Rhetorical Analyze on Kristof’s “Food for the Soul”. In the article, “Food For the Soul’, ahuman rights defender, and a two time Pulitzer Prize Winner NicholasKristof discussed the profits of traditional family farms over modern industrialagriculture. In his article, Kristof engagedreaders to accept his ideas and take his side on agricultural debates by focusingon telling nostalgic stories about his childhood on his family farm in Oregon,using metaphors, and choosing vivid words with emotional emphasis.
In the beginning of the of the passage he mentionedthe increased usage of modern cultivation technique which does not interesthuman living. He uses one sentence paragraph for transition from modernindustrial agriculture to traditional family farms. Here, with a metaphor, heemphasizes that modern industrial agriculture is harmful, and “has no soul”. Inthe passage he tried to explain the loss of vital components from our food andspread of microbes which creates difficulties for the standards of healthyliving. He wats to scare his audience illustrating theconsequence of the surplus usage of antibiotic leads to “superbugs” that resistthe effect of antibiotics.
So, it is unproductive and fruitless. Kristof going on to motivate the reader touse family farm products over industrial agriculture when he uses MichaelPollen’s research to prove his point that diversity in farming is essentialwhich is given by family farms and not by industrial agriculture. Heprovides information that the large production of grains results in “monoculture”.Michael Pollen conveys that two third of ourcalories is attained from just four crops, which is against variety.”Monoculture in thefield result in monocultures in our diets. Fast-food culture and obesity arelinked to the transformation from family farms to industrial farming.” The author evokes feeling and move closerto the readers by appealing to there imagination when he vividly sharesan anecdote about the time from his childhood on the family farm when he placeda chicken egg in a goose’s nest. At the end, the behavior of chicken wasobvious and understandable.
The nurture affects the “soul”. Correspondingly thecultivation of crops affects the quality. The better the cultivation the betteris the fruit.
In addition, Kristof gives an example one of his old high school friends Bob Bansen, who just with 225 JerseyCow’s dairy competes Dairy factories of 20,000 cows. He uses this example to provethe readers that still there is hope. If one small producer can do it then whycan’t others do it. Through this he wants to persuade the reader to support thesmall traditional producers. Author tells us that Bob Bansen names all his cowsand they are his family friends. This shows that he treats his caws as pets. While”a cow means nothing to” big diaries as said by Bob, shows thattraditional small producers are much Eco-friendlier and helps in financial sustainability.
Using these examples, the author wanted toemphasizethat the modern industrial agriculture where only profit and yield matters islacking something vital like high standards of healthy living. When the authordescribed his farm as inefficient, and he doesn’t say the family farm iseffortless. In his opinion, it demands more effort and finances but will payoff with good health. Kristof writes thisarticle to raise consumers awareness that we should buy the products of smalltraditional producers for our sustainable future. He found an effective way to inform, entertain,and motivate people to change their outlook on tradition family farms.
This articleinspired to know more about what we are eating and how it effects our health andwellbeing.