Henry David Thoreau

"The morning, which is the most memorable season of the day, is the awakening hour. Then there is least somnolence in us; and for an hour, at least, some part of us awakes of that day, if it can be called a day, to which we are not awakened by our Genius, but by the mechanical nudging of some servitor, are not awakened by our own newly acquired force and aspirations from within, accompanied by the undulations of celestial music, instead of factory bells, and a fragrance filling the air--to a higher life than we fell asleep from; and thus the darkness bear its fruit, and prove itself to be good, no less than the light. The man who does not believe that each day contains and earlier, more sacred, and auroral hour then he has yet profaned, has despaired of life, and is pursuing a descending and darkening way. After a partial cessation of his sensuous life, the soul of man, or its organs rather, are reinvigorated each day, and his Genius tries again what noble life it can make." also "The millions are awake enough for physical labor; but only one in a million is awake enough for effective intellectual exertion, only one in a hundred millions to a poetic or divine life. To be awake is to be alive. I have never yet met a man who was quite awake. How could i have looked him in the face?"

Close Read:

The first thing I notice about this passage is the contrast of the short first sentence and the very long third sentence. To me, the way the first sentence is constructed in a short, not descriptive yet informative style, makes it feel like a topic sentence. It lets you know what he is going to be talking about, so that when he has a really long third sentence you don't get confused and lose interest because he has started sounding like the grown ups in Charlie Brown, "Blah blah blah blah blah." In this first sentence we are introduced to this theme of awakening. He mentions "...the awakening hour." This can be taken literally, the human body comes from sleep into a conscious state, or it can be taken on a more spiritual level, the soul is more in touch with God and nature and the God that is seen in nature. Thoreau keeps referring to the second way of interpreting awakening throughout this passage, which, along with its construction, helps make the first sentence feel like a topic sentence. In the second sentence readers run into contrasts referencing to a more spiritual awakening. Thoreau starts the second sentence by saying "Then there is least somnolence in us" which is the opposite of what most people feel. When I wake up in the morning I am the MOST sleepy I am all day. This contrast helps me think about the awakening he is talking about in a more spiritual way, because physically I cannot relate, but emotionally, like when watching the sun rise over a dew covered field, I can understand what he means by having my soul awakened. This brings the thought that my soul awakens in the morning to a more personal level, which builds up his ethos, because it is harder to tell yourself that you are wrong than it is to tell someone else that they are wrong. After introducing the way to think of being awake in the first sentence, and building up his ethos and getting readers to understand what he means by being awake in the second sentence, Thoreau puts in a long sentence to back up what he is saying. He does this by using contrasts and some pathos. The first contrast we see is between what Thoreau calls "...our Genius..." and the "...mechanical nudgings of some servitor...". The Genius Thoreau is talking about is the God readers find in nature. (God being found in nature is a romanticist quality, so that fits in with Thoreau.) This is a big contrast to the American city and peer pressure. In the first part of the sentence Thoreau is saying that you cannot have a good day if you are awakened (this awakened is bodily consciousness, not spiritual) by the city and its hustle and bustle rather than nature and its serenity and pureness. The second contrast readers come across is the one between "...aspirations from within..." and ..."factory bells...". Here Thoreau pulls in pathos to make readers believe what he is saying. One of the things Americans want to have is "...force and aspirations from within...". When Thoreau put that line in he caught our attention again and made us want to agree with him because he is relating what he is saying to what we want and believe in. Also in this contrast Thoreau took a part of everyday life that people probably didn't think twice about and made it an enemy of American "force and aspirations from within" by setting it opposite to it. This contrast makes even me, who never had been called to awaken by factory bells, dislike them because they took away my inner drive and made me a robot, a slave to society. Thoreau also did the opposite of a contrast and took two things that normally aren't seen together and teamed them up to help defend his position. Thoreau took "...force and aspirations from within..." and said that it was "...accompanied by the undulations of celestial music...". The word "force" makes me think of a straight powerful line, whereas the word "undulations" makes me think of a strain of music that is dancing on the wind with no care or hurry. These two things are different, but together make a powerful line saying that the force and drive you have from within is itself driven from the God found in nature, not factory bells. Also in the first two parts of the third sentence is parallel structure. Thoreau repeats "...are not awakened...". This parallel structure helps readers connect the two parts of the sentence which makes it easier to relate to the first/topic sentence. The parallel structure is also doubling as repetition that helps readers remember that we ARE NOT AWAKENED by these things. In the fourth and fifth sentences Thoreau delves even farther into the spiritual side of awakening. Thoreau uses diction that really defends God in nature. Words like sacred, auroral, soul, reinvigorated, Genius, and noble, all remind readers of God and the bible. In the fourth sentence Thoreau says that if man doesn't believe that the next morning will bring an even better and more spiritual hour than any before, he has already started descending towards hell. In the fifth sentence Thoreau says that after sleep the "soul of man" is fresh and ready to let God in nature try and better him/her again. By using such strong religious diction readers cannot mistake what he is saying, which is just an even more clear way of saying what he has been saying throughout this passage: your soul awakens in the morning with the help of God in nature. In the last part of this passage Thoreau uses a rhetorical question and his personal experience to build ethos pathos and conclude this part of his work. Thoreau uses a hyperbole to make readers think about what all they have read. When he says the part starting with "The millions are awake enough..." and ending with "...to a poetic or divine life," Thoreau is using exaggerated statistics to say that he does not believe anyone takes the time to let God in nature do its work every morning. Thoreau also uses a sort of reverse parallel structure in this part. At the beginning Thoreau uses a short then long sentence to get his point across, but now he uses a long then a short sentence to get his point across. This makes this part stand out to readers because it is different than what they have yet seen. The last two lines of this passage are, "I have not yet met a man who was quite awake. How could i have looked him in the face?" Thoreau uses these very strong lines as his closing emphasis on how important what he has been saying is. His ending rhetorical question really packs a literary punch. When a man as in touch with nature as Thoreau is says he could not look a man who is truly one with God in nature in the face, it shifts this entire passage up a notch and sets it on a pedestal to be re-examined. What a great way to end a powerful passage.

Response to Douglass

When I finished reading this passage the first thing that came to my mind was how smart Douglass is. I know what you mean! His diction in this piece, the strong language like: "I have often been utterly astonished'" and "It is impossible to conceive of a greater mistake," makes his readers believe that he knows what he is talking about. Writers seldom use such strong and definite diction unless they really know what they are talking about and are positive they are right. The strong writing in this passage also create ethos.
The first thing I noticed about this passage is that Douglass right away uses antithesis. You got it. You identify a central persuasive element--nice stuff. He starts out this passage with a long descriptive sentence, then his second sentence is short and to the point saying that the beliefs people had, which were described in his firts sentence, were wrong. This opposition of long sentence then straight to short sentence really makes the short sentence catch your eye, and your mind. Yes. This is the moment when he refutes a popular misconception, and you do a nice job noting how his writing reflects his purpose. This is important because the whole point of this passage is to say that white men don't know black men, and that white men and black men are one in the same. Well, I'm not quite seeing this declaration of racial equality. Can you specify how you get that from this sentence? This is stated very early in his antithesis which is also his second sentence. The words that I notice first are "utterly astonished". I don't hear these words used together often so when he put them together I got a feeling of how weird it was for him to hear that white men think slaves sing because they are happy without Douglass having to use weak adjectives like very. This builds up his ethos for me because it makes me feel like he not only knows what he is talking about, but also knows how to say it powerfully. Some sentences that stuck out to me were "The songs of the slaves represent the sorrows of his heart; and he is relieved by them, only as an aching heart is relieved by its tears," and "The singing of a man cast upon a desolate island might be as appropriately considered as evidence of contentment and happiness, as the singing of a slave; the songs of the one and of the other are prompted by the same emotion". These sentences stuck out to me because of the combination of their content and structure. Both of these sentences have pathos in them, but what really makes the pathos so strong is the way the sentences use comparisons. Comparing slave songs to an aching heart crying really strikes a heart string with me. It makes me want to reach out and try to comfort the slave, even though I have never known one. The only reason I want to reach out and comfort is because I can relate to the slave now. Just saying the slave sing because they are sad wouldn't help convince anyone that slavery should be gone. What makes the sentence so powerful is that the comparison given makes you able to relate to the slaves. Everyone has cried, so everyone can understand this comparison. Notice this also fits with the Age of Reason belief in sensitive-but-strong men. He builds his ethos as a man (and as a human being!) by displaying his sensitivity. Douglass's ability to write sophisticated, yet have everyone able to relate to a slave is genius. He is able to get you to feel emotions that slaves, on a much more grandious scale, would feel. By knowing this we see that slaves must be humans just like us. Because we are able to feel how they feel, slaves must be at least similar to us. This conclusion is what Douglass was hoping for. In this passage he wanted to get us to realize that slaves are human and slavery is wrong, to the point of inhuman if you are openminded. Since I have only read through chapter nine it is hard to say, but I think that this passage could be a microcosm to the book. Frederik Douglass was an escaped slave who was also an abolitionist. So far I have found this work to not only be a narrative, but also a persuasive book about why slavery is wrong. This passage supports that claim by saying that slaves are humans like you and me and they should have the same rights we have. He doesn't directly say this, but once you have read the passage and taken in the afore mentioned sentences you realize that slavery being wrong is the theme of this passage. In this passage is also saw an Age of Reason theme. Douglass says "I have often sung to drown my sorrow...". This supports the Age of Reason thought that men should be manly and sensitive. You're right with me, sister! Great stuff. Saying that he could cry made Doulass an Age of Reason man which would create ethos with the white men and women to whom this writing was designed for.
I want you to pause for a moment and realize how well you analyzed one little passage. I want to get you going with an analytical essay right now--you're in high gear. Well done.