Tow #26 "Revenge, My Lovely"

Reading goals: Skim through article quickly and understand main purpose

Writing goals: Efficiently identify author's argument

In this weeks issue of NYTimes, the author, Jo Nesbø analyzes the human's natural thirst for revenge. He states that revenge has always been portrayed as being a "barbaric, shortsighted and pointless instinct" that we are taught by society to resist. But Nesbø argues that in reality, it is actually perfectly logical behavior and shows that we have the capability for abstract thought. In the article Nesbø uses analogies and rhetorical questions to prove this point.

Nesbø introduces the concept of revenge to his audience by using an analogy to an antelope. He states that if an antelope's calves are attacked, she will fight back to protect her young, but only to a certain point - until the calf has died and it would be pointless to keep on attacking the aggressor. Nesbø  then compares the human response to the same situation. While antelopes would not consider pursuing the aggressor after they consider it futile, humans Nesbø writes, would exact revenge in hopes preventing a future attack on their offspring in the future. By using an analogy, Nesbø is able to distinguish between an animals shortsighted instinct and a human's revenge- their capacity to think about the abstract future.

In addition to the animal- human comparison, Nesbø also uses rhetorical questions throughout his article in order to suggest a new idea to the reader. The placement of rhetorical questions at the end of paragraphs offer transition to the next paragraph as they are introduced to a new perspective on the issue. Questions like "... is it the case that we go along with a legal system we don't think meets our emotional need for retribution?" also allow the author to directly address the readers. 

Nesbø effectively justifies the human nature to seek revenge through the use of simple analogies and and rhetorical questions.