Life can be boring, especially when you might have lived in a certain place for so long. However, to have a place to call home is the most comfort feeling anyone can have, even if they have been moving their whole lives. But home, does not always mean a physical place, but the bond shared with people in that place. In Scott Russell Sanders essay, Homeplace, he expresses how people staying is good because one can truly respect or feel blessed of what they have received than to throw away the effort that once existed. Yet, Richard Ford’s I Must Be Going, reveals staying in one place for so long is not for everyone who wants to explore the world. The two writers express two different ideas of commitment by using logos, pathos, and ethos. Nevertheless, Sanders’s essay is better because he …show more content…
To be honest, after reading Sanders’s essay, it reminded me of how I wanted to move away from Chicago as a kid because of how television portrayed the outside world with more action. But as I grew up I came to realize that the action in Chicago is the same as any other city and yet, it is more special to me because I was born there and now understood why my mom chose to stay. The reason my mom chose to immigrate and become an inhabitant of Chicago, instead of New York or California, was because our family, friends, her job, and our house was there. But even after my dad passed away, she mostly stayed because our house carried so many good and bad memories that both my mom and dad spent time and money to decorate our home to feel comfortable for them and for me. Anyhow, Sanders’s technique of using a lot of logos to prove his point, really connected to the pathos and the ethos of how he feels staying in one