CVCC Grant and Lee & My Childhood on The Continent of Africa Responses How Do I Write Repliesto a Reader Response? When Do I Write Replies? When you do

CVCC Grant and Lee & My Childhood on The Continent of Africa Responses How Do I Write Repliesto a Reader Response?

When Do I Write Replies?

When you do not post a reader response, your job will be to replyto the posted reader responses.

How Long Should It Be?

Replies should consist of one well developed paragraph.

What Do I Write About?

A good reply will address questions posed, bring in support from the sample essay, and ask additional questions/seek additional comments from classmates. Alternatively, you can take an idea from the response you are replying to and develop this idea further, using your own experiences and observations or using illustrations from the text. Replies, too, should be carefully edited.

If you are not responsible for posting a reader response, you should post at least 4 substantial repliesand engage in the discussion of both assigned essays.

Amani Panduwawala

RE: Grant and Lee

Amani Panduwawala

ENG 101

Dr. Isaiah Ayafor

Reader response

6/21/2020

Grant and Lee

The essay Grant and Lee written by the author Bruce Catton compare the characteristics of two leaders who were involved in the Civil War. Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee who were two very strong and very different generals met in the parlor of a modest house at Appomattox Court House, Virginia on April 9, 1865, to end the Civil War. The mood of this essay is serious and diplomatic because the author informs the reader that each general truly believes in the way that they grew up. These two opposing leaders of the Civil War had many differences. For example, Lee was brought up believing the old aristocratic concept. His background was built around family, culture, and tradition. Whereas Grant believed that people should work hard and earn a spot in society. He did not care about the past only had a sharp eye for the future. Each general was long-standing believers in how they were brought up. They also had many common traits. Nevertheless, the opposing generals being able to come together is what made the event at Appomattox such an important moment in American History. While these two leaders come from two different backgrounds, they were both hardworking and would never give up because they both wanted to see their country succeed.

I find it very interesting to read this essay because of the way it flows. To begin with, the author builds the foundation of the essay by establishing the setting, which is the place where it all started, at the Appomattox Courthouse. Then moves on to talk about the differences between the two generals stating where they come from and what they believe in. Afterward, he tells the reader that the two leaders are not so different after all and they are very much alike. Finally, he comes back to where it all started at the Appomattox Courthouse. Through-out the essay the tone of Grant and Lee is significant as he respects both leaders and what they believe in. He does not criticize any of their actions. Thus, the author has used effective strategies to convey his ideas. However, I think that the audience the author was targeting were readers who were interested in U.S History. The Civil War in particular because he makes references to many instances which had happened in those times. I had difficulties understanding many parts of the essay in one reading. As I was not familiar with the terms used.

The authors’ intention to write this essay was to compare the beliefs of each leader and their armies and show why they stand for what they believe in. “He embodied a way of life that had come down through the age of knighthood and the English Country squire” (378) This depicts that Robert E. Lee came from an upper-class family who believed in a form of government where a small group of elites rule the nation. He wanted a lower class and an upper class to exist in the workforce for the economy. He believed that slavery was essential to the economic solidity and assumed that the upper class should look after the community. “He had come up the hard way and embodied nothing in particular except the eternal toughness…”(378) Ulysses S. Grant comes from a lower-income family who understood that the past cannot be changed and only worked towards the future. He believed that everything in life should be earned and not handed over to. He was a strong man who worked very hard to get where he is. He did not let his past or his family income define what he can and cannot do. These two men were so very different but very much alike at the same time because they had one objective. To make their community and country a better place. Conversely, it can be seen how the writer tries to distinctly show the difference between the two leaders without disrespecting either of them.

Apart from their differences, Catton speaks about their similarities which stands out. They are both amazing leaders who have exceptional fighting qualities which are very similar to each other. One of their similarities is that they never give up. They fight until they can stand and move their fists. This shows how determined both armies were to protect their communities. I was moved when Catton said “No man was born to anything, except perhaps to a chance to show how far he could rise. Life was competition” (380) it gives me hope. It indicated that where you come from does not define who you are or who you can be unless you let it. Everyone must work hard for what they believe in and when they do amazing things can happen. Another similarity is that they were both brave enough to stop the war and come to an agreement to come together in peace. This resulted in many generations to live in a safe nation. Which is why I think they’ll be in debt to these two leaders.

When I first read this essay I thought that I was not going to enjoy writing about it because I dislike reading anything to do with history. As I kept reading, I learned a lot of things and enjoyed reading it because it was very interesting. For instance, I find it inspiring how these two great leaders could come to an agreement to stop the war. The fact that they never gave up but always gave in their fullest when fighting is very uplifting This story portrays that there are many people in the world who care about the community and want to do better for them to help the nation and the future.

Is there any leader you like more than the other?
What do you think these two generals represent in the modern world?
Do you see any other similarities or differences?
“ And the little room where they wrote out the terms was the scene of one of the poignant, dramatic contrasts in American history” (377) What do you think Catton meant when he said this? Why did that scene evoke a keen sense of sadness and regret?
Why is the future generations in debt to these leaders?

Zachary Reissman

RE: Grant and Lee

Zach Reissman

Grant and Lee Reader Response

Bruce Catton’s, “Grant and Lee: A Study In Contrasts (1956)” is all about comparing two American generals. These generals were essentially opposites of each other in terms of perspectives yet were surprisingly similar in undertones. It eludes to the two generals being in two different moments of time. This partially being as a result of how they were raised. One carried morals and ideals from an older time, Robert E. Lee. His ideals were very much a derivative of the past as he believed “that the old aristocratic concept might somehow survive and be dominant in American Life (p. 378).” He remained in the mindset that nothing really needed to be changed. He was shielded from, hardships in his childhood as he lived the life of the upper-class child. What gave him meaning was his “loyalty would go to locality in which that society existed (p. 380).” This meaning he cared most for protecting the and enforcing the perspective of his local geographic location. He didn’t not see a reason to go about any other way. Lee truly believed that keeping a class structure within society would enforce people with a strong obligation to serve the community.

Now on the opposite end of the spectrum, Ulysses S. Grant had adapted to the changing of times and continued to look at the future. His come up involved a much more rugged approach. This ruggedness included where grew up, which was more Western. He was not lucky enough to be born into a privileged situation. He instead had to work his way to the top. This process causing him to be “one of a body of men who owed reverence and obeisance to no one, who were self-reliant to a fault (p.378).” What he wanted to implement was democracy throughout the country and to make sure it withheld for the future. This being because every person should have an equal chance. Instead of just viewing his local region as the focal point of how things should be done, he instead wanted to continuously broaden his concept of society as it is constantly growing.

The interesting thing was how the men shared many of the same methods even though they were leaders of contradictory beliefs. On paper, they seem like solar opposites. This was best represented when the Catton explains, “Grant was the modern man emerging; beyond him, ready to come on the stage, was the great age of steel and machinery, of crowded cities and restless burgeoning vitality. Lee might have ridden down from the old age of chivalry, lance in hand, silken banner fluttering above his head (p.380).” Quickly we see the resemblance of each other as both men oversee their cause and are the most tenacious towards it. In other words time and time again they showed their major similarity; their inability to give up. Just absolute stubbornness even in the face of impossible odds. They were quick thinking on their feet and able to find resources where it didn’t seem possible. One important value they shared that was overlooked as how they really let war decide. There would be no backlash, once a war was won it was quickly back to peace. The civil war was horrid and seemed to really have split the country firmly in two, but because of the two generals’ behaviors at this peace treaty meeting, it enabled a quick return to a fully unified nation.

I was rather surprised at how two men were so different in their philosophies had very similar traits that allowed them to become so prevalent in society. I was quickly able to wrap my head around this though as you can see these same types of occurrences elsewhere. Even today, we constantly see people in positions of power have similar characteristics, which allow to become powerful. An easy example is looking at politics. Even leaders in opposing beliefs or countries often share similar traits such as they have a strong ability to advocate for themselves and are relatively strong with words. It is an awkward feeling to see people who could basically be sworn enemies, are only different in their ideals as opposed to who they are characteristically. It makes me feel weird to see that the same sorts of traits will help you rise to power no matter what society you are around or where you were raised.

I also enjoyed the structure of the essay. The other did a fantastic job creating a smooth flow from thought to thought. I really enjoyed how he showed the differences throughout the beginning of the essay. He really showed how different the two generals were, even going as far as to explain their childhoods. He showed how they were able to become leaders of their cause and quickly started to connect the similarities in their process. This enabled Catton to smoothly reveal how they may not be so different after all. His word choice really brought out these two characters as well. It really highlighted their personalities and causes, but also their underlying similarities.

Questions

Currently, where else do you see this concept of two leaders for very different causes having similar traits?
Why do you think we see many wars that relate to people wanting a change and people wanting things to stay the same?
Why were the two generals’ etiquette so essential for the future?

Bianca Johnson

RE: Remembering My Childhood on the Continent of Africa

Collapse

Remembering My Childhood on the Continent of Africa

By David Sedaris

In the narration style essay “Remembering My Childhood on the Continent of Africa” by David Sedaris, Sedaris defends why he steals the stories of Hugh, a traveler, who was dealt many hardships. He starts by reminiscing about a time when Hugh went to a Ethiopian slaughter house in fifth grade. From there he specifically compares aspects of his life to Hugh’s, to prove how “unspeakably dull” (371) his childhood was. From the location of his home, to the pets that they owned, Sedaris and Hugh were polar opposites. “I threw stones at stop signs. Hugh threw stones at crocodiles.” (371)

Sedaris then compares the time they went to see Herbie in theaters. Referring to it as the “movie about a talking Volkswagen.” (372) For an hour after the movie Hugh had to wait for his dad by a dead body hanging from a telephone wire. Everyone seemed nonchalant about it; the people passing by, and his friends. For this reason Hugh had protection, or his dad did because he “was a career officer with the U.S State Department,” (372) Hugh was then tossed from place to place till he ended up in France, though he knew only one phrase in French.

Sedaris ends the essay by claiming Hugh’s stories as his own. He speaks in first person when referring to Hugh’s life in great detail. “…past the guard napping in his gatehouse and into the waiting arms of my monkey.” (375) Sedaris doesn’t own a monkey, Hugh owns a monkey, yet Sedaris is claiming him as his own.

Hugh’s hardships captivated Sedaris. He even admits to being jealous of Hugh. He mentions being bitter, but not necessarily about their money. “They weren’t rich, but what Hugh’s family lacked financially they more than made up for with the sort of exoticism that works wonders at cocktail parties…” (372) That exoticism is what Sedaris yerd for. Sedaris admires Hugh’s life to the point where he would claim it as his own.

I found it interesting that Sedaris would admit to stealing Hugh’s memories but he seems to defend why he does it. “I can’t help but envy the sense of fortitude he gained from the experience… I’m just a petty theft who lifts his memories..” (347) In the Sedaris’ mind it is justifiable because he was cursed with a dull life.

How do you think Hugh would react to reading this essay?

Would you rather live Hugh or Sedaris’ life and why?

Joel Mwanza

RE: Remembering My Childhood on the Continent of Africa

Remembering my Childhood on the continent of Africa

by David Sedaris

In “Remembering my childhood on the continent of Africa” by David Sedaris, the story is written in the first person. it is a comparison between Sedaris’ life and Hugh’. Sedaris compares two lifestyles to show how boring his own life was compared to his friend. By using descriptions, personal experiences of his friend and himself, Sedaris shows why he takes satisfactions in passing his friend’s life stories as they were his own since the stories were more interesting. The trips, environment and activities contribute to the development of the difference in lifestyles between both. For example, the author states that “when I was young, i went to the theater at nearby shopping center and watched a movie about a talking Volkswagen… like me, Hugh saw the movie by himself on a weekend afternoon. unlike me, he left the theater two hours later, to find a dead man hanging from a telephone pole at the far end of the unpaved parking lot”(Sedaris 182) . This quote above indicates that Sedaris is being naive and childish. No child at his age should feel pleasure in seeing a dead person.

I really liked the essay because Sedaris gives point by point account of his childhood and his observations during his young adult life while admiring his best friend. Many people do not like telling others how their life was when they were young thinking that people may make fun of them. However, Sedaris is honest and proud of his past, he wants everyone to know how his life looked like when he was growing up.

Questions

would you like to compare your lifestyle to your friend’? and why?

Do you think Sedaris was happy when he was young?

Note; 1 REPLIE FOR EACH STUDENT TOTALING 4 REPLIES.