Rossberg 1
Ally Rossberg
AP Lang & Comp
Richards
12/9/13
The Necessity of Opposition
Opposition: The action of resisting or combating. Ultimately, it is something
experienced in life that is often unpleasant. Compassion: A feeling of deep sympathy and
sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune. These two words are not often linked
together, but in Barbara Ascher’s essay “On Compassion” she argues, “Compassion must
be learned, and it is learned by having adversity at our windows, coming through the
gates of our yards, the walls of our towns, adversity that becomes so familiar that we
begin to identify and empathize with it” (Ascher, 35). In this essay, she makes a series of
observations, later coming to the conclusion that the opposition present in life magnifies
one’s compassion. Opposition is present in so many aspects, and though it is less than
ideal at the moment, is ultimately beneficial as it brings out the best in everyone. Her
argument is shown through her structure and use of descriptive and figurative language,
which extends not only to her examples, but also to the readers and their own state of
morality.
The structure of the essay consists of long, descriptive sentences conveying the
narrator’s observations and inferences. Amid these, are a few brief interjecting sentences
used to show emphasis. “His eyes fix on the baby,” for example, is an observation like
many sentences before it, but conveys a shift and variance from what is normal. Up until
this point the man had only been standing and waiting, but in many of these short
Rossberg 2
sentences the homeless stop merely existing and begin interacting. These interactions
display the compassion Ascher becomes so fixated on. Without these necessary shifts the
people would possibly not have the courage to act on their compassion, but it is as the
opposition becomes more evident that they are driven towards compassion. Sentences
such as, ”The man does not look away,” make blunt statements about the actions and
motives of those being observed. Later in an encounter at a coffee shop Ascher says, “If
expulsion were [the owner’s] motivation she would not reward his arrival with gifts of
food. Most proprietors do not.” The short sentence furthers the statement as the narrator
attempts to unmask the owner’s motives. It shows the woman’s acts are not common, as
compassion usually is not. When the succinct sentences are contrasted with the long,
descriptive ones, it is the short sentences that contain the most emphasis. Compassion is
rarely shown, and it is the diverse sentences that suggest a departure from daily routines
as people reach out and show compassion towards others. Like the varying sentence
lengths, without these alterations, people would continue to be consumed in their selfcentered motives. It is opposition that causes these motives to shift, as Asher
demonstrates through her use of variance in sentence structure.
A structural device also used by Ascher is her use of rhetorical questions. The use
of questions engages the reader in the situations. They are no longer simply reading a
series of events, but are questioning along with the narrator, as the examples become
more than merely examples. The reader begins examining similar happenings in their
own lives and questions their own motives, along with those in the essay. For example,
when Ascher asks, “Was it fear or compassion that motivated the gift?” the reader begins
to wonder about the woman’s motives, but also might put themselves in her situation.
Rossberg 3
They may question their own course of action, or their own motives. The questions
transform the interactions between those being observed, to interactions with the narrator
and the audience. The narrator is no longer just passively observing, but curiously
questioning. “What compels this woman to feed this man? Pity? Care? Compassion?”
These series of questions drive her to make conclusions about the givers’ motives; she
observes things such as pity, fear, care, expulsion, or compassion may drive them. She
later makes the statement, “I don’t believe that one is born compassionate.” As
compassion is continually exercised, a compassionate person begins to develop. It is
through Ascher’s series of questions she that she comes to this conclusion. These
questions drive the essay. It is the questions that make critical connections between the
text, the author, and the audience, which Ascher does so well throughout the essay. They
turn simple observations into conclusions about humanity and compassion, and its
nonexistence without opposition.
Throughout the essay, Ascher observes a series of events in which imagery is
used to convey the contrasting situations. The essay opens with the description of a man,
“His buttonless shirt, with one sleeve missing, hangs outside the waist of his baggy
trousers.” This description is countered with those similar to, “A man with a briefcase
lifts and lowers the shiny toe of his right shoe…” The imagery of these two events helps
put the reader in the narrator’s situation through the visually stimulating language Ascher
uses. The contrasting situations especially show how privileged one group is compared to
the other; for example, the man with the shiny shoe contrasted with the one with a
buttonless shirt. It is obvious the man with the shiny shoe can do more than spare a few
cents. Ascher uses these descriptions to appeal to the readers’ emotions. It is nearly
Rossberg 4
impossible to read the statement about the homeless man and not feel a pang of sorrow
are pity towards him. The imagery helps extend the situations in the essay, to in the
audience. Even something as simple as reading about the opposition that persists through
everyday life spurs a bit of compassion. These glimpses of compassion inspire people to
be better. They become trained to notice when their hand can be of assistance then
become accustomed to acting on this impulse until they are truly driven by compassion.
Ascher’s descriptive language that emphasizes opposition is also shown through
her use of diction. Much of the diction conveys the helplessness of the homeless. The
essay opens with the statement that “the man’s grin is less the result of circumstance than
dreams or madness,” and continues to say, “his gait is the shuffle of the forgotten ones
held in place by gravity rather than plans.” These statements are supported by her choice
of words such as his arms “dangling” as he “stands and stares,” and a second man who
“wandered” into a coffee shop as he smelled of “stale cigarettes and urine.” These words
are not only sensory but also denote minimal action. The words “shuffle” and “wander,”
for example, suggest movement without purpose. Those who are homeless have lost
motivation and merely go throughout their days with abandoned hopes that someone will
be generous enough to reach out to them. Their actions are no longer in sync with their
own dreams, but they blindly move about with a simple hope of survival. It is this
hopelessness that is so intriguing to standers-by, still motivated and driven by their own
ambitions. They are those who have the ability to fulfill the homeless’ only hope. The
descriptions of the homeless are countered with the author’s choice of words such as
“blond,” “shiny,” and “rich cappuccino.” These words imply cleanliness, wealth, and
easy living. When contrasted with the other descriptions, the two seem from opposite
Rossberg 5
worlds. While the homeless are blindly wandering, people like the man at the light
watching the reflection on his shoe who “could hold it and make it his” seem to have it all
figured out. Though there of course are trials they are facing in their lives, these become
miniscule when compared with others. Without this necessary opposition, shown clearly
through the diction in the essay, people would never recognize how truly blessed they
are. As people recognize this opposition they no longer have a desire to improve their
own lives, but others’, because compared to those with nothing, they have so much to
spare. When people seek to help and bring out the best in others, they somehow bring out
the best in themselves.
Similes and metaphors are used throughout the essay to make comparisons and
connections that extend past the occurrences in the essay. These devices are used in all
literature to make comparisons of two unrelated things. The use of these in the essay
helps draw the essay away from mere descriptions and make the examples more
accessible to the reader. “Like a bridegroom waiting at the altar, his eyes pierce the white
veil.” She could have simply said that he looked intently at the child as it covered its face;
however, the use of similes not only creates descriptive language, but also makes it
relatable to the reader. Nearly everyone is familiar with the longing look of a bridegroom
at his alluring bride. This helps appeal to the reader’s logic as they make connections.
These connections make the essay relatable to the reader, as it is no longer just another’s
acts they are experiencing. They are able to draw from their own experiences as they
become more engaged in the argument posed by the author. Comparisons, though not
often realistic, have the ability to convey events almost more effectively than reality. This
conveyance is essential to the essay as Ascher successfully enthralls her readers in her
Rossberg 6
observations, allowing her to make conclusions, not only based on her own findings, but
on all humanity.
Ascher also uses figurative language through her use of allusions. In paragraph
twelve she alludes to the setting, mood and themes of Charles Dickens’ books in
comparison to Manhattan. Many of Dickens’ books, Tale of Two Cities, for example, use
the comparison of rich and poor as Ascher does. She uses this allusion to support her
argument of the separation of the two socioeconomic groups as she says; “Ladies in highheeled shoes pick their way through poverty and madness.” This great distinction
between rich and poor was shown so often throughout Dickens’ books, and as the reader
draws from their own background knowledge they can more clearly visualize the image
Ascher is attempting to create. It is often the easiest option to build up one’s own wealth.
However, this will never bring true happiness. The greatest satisfaction in life will always
come from helping others. Opposition will always exist. It is not often pleasant, but it
opposition that drives compassion and illuminates ones potential. Ascher also alludes to
ancient Greece as, “drama taught and reinforced compassion within a society.” Her
allusions provide evidence that opposition is not just a present day occurrence, but has
persisted through centuries, and will continue to do so. As opposition has endured, so has
the compassion accompanied with it. “The object of a Greek tragedy was to inspire
empathy in the audience…”
Through Ascher’s structure, and descriptive and figurative language she
effectively conveys a scene of opposition and people’s acts of compassion. She uses these
rhetorical devices to extend her writing past the page, to the reader. Asher causes the
reader to evaluate the motives of the examples in the essay and relate them to their own
Rossberg 7
life, as they reader makes connections through their emotion and logic. So often is
opposition viewed negatively and without a glimpse of compassion. In Ascher’s
argument she states the necessity for these conflicts in bringing out the best in people. So
though it is often hard to grasp opposition with a positive attitude, without it there would
be no inspiration driving people to compassion, ultimately improving humanity.
Rossberg 8
Works Cited
Ascher, Barbara L. “On Compassion.” 50 Essays a Portable Anthology. Comp. Samuel
Cohen. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2004. 35-37. Print.