Spanish Argumnets

Prompt: What does each author argue, and who argues their point more successfully? Why do you think that? After reading selections from Gloria Anzldua’s Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza and Richard Rodriguez’s autobiography, Hunger of Memory: The Education of Richard Rodriguez I believe that Richard Rodriguez was able to more successfully argue his point of view. While writing Rodriguez managed to establish a high level of ethos. The way he went about this was by establishing that he had good judgment, was knowledgeable, and was able to show that he understood the complexity of the issue. All of these were established by the fact he received a PHD in English literature form Berkely. This insures the reader that he has studied the importance of language in society. Also the way he recalls the events as sort of “matter of fact” and his ability to remain calm through the entire article gives his writing a more relatable and down to earth feeling. While Gloria Anzldua is also well educated receiving a BA in English from Pan University she tends to let her emotions dictate her paper. The fact that she is passionate about the topic at hand and wants to make a change is not necessarily a bad thing; however, high levels of emotion have the potential to lower the ethos and respectability. While Rodriguez retold the events of his life he was still able to appeal to the reader’s emotions when talking about how giving up the Spanish language distanced him from his family. His ability to retell the events without getting heated gave his article a more “down to earth” and “level headed” feel. Something that I found interesting on Rodriguez’s take on speaking Spanish in a predominantly English society was how he gave off the vibe that even if given the option he would not go back and change the path he chose to take. This to me makes me believe he is comfortable in his own skin and knows where he stands, giving him a more “level headed” feel. In the end although I