Rhetorical Fervor of the Hiroshima Project by John Hersey

The account of Hiroshima by John Hersey is based on survivor accounts of the events leading up to and after the detonation of the atom bomb, which not only changes the course of history in Japan but for the whole world. This project addresses both mankind and the issue of life in the aftermath of the events of August 1945. Was this a dilemma just for Japan, or does the nuclear bomb pose a danger to the whole world? This is the rhetorical query that drives the Hiroshima account. The book is directed to the world audience, and specifically to leaders whose decision affect human lives through acts of war, this begs the question, is nuclear war necessary? The author uses a calm tone to show the audience the disruptive effects of the bomb on the six survivors. The tone is somber, and the flow of the chapters presents a smooth outline and transition of the activities before and after the bomb. The authors focus an account for life changing occurrence and the unexpected turn of events on Hiroshima and the world.

Reflection on Hersey Account

Throughout the account by Hersey, in the book Hiroshima he presents the audience with a morality and ethical situation on the effects of the nuclear weapon. The book based on experiences of the survivors and their account of the events. In the chapter, A Noiseless Flash, the account of each victim is a description of the detonation which changed the course of their lives. The credibility of the author is established by presenting the audience with the extent of suffering the aftermath of the noiseless flash caused to the survivors. The attitude in this chapter sets the mood and tone for the rest of the account. The audience relates to the survivor witness through the creation of memory pictures due to the figurative words used to describe the event. The author is overly inclusive in the events, and thus, the survivor account of events creates a connection with the audience.

Hersey account is an appeal to human conscience has presented in the chapters in the use of ethos in the expression of suffering in the chapter Aftermath and Fire. The author pleads with the audience’s emotion in the creation of credibility of the survivor accounts and uses language to figuratively arouse emotional response on the state of affairs after the nuclear bombing.

Identification

The survivor account as narrated by Hersey in the prior events of the lives of the survivors is arousing a sympathetic identification of the audience to the survivor and the country of Japan in general. The events present the disruption of the normal life of each survivor; the nuclear war was portrayed as a threat to survival and a disruptor of human life in Japan, and in the world, the future aspects of human survival are left in the audience’s mind as a thought. The audience identifies with the survivors and Japan, in the personal appeal to conscience on the effects of the nuclear bomb to humanity. The author brings the “us versus them effect” in the account through the creation of the victim scenario and the perpetrator. The ”us” effect describes the survivor and the Japan nation as the victims of inhuman and destructive weapon, the identification with the audience brings about the emotional appeal and responses to the plight of the victims. The author uses survivors from different walks of steps, and precise descriptive language expresses the differences in their lives and how the nuclear bombing was an everyday aspect of their lives. The audience connects the sense of loss created by the author’s account (Clark 1).

On the other hand, the ”them” effect of identification brings the perpetrator scenario, the events which led to the bombing and the rational justification for the use of the weapon. The audience forms part of the” them situation” whereby the author presents the disruption of human life, the spread of hurt and the loss caused by the events. The ”them” group is evoked to respond to the plight of the Hiroshima survivor, to reexamine their decisions. The “them versus us” is not opposing identification since the author presents facts in a non-accusing tone. The tone is not conflict rising; thus, it is sympathetic. Besides the sympathetic tone, the chapter “Panic Grass and Feverfew” presents an opposing identification whereby the effects of the bombing are felt and the widespread hatred for Americans who in this case from the audience and them scenario (Clark 1).

The Structure

The author uses narration to order the accounts of the different survivors in a smooth transition to one survivor to the other. The author uses the transition development to describe the survivor’s lives; it forms the beginning of the typical change in their lives and the macro change which is the nuclear age in the world. The transition after the events of the noiseless flash describes the survivor’s situational changes and the following chapters define a common ground of devastation, pain, diseases loss for the victims. The beginning of the account is the preparation of the audience in evaluating the lives of the survivors; the contribution to the rest of the chapters is narrated through the disruptive transition and aftermath of the bombing. The end is future oriented to explain the beginning of the nuclear age, which is relevant to the survivors and the audience. The beginning is an emotional preparation of the public while the end is the eventual outcome of the events which in this case is marked by depression, destruction of human lives and comprehensive loss. The end is also characterized by evaluation of the human conscience following the emotional response brought about by the accounts (Hart and Daughton 25)

Use of Narration

The report by Hersey is developed through narration, whereby the author arranges the idea through the transition to create the maximum effect on the events to the survivor and the audience. The audience derives the meaning of disruption through the vivid creation of events through the survivor’s narrations. The author emphasizes the facts of each transition for each survivor through chapters, for instance, the noiseless flash description and effect to each survivor followed by the fire which explains the beginning of devastation, pain for the victims. The author uses aspects of style such as dialogue for instance, ”I am hurt, am hurt…” and other direct speech expressions and appeal for help. These are meant to create a sympathetic mood of the situation; the audience can recreate the scenario (Hart and Daughton 25).

Contribution of Style to Hersey’s Argument

The presentation of facts by Hersey in the book Hiroshima is slowly captivating, and the creation of neutral ground on explanation and description is non-provocative. Given the nature of events, the emotional arousal of the audience is not captured due to the nature of style and descriptive nature of the situation. I will concede with MacDonald observation on the tone as perfectly flat, and the audience identification is lowly presented by the style. In refutation of Aloffs claims that facts should be reported accurately and patiently, this is a denial to the public’s response. The effect of the style to the readers is the non-participatory approach and the lack of connection to the events and lack of emotion. For instance, in the chapter, the fire, the reactions of the characters such as Mrs. Nakamura and the response from her dying children, is otherwise blunt and lacks emotions. Hersey’s word and expressive language do not portray the intensity of the situation given its nature (Hersey 30 and Boston University 4).

Criticism

The account by Hersey is not accusative, and the neutral use of style and description is not meant to support either side. The statement is factual and accurate; it does not, however, spark feelings from each side. He neither justifies the cause of the situation nor supports the victims of the events. The chapter Details are being investigated is not inflammatory, the details are not clear. The awakening of the human conscience through pinpointing to the specific scenario is not projected. The need for the audience the to question the perpetrator is denied by the use of neutral, factual narration. The failure to awaken the readers’ moral ability to judge is limited due to the blunt and affectless emotion of the author (Aloff 2 and Shulevitz 5).

Terministic Screen Analysis

The choice of Hersey language is a reflection of his journalistic abilities and tendencies to factual reporting. The views are deflection towards war, and Chapter three presents the audience with the end of the war. The choice of characters is at best neutral as it is with the language used in the entire account. For instance, in the chapters Details are being investigated the announcement by the US president is non-sensational and thus, a deflection of the Japanese to take action. The response to the announcement by the Japanese according to Hersey was a show of declination and despair (Hersey 69).

Pentadic analysis

Hersey account on the survivors of Hiroshima gives a detailed and factual explanation and the attention he inserted in explaining the situation and presenting the world with the view of the actual events. The Pentadic analysis relates to the journalistic accounts of events as would Hersey in his book. Hersey acts as the agent, and the Hiroshima is the scene. The author puts himself in the site by the recording of the accounts of the survivors. The scene act analysis according to Hersey’s account is neutral; the author simply records the facts and details. The agent action review presents unclear picture since Hersey doesn’t identify with either the victim or the audience; the agent is a reporter of the situation (Clark 1).

Relationship between the new edition and Original Text

Unlike the original wording, the new version created a change in the Pentadic analysis. The addition in Hersey’s book creates a different perspective to the audience and raises the argumentative aspects of the situation. The chapter Aftermath brings to view, the Japanese response to the bombing and specific details of the nuclear explosion of the Japanese people. The scene changed to that of political activism against the actions of the US and the awareness of the nuclear power. The survivor contributions to the site are more pronounced such as the Tanimoto, the priest effort in gospel spread and rebuilding of Hiroshima, the engagement with other nations such as the US in the campaign against atomic bombs dubbed A-bomb minister (Boston University 4 and Hersey 69).

The aftermath displays changes in the internal relationships of the Japanese and this presents a different argument on the effects of the bomb. For instance, did the bomb affect the people’s perception on the affected? The A-bomb sickness created a new state for the affected that would be discriminated. The argument goes beyond the world audience and questions the conscience of the perpetrator in this case the US in paralyzing the functioning of the Japanese people. The new edition is captivating and generating the audience’s response to the factual representation of the situation in Hiroshima (Boston University 4 and Hersey 69).

Works Cited

Adoff, Midd. “Defending John Hersey-New York Times.” 28 October 2001. The New York Times.

Clark, Gregory. “Kenneth Burke: Identification and Rhetorical Criticism in Writing Classroom.” The Journal of Kenneth Burke Society (1997).

Hart, Roderick and Suzanne Daughton. “The Apportionment and Sequencing of Message Elements: Modern Rhetorical Criticism.” (2016).

Hersey, John. Hiroshima. New York: Vintage Books, 1989.

Shulevitz, Judith. “The Close Reader: An Emotion Too Big To Have.” 7 October 2001. The New York Times.

University, Boston. “Postwar America and the World: Research, Writing, and Revising.” 24 February 2017. Revising Dialogues.

.