Christopher Columbus Weatherford

Decent Essays
Rhetorical Analysis of “Examining the Reputation of Christopher Columbus” Jack Weatherford, professor of anthropology at Macalester College, describes the misconceptions of Christopher Columbus and who he was as a person in his essay, “Examining the Reputation of Christopher Columbus”. Through his writing, Weatherford is able to show readers that Columbus was not the hero he is made out to be. Weatherford uses tools such as negative diction, juxtaposition, and facts in the form of evidence to support his claim. The argument that Weatherford presented his readers with was that Columbus is not the person many believe he is. Weatherford’s essay is a strong example of a one-sided case since it only presents evidence favoring its conclusion, and it ignores the evidence against it. Although this was the case, Weatherford was able to prove that his opinion was the correct way to think, above all other viewpoints. The words he chose to include in the essay actively showed that Columbus was not a hero. Towards the end of the essay, he used verbs such as tore, fail, steal, seize, capture, beat, torture, and kill. If someone were to read these eight verbs alone without any context, they could immediately identify that the person the verbs were describing was not a respected individual. It is obvious that the author believed that Columbus was an evil man, who committed many terrible actions throughout his life, and he was not the positive role model that many claimed him to be. The
Get Access