It is hard to disagree that there is a vast number of ‘eternal questions’ – controversial issues and concerns that humans will most likely never solve. One such topic for debate is the death penalty. Punishment on the one hand and murder on the other, this practice has questionable morale, and many people fail to decide which side they are on. Thus, to raise awareness of ordinary people, Mobley writes an effectively structured essay and appeals to the moral principles of readers by using ethos, pathos, and logos, but one may say that using the latter more would make the writing more persuasive.
Appealing to the Intended Audience
It is possible to state that the author’s intended reader is an average person, not politicians or legal authorities. While ordinary people cannot affect the law immediately after reading Mobley’s (2021) essay, they can start changing their perceptions and the minds of their relatives and friends, which will eventually lead to nationwide awareness. In his writing, Mobley (2021) refers directly to the average reader by mentioning hospital operating rooms, Christmas trees, and family-friendly neighborhoods familiar to almost everyone. This technique indeed makes the essay more understandable for such an extended audience. This is also a possible reason why the author uses pathos more than ethos or logos – in most cases, it is enough to evoke emotions and empathy in average people instead of reasoning them.
Construction of the Writing
One may agree that the structure of the text is quite engaging. Mobley (2021) begins his essay with an intriguing sentence: “It is the day before the execution,” and it becomes extremely interesting to read further (p. 977). What is more, during the first two pages, the author’s position regarding the death penalty is not quite clear. Mobley’s narrative is slow and unobtrusive, and its purpose is actually revealed only at the end of the writing. Having first described the irony, the horror, and the supposed necessity of the death penalty, the author explains their changed views and invites the reader to do the same. The questions left for the last paragraph of the essay force the audience to stay as involved as possible in the discussion even after finishing reading.
Rhetorical Strategies
Further, it is essential to explore how the author uses the three rhetorical strategies to make the writing more persuasive and appealing. Ethos, pathos, and logos are required almost equally in each article because they allow affecting the emotions, reason, and trust of readers. As a consequence, it is more likely for a text to be effective if the three techniques are utilized.
Ethos
Ethos refers to building the writer’s authority in order for the readers to believe what they learn. Mobley (2021) wants the audience to rely on his experience and position as he had been working in the Florida State Prison for five years. He communicated with the people who worked there and many inmates, learning about their views. Additionally, his responsibility was to prepare the death house for executions. Therefore, it is possible to trust the opinion of someone who has been so close to the process under discussion.
Pathos
What the author uses most effectively in his writing is pathos. It is unlikely that there is a reader whose empathy and emotions are not touched by the essay. Mobley (2021) describes the execution area: “it reminds me of an operating room in a hospital, but instead of an operating table used for saving people, there is a gurney used for killing people” (p. 978). This sentence cannot leave the audience indifferent because of the bright opposition between saving and murdering, life and death. Further, Mobley (2021) notices: “it is amazing to me how perfect and precise everything has to be to kill someone,” and this idea makes readers emotional as well (p. 978). As a result, the efficient use of this strategy allows the author to start changing the readers’ minds even before they learn the essay’s purpose.
Logos
Finally, one may suggest that the writing would be more effective if there were more logical statements and facts. For example, when talking about the prison and the death penalty, Mobley (2021) lists the most notorious serial killers who were executed. This is a logical argument for capital punishment, but no historical facts or data appear to prove the unethical side of this issue. For example, if Mobley (2021) reminded the audience of falsely accused and executed persons, this would be a strong argument against the death penalty. At the same time, when asking logical questions like “Who has the right to say who lives and who dies?”, the author efficiently uses logos.
The Author’s Purpose in Writing the Essay
As mentioned above, the objective of the writing is to raise people’s awareness of the immoral side of capital punishment. Mobley (2021) wants “us to think outside the box and to form our own opinions, even if they do not align with the views of” others (p. 980). After creating such a descriptive and literary-rich essay, Mobley (2021) encourages everyone to decide for themselves: is the death penalty murder or justice? Regardless of the answer, the readers find individually, the aim of the essay is reached – more and more persons become aware of this concern.
Reference
Mobley, Russel. (2021). Justice or murder? In R. Bullock, D. Bertsch, M. D. Goggin, & F. Weinberg (Eds.), The Norton Field guide to writing with readings and handbook (pp. 977-980). W. W. Norton & Company.