Sunday, October 5, 2014

My Rhetorical Analysis on "Defending Jacob"



In “Defending Jacob”, William Landay talks about the story of Andrew Barber, and how his world began to fall apart after the murder of a young boy, with his son to be accused of. Landay’s narrative follows the style of a man who displays conflicting viewpoints on the world, shown through pity and spite, on characters and events that happen throughout the story.
 
When you begin reading of “Defending Jacob”, you expect the story to be focused around this character named Jacob and his point of view, as the opening of this literacy narrative begins in a Police Interview setting. However, you find out in the next line that the perspective of the story is actually focused around Jacob’s father, Andrew.

From here, we begin to see Andrew describe Mr. Logidudice, the man interviewing him. Even though we had only just met this character, it’s clear from the amount of backstory following this shows how Andrew has known Mr. Logidudice from quite some time. With the way in which Andrew describes Mr. Logidudice, however, shows how Andrew shows pity for Mr. Logidudice, as Andrew describes how Mr. Logidudice has messed up over the years. This is mostly seen through lines such as “His reputation was already damaged beyond repair, and his career along with it.”, being followed up later on in the same paragraph with “But to me, Logidudice was okay. He was just innocent.” It’s through this that we can see of how Andrew is going through different conflicting opinions on even just one character, displaying both spite for how Mr. Logidudice has messed up only to follow up with how he cared about him as well.

Later on in the narrative, we begin to unfold in this interview with Mr. Logidudice, asking more questions of the case. It is here, however, that we get another case of Andrew conflicting among his own thoughts. Andrew states of how “‘I believe in the system, same as you, same as everyone else‘”, but then immediately follows up with “I do not believe in a system, at least I do not think it is especially good at finding the truth.” This again displays another confliction with Andrew, as he talks about how he believes in the court system similarly to Mr. Logidudice and everyone else, however then immediately flips over and states of how he doesn’t believe in a system, saying how it’s not good as finding the truth.
From these, it can be seen how William Landay’s narrative follows a conflicting style of writing for our main protagonist.

No comments:

Post a Comment