Benny Paret Rhetorical Analysis Essay
Kristen Johnson
Mr. Zepp
AP Lang. 3B
19 December 2014
Benny Paret Rhetorical Analysis Norman Cousins “Who Killed Benny Paret” in 1962 essay fixates on a barbaric boxing match at Madison Square Garden between Emile Griffith and Benny Paret, which led to Paret’s brutal demise. Millions of people worldwide take part as spectators to the sport of prize fighting. Cousins uses diction, syntax and figurative language to communicate how, “You put killers in the ring” (3), and people pay to gawk at a murder. Throughout the essay Cousins employs ethos, pathos, and logos, which evokes ethical appeal, emotion, and logic to reason with the readers resulting in Paret’s death. It was not the alone act of the crowd that killed Benny Paret, but the managers, referees and physicians doing as well. The crowds of people that attend these matches don’t go to see the sport of boxing, but the brutality of a knock out. Cousins argues that prize fighting is a display of violence and that boxers essentially kill themselves in a ring for the basic intention of entertaining a crowd. All through the essay he attempts to validate why Paret was killed, specifically questioning his manager, the referee, the faulty physicians, and the crowd. Cousins uses diction to express his opinionated views on prize-fighting. Even though Cousins was new to the sport he begins interviewing Mike Jacobs, an influential prize-fighting promoter. He describes Mr. Jacobs speaking of promoting boxing by using the word, “colossus (2), and when he speaks, he was no longer mild-mannered and gentle-looking. Instead, he had the authoritative and commanding voice of Napoleon, the famous military leader in French history, when he inspected a battle. Thus, showing us that he was very meticulous in the matter of prize fighting, but specifically engaging the crowd. Mr. Jacobs knows how to sell a match in conjunction with comparing their scrupulousness. “Colossus” (2), is also comparing their height. “He was no longer a
Mr. Zepp
AP Lang. 3B
19 December 2014
Benny Paret Rhetorical Analysis Norman Cousins “Who Killed Benny Paret” in 1962 essay fixates on a barbaric boxing match at Madison Square Garden between Emile Griffith and Benny Paret, which led to Paret’s brutal demise. Millions of people worldwide take part as spectators to the sport of prize fighting. Cousins uses diction, syntax and figurative language to communicate how, “You put killers in the ring” (3), and people pay to gawk at a murder. Throughout the essay Cousins employs ethos, pathos, and logos, which evokes ethical appeal, emotion, and logic to reason with the readers resulting in Paret’s death. It was not the alone act of the crowd that killed Benny Paret, but the managers, referees and physicians doing as well. The crowds of people that attend these matches don’t go to see the sport of boxing, but the brutality of a knock out. Cousins argues that prize fighting is a display of violence and that boxers essentially kill themselves in a ring for the basic intention of entertaining a crowd. All through the essay he attempts to validate why Paret was killed, specifically questioning his manager, the referee, the faulty physicians, and the crowd. Cousins uses diction to express his opinionated views on prize-fighting. Even though Cousins was new to the sport he begins interviewing Mike Jacobs, an influential prize-fighting promoter. He describes Mr. Jacobs speaking of promoting boxing by using the word, “colossus (2), and when he speaks, he was no longer mild-mannered and gentle-looking. Instead, he had the authoritative and commanding voice of Napoleon, the famous military leader in French history, when he inspected a battle. Thus, showing us that he was very meticulous in the matter of prize fighting, but specifically engaging the crowd. Mr. Jacobs knows how to sell a match in conjunction with comparing their scrupulousness. “Colossus” (2), is also comparing their height. “He was no longer a