One argument for staying put is how can you value other places if you do not have on of your own. Those who just move on to make a home somewhere else have not made one where they were before because they don't know what home is if they're moving place to place. He also argues the fact that many root themselves in ideas rather than places. The idea of moving to a "better" place intrigues people and causes them to move. These ideas follow us and make us feel as if where we are now isn't good enough. But if you're they're long enough you can make a home for yourselves and those around you.
At the beginning he mentions a story of the family that keeps rebuilding their home because of tornado's that take off with parts of their house. This family could save money and move to a safer locations but resists changing locations. They refuse because of their time and investment in their land. It's what they're familiar with. Who would want to start over when so much hard work has already been accomplished.
I think his arguments are affective but he mentions many examples of quotes or stories that refer to moving, like Rushdie's thoughts and Newton's law. I think it would be stronger if they're was only one point that argued against his essay instead of equal examples on each side of the arguement.
No comments:
Post a Comment