1
Literature and literary criticism:
How to take the right path
ERH 101, Section 1
Date Due: 10 July 2015
Date: 8 July 2015
Paper No. 2
Help Received: class discussion,
Questions for rhetorical analysis
George Hempt
2
“Coming at things from my middle-class perspective, however, I took for granted a
freedom that school, knowledge, and engagement with ideas seemed only to threaten,” (Graff,
112). Graff opens his story as a typical kid struggling with literature. He grew up as a middleclass Jew often forced to literature he could not relate to and could care less about what the
writer has to say. This taken-for-granted attitude as well as his fear of becoming a bookworm
rings in the hearts of so many teenagers today. The way Graff became the intellectual he is
today, however, is very atypical. This unbeaten path is very interesting and Graff shows that the
common path of the literate people today can be detrimental in the long run. Graff uses logos
through personal experience, and multiple examples to develop pathos within the audience. This
sympathy drives the argument home and how the path many literate people take can be very
detrimental to their creativity as a person.
Graff begins his story, “Disliking Books at an Early Age,” as a troubled kid when it
comes to literature. He did not become a bookworm at an early age because he was afraid of
being bullied and singled out. His father, being a literate man, forces him to read books and does
not understand his son’s struggle. As a kid, he would sit in his room reading books that he could
never relate to. Just as you can listen to someone boast about their personal accomplishment
(what he felt when reading about Magellan), you could care less about what they have to say
because you cannot relate to them. This struggle continued as he went to college to study, “the
nebulous but conveniently noncommittal territory of the liberal arts,” (Graff, 112).
As soon as the story begins I can feel pathos that Graff attempts to withdraw. I feel
sympathy for the common problems that many teenagers face. Graff continues to struggle with
literature until he is exposed to the professional criticism and argument over the ending of The
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. This exposure to argument drew him to the literature. These
3
arguments spark curiosity in Graff and begin his development of pathos. He shares this pathos
with the reader to develop sympathy, which works very effectively. Because of the arguments,
he now had a purpose for reading and became engaged and felt a personal experience with the
reading. I experience the same pathos and emotion when finding a certain piece of literature that
I find personal to me. He most importantly gained confidence when he realized that he had
reached the same conclusions that many of the famous authors had reached before him. This
exposure to literary criticism showed Graff that famous authors are capable of mistakes as well,
and was also the key to his success. Graff could apply these discussions to his life and he became
less embarrassed to think and talk like an intellectual. Graff is currently a professor of English at
the University of Illinois at Chicago. He is also the dean of curriculum and instruction in the
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. These credentials establish ethos to the reader and could
with any reader. When I connect with Graff through pathos (sympathy because I experience the
same problems), and see his credentials I gain confidence throughout the reading to see someone
who is like me that can achieve so much.
Graff explains his argument as learning a foreign language. The pathos I feel is
frustrating when trying to learn Latin in my middle school and high school years. When studying
a foreign language in middle school or high school, we are given books to study the words of the
language. We can learn the words, but have trouble establishing a conversation and seeing all the
aspects and accents of the particular language. The quickest and best way to learn a language is
to be exposed to the culture and others speaking that certain language. Graff describes this in his
explanation of how he struggled with the language of literary criticism. “I was being asked to
speak a foreign language – literary criticism – while on the other hand, I was being protected
from that language, presumably for my own safety,” (Graff, 116). He was being protected from
4
the arguments, and was being exposed to just the literature itself. Being exposed to the
professional criticism later could corrupt his first experience of the literature itself. With this idea
being developed, Graff exposes the reader to his bifurcating main argument.
The step-by-step logos of Graff’s argument divulges the bifurcation of the path to literacy
development. Graff presents his argument with two different ways people can be exposed to
literature and literary criticism. The first way is the most common way, which many teenagers
experience. The second way is the path Graff himself took. Teachers today expose the students
first to the literature itself. A student could become inspired by a certain literary piece. When this
student pursues higher education, the will be exposed to the “professional pressures” of literary
criticism. The student adopts the literature itself and the language used, as Graff describes it, as
their primary experience and the crucial literary criticism and analysis as a secondary experience.
This hierarchy of development is the logos used to explain why literate people become obsessed
with the analysis of the piece. It can be compared to someone memorizing the study material for
a test, but not actually understanding the material. This order of exposure can be seen as
corrupting. Having been exposed to the secondary critical discourse of certain writings, a literate
person will tend to latch on to a certain viewpoint about this particular writing. They can become
corrupted over the years by sticking to one interpretation (believing it is the truth) and losing
sight of the other viewpoints. This corruption of ideals leads literate people to forget their
original inspiration to literature in the first place. In a way they become, “seduced by
professionalism, drawn away from a healthy absorption in literature to the sickly fascination with
analysis and theory and to the advancement of their careers,” (Graff, 115).
The first side of the argument described above, can be applied to our society. The logos
used can be applied to a very diverse audience. This audience-based argument shows the purpose
5
of why Graff wrote this piece. Graff describes the current attacks and resentment towards
literary theory, “rooted in anxieties about the increasing self-consciousness of modern life,”
(Graff, 115). Our current society is self-absorbed, just like corrupted literates and teachers are
self-absorbed in their careers and opinions. We follow and worship celebrities. We follow what
they say because they are cool, attractive, popular, or have a lot of Twitter followers (they
MUST be right). We tend to become obsessed so much with what the celebrities wear and do,
that we lose our individuality. These celebrities themselves can become self-absorbed and selfconscious because we follow their every move. Celebrities can become corrupted by this
popularity and make decision based on what would get them the most attention. Certain
celebrities can forget their roots and upbringing just as a student may forget their original
inspiration or roots to literature.
This analogy that Graff suggest about our society applies to the audience shift. The first
half of the writing applies to readers and their struggle to apply themselves to literature. The
turning point of this shift occurs when Graff suggests that the problem with struggling young
literates is the teachers and how they expose them to literature and literary criticism. This shift
also enforces the ethos previously established in the argument. He applies his argument to all
levels of higher education from a lowly undergrad student to a professor and even dean. He
establishes this ethos because he has been at all levels of this education spectrum. He struggled
with understanding just as the average undergrad student does. He has been teaching also for 15
years that gives him a lot of experience. The fact that he remembers his past so well and still
remembers his first draw to literature persuades the reader that he has learned the right way and
traveled the correct path. The point at which I realized he was so persuasive was when I began to
6
read the passage with confidence almost as if I was in Graff’s shoes staring at those blank pages
in my room.
Graff makes this argument so persuasive that I can draw sympathy and draw a very
similar circumstance in my own life that can be related to his argument. It was the summer
before my junior year of high school and I was to begin tutoring for the SAT’s. My tutor stressed
constantly to me not to “marry an answer.” While answering a multiple choice you should not
just find the first answer that you like and “marry it.” You have to look at all the possibilities
first, before making a decision. Just as a young reader may find a book they like and fall in love
with literature, it can be detrimental if they do not explore the broader picture of literature (all
types of books, poems, and speeches). Graff climaxes his argument with the idea that because he
was drawn by the literary analysis and arguments and not the literature itself, he sees his
“professional pressures,” not as a betrayal to his, “inner impulses” that drew him to read books,
but as, “a way to fulfill those impulses,” (Graff, 116).
Graff uses pathos, ethos, and logos very effectively throughout his writing. The argument
is very simple to understand and easily divulges pathos within the reader. Graff uses multiple
examples and heavy us of logos to make his argument very persuasive. This effective logos,
draws out this pathos (sympathy) in basically every reader because the situations are very
relatable for a diverse-based audience. This common pathos draws respect from the reader and
establishes ethos within the reader as well. These three inter-woven aspects along with the
kairotic moment, communicates a strong truth that you can achieve seemingly impossible things.
Though they may seem daunting at the present, that spark can occur when you least expect it.
7
Works Cited
Graff, Gerald. “Disliking Book at an Early Age.” Composing Knowledge: Readings for College
Writers. Ed. Rolf Norgaard. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martin’s, 2007. 111-112, 115-116.
Print.