Response To Essay By Salman Rushdie

Scott Russell Sanders writes a response towards an essay by Salman Rushdie on the benefits of moving, refuting “the belief that movement is inherently good, staying put is bad” (Line 65). His perspective upon the concept of moving is negative connotation with the use of words such as disastrous, ugly, mongrel, drunk, uprooting, etc. The use of such words indicates his harsh attitude on the subject, which is heard throughout the story. He claims that we shouldn’t root ourselves in places rather than ideas that we should care for the earth rather than our own selfish desires. Sanders acknowledged a counter-argument through the use of direct quotes and his informal, yet respectful tone. He relates his beliefs of settling down and the cease of our …show more content…
For instance, Sanders quoted Rushdie in saying that”’ to be a migrant is perhaps to be the only species of human being free of the shackles of nationalism( to say nothing of its ugly sister, patriotism)’”(Line 34). He asserts this statement by saying “Lord knows we could do with less nationalism (to say nothing of its ugly siblings, racism, religious sectarianism, or class snobbery)” (Line 37). With the use of direct quotes towards Rushdie and the repetition of his words and syntax, Sanders was able to assure the reader(s) of the his careful thoughtfulness on the issue, and was able to state his belief that moving doesn’t help rid the unfortunate aspects of humanity in which well wish to be freed from. Sanders also quotes Rushdie several other times; for example, he says” Rushdie claims that migrants must… make a new imaginative relationship with the world” (Line 47). His quotes are then used as a counterexample towards one of his main points which is, how can one create a new relationship with world when they are constantly altering their place in

Show More

Related Documents: Response To Essay By Salman Rushdie

Syllabus: University of Cambridge and Cambridge Pre-u Syllabus Essay