In “Newark, 1944, When Polio Disrupted the Playground”, Kakutani weaves together a skillful essay using many rhetorical devices to analyze Nemesis by Philip Roth . One of those rhetorical devices is parallelism, for example, when she comments, Bucky (the protagonist) “is supervising the neighborhood playground, watching the boys play ball and the girls jump rope”. Moreover, she helps the flow of her essay through her use of repetition, for example, when she says, “how God could allow…wonder how God could have let…how God could be…” The above example is also a good example of Kakutani’s use of the “rule of three”, or tricolon to make her essay sound better. Furthermore, Kakutani uses alliteration in her writing. For example, when she says, “responsibility and transgression, tradition and rebellion”. Kakutani’s use of a question quoted directly from Nemesis, adds a certain personal element to the essay, “Who brought polio here if not me?” asked the protagonist of Nemesis. Finally, Kautani’s utilization of natural emphasis adds the perfect final touch to her essay. Just reading the last couple of words of the paragraphs, “polio…spreading anxiety and suspicion”, “menacing teenagers”, “life-denying consequences…”, “accused of being a carrier”, “God could be so heartless and cruel”, and finally, “’Who brought polio here if not me?’” gives the reader a good idea of what the essay is about, but in memorable words that Kakutani hopes that the reader would take away with him.
Overall, Kakutani's use of rhetorical devices in her essay makes it flow easily and helps her convey her point in an easy to understand manner. In addition, it helps the reader more easily connect with and understand her essay and the plot of Nemesis, and helps make the reader more receptive to her ideas since they're easy to understand. The only weakness I perceive in this essay is its continuous references to other authors and previous works of Philip Roth that the reader of this essay (like me) would not be familiar with.
In analyzing Nemesis, Kakutani used New Historicist criticism. She mentions many of Philip Roth’s other works, such as Indignation, and The Plot Against America and compares and contrasts these works with Nemesis. Moreover, Kakutani examines possible purposes behind why Roth wrote Nemesis, for example, to entertain, or to comment on the post-WWII era.
Kakutani’s analysis of Bucky immediately reminded me of Michael Henchard of The Mayor of Casterbridge. Kakutani describes Bucky as a “one-dimensional character” that “makes for a pallid, predictable story line in which the random workings of fate and the fate of temperament—rather than genuine free choice—are the narrative drivers”. Henchard is definitely a “one-dimensional character” battered by “fate and the fate of temperament”. Michael is an honest man and hard-working man whose fatal flaw is his temper: he sold his wife and daughter on a drunken whim and then proceeded to become mayor of a small town through hard work. The Mayor of Casterbridge is the tale of how the "randomn workings of fate" has brought about Henchard's rise and fall.
Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment