many people have heard of johnny appleseed, but not everyone realizes he was the real deal, an eccentric and…

many people have heard of johnny appleseed, but not everyone realizes he was the real deal, an eccentric and energetic pioneer named john chapman. however, the authentic story cant hold a candle to the mythology of the oddball who sowed apple seeds out of sheer benevolence. chapman was actually a savvy businessman, traipsing around the american midwest planting seeds like they were going out of style. good things come to those who wait, and the trees flourished like there was no tomorrow. more significantly for chapman, they established his claim to frontier land and brought him a degree of prosperity. why are the analogies used in the passage ineffective in contributing to the authors message? 1 they use snobbish language that is not appropriate for this subject matter. 2 they carry a message that is nearly opposite of what the author intended.

many people have heard of johnny appleseed, but not everyone realizes he was the real deal, an eccentric and energetic pioneer named john chapman. however, the authentic story cant hold a candle to the mythology of the oddball who sowed apple seeds out of sheer benevolence. chapman was actually a savvy businessman, traipsing around the american midwest planting seeds like they were going out of style. good things come to those who wait, and the trees flourished like there was no tomorrow. more significantly for chapman, they established his claim to frontier land and brought him a degree of prosperity. why are the analogies used in the passage ineffective in contributing to the authors message? 1 they use snobbish language that is not appropriate for this subject matter. 2 they carry a message that is nearly opposite of what the author intended.

Answer

Brief Explanations:

The analogies in the passage use informal and colloquial - like language such as "going out of style" and "like there was no tomorrow". This kind of language seems out - of - place and not serious enough for a discussion about a historical figure's real and mythological aspects. It gives a more light - hearted tone rather than a proper, in - depth analysis.

Answer:

  1. They use snobbish language that is not appropriate for this subject matter.