Previous
Paradox
Definition of Pathos
Pathos, along with logos and ethos, is one of the three "modes of persuasion" in rhetoric (the art of effective speaking or writing). Pathos is an argument that appeals to... read full definition
Pathos, along with logos and ethos, is one of the three "modes of persuasion" in rhetoric (the art of effective speaking or writing). Pathos is... read full definition
Pathos, along with logos and ethos, is one of the three "modes of persuasion" in rhetoric (the art of effective... read full definition
Chapter 5
Explanation and Analysis—Ownership:
In a symbolic conversation between two unnamed figures, a man identified only as the “squatting man,” who represents the interests of the Oklahoma tenant farmers, uses pathos in his argument to the other figure, a tractor-driver who represents the interests of the banks:
Grampa took up the land, and he had to kill the Indians and drive them away. And Pa was born here, and he killed weeds and snakes. Then a bad year came and he had to borrow a little money. An’ we was born here. There in the door—our children born here. And Pa had to borrow money [...] We measured it and broke it up. We were born on it, and we got killed on it, died on it. Even if it’s no good, it’s still ours. That’s what makes it ours—being born on it, working it, dying on it.
The tractor-driver has justified the mass eviction of the Oklahoma tenant-farmers on a financial basis, arguing that the banks must maximize profits to survive. Here, the “squatting man” delivers a pathos-filled argument that the tenants are the true owners of the land, as they have lived and died upon it. He claims that his grandfather “took up the land,” fighting against Native Americans in order to “drive them away.” Further, he adds that his father was born on the land, as were his children. Throughout his speech, he emphasizes his emotional connection to the land, noting that he and his family “got killed on it, died on it.” To him, it is this personal, emotional connection that establishes ownership. The other figure, however, rejects this emotional argument, relying instead on legal definitions of ownership in order to justify the evictions.
Related Themes:
