AOW #8: Bonded by Disability Article

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/11/nyregion/bonded-in-love-and-disability-a-couple-keeps-a-promise-till-death.html?_r=1

This is an article about true love between two people who have very similar situations. The article is talking about a man named Edwin Morales who met Noemi Rivera. They both met when they were both about 7 years old. Edwin Morales had cerebral palsy and the impairment of his nerves and muscles and his arms and legs. Surprisingly, Noemi Rivera was in very similar conditions and she had the same disease. After they both met when they were seven, they got married three decades later. However, the article also talks about Noemi’s death and the reflection of their lives together and how they helped each other stay strong!

This author of this article is Jim Dwyer. First of all, his article is in the New York Times, so obviously he is a very learned writer. However, after researching, I found that he won the Pulitzer Prize for Spot News Reporting, which is a very prestigious award. I also discovered that his book 102 Minutes: The Untold Story of the Fight to Survive Inside the Twin Towers was in the National Book Award finals.

The exigence of this piece, based on the date would definitely be temporal or causal. It would be temporal because there was a very small amount of time between when the article was written and when the funeral actually happened. Also, I can tell that it could be temporal or causal because he used words/phrases like “on Thursday” to signify that the event was in extremely close vicinity to when the actual article was produced. It showed that the only Thursday or day we would be talking about would be the one that is CLOSEST to the current date.

The purpose of this piece was not only to express pathos through a heart-wrenching tale, but it was also to evoke thought about the true communal memory of our society. Besides the story telling, his other purpose was to allow the audience to question the communal memory of what a good relationship really is. It made the readers think about what defines a “perfect couple” or “perfect relationship” and makes them understand that there is no “perfect” couple and that none are the same (like this couple).

I think that the audience would be anyone and everyone. However, more specifically, the audience would be people who read the New York Times online or on the newspaper.

Rhetorical elements:

Pathos – There was a significant amount of pathos included within the passage. It was mostly included in the beginning and in the end when he was saying that the man “sat near his wife’s coffin at a funeral home on St. Nicholas Avenue and discussed the days of a life”. This communal memory of silent remorse/reminiscence added to the pathos immensely. Also, at the end, the few lines of dialogue between Edwin and his father in-law touched the audience as well.

Organization – event --- past --- event

The rhetorical organization was very effective because they started with the present then somewhat added a narrative flashback and then came back to the present at the end. It was interesting because it was somewhat like a mini classical argument structure all put into less than 6 or so small paragraphs. The beginning could represent the expanded “hook” because they start out right in the middle of the funeral/event. Then the middle could represent somewhat of a narrative – flashback because he talked about the couple’s past/gave background knowledge in the 3^rd person. This then led to coming back to the present day which is the resolution or conclusion of the entire piece.

I completely believe that the author accomplished his purpose because, as previously stated, pathos was intermingled within the introduction and conclusion. By ending and opening with intense/flat-out, real-life scenes from the specific couple, I could really get the feeling that he was trying to put out. I could see that we must put differences aside and realize that one of the most important things that make up a relationship is caring for one another and if both sides of a couple care about each other, then it DOESN’T MATTER if it is “perfect” or not – because it is perfect to those two people.