The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Analysis

Adapting from former US president Jimmy Carter, the author reveals his clear

opposition toward the development of the Artic National Wildlife Refuge. By emphasizing

the evidences that degrade the development, the author attempts to persuade the readers

to also be engaged in preserving Arctic Refuge. In order to effectively convey his thoughts,

author used various literary techniques including personal anecdote, evidences, and

dictions.

Considering that The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge could sound unfamiliar for the

readers, the author first provides brief introductions about what it is (“America’s truly great

wilderness”); however, the author intentionally shifts his essay to his personal experience.

This was an attempt to make a
These constant word usage functioned to instil

the conception that Arctic Refuge is a “good” place. Conversely, this planted negative

emotions toward the development of Arctic Refuge, obviously leading the readers to be on

the author’s side. Until the end, the author states that Arctic Refuge is the “symbol of our

national heritage”. Also, author cites that “It will be grand triumph for America if we can

preserve the Arctic Refuge in its pure, untrammeled state”. This infer that the author

believes that the Arctic Refuge is pure and untrammeled in current state. Again, the author

used strongly positive words to describe the Arctic Refuge. To end the sentence, the author

uses “extraordinary” and “greatest gift”, which can no more be emphasized.

In conclusion, author was successful in creating connections between the reader and

himself through introducing his personal anecdote. After doing so, the author consistently

argued his point that were backed by accurate evidences. While doing so, his usage of

positive modifiers also amplified the impact of the readers. These factors functioned