Dual hardships
The psychological effects from losing a loved one to going through a natural disaster can have profound effects on the mental side of life. Sorrow and pain are often the terms used to describe these feelings but only one knows it cuts way deeper than just that. The human brain tends to engage in mental disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, depression and in some cases even shock because of the predicament they are in. Having to cope with loss and the trauma of a natural disaster can follow up with long lasting emotional scars which can ultimately affect one’s well being. Despite such traumatic events, healing from them expresses the resilience in oneself.
In the articles “Bereavement: Grieving the loss of a loved one” and “How do Earthquakes affect humans” they both dive deep into my initial claim. The article “Bereavement: Grieving the loss of a loved one” by HelpGuide emphasizes that grief is a neutral human response to losing a loved one. It is an overwhelming emotion that includes a variety of feelings such as depression, anger, guilt, etc. The article also encourages individuals to restore their grief at their own pace. Likewise the article “How do Earthquakes affect humans” highlights that trauma brought on from natural disasters such as Earthquakes can and have led to psychological effects like anxiety, depression, PTSD, intense fear, flashbacks and many more. The fear that corresponds with earthquakes can trigger a state of distraught which can mentally deteriorate one’s mental health resulting in even bigger health issues.
The best thing you can do for yourself in tough times such as losing a loved one is to face it rather than running away from it. “Neglecting your well-being prolongs the grieving process and makes you more susceptible to depression or complicated grief.” Fact stated by the article from HelpGuide. It expresses that running away from your emotions is a temporary answer. It will only do you more harm than good. The need to prioritize self care can shape its way to a healthier grieving process. “Avoid using alcohol or drugs to cope. While it’s tempting to use substances to help numb your grief and self-medicate your pain, in the long run excessive alcohol and drug use will only hamper your ability to grieve.” This quote recognizes the temporary pleasure drugs can have when grieving over someone but it heavily advises to manage emotions in a healthier way. As someone who lost their grandma and experienced a sense of grief, healing is extremely tough to go through. But trusting the process is the best option to permanently relieve those feelings. Through the help of ethos, it shows the readers where the narrator stands.
“Earthquakes can also affect humans mentally or psychologically. What must it be like to see your family or friends trapped inside a collapsed building or missing, assumed dead, or your home getting destroyed?” quote found in the article “How do Earthquakes affect humans”. It raises the question of uncertainty and how death can occur at any given moment. It makes the concept of life more appreciative and the people around us as life is very uncertain. The value of family is one of, if not the most precious thing someone can have. It teaches me the importance of it because humans are biologically programmed to take things for granted that are too abundant. Likewise when we are surrounded by our family’s unconditional love we start to erase its value; and when we are pushed back into reality, there isn’t going to be a stranger acting as a backbone to your fall, it’s always going to be your family. The use of pathos immensely aids the readers to become more hooked onto this.
Experiencing the dual challenges of losing a loved one and enduring a natural disaster as a child can profoundly shape one’s character and perspective on life. The grief of losing a loved one while also having to face the aftermath of an earthquake appreciates the fragility of life. Together, these experiences mold a person into someone who values the present moment vividly.
You have two great topics and articles. I would recommend choosing one topic to analyze since the assignment is about analyzing and comparing arguments from the same topic: either how the loss of a loved one affects child development or how a natural disaster affects child development. Choose one and find another article for that topic. Furthermore, when you analyze “Bereavement: Grieving the loss of a loved one”, you talk about the authors appeal to the emotions which is pathos, not ethos (credibility). Also, a lot of your analysis is more summary; maybe reconsider what specific evidence you use. Consider how you feel while reading the article and what specific lines invoke that feeling. Why does the author choose this specific form?
We’re supposed to analyze three rhetorical concepts; in addition to pathos, consider using logos, ethos, invention, style, memory, or arrangement. Maybe for your thesis, you can state both articles and the rhetorical concepts the authors used to make their argument. Remember you’re not making the argument yourself, just analyzing how the authors of your sources do it. Also remain in third person!
The article you chose go great with your topics, however I think having two different articles talking about two different concepts would be hard to link together in assignment #3. Having articles on how the death of a loved one affects a child and how a natural disaster affects a child, makes me unsure about what your topic question for assignment #3 would be. I was also unsure about the analysis, it feels much more like a summary of the two articles. On the one analysis part I see, I think you should include the effect it has on the reader or the intended audience rather than just the emotions that someone losing a loved one would feel (more like author’s purpose). I think you could also introduce the earthquake article better, for example including the full title of the article and the author as that is never mentioned and it took me a bit to find the actual article by linking quotes you used. As Anusha said, I think staying in third person would be the better choice for an analytical paper as it’s less personal.
This was a good first draft. You did a really good job summarizing the articles. Even though I didn’t read the articles myself, I understood that both articles claimed that people who go through traumatic experiences like losing a loved one or experiencing an earthquake can have everlasting mental impacts. Apart from that, I really liked your intro and mini analysis on the information you read from the article. From these sections alone, I can tell that you’re very passionate about this topic.
However, for the next draft, I think it would be good to focus more on how the author is trying to convince readers to support their claim. You touch upon this by mentioning the use of ethos and pathos, but I think the analysis needs to be more detailed. It would be good to cite a quote which particularly evoked specific emotions for you, and explain how the author evoked those feelings as well as what’s their purpose for evoking those reasons. This feedback applies to your analysis of the author’s use of ethos too. Since you briefly mention pathos and ethos at the end of your body paragraphs, it seems like the analysis for the author’s use for either rhetoric appeal is not complete.
Apart from that, I think it would be good to highlight which article you perceive to be more convincing. Providing more compare and contrasts between the two articles you read would also help us understand why you believe one author is more convincing than the other.
As previously stated you have two strong and impactful topics that you bring up, but it may be beneficial to stick to one that you are more passionate to write about. You mention how one article emphasizes the process of grievance and the other about the trauma that arises through earthquakes which can lead into two separate conversations therefore it might be wise to stick to one and find another article that relates to the one you choose. However, besides that I can tell you are enthusiastic about both topics and can probably elaborate on whichever topic it is the way you did here. You highlight the rhetorical appeals of each author very clearly and you might want to expand on your analysis for those appeals a little more. I would also recommend trying to fix the grammar of this essay into a 3rd person perspective so it may be more professional. Otherwise you have a solid start and i’m excited to see how the paper transforms.