By comparing and contrasting these two, I have come to a realization that essays that have a different meaning, and varied topics can be significant in explaining things that happen in the society. By doing an analysis of the above essays in the context of the message, language, and audience, a person can conclude that though they look different in many ways, they have comparable features that that make all their readers socially engaged.
On dumpster diving and the ways we lie, have a positive tone. The tone shifts throughout the two essays, in the on dumpster diving, Eighner is immensely informative and descriptive. However, he changes to become critical and analytical; this is done with the use of appropriate diction and imagery. The same case applies to the ways we lie. The authors in both essays are immensely positive in their situation; they do not look down upon themselves or the other people who live a life comparable to them. The message in both essays is organized in a special way.
Despite having common features, there is a difference in both essays in regards to the messages given and approach used to give it. The information that is given by Eighner on dumpster diving, does not in any way appear in an organized manner. The information given by Erickson in the ways we lie is organized. The author jots together thoughts in a way that interests him. On dumpster diving sometimes assumes a narrative method; the article explains the life in the eyes of the scavenger and how different people live by minimal resources that they are able to get; it is about survival. The most important part of the essay is the wastage of valuable goods versus the basic goods needed for survival. The author in the ways we lie strives to have a conversational tone to make people become comfortable when reading it. The author of this essay contends that many individuals who engage in lies live under a perception that they are still honest. Erickson categorically describes the four groups of lies. The author contends that omitting important information can be classified as a type of lying, and should always be avoided in all ways.
In the analysis of the audience of the two essays, the ways we lie and on dumpster diving has more than one audience. This means that all variability among the perceived audience has a wide background. The authors in both essays chose to use the diversity of readers. The authors use examples to connect with the audience; the information presented in the essays change to only provide the main information.
The audience in the ways we lie influences and touches individuals who have a higher probability to lie. It contrasts with the audience in Dumpster diving, the audience in Dumpster diving is the public, for example, the individuals who have no ability to comprehend the method of living when an individual is termed as a scavenger. Since the writer of the essay has not specified the type of audience in his work, the essay can have a general audience.
Another common similarity in both essays is the use of language; both essays make use of the scholarly language. Both authors appeal to people’s sense of right and wrong. The authors utilize short sentences for indicating the beginning of a new topic. The language utilized in both essays reflects on experiences. The essay Dumpster diving makes use of language that convinces readers of respectability of the dumpster diving. Since the writer of this essay can creatively convince all readers about his credibility, he creates intense integrity to the position of the dumpster diving this is because the writer is one of them. The author describes dumpster’s diver’s positively using words, for example, sound and honorable. He differentiates between the individuals who collect bottles and the empty cans. The writer uses the term scavenger for describing the act of working hard and respectfully. The word Scoungrel is used to describe the bottle collectors who are perceived to be holding low positions. In the ways we lie, the author has used in formalities for the purposes of influencing her audience. This method of convincing the readers is similar to the on dumpster diving. The use of “we” instead of “I” is vital in linking all the readers with the article’s writer. The desire of the author is to strengthen the bond between him and the reader; this creates an impression that the author is not accusing the readers of wrongdoings but instead marks out a weakness in every human being.
Despite the above similarities, there are contrasting features when the concept of language in both essays is considered. In The ways we lie, the author uses an informal language; one reason for doing this is for the purpose of distracting his link to the article. Personal anecdotes are used for explaining the idea that every person is related and guilty of the same sin. The language used prevents readers from coming up with personalized conclusions or linking lives to the content of the essay. The many anecdotes in the essay show readers that the writer is the same with all people. It strengthens assertions that types of truth, which are accounted are only lies because everyone is guilty. The language in on dumpster diving is formal; it utilizes a sentence structure for the purposes of making the paragraph to be more powerful. The utilization of common languages and inclination has made the essay simple to understand. The essay uses scientific evidence to support its stand.
In conclusions, the above analysis has looked at the audience, language, and message in two essays. Though similar in some instances, the two books are different in considerations of the rhetoric situations, for example, the message conveyed by the essays is different, but the two essays seem to have a similar audience. In The ways we lie, the author utilizes informal language to convince the reader. All essays have comparable features that socially keep the audience busy. In paragraph two, a comparison of the messages is given in terms of tone. Both essays have a positive tone. Paragraph three looks at the differences between the messages in the two essays, while information in the ways we lie look organized; the one in dumpster diving does not. Paragraph four has compared the audience. Both essays have audience with a wide background, however, paragraph five states that on dumpster diving focus on people with a higher comprehension to live; the ways we lie is meant for people with a high probability to lie. In paragraph six, the language of the two essays is described as scholarly; however, paragraph seven