Thoreau's Second Rhetorical Analysis

1. The tone in Thoreau’s second is very critical and harsh. He makes it very obvious that he hates the U.S. Government. He uses diverse theories to show his tone. The first is he has well-adjusted sentences. He goes from forceful to relaxed. This strategy is being used so that he does not overwhelm the reader or bore them. He also uses metaphors. The main metaphor he used was “it is a … people themselves”. This metaphor advocates that the government gives people the impression of power, when they truly don’t have any. He is also very forceful in his sentences when he starts out with “It does not …”. This paragraph gives Thoreau’s true opinion on the subject at hand.
2. The friction metaphors are used to compare the U.S. to a machine. The friction is referring to the rough patches in the government. Thoreau …show more content…
Thoreau uses a lot of rhetorical questions in his essay to get points across. The first rhetorical question he uses is in the second paragraph. It is, “what is but a tradition… some of its integrity?”. This question is saying that although democracy is a tradition and it has certain qualities, Thoreau feels that it looses some of its value each year. That each year we loose some of our freedom and rights. It relates to the metaphor about the wooden gun. It gives people a strong sense of power when they don’t actually have much. In the last paragraph, he has two rhetorical questions. The first is “Is a democracy … possible in government?”. The second is “Is it not possible… rights of man?”. These two questions contribute to the paragraph they are in by wrapping up his argument. In his last paragraph he discusses how he will follow any rules of the government he supports and the evolution of our government. These two questions closely relate to the evolution of our government. Thoreau wonders if we can go beyond a democracy, granting us more freedom and rights. He believes those aspects of our country needs work and he makes it obvious by asking those