Arthur Jarvis Writings
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
Read the prompt below and annotate. Look for patterns and deviations in syntax. Examine diction and how it contributes to tone. Look at pronoun usage, verb choice, and adjectives. Look for tools of persuasion (logos, ethos, pathos). What is the author's purpose? Who is his intended audience? What techniques does he use to achieve his purpose? (Remember that this was the final essay/speech Arthur Jarvis was writing prior to being killed by Absalom Kumalo.)
AP LANG EXERCISE
Cry, the Beloved Country (in the words of Arthur Jarvis)
“What we did when we came to South Africa was permissible. It was permissible to develop our great resources with the aid of what labour we could find. It was permissible to use unskilled men for unskilled work. But it is not permissible to keep men unskilled for the sake of unskilled work.
Because of what Meghan said it shows that many of his sentences are built off of him contradicting himself.
“accusation?”
“It was permissible when we discovered gold to bring labour to the mines.
It was permissible to build compounds and to keep women and children away from the towns.
It was permissible as an experiment, in the light of what we knew.
But in the light of what we know now, with certain exceptions, it is no longer permissible.
It is not permissible for us to go on destroying family life when we know that we are destroying it.
“It is permissible to develop any resources if the labour is forthcoming.
But it is not permissible to develop any resources if they can be developed only at the cost of the labour.
It is not permissible to mine any gold, or manufacture any product, or cultivate any land, if such mining and manufacture and cultivation depend for their success on a policy of keeping labour poor.
It is not permissible to add to one’s possessions if these things can only be done at the cost of other men.
Such development has only one true name, and that is exploitation.
It might have been permissible in the early days of our country, before we became aware of its cost, in the disintegration of native community life, in the deterioration of native family life, in poverty, slums and crime.
But now that the cost is known, it is no longer permissible.
He does this to show the reader that in the longer sentences he wants them to see how passionate he is about protecting the Natives and their land. With the longer sentences it feels like he is arguing and getting his point across by making the reader feel his anger and passion.
He begins by stating what circumstances make it okay, and then goes on to address all the reasons as to why what they are doing is wrong. He ends the paragraph with “But now that the cost is known, it is no longer permissible,” its important that he ends this way to convey the meaning that labor can no longer be conducted this way and that decision is final.
“It was permissible to leave native education to those who wanted to develop it. It was permissible to doubt its benefits. But it is no longer permissible in the light of what we know. Partly because it made possible industrial development, and partly because it happened in spite of us, there is now a large urbanized native population. Now society has always, for reasons of self-interest if for no other, educated its children so that they grow up law-abiding, with socialized aims and purposes. There is no other way that it can be done. Yet we continue to leave the education of our native urban society to those few Europeans who feel strongly about it, and to deny opportunities and money for its expansion. That is not permissible. For reasons of self-interest alone, it is dangerous.
Arthur uses “we” instead of “they,” blaming this on himself along with the whole of the group. He’s showing his credibility by relating himself and taking fault.
Through this whole paragraph he uses commas and makes his sentences long, but right at the end he doesn’t. He does this to put more emphases on how dangerous it is.
“It was permissible to allow the destruction of a tribal system that impeded the growth of the country. It was permissible to believe that its destruction was inevitable. But it is not permissible to watch its destruction, and to replace it by nothing, or by so little, that a whole people deteriorates, physically and morally.
I agree with Cole, and I also believe that Pathos is being used throughout the entire article by using “permissible and non permissible” to make people agree with what he is saying in paragraph 9 and make people change and not be “criminals, prostitutes and drunkards.”
“The old tribal system was, for all its violence and savagery, for all its superstition and witchcraft, a moral system. Our natives today produce criminals and prostitutes and drunkards, not because it is their nature to do so, but because their simple system of order and tradition and convention has been destroyed. It was destroyed by the impact of our own civilization. Our civilization has therefore an inescapable duty to set up another system of order and tradition and convention.
Every other paragraph starts with “it was permissible,” but this one is showing the effects of those actions from the other paragraphs. This whole paragraph really tugs on your emotions because of the adjectives like “violence” and “savagery.” And as Arthur argues, this is because of the lack of order in the society.
“It is true that we hoped to preserve the tribal system by a policy of segregation. That was permissible. But we never did it thoroughly or honestly. We set aside one-tenth of the land for four-fifths of the people. Thus we made it inevitable, and some say we did it knowingly, that labour would come to the towns. We are caught in the toils of our own selfishness.
He is admitting that the only reason all of this is happening is because of his people’s egotism. They are trapped because their ego and self image were more important than four-fifths of the people. This is important because by admitting his own and his peoples selfishness he is acknowledging the fact that they need to fix the problems they made.
This is an example of how being selfish tears people and communities down. If they had been selfless towards the community and treated them fair they would build people up and grow together as a community.
“No one wishes to make the problem seem smaller than it is. No one wishes to make its solution seem easy. No one wishes to make light of the fears that beset us. But whether we be fearful or no, we shall never, because we are a Christian people, be able to evade the moral issues.
“It is time—”
General Document Comments 0
icons on the left to see existing comments.
0 archived comments