Lance Reidenbach
9.13.2016
ENGL 306
Beslan
On
1 September 1, 2004 in Beslan, North Ossetia, Russia, a school was swarmed and
attacked by men who eventually held them hostage for three days. Twelve years
later on 1 September, 2016 five women stood up at a mourning site, removed
their shirts to reveal another shirt, all of them reading, “Putin is the executioner of Beslan”. (Beslan
2016) Protesting respectfully at the memorial site the women were soon removed
and arrested for violating a law against unauthorized protesting.(Agents 2016)
Many believe their rights to free assembly were being violated. With these five
women were two camera men who were recording the whole incident.
First
some main points of the situation being protested about. On 1 September, 2004
roughly 1,200 people were taken hostage at a Beslan school by 32 heavily-armed
gunmen. The school was under siege for three days ending on 3 September, 2004.
The school was rushed and bombarded by Russian forces with guns, rockets and
explosives. After a total body count reached 334 dead and over 700 hundred
wounded. Among the dead were the lives of 186 children, 118 relatives or
school guests, 17 teachers, 10 Special Forces officers, 2 Emergencies Ministry
employees and one policeman. (@RT 2014) In the end the one who decided the
final rush on 3 September, 2004 was the, at the time, current president of
Russia, Vladimir Putin.
The
names of the five women who were protesting with their shirts showing their
hate for Vladimir Putin have now been named. The five names are: Emma
Betrozova, Ella Kesayeva, Zhanna Tsirikhova, Svetlana Margiyeva, and Emilia
Bzarova. (Agents' 2016) The location
as to where the protest occurred is actually at the school site itself. A large
granite wall has been put up with the names of the people lost engraved.
Pictures are constantly being changed when the previous ones fade away. Every
year they release 334 white balloons, one for every person who passed on. The
school bell tolls. On this day 1September, 2016 the five women brought special
shirts, shirts with their hate for Putin.
Why
is this so important to the world? Why is it important to Russia? Why is this
year so significant? Vladimir Putin is president. First he was president in
2000, and then re-elected in 2004 and sworn in on March 15. He stepped down in
2008 being replaced by Dmitry Medvedev. On 4 March, 2012 Vladimir Putin is
president again by less than 65%. Many are still curious as to how he won
re-election in 2016. Vladimir Putin is in a lot of trouble right now and
perhaps, these five women who have lost one or more members to the siege think
they can finish him off. Push him over the edge. This could be the way to bring
Putin down from president.
The
ones speaking through this protest may appear to be five crazy women, but
really this is five women representing the many other women who lost sons and
daughters and husbands in the massacre. They are speaking for the ones who
cannot. These five ladies were brave knowing what could happen to them. Luckily
they only got a short prison stay and a fine for each. Emma Betrozova, Ella
Kesayeva, Zhanna Tsirikhova, Svetlana Margiyeva, and Emilia Bzarova, wanted an
audience. The audience was more than one. They wanted to reach out to the ones
who lost family and friends. To the ones who can help them. But most of they
wanted to reach out to Russian government, mainly Putin, as their shirts
revealed. Overall their message is to show how Vladimir Putin is a terrible
president. They want to reveal his fallacies, to bring him down, and bring
forth a new era. Putin has a huge crowd, who hold him responsible for that
terrible day back on 1 September, 2004.
Let
us look at it with the “ethos” view. These five women do not really have much
related to ethos. There is no need for the stance in credibility. They, being
the parents and wives of the murdered members are credible enough. There is a
choice of word and tone. You can sense seriousness. And for word choice, their
shirts say “Putin” and not “Russia”. This is not an attack on Russia. This is
an attack on Putin, the one to blame for the body count on that day in
September.
When
it comes to the protest by the five women we need to also look at it from a
“logos” point of view. From here one
would be sharing logical numbers and statistics or reports. What kind of
numbers do you need to know? There were 344 dead including 168 children. It is
a fact and everyone knows it. Putin was president and he made the decision thus
the murders are on his hands. I believe “ad hominem” fits here. You could think
that these women are fighting about the loss of life and family but at the same
time are mostly in hate with Putin and want him gone. He is the killer. If Putin
went away then Russia would be better.
Finally
we can look at it from a “pathos” perspective. These women were absolutely
emotional here. Their personal stories were being broadcasted across the area.
The tone of anger and pain came from the cries. They were calling out for Putin,
to take responsibility for the loss of their family. People were able to feel
them and connect to them. Keywords included “Putin” and “Beslan.” The man they
hated and the reason they hated him. This was not just for the higher ups to
hear. Not just the ones they wanted out.
They wanted everyone in Russia to know and feel what they know and feel.
Know what happened and asking them to help fight. And around them the people
did grow. The crowds grew and support rose up.
The
five women, Emma Betrozova, Ella Kesayeva, Zhanna Tsirikhova, Svetlana
Margiyeva, and Emilia Bzarova, lost members of the family in September 2004.
They are targeting Vladimir Putin as the evildoer who needs punishment. Putin,
being the one who initiated the attack on the school ending up killing 344
people, 186 of them children. The women put deaths of day to name of Putin and
come up to this solution. They scream for their lost. They wear apparel calling
out Putin. They rally others around them to help and to support them.
Apparently Russia or perhaps Putin is scared of them. The government did arrest
them illegally. These women had the freedom to do what they were doing. There
was no necessity for just five little women to be taken away. These protesters want
Putin gone. This is the moment to do so. He is dealing with many other issues
against him and only recently was elected president again. Putin has a lot on
his hands maybe these ladies from Beslan will push him over the edge.
Citations
@RT_com. "3 Days in Hell:
Russia Mourns Beslan School Siege Victims 10 Years on." RT
International. Reuters, 1 Sept. 2014. Web. 14 Sept. 2016.
Agents', By 'Russian. "Russian
Police Detain Beslan Mothers Who Blamed Putin For School Tragedy." RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty.
Novaya Gazeta, 1 Sept. 2016. Web. 14 Sept. 2016.
"Beslan Mothers Detained over
Anti-Putin Protest at Ceremony." The Guardian. Ed. RFE/RL. Guardian
News and Media, 01 Sept. 2016. Web. 14 Sept. 2016.
"Beslan School Siege Fast
Facts." CNN. Cable News Network, 15 Aug. 2016. Web. 14 Sept. 2016.
CNN Library. "Vladimir Putin
Fast Facts." CNN. Cable News Network, 22 Jan. 2016. Web. 14 Sept.
2016.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, I love the diction of this paper. It’s a very strongly written paper, with some really strong language that adds some emotional fire to it. It is very clear that this is an issue that means a lot to you, and that gives you some rhetorical power. The rhetorical context is laid out in such a detailed way, it really allows the reader to get a deeper perspective on the issue especially since it’s one that wasn’t really well known. However, the conclusion of the paper as a whole is missing a key element: were these women successful in their rhetoric? Ethos and pathos were detailed in such a structured way, which I think is key to the success of this paper. However, was their something missing in their rhetoric, or do you think they were successful in getting their message across? Through the detailed rhetorical context, you successfully addressed your audience and I say this because I really don’t think a lot of people are aware of this ever happening. Therefore, the key to your personal rhetorical success is to give lots of context, and conclude it with your own personal analysis of these women’s rhetorical strategies. The entire paper is structured very well, I think just this one addition to the conclusion would complete the paper. Overall, awesome work! There is a strong voice in this paper, and I really enjoyed reading it.
Lance: 5 women Beslan:
ReplyDeleteStarting from the beginning of your paper, the topic sentence is well-written; however, I do think that a stronger ending to your first paragraph would have been effective – perhaps, instead of it being a detail, you could summarize the significance of this event. The context of this event is well-explained, but, I do think that you could merge the second and third paragraphs into a more, concise summary of relevant details. I was not quite with where you were going with the paragraph on Putin – yes, he is a significant figure in this tragedy; however, you may want to add the ideas to the author’s purpose because that paragraph alone seems randomly inserted into the paper. Nice explication of the protestor’s audience and purpose; I clearly understood the weight of the tragedy through the lens of your writing and of the protestor’s intent. Although you say that there is no particular stance of ethos, I believe that you could expand the women protestors as a general response to the representation of the unjust government (i.e. Putin) and perhaps, a representation of the existence of democracy – or lack thereof. I definitely agree with the “ad hominem” argument in your logos analysis; the statistics are there and the numbers are heavy – a good segue to the pathos analysis. I believe you could do more with pathos since it can truly take the bulk of your paper. Although, I do think you had effective word choice here: “the tone of anger and pain came from their cries.” You should do more of that – perhaps include the running emotions of the women at the scene of the protest. I think that your last sentence shouldn’t necessarily be directed to the Putin argument, but rather, an overall statement of the author’s purpose in this piece of protest rhetoric and the emotions apparent in the protestors and at this particular protest scene. Also, I was not too sure on the clarity of the identity that is manifested through this object of protest, so I would reiterate on that point! Overall, great work and it was a pleasure reading your paper!
Your overall analysis of the protest, including the audience and the identity that it created, is thorough. However, in these cases ideas such as the identity is more implied through your analysis. It would strengthen your paper if you explicitly stated what the identity was. The organization of your essay was also effective, especially the explanation of the rhetorical strategies coming after the brief explanation of the protest itself. I would combine paragraphs two and three, since both of these contain background on the protest as well as an explanation of the protest itself. This would make the needed context for the remainder of the essay to be all in one place. Also work on condensing some of that information so that you can focus more on audience, identity, and rhetorical strategies as you move through your essay.
ReplyDeleteSomething that would add to your paper as a whole is adjusting the conclusion. Rather than restating some of the facts and ideas that were already discussed in the paper, work on adding whether or not the protest was actually successful, or whether your believe that it will be successful in the future. This would provide for a effective end to your essay as a whole.
Another thing that I would adjust is the tone of your essay. While reading, I could not help but be distracted by the casualness of the tone and the language, as well as the continual first person that was used throughout. This type of language caused for your essay to be less effective as a whole, and for readers to take something as serious as this protest less seriously. If you make these adjustments your essay will be strengthened greatly.
Things to revise on paper:
ReplyDelete-Change tone
-Update Ethos
-More evidence
-Make identity more explicit
-Cut out repetition