Response to Thoreau Post

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. That's a good observation. It is an essay--it makes sense to look for topic sentences. 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. Yes, you've got the metaphor of awakening and the morning in here. 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, You're a Romantic! 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. Good job identifying this central contrast. 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. Yes. Mechanization is always a negative for Thoreau. "Progress" itself is a suspect notion. 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. I'd say more spirituality than Bible, but definitely religious connotations, yes. 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. You are reading in such depth, Caitlin. Sometimes you're looking at so much that I'm not sure I'm following what you mean. It's ok to set limits for yourself, to look at three or four central elements of a passage. Remember, too, that things like ethos/pathos/logos usually show up in persuasive texts. Once we get to fiction, you'll be looking at all the old elements of fiction. Anyway, this is a great close reading. Thank you for all the time you're putting into your reading.