Susan Cheever ompares herself with a yak from the Central Park Zoo, and it becomes clear to us how she sees herself very different from her family, being “disappointingly ordinary’. She stands therefore in opposition to her ordinary family; Cheever comes, as the yak, from an exotic foreign place and have accepted the terms in the big city, but her family wishes different, and, beside Cheever’s love for the big city and their small apartment, they end up moving to the suburb in New Jersey, with house, forest and other families who love the outdoors.
This is the first big contrast Susan Cheever deals with in her essay. The contrast between her desire for the big city and love for the nature in Central Park put against her parent’s love for the outdoors, and what others may call “real” nature. As an extension of this, Cheever sheds light on the contrast between the suburbs and the city, which function as the main focus and theme throughout the essay.
Her fascination of the nature in Central park and the relationship between man and nature is a topic very dear to her.
She grew up near Central Park and have many of her better childhood memories linked with the big city park. It is here she separates herself from her parents. They have different ideas and dreams, including another child, a car and a house in the suburbs. But Susan Cheever loves her life in the city and pictures a life in the suburbs as dirty and filthy, because as she says: ‘VVhy would I want to swim in someone’s muddy pond crawling with leeches when could perch myself on a marble basin and cool myself with splashing clear water. ” (p. 2, l. 1 10-113).
As the reason why she loves the city so much she refers to a quote by Andy Warhol saying that it was better to live in the city than the ountry because in the city he could find a little bit of country, but in the country there was no little bit Of city. Cheevers use of Andy Warhol is a way of borrowing from other people’s ethos. Ethos is something you gain from experience or from being a trustworthy person. Andy Warhol has ethos because of his status as an American artist, and Susan Cheever borrows that ethos in her argument for why the city is a better place than the country.
Another use of ethos comes from Cheever’s own experience, being a person who has tried living both at he countryside and in the city she has experienced the pros and cons of both lives. The use of the pathos appeal is also worth mentioning, as Susan Cheever through her essay succeeds in creating a contrast between the suburbs and the city. As she paints a pretty picture of the life in Central Park and New York City, with use of positive big beautiful adjectives, she creates an even bigger contrast to the county.
Cheever’s conclusion that the city life is better than a life in the suburbs is backed up by here argumentation in the essay. Based on Toulmin’s model of argumentation Cheever is using the fact hat the city has a little bit of both worlds, with the control and structure from the city and the beautiful nature in Central Park, as a base for her argument. The well known argument, that two things are better than one, and that it logical would be to prefer having the option to mix both sides, works as a warrant for Cheever’s argument.
Finally as a rebuttal she acknowledge that the county has what some would call real nature, but she still argues that the controlled nature in Central Park definitely is to prefer. The article “City vs. country: where’s the better place to live? 1 from The Guardian features the two women; Heather Long and Jessica Reed. Long is listing the benefits of living in the suburbs, and Reed is concentrating on the benefits of a more glamorous city-life. Both argue for each of their case.
Heather Long comments that it is a lot cheaper to live in the country, and that you would experience people being nice not just because it is polite to be so, but because they generally are. To which Jessica Reed argues that living at the countryside isn’t like living in the TV-show “Gilmore Girls”, and that there are a ot of benefits with living in the city. For example the opportunity to walk everywhere you have to go, saving money on gas and transport.
It is clear that there are different opinions on whether the city or the suburbs is to prefer, as we also see in Susan Cheever’s essay. There are both pros and cons with both lives, and which one you prefer probably has something to do with how you grew up, or with which memories you will link to each lifestyle. Therefore it is also safe to say that Susan Cheever tries with her personal essay to reach out for the people who can relate to having childhood emories of certain places, or to them loving the merging of nature and concrete in the big city as she does.
Her personal essay is clearly an expression of her love to the Central Park, as we see in the end of her essay, quote: “l long for the natural wonderland that is wild enough to delight and tame enough to enjoy – the wonderland called Central Park. ” (p. 4, l. 301-304) She is truly a city-person, and with her personal essay she captures my interest. The perfect story of a magical world with all the beauties from nature controlled and combined with the safety from the city.
Cite this My Little Bit of Country by Susan Cheever
My Little Bit of Country by Susan Cheever. (2017, Jul 20). Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/my-little-bit-of-country-by-susan-cheever-43432/