Celestino1

Ulises Celestino Stephan Topf ENGL114B 24 January 2014 I understand what Manuel Munoz is trying to say, but I do not agree with him. Munoz makes a number of statements which I felt appealed to the emotions of the reader. Munoz states the fact that his stepfather, a field worker, would have not excelled if he were not to change his name. His point of view is somewhat agreeable; however it seems to me like he is experiencing personal discomfort. I do not feel obligated or compelled, by any means due to racism or discrimination, to change or to be ashamed of my name. Munoz displays a large amount of what appears to be racial references. Munoz does accurately support his discomfort with some of his life examples, I feel that his tendency to be offended by the name given to him is simply a personal insecurity. My fathers name is Magdaleno. We see him refer to the name Madaleno in one of his examples. My father is proud of his name; he works a night shift doing global logistics. My father is required to make notes and report to the managers; this means he must be able to speak at least a low deal of English. Why does a name allow people to draw negative assumptions about a persons persona? Munoz referred to his stepfather Antnio, or Tony, in one line stating . Becoming Tony gave him a measure of access as he struggled to learn English and get more fieldwork. This may make the audience assume that he has it difficult, thus appealing to the audiences emotion. This is the technique we refer to as pathos. Munoz audience could range from older adults to young adults. His reference of the difference between white and American gave an idea of who he

Celestino2

might have been arguing against. To me it seems as if he is attempting to create a movement of some sort. Regardless of Munoz use of pathos and logos, when referring to the teachers that did not take to consideration the strangeness of his name rather the form in which they will pounce it properly, I am not fully convinced or moved by the argument he is attempting to convey. On the contrary, I feel as if Munoz is ashamed by his Latin roots and he is forgetting the whole purpose of the fight against the discrimination or neglecting of the Latin community. It is not the pronunciation of names in we should be worried about, rather the act of neglecting towards the Latin community. While reading this I felt as if Munoz was addressing the Latin community about the importance of the English language or transformation to the English language. I did not feel appealed to because he used the Latin names with a negative connotation I felt as if he allowed his personal feeling to intervene with the whole purpose of the article. There is nothing wrong with my name being Ulises Celestino as long as I am a diligent young man.