Question
Excerpt 1 From Atticus's Closing Argument in Tom Robinson's Trial - Ch 20 of 'To Kill a Mockingbird' by Harper Lee
“The state has not produced one iota of medical evidence to the effect that the crime Tom Robinson is charged with ever took place. It has relied instead upon the testimony of two witnesses whose evidence has not only been called into serious question on cross-examination, but has been flatly contradicted by the defendant. The defendant is not guilty, but somebody in this courtroom is.
“I have nothing but pity in my heart for the chief witness for the state, but my pity does not extend so far as to her putting a man’s life at stake, which she has done in an effort to get rid of her own guilt.
“I say guilt, gentlemen, because it was guilt that motivated her. She has committed no crime, she has merely broken a rigid and time-honored code of our society, a code so severe that whoever breaks it is hounded from our midst as unfit to live with. She is the victim of cruel poverty and ignorance, but I cannot pity her: she is white. She knew full well the enormity of her offense, but because her desires were stronger than the code she was breaking, she persisted in breaking it. She persisted, and her subsequent reaction is something that all of us have known at one time or another. She did something every child has done—she tried to put the evidence of her offense away from her. But in this case she was no child hiding stolen contraband: she struck out at her victim—of necessity she must put him away from her—he must be removed from her presence, from this world. She must destroy the evidence of her offense.
“What was the evidence of her offense? Tom Robinson, a human being. She must put Tom Robinson away from her. Tom Robinson was her daily reminder of what she did."
hich rhetorical appeals does Atticus use here, and how do they support his overall purpose?
Responses
Logos and pathos – He shows that the evidence doesn’t add up and evokes sympathy for Tom as a man unfairly targeted. These appeals serve his purpose by exposing the weakness of the case and urging a fair, human response.
Logos and pathos – He shows that the evidence doesn’t add up and evokes sympathy for Tom as a man unfairly targeted. StartFragment These appeals serve his purpose by exposing the weakness of the case and urging a fair, human response. EndFragment
Pathos and ethos – He acknowledges Mayella’s poverty while presenting himself as a fair and principled speaker. These appeals serve his purpose by building credibility and generating sympathy without excusing injustice.
Pathos and ethos – He acknowledges Mayella’s poverty while presenting himself as a fair and principled speaker. StartFragment These appeals serve his purpose by building credibility and generating sympathy without excusing injustice. EndFragment
Logos and ethos – He highlights factual contradictions and reinforces the jury’s legal responsibility to judge impartially. These appeals serve his purpose by focusing on facts and reinforcing the jury’s role in upholding justice.
Logos and ethos – He highlights factual contradictions and reinforces the jury’s legal responsibility to judge impartially. StartFragment These appeals serve his purpose by focusing on facts and reinforcing the jury’s role in upholding justice. EndFragment
Ethos and logos – He builds trust through calm reasoning and focuses on the legal flaws in the state’s case. These appeals serve his purpose by positioning himself as trustworthy and the case as logically flawed.
“The state has not produced one iota of medical evidence to the effect that the crime Tom Robinson is charged with ever took place. It has relied instead upon the testimony of two witnesses whose evidence has not only been called into serious question on cross-examination, but has been flatly contradicted by the defendant. The defendant is not guilty, but somebody in this courtroom is.
“I have nothing but pity in my heart for the chief witness for the state, but my pity does not extend so far as to her putting a man’s life at stake, which she has done in an effort to get rid of her own guilt.
“I say guilt, gentlemen, because it was guilt that motivated her. She has committed no crime, she has merely broken a rigid and time-honored code of our society, a code so severe that whoever breaks it is hounded from our midst as unfit to live with. She is the victim of cruel poverty and ignorance, but I cannot pity her: she is white. She knew full well the enormity of her offense, but because her desires were stronger than the code she was breaking, she persisted in breaking it. She persisted, and her subsequent reaction is something that all of us have known at one time or another. She did something every child has done—she tried to put the evidence of her offense away from her. But in this case she was no child hiding stolen contraband: she struck out at her victim—of necessity she must put him away from her—he must be removed from her presence, from this world. She must destroy the evidence of her offense.
“What was the evidence of her offense? Tom Robinson, a human being. She must put Tom Robinson away from her. Tom Robinson was her daily reminder of what she did."
hich rhetorical appeals does Atticus use here, and how do they support his overall purpose?
Responses
Logos and pathos – He shows that the evidence doesn’t add up and evokes sympathy for Tom as a man unfairly targeted. These appeals serve his purpose by exposing the weakness of the case and urging a fair, human response.
Logos and pathos – He shows that the evidence doesn’t add up and evokes sympathy for Tom as a man unfairly targeted. StartFragment These appeals serve his purpose by exposing the weakness of the case and urging a fair, human response. EndFragment
Pathos and ethos – He acknowledges Mayella’s poverty while presenting himself as a fair and principled speaker. These appeals serve his purpose by building credibility and generating sympathy without excusing injustice.
Pathos and ethos – He acknowledges Mayella’s poverty while presenting himself as a fair and principled speaker. StartFragment These appeals serve his purpose by building credibility and generating sympathy without excusing injustice. EndFragment
Logos and ethos – He highlights factual contradictions and reinforces the jury’s legal responsibility to judge impartially. These appeals serve his purpose by focusing on facts and reinforcing the jury’s role in upholding justice.
Logos and ethos – He highlights factual contradictions and reinforces the jury’s legal responsibility to judge impartially. StartFragment These appeals serve his purpose by focusing on facts and reinforcing the jury’s role in upholding justice. EndFragment
Ethos and logos – He builds trust through calm reasoning and focuses on the legal flaws in the state’s case. These appeals serve his purpose by positioning himself as trustworthy and the case as logically flawed.
Answers
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
The most fitting response to Atticus's rhetorical strategies in this excerpt is:
**Logos and pathos – He shows that the evidence doesn’t add up and evokes sympathy for Tom as a man unfairly targeted. These appeals serve his purpose by exposing the weakness of the case and urging a fair, human response.**
In this closing argument, Atticus utilizes logos by logically pointing out the lack of medical evidence and highlighting the contradictions in the testimonies, which serves to undermine the prosecution's case. At the same time, he appeals to pathos by eliciting sympathy for Tom Robinson, framing him as a victim of both personal and societal injustices. This combination aims to persuade the jury to consider the humanity of Tom Robinson and the moral implications of their verdict, ultimately reinforcing the need for justice and fairness.
**Logos and pathos – He shows that the evidence doesn’t add up and evokes sympathy for Tom as a man unfairly targeted. These appeals serve his purpose by exposing the weakness of the case and urging a fair, human response.**
In this closing argument, Atticus utilizes logos by logically pointing out the lack of medical evidence and highlighting the contradictions in the testimonies, which serves to undermine the prosecution's case. At the same time, he appeals to pathos by eliciting sympathy for Tom Robinson, framing him as a victim of both personal and societal injustices. This combination aims to persuade the jury to consider the humanity of Tom Robinson and the moral implications of their verdict, ultimately reinforcing the need for justice and fairness.