After reading i'm still not able to think what I would do in that type of situation. There is one thing though that makes me think which is the timeframe of when all this happened. It was around the 50's, which means society was very different from today's. Something like that nowadays would be frowned upon and punished by law without any doubt. My question is if at that time was this type of household behavior frequent? was violence normal within the average household? I would really like to know more about that subject. As well as women rights at that time, because this book really reflects the inferiority and degradation of women. It makes them seem completely submissive in a patriarchal society. This is reflected in Rosemary as she has always been stepped on by men, and really not much has been done by her in this subject. After all she has been trough I wouldn't of thought twice to move out immediately from that house. What would you do if you were in Tobias's and Rosemary's shoes?

An Intricate Beginning

It's hard to find a book that since the beginning leaves you with a feeling of uncertainty inside. I can say I was hooked immediately by the memoir "This Boy's Life" by Tobias Wolff, as it's different from the usual stuff you get to read. From the first chapter you read through very intriguing events when seen as a whole: a car accident, and a mother-son who are escaping from an apparently bad person. I don't know about you, but it's as good as it gets for me. There are many things that let me unsettled from this timed reading. The most notable is of that malignant figure described from the beginning (the reason tobias and his mom left their home) who is later called Roy. Roy from what I inferred is a grade A stalker who followed Tobias and his mom all the way to Utah from Florida. He never could his mom slip away apparently. At first it seemed to me like a man in love wanting a second chance "My mother didn't tell me what went on between her and Roy, the threats and occasional brutality with which he held her in place. (p.14)" After this I was seriously disturbed with what I was reading. The man who was beating his mother, and the reason they left Florida was back. And as if nothing he just starts hanging out with Tobias and his mom as if the nothing. This is very messed up. The worst part is Tobias's passivity with what was going on. Without any type of emotion whatsoever, now I could start to see how dysfunctional this family was.

It was now very clear how Tobias had been shaped by his childhood. He came from a separated family, from whom his dad afterwards didn't take care of him (apparently his dad was very rich). This and the problems he was facing with his mom and Roy made him sort of emotionless. As if he was repressing all this feelings inside so much that he became numb on the outside. This I can support more clearly when he is confessing himself at church, at first he isn't able to: so the father tells him to take a break. He then goes with a nun who gives him a glass of milk to help him clear his mind, so that he can try to confess again. In the doing the nun tells him about some sins she made when younger. The point is that afterwards Tobias confesses, but he tells the father everything the nun told him as if it had happened to him. I saw this as a sign that he is not able to tell what he feels, thus having to make up sins and things that never happened. In this point I differ with Juan Jose Castro who is reading this same book. He says that Tobias is mature towards mom related issues, but I see that it's more of a state of numbness from suppressing what is going on. It's a question I want to answer as well as a debate I am looking forward to have with Juan Jose. All around I find this book very intriguing as it is controversial and very devious, I hope it keeps on like this.

Vocab:

Tomcatting: To promiscuously pursue a woman or women for purposes of sexual gratification. Used for males.

Coyness: (esp. in a woman) the quality of feigning shyness or modesty in an attempt to seem alluring.

Bellicose: demonstrating aggression and willingness to fight.

Grubstake: an amount of material, provisions, or money supplied to an enterprise (originally a prospector for ore) in return for a share in the resulting profits.

"Prison" Break

Chapters 10 and 11 proved that the most you risk the most profit you will obtain as an outcome. Through the reading we see Frederick in a constant doubtfulness over wether he should escape or not. I just couldn't help bringing up Prison Break while I was reading. Constant flashbacks rushed through my head. They converged with the visualization I was making while reading, and I just saw Frederick's position as Michael Scofield in the series. Both had always had the constant idea of escaping and in both stories there were failed attempts in the doing. There was one occasion  in which Michael was in a prison In Panama and had to escape but while doing so his plan didn't work out accordingly and was almost shot in his attempt. This was similar with Frederick as he got caught along with his friends not trying to escape but planing to do so. Getting back to the more risk the more reward idea, Frederick Douglass was making a shot in the dark in his decision to escape "Our knowledge of the north did not extend farther than New York; and to go there, and be forever harassed with the frightful liability of being returned to slavery- with the certainty  of being treated tenfold worse than before- the thought was truly a horrible one. (p.87)" At the moment liberty might be the main solution and after that everything else would be easy, but I believe that this is not as easy. Although obviously escaping is the primary goal I believe that you have to think even farther than this and question yourself, What is next? This is the hard part because in slavery you have everything granted maybe not the best commodities but you are ensured a place to stay and a meal for the most part. But "out in the wild" you have to provide for yourself plus as being black you already start from the bottom.

" Let him place himself in my situation-without home or friends-without money or credit-wanting shelter , and no one to give it-wanting bread, and no money to buy it. (p.106)" This quote makes me think that if this is a reason for slaves not to escape or if they even knew the life that proceeded escaping. The main thing to understand is that you step out of a society were your role and everything you have is determined by your master. Even though they don't give their slaves the best life quality they do provide them with the essentials basically. But when the slaves step out from this system they enter a completely different world in which they now have to provide for themselves nobody will give them anything. So you essentially step from slavery into extreme poverty and truthfully I don't know which is worse as capitalism is a harsh environment were there is always a bottom class. Here I want to recall the article we read in class written by George Fitzhugh in which he compares slavery with capitalism. He says that white free laborers are practically slaves but slaves which you don't have to provide for. From this my question arises is it better to be a slave or a black free laborer (be careful the term Free doesn't infer economically sustainable or good quality of life) You might think the question is obvious and that its better to be a black free laborer as at-least you retain your Human Rights, but I suggest a deeper thinking on it.

Frederick was actually very lucky in finding someone like Mr. David Ruggles "Thank haven, I remained but in a short time in this distressed situation. (p.106)"From this we can see its not easy to find an opportunity on your own. This is why I believe Frederick left a trail of bread crumbs in which he gave full names but didn't give the major details to avoid ruining his fellow slave mates the opportunity of escaping. I Think he found so troublesome the period in which he lived in extreme poverty that he wanted to give the future escapees a guide on what to do so that they could at-least attempt to avoid what he lived. So alas we saw that Frederick's risk did give him a major reward. It gave him a wife, a job, liberty and the security of having a voice and never having to look behind your back for any threat. "I was now my own master. (p.111)"

Hunger Games

From today's reading two aspects stood out for me: the first was greed, the second hunger. Greed was represented by Master Thomas Auld a man who came from a humble background but through good connections was able to achieve a higher status in society per se. He became a slave holder as inheritance through his wife "He had been a poor man, master only of a Bay craft. He came into possession of all his slaves by marriage; and of all men, adopted slave holders are the worst. (p.62)"This was a man who wanted a taste of power but as soon as he got it he wasn't able to manage it. He even didn't get the full respect of his slaves "We seldom called him "master;" we generally called him "Captain Auld," this is a sign of a weak man someone who's greed made him much worse than what he was. While reading for me it was like seeing a spoiled boy who got the toy he always wanted but never knew how to use it. So he started by using fear through force, constantly whipping his slaves even Frederick various times thinking that this would make him more like Mr.Covey who had the reputation of getting slaves and in one year making them better at what they did, in other words more suitable and prepared for serfdom. It was a cheap imitation of how other slaveholders acted, this is what I believe made him act how he did ( in a very changing way) constantly changing his methods. 

I believe that the source of Frederick's hunger period was because his master had never dealt with slaves. "The rule is, no matter how coarse the food, only let there be enough of it. This theory; and in the part of Maryland from which I came, it is the general practice. (p.62)" In this quote I agree with Frederick just that he left out or maybe never thought that this was a general practice for people who were already slaveowners. It probably didn't apply as general knowledge for new coming slaveholders so that may be a reason why Master Thomas never took much interest in his slaves food. As he was poor before he might of applied how he lived in those years towards the slaves. This is my main point a person with a poor background has his mindset on this standard of living but as soon as he has more power he might have more resources but he will govern under the standard of living he had before. So his slaves wont have what they need but less as the owner is not aware of this. A person with rich background who has had an excess of everything in his life will govern this way and maybe will give his slaves what they need without a problem. My theory doesn't apply to all cases but it might be a way to see why Master Thomas is the way he is. 

While reading I got to see under Frederick's point of view that maybe worse than a cruel slaveholder is one who makes his slaves grow hungry. Hunger is a state which makes the human being work under pure instinct to get what they need, it makes them do whatever they have to. This is a cause for violence and many other problems currently but in that time it must of been much more difficult for a black slave to get food under their conditions. I don't know why but I kept remembering the book series Hunger Games while reading in the sense of what you would have to do to get what you want. Douglas had to recur to letting his master's horse go so that he could then chase it to his Master's  father in laws' farm to get some food. Although it was very clever it was also desperate and dangerous. From all this we can see a pattern on how someone's greed for power can affect others well being.

Once More Into the Fray

While reading today I was a little confused because I had the sense that I had already read what I was reading, so I was a little scared at first. Then I realized that this was actually one of the first things I read at the beginning of this AP-Lang class. Knowing this I remembered almost the entirety of the chapter I was reading what I didn't have was the context of the previous chapters. Having this I got to analyze much better what I was reading and interpreted in a different way as the first time I read. My first blog post was about how patience in hard times is key in many situations I kept this thought every second of my 25 minute reading. The text was about how Frederick after being drawn into reading by a slip of his mistress became very eager to learn more and to read more. He already had that truth which his mistresses husband tried to keep very cautiously, this was killing him inside he felt trapped: "It opened my eyes to the horrible pit, but no ladder upon which to get out"(p.51). 

It is amazing how a little  knowledge can change your life radically, the depravation of any type of knowledge in the slaves made them ignorant it made them much easier to control like a herd of animals. They lived in a bubble in which they didn't see their lives go beyond that of slavery, in my opinion I think they thought that this had always been their destiny and that there is no way of escaping it : "I was 12 years old, and the thought of being a slave for life began to bear heavily upon my heart"(p.50). So for Douglass to step out of this bubble was huge for him he couldn't grasp at first what he had on his hands he was on his own renaissance or enlightenment if you would apply upon his situation as he was stepping out of the darkness. The Columbian Orator  his first book to read gave him a new set of ideas who made him keep digging his hole with no ladder out, he had now acquired the big picture ideas. He got beyond a slave consciousness and stepped into his masters, this made his hatred grow bigger. He could now see that he was being used all along, a bunch of opportunistic thieves: "The more I read, the more I was led to abhor and detest my enslavers. I could regard them in no other light than a band of successful robbers, who had left their homes, and gone to Africa, and stolen us from our homes, and in a strange land reduced us to slavery"(p.51). All this knowledge he was soaking up like a sponge was giving and enriching his point of view, and even giving him the criteria to know that he wanted to become. An abolitionist as he knew that this word was related to the idea of the end of slavery. Also the term of human rights he was able to get from reading which he knew that his people were being kept off. All that patience I said from the beginning that Douglass had been keeping was for this moment, the moment that he knew he had to escape now knowing that he had to fight slavery.

What I most valued from today's reading was the perseverance to achieve what you want with no fear, no regrets. Douglass Is a clear example as he is a self made man who educated himself in a moment were it was almost virtually impossible. With no support, with no resources you might say he rose from the ashes to fight a fight worth fighting to make of his people something more even if he never lived to see it.

Cogito Ergo Sum ( I think therefore I am )

After reading for 25 minutes I was able to read chapter 4 and 5 which gave me a very different set of ideas than from previous chapters. So many that in fact I feel a bit overwhelmed over what to discuss or what this piece of writing is going to be about, so I'm going to give it my best. One of the big picture ideas I got from this reading is that with time the point of view of a person tends to change. I believe this is due to the fact that with time you acquire more experiences from which you can analyze and give a comparison, thus changing your view of things. This I see throughout both chapters, he starts talking about his very harsh condition under Colonel Lloyd's plantation "In hottest summer and coldest winter, I was kept almost naked- no shoes, no stockings, no jacket, no trousers, nothing on but a coarse tow linen shirt, reaching only to my knees. I had no bed. (p.39)" We can see the primitive conditions that he is accustomed to live under. But then he is moved to Baltimore which from his description seems to be to me like a haven for slaves, as society is much more civilized than were he used to be. So with a more educated society we can see much less cruelty and a bit more humanity towards slaves "There is a vestige of decency, a sense of shame, that does much to curb and check those outbreaks of atrocious cruelty so commonly enacted upon the plantation. (p.46)"After this quote I could not comprehend what I just read, I was astonished. Did I just read that in a slave society (as the south was at that time) there was a sense of shame towards cruelty it was really shocking. From this I was able to see a big change in point of view in Frederick Douglas he saw that his plantation wasn't the only thing in the world and that in other places slaves were actually treated better. I believe he saw the same thing that I noticed which is that were there is a higher degree of overall education and exposure to a current of different ideas there is more consciousness towards human rights but off course exceptions apply.

There was also another idea that Frederick proposed or theory perhaps which is: someone who isn't in contact with slavery does not have that sense of racism and inequality as others. I can explain better my thought trough this quote: "My new mistress proved to be all she appeared when I first met her at the door, -a woman of the kindest heart and finest feelings. She had never had a slave under her control previously to myself, and prior to her marriage she had been dependent upon her own industry for a living. She was by trade a weaver; and by constant application to her business, she had been in a good degree preserved from the blighting and dehumanizing effects of slavery. (p.44)" We can see from this that a person who's life is distant from slavery doesn't adapt that innate cruelty towards slaves that we are know of. She taught him to read, something no person in her right mind would do in a slave society. But she did it because she did not even know that she couldn't do that this is my whole point without the knowledge of slavery  there is no preconception on how to treat someone from another race. 

We can see that throughout time this kind mistress changes " But, alas! this kind heart had but a short time to remain such. (p.44)"Her husband makes her get in touch with the ideology of slavery and how to act upon it so she changed for good and became less kind to Frederick. This tiny slip made by his mistress have him a key to his freedom, he now had the ability to read and question the institution of slavery and to put up to question why does education of the black have grave consequences against slavery. This is the moment were I believe the game changed for him and his life became a timer in which the end of it would mean his self release from slavery.

Vocab:

tow

sloop

galling 

egotistical 

abhorence

blighting

gip

Reading Journal Entry Chapters 3-4

The Wisdom of Patience

After reading chapter 3 and 4 of Frederick Douglas memoirs I understood that Patience was a key factor for his survival and so I apply this value and its use to life in general. We can see through these chapters many horrific events that Frederick Douglas was witness of (not that its different in other chapters) like the the killing of a fellow slave named Demby "Mr.Gore then, without consultation or deliberation with any one, not even giving Demby and additional call, raised his musket to his face, taking deadly aim at the standing victim"(p.36) he shot him for refusing to get constantly whipped as he escaped into a creek. We can also see another gruesome event when Ms. Hick killed a sixteen year old slave for falling asleep while taking care of her baby whom started to cry, she broke her nose and breastbone with a stick "She, having lost her rest for several nights previous, did not hear the crying." From reading these shameful events I could not understand how Mr.Douglas was able to just carry on in those moments and keep living his slave life as If nothing. Then I finally understood that patience led him to be successful in his passing as slave, (If being successful as a slave exists) as from what I can see he was wise on following the rules and leaving his mouth shut. It was Patience who left him alive, it was patience which lead him to that moment where he was able to escape and free himself, it was patience which led him to be able to write about his life and become an abolitionist. As I said this can be applied as a general message in life Patience will lead you to that moment you have to seize which will make things better in your life. Even through the hardest times there will always be a moment when things might get better and only patience will let you arrive to that moment which you have to clasp to "Good Things Come to Those Who Wait."

Throughout the reading we can see various passages of Logos, Ethos and Pathos of which I am going to show an example of each:
Logos: "This plan worked well; the slaves became as fearful of tar as of the lash. They seemed to realize the impossibility of touching tar without being defiled" We can see in this passage the logos of the argument made because if the slaves where seen with tar it meant that they tried to get into the garden to eat a fruit so by thus they would be whipped. So it is logical to say that the slaves would fear getting near the tar by fear of getting heavily lashed by their master.

Pathos: " I have seen Colonel Lloyd  make old Barney, a man between fifty and sixty years of age, uncover his bald head, kneel down upon the cold, damp ground, and receive upon his naked and toilworn shoulders more than thirty lashes at the time" In this quote Mr.Douglas is trying to engage the readers empathy with what is happening by being vastly descriptive about the situation of an old defenseless man getting whipped in the cold.

Ethos: " To describe the wealth of Colonel Lloyd would be almost equal to describing the riches of job" In this argument he employs Colonel Lloyds reputation by saying he is rich beyond vastness.

Vocabulary:
Dearborns: ?
Barouches: fourwheeled carriage with a high front seat outside for the driver, facing seats inside for two couples,and a calash top over the back seat.
Sundered: to separate; part; divide; sever.
Maxim: a principle or rule of conduct.
Obdurate: unmoved by persuasion, pity, or tender feelings; stubborn; unyielding.
Homage: the formal public acknowledgment by which a feudal tenant or vassal declared himself to be the man or vassal of his lord, owing him fealty and service.

piece of writing video