Introduction
As an object of analysis, the article We Are All Migrants by Mohsin Hamid is considered. This work includes personal reflections on why people should perceive themselves as those who cannot be fully considered indigenous. The argumentation to which the author resorts is connected with historical and socio-cultural overtones. The article addresses the topical issue of human relationships within the framework of continuous migration as a process that is natural and should not be perceived negatively.
Analysis
In the article in question, the position regarding continuous migration as a natural order of things is presented from the personal perspective of the author. As Hamid argues, all people are descendants of nomads and migrants, which makes it impossible to condemn this phenomenon in society (17). One of the key features of the text is the constant use of the first person, which the author resorts to in order to bring himself closer to the reader and unite his views. The overall argument is related to the fact that people have always traveled and explored new places continuously. Due to this, they “are not native to the instant” and should perceive the change of locations as the natural order of things (Hamid 17). This thesis is traced throughout the article and supported many times.
As examples, natural moments from people’s lives are mentioned, which, nonetheless, reflect the true nature of migration. When reviewing travel photo albums or remembering life in another city as a child, a person involuntarily identifies oneself as a migrant (Hamid 18). By evaluating the article’s pathos, logos, and ethos, one can highlight the appropriate stimuli. For instance, when speaking of nostalgia and dreams from the past, Hamid manifests pathos (20). Logos is expressed in a scientific approach to analysis, for example, when the author refers to the historical manifestations of migration and notes the natural manifestation of this phenomenon (Hamid 18). Finally, as the author’s ethos, one can pay attention to Hamid’s past, who speaks of his own experience of moving around the world and the belief that every person is prone to change places of residence (17). All these rhetorical strategies allow for the creation of unambiguous messages to readers.
Interpretation
The use of the aforementioned features and patterns means that the author seeks to convey his position to the reader and that he himself is convinced of the objectivity of his argument. Despite the fact that Hamid repeatedly uses “for me,” “we,” “ourselves,” and other forms of personal perception in the text, he clearly seeks to get closer to the audience and unite thoughts in one direction (20). Such a strategy is a method of authorial influence and is designed to convey the purpose of the discussion to a wide range of readers to form a common view and exclude any contradictory positions. While pursuing such a task, the author discusses the social, historical, and other manifestations of migration, describing a person as “a migratory species” (Hamid 18). The geographical context is also touched upon but to a lesser extent because the main focus is on the cultural rather than the territorial analysis of migration as a phenomenon.
Scientific or political perspectives are not touched upon in the article under consideration because the work is rather journalistic than academic in nature. At the same time, along with historical and socio-cultural assessments, Hamid resorts to a psychological analysis by referring to people’s dreams and memories (20). Such a perspective is intended to reflect the reader’s inner motives and create in them a sense of similarity of thinking with that of the researcher. It is possible that the author’s bias can be observed in some cases. For instance, saying that people inevitably leave their habitual places of residence if necessary cannot be considered an indisputable truth since sometimes, additional barriers and restraints are stronger than such a desire (Hamid 18). Nevertheless, by constantly referring to his own perception, the author expresses a subjective position, thereby minimizing the research bias.
Evaluation
While assessing the effectiveness of the author’s message, one can note that the key idea is conveyed comprehensively. Numerous arguments in support of the proposed ideas are presented, and both personal experiences are offered and common human examples are described. The value of this text lies in addressing the social problem of migration and the ambiguous views of some people on its validity and admissibility in the modern world. The strength of the article is the large number of references to real-world examples and different evaluation perspectives. At the same time, the lack of empirical data can be considered a weakness because Hamid generalizes the concept of people without offering precise research data (17). Compared to other works on the subject, this article does not assess migration as a problem and defines it as a natural rather than a controversial phenomenon.
Conclusion
The neutral perception of migration as a common and sustainable socio-cultural phenomenon is a prominent feature of Hamid’s article. The author uses different arguments and sets the task of conveying personal views to the reader, at the same time convincing of the correctness of the proposed ideas. The features and rhetorical strategies applied reveal the journalistic rather than scientific methodology of the article. The work is valuable as the discussion of the acceptability of migration, and although it lacks valid empirical data, different views and perspectives strengthen the argument.
Work Cited
Hamid, Mohsin. “We Are All Migrants.” National Geographic, vol. 236, no. 2, 2019, pp. 17-20.