“In Muskin’s and Thinkin’s”, Jack Pendarvis reveals his happiness with his choice to leave writing and move toward farming. Pendarvis uses syntax, diction, and imagery to create a jokingly taunting tone and message of happiness with a new lifestyle.
Pendarvis personalizes the piece by utilizing the syntax to make the whole piece more conversational. Throughout the piece, the author uses a mixture of first and second person. He even mixes their use within sentences with “I can just picture you”. These uses create an informal sense surrounding the piece, but they also add to a taunting tone. Pendarvis uses first person to show how happy he is with his decision to quit writing. Then he uses second person to turn it back on his audience and make them feel lesser than him for not making the same decision. At one point he states to his reader, “I’m literally watching as you atrophy. Meanwhile I just get stronger in mind, body, and spirit”. This statement implies that the reader thinks the audience of writers are wasting away because they write, while he is only improving through his decision to quit writing. It creates a sense of superiority and it would not have that sense without both first and second person. Pendarvis also uses questions to show that the taunting tone is somewhat joking. At one point he asks, “When I actually start farming, will I be able to lift a car with my mind?”. He quickly responds, “seems likely”. The question and answer show that he is excited to start his farming work, but it also shows that he is joking about how much better he is for starting this work, because of how ridiculous the claim is. Pendarvis uses second and first person as well as questions to create a tone of joking superiority and a sense that he is happy with his decision. In creating this tone, the whole piece holds its overall meaning of a sincere farewell, as opposed to a flippant goodbye.
A mixture of elevated and informal diction is used by Pendarvis to create an expectation of superiority and then break the expectation to show a joking underlay. In the same paragraph, Pendarvis uses the words “atrophy” and “jerk”. “Atrophy” cannot be labeled informal diction by any means, just as “jerk” could not be named elevated diction. The juxtaposition shows the contradiction in his overall tone. Though he may create a condescending tone towards the audience, the use of informal diction brings him back down to a lower level to show he is not serious. The author uses the word “repulsed” to describe how he feels about the other writers reading this piece. Though the word adds to a superiority in his tone, the extremity of the word makes it seem more humorous and joking, than serious. He later uses “blast” to describe his time with the other writers, ultimately showing he enjoys them and that he is not serious in his taunting portrayal of his thoughts. Pendarvis utilizes a mixture of diction to show that his tone in ultimately joking.
Pendarvis uses imagery to solidify his feelings about farming and reinforce a joking tone. Within the piece, the imagery is almost solely dedicated to descriptions of farming. Towards the end of the piece, the author declares, “the first thing I’m going to do is find a big pile of dirt and just run my hands through it”. This positive image shows how happy Pendarvis is to move on to farming. Like this example, the rest of the piece holds positive imagery as well, especially when describing farming. At one point, Pendarvis compares his hair to Hercules’ and then says, “I’m tossing my shining curls back and forth right now”. Because he connects his curly hair with farming, this image increases the positive connection to a change of job from writing to farming. The writer also uses images that contradict in elegance to show part of him is joking when describing how much better he is than his audience. He says he will be “experiencing the true satisfaction that can never come from the pointless internal murmuring of the puny bookworm in his cocoon of so called knowledge” and then quickly adds “also, I am pantless in this scenario”. The quick change from a detailed image to a straightforward statement displays his joking tone, especially because the second part is humorous. Imagery in this piece adds to a happy reaction to change as well as a joking addition to the tone.
Through a jokingly taunting tone, the piece manages to display the true of a genuine goodbye to colleagues of Pendarvis. In order to convey this tone, the author uses positive imagery, contradicting diction and syntax. All the devices add to a clearer tone and message in Pendarvis' work.
Lindsay,
ReplyDeleteI love how much evidence you provide for each claim. Your first paragraph on syntax had great claims. However I became lost through your sentence structures. In one sentence you discuss evidence and tone which are both major aspects of your essay, so try to separate them with a period. It’s okay to have short sentences in order to create clarity. I’m guilty of writing millions of run-on sentences. Try to have one subject per sentence in order to keep your thoughts organized and clear. You also explain how the syntax creates a tone but you don’t explain how that tone impacts the meaning. Try to build your argument through the paragraph with a cause and effect style (Pendarvis writes…this shows…which means…) I loved your second paragraph. Your argument was clear and supported. Your third paragraph described more about the details that Pendarvis uses rather than imagery since you address why including certain sentences affected the overall meaning.
Try to reorganize the first paragraph, change some words in the third paragraph, and include a conclusion to tie everything together. Also know that you don’t have to cite Pendarvis after every quote since its clear this essay is about him.
Lindsay,
ReplyDeleteI think this post is repetitive. Instead of calling the writer Pendarvis every time that you mention him, it’s okay to say he, the writer, etc. Just to cut down on the repetition. It’s also okay to just put in the quote, because we know who is saying the quote, seeing how there is only one writing piece that you are referencing. When you start pulling outside references, that’s when it would be tricky to get away without the name.
I also feel like you aren’t talking to me. You say that the piece is conversational, and has a taunting tone of happiness, but I feel like you are bored, and you have your professor- talk on. I know you, and I know that this isn’t how you talk, so reading this just feels like a disembodied voice. I want to hear you in this post. Do that and you will be gold!!
Lindsay,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate that you mention initially the DILDS that you were going to discuss, syntax, diction, and imagery. Your first paragraph discussing the first person to second person changes within the piece was a little confusing to follow. I would try to look at this paragraph and make sure it is focusing on the sentence structure of the article and how this adds meaning. I thought you did a great job of explaining how the diction used in the piece was used to add meaning to the article. The words that you used from the piece for this paragraph were very strong! Your discussion of imagery was also good. I think that identifying imagery is especially difficult, or at least it is for me! You had some great evidence in all three of your paragraphs, which helped to back up the claims that you made.