The tone os Sander's essay is wishful. I feel like he's trying to argue a point that no one will really listen to and take into consideration. As he states on page 175, "I think of my home ground as a series of nested rings, with house and family and marriage at the center, surrounded by the wider and wider hoops of neighborhood and community..." This sounds like a nice place to be and I think he's trying to get across the fact that when you make a home your home and build upon that it's the best there can be and why move? When people move it's usually because they have to due to a job, or can't afford the house, etc. Staying in one place could cause issues and problems for families and others. Everything he says is true, a home can't really be a home unless you live in it for a long period of time but I think you have to make the best of what you have and if you have to move, so be it. Make that house your new home as much as possible.
I find Richard Ford's voice more engaging and convincing. Although I've only had one home all my life, I believe that everyone may fall upon trouble or happiness and have to change where their home is. Sanders considers home as the place he lives, where he has built relationships and spent a majority of his lifetime. Home to Ford means where he lives at the moment, typically not that long considering he has lived all over America. But as he states he "never thought any of these places were home when I lived there". I feel he knows home as where he lives in the moment but his essay is intriguing. It relates to many and his tone is entertaining and also makes you think.
No comments:
Post a Comment