Rachel Carson's essay on "The Obligation to Endure," is a very convincing argument about the harmful uses of chemicals, pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers on the environment. In her essay, she does a nice job in getting her point across using an assertive tone through her writing. Carson has a one-sided argument and she is very aggressive towards those who believe otherwise; she is very effective at stating her opinion.
Carson has a definite purpose in her essay and she establishes that right from the start. The point she is trying to get across is that using pesticides and other chemicals is an endless cycle that will never totally do what it is supposed to do. She says that the insects continually become immune to the pesticides that are used; which in return the chemicals and pesticides are made stronger year after year to do a better job the following year. This process she claims cannot be healthy to our environment nor to the living organisms within it.
Carson does a nice job at going after the jugular, she does not let up. She knows what she believes and she does not switch sides. I think she goes after the chemical companies and the farmers especially since they are the easiest to blame on the topic of applying certain chemicals. She only states her opinion on the topic so it seems to be effective; yet the stories of the opposition have a good reason for what they do as well.
The context of this essay focuses on today's problems of pollution so that the future may be improved. This is an effective way to point out the problems of today; giving those who apply chemicals on a regular basis a guilt check. One thing she fails to do in her essay is to give examples of ways these problems can be improved or fixed. If she gave specific examples on how to improve, the environment future generations could learn from the mistakes of today to help the environment benefit later on.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment