Cesar Chavez Reflection Essay Sample

I would grant my essay a 3/6 on the 1-6 scale. I gave myself 1/1 for the thesis statement, as it was easily defensible, and while the wording could have been more sophisticated, it correctly analyzed the rhetorical choices of the author as required. In the future, however, I will make sure to provide more specific examples than “statements and subtle innuendos” so that it is even easier to defend and makes more sense to the reader. Other than this, I gave myself a 2/4 for the evidence/commentary. This is because I had minimal commentary to go along with the evidence that I gave. I did not entirely fulfill the “so what?” section of my argument, therefore, I took 2 points off in this category. For example, when describing the metaphor between Dr. King’s life and the “power that nonviolence brings”, I only provided one sentence of explanation, which essentially restated what the author had already said. Therefore, while I did have commentary, it was not to the degree that it should have been. However, my evidence fulfilled all of the requirements, as it was “specific” and supported each of my claims. I also analyzed a lot of the author’s rhetorical choices. This is represented with the word choice of Cesar Chavez referenced within my essay, as well as the metaphor between a violent victory to “strings attached”, and finally the reference to religion in his very first paragraph. (Chavez 1) Due to this, there was no need for any additional points to be docked. Finally, I did not give myself the sophistication point on my essay, as while the wording was clear and easy to follow/understand, I should have included more sentence length variation, as well as more variation in wording for certain sections. For example, I repeat the words “violence” and “nonviolence” multiple times in a row at a time, as those words were frequently used in the text. However, I did not have a clear purpose in doing so, therefore, it does not fit the “sophistication” requirement. 

My thesis statement argues that “Through statements and subtle innuendos that hint at his favoritism for King’s non-violent ways, Cesar Chavez implies that the correct course of action is always the one that harms no one and allows for growth over longer periods of time.” This establishes my clear (and defendable) position that Cesar Chavez is arguing for nonviolence and its power through his choices in writing and therefore is a satisfactory thesis for what it needs to accomplish. However, as I stated above, the wording could be improved greatly. Instead of “statements and subtle innuendos”, saying “metaphors that hint at the power of nonviolence, if-then statements that logically support the ideas of his target audience, and emotional appeals to the needs of workers and people of religion” would more effectively inform the reader of what I intend to argue within my body paragraphs. Therefore, this is something that I will make sure to fulfill in my next essay of this kind. As far as my argument, there are usually 2 pieces of evidence per every assertion made in the paragraph. However, I did not equally balance the commentary to those pieces of evidence. For example, when I referenced the “strings attached” metaphor in Chavez’s writing, I did not provide very detailed commentary to argue that the meaning of this metaphor is “victory comes with repercussions”. My commentary was around equivalent to the amount of evidence, but in future cases, I will make sure to include more of it to adequately support my points implied in the evidence. Finally, my essay progresses with each paragraph explaining a separate claim that Chavez makes within his article. The evidence supports the rhetorical choices that Chavez makes to explain those points. Therefore, the paragraphs are linked through the similarities in each of Chavez’s points, which argue either for nonviolence or against violence. While this was not the most effective way to argue my point, it is still tied together and linked in a way that the essay flows relatively smoothly.

I chose a few rhetorical devices, which include metaphors, his appeals to certain groups of people, and finally his appeals to ethics through logical wording (if-then statements). While I didn’t layer more than one of these devices into each paragraph, I included multiple throughout my essay. I quoted my evidence by including short phrases utilized by Chavez in my sentences to make my points more convincing. There was no unnecessary source summary- I was to the point and argued for my thesis. Therefore, I am proud of how I quoted evidence, as well as the rhetorical devices that I used. However, I should have clearly stated what devices Chavez was utilizing. As the person who wrote the essay, I can identify what rhetorical devices I am referring to, but the person reading my essay may not be able to. Furthermore, this lack of clearness in my writing does not adequately connect the devices referenced to the audience and purpose for this piece. While I do argue a point, I do not clearly state what devices Chavez used to argue it. So, while the argument is complete and linked, I need to make sure that every point is translated over to the audience in the most optimal way possible. Therefore, I will make sure to clearly state the rhetorical devices utilized by the author in the next essay.

What I am doing well:

Choosing evidence that supports my thesis and main points. My first body paragraph argued that through Chavez’s emphasis on the importance of human life, he was arguing against violence. By citing his statement that violence either leads to more violence or the “total demoralization of the workers”, I made it clear that Chavez intends to argue against lost lives due to violence. He instead prefers taking a longer but far less bloody route to victory. 

My conclusion at the end: I wrap up the thesis by restating it, and end with a bigger idea that leaves the reader thinking. In the case of the Chavez essay, I said that “violence is never the only option”, which will “always hold true”. This ends on a note which still stays on-topic but offers a bigger theme that encompasses society today and applies to everyday people.

Utilizing if/then statements to tie my paragraphs together. For example, in the final body paragraph, I start with the idea that victory comes with strings attached. Then, I explain what exactly those “strings attached” mean, and what negative effects they could have on society. Finally, I end on what those negative effects could mean for the common people, as well as the workers specifically. In this way, my ideas tie together very well, and in a logical manner.

What I need to improve on:

Making my topic sentences argue a point that is easy to understand and argue. A lot of my topic sentences quoted Chavez but did not argue for a point of my own. While it did support the thesis, it was not original and also did not argue specifically for any devices that Chavez used. So, I will make my topic sentences clearer and easier to support for my essay.

Clearly stating what the purpose of each piece of evidence is. Often, I left a piece of evidence not completely defended with commentary. For example, after I talk about his quote on the “total demoralization of the workers”, I do not explain exactly why that argues against violence. While the quote itself makes the stance very clear, I should still include explanations so that no one is left confused and no thought is left unfinished.

Using clear but sophisticated wording. I often use the same words in a row without a clear purpose of doing so (such as the words “violence” and “nonviolence”). There are other ways in which to get the point across, such as by using the words “aggression” and “gentleness” or “being rational” versus “being irrational”. There are a lot of places that lack variation in wording, which is something that I will work to improve upon in the future.

Finally, one goal that I have for myself is to include at least 3 examples of well-defended rhetorical devices utilized by the author to support my claims in my next synthesis essay. When referencing those rhetorical devices, I will make it clear what they are, as well as what they argue for. I will also make sure to be detailed with this, and get my point across to the reader in the most convincing way possible.