"Bring Back Flogging"

Michelle Horner
Blog Post Week 4
6/7/07
Analysis of Jacoby’s Essay “Bring Back Flogging”

Title The manner in which Jacoby will be conducting his essay is clear from the title. This title, “Bring Back Flogging” immediately grabs the readers attention, lets the reader know the thesis of the article and gives the reader a sense for the author’s stand on the subject. This is a powerful way to begin his essay.

Thesis I think the general thesis is given in the title of the essay. It gives us the view of the author: reinstating flogging as a punishment in our society. It is also good that Jacoby states his purpose so early on, before the essay is actually read! I think a more specific thesis is stated in the last sentence of the essay: “Maybe we should readopt a few.” This statement more clearly lets the reader know that it is not just suggested that we bring it back, but that we implement flogging back into our criminal justice system.

Purpose Although Jacoby does not use terms implying proof or drawing conclusion he does make it clear that this essay is persuasive. This can be seen, for example, with his us of rhetorical questions to make the reader think of the other points of view. He has presented these questions in such a way so that it would be absurd for the reader to agree with any other point than the one he is trying to make: to “bring back flogging.” Jacoby does make a clear distinction between the flogging of Puritans, and the manner in which he would use it in modern society. The line that Jacoby draws is at “corporal punishment that doesn’t maim or mutilate.” This is an important distinction for him to make in order to gain support for his thesis.

Methods Jacoby uses a variety of methods to gain the readers’ support. He uses a plethora of examples as well as quotes from credible authorities. His article begins with examples of punishments given by the Puritans. These examples point to the harshness of flogging in the past. He uses these examples to contrast with our current society’s standard of imprisonment. Jacoby refers to the term “cages” multiple time throughout his article to help persuade the reader to see punishment from his view. He also makes good use of authorities that have expertise on the subject of criminal justice such as “a noted Princeton criminologist.” Jacoby uses statistics throughout his essay to explain to the reader the horrors of our current punishment system. He uses these statistics to draw on the readers’ sympathy for the criminal who is put in a “cage” and has a high probability of being “beaten, raped, or murdered.” Finally, Jacoby uses rhetorical questions to draw the reader in and make them see that there is no other way besides brining back corporal punishment to deter these offenders and stop the “horrors” these inmates are subjected to. Some of these points may be slightly exaggerated; however, they do help to relate his point to the reader.

Persona Jacoby presents himself as an average man; however, he does have strong convictions. Jacoby uses his language to relate to the reader and to come across as one of “us.” He wants us to believe that he is just one of us, and that he is looking out for us as a society. Jacoby portrays himself in a way as to show us that he is trying to protect us from the “out of control” crime rate that is plaguing our society. It is almost as if he is sweeping in like a hero to save us.

Closing Paragraph I particularly think that the way in which Jacoby uses the term “enlightened” throughout his essay yet with wholly different meanings. Toward the beginning of his essay he describes our current system as “enlightened” since the Puritan age. He then proceeds to list the ways in which we are contrary to this view and arguably less humane than we were in the Puritan age. He then brings the essay to a close returning to the idea of enlightenment. He uses the term this time, to indicate that it was the Puritans that were, in fact, “enlightened.”
Impressions As a criminal justice major, I find Jacoby’s argument quite intriguing. Corporal punishment is a topic that is discussed quite frequently in criminal justice classes. I have had discussions regarding physical punishment and fines. It seems to me the underlying question is how much money, or how much physical punishment is each crime worth. In the case of fines for example, how do we determine how much money a life is worth in the case of murder? It is a question that I have wrestled with in my thoughts and in my classes, and I have never been able to formulate a clear set of punishments in that way. My classes have also taught me the value of proper treatment. I think that the best way to rehabilitate criminals is to provide a combination of treatment and punishment. Jacoby has a good point; punishment is not as effective as we would have hoped for. We need something else to help deter future crime. This is where proper treatment would come in. Notice my use of the word proper. Treatment will not be effective for all people, and it definitely will not be effective if the offender does not want it. There must be a balance of the two in order to make our criminal justice system effective. After all, our Eighth Amendment right protects us from “cruel and unusual punishment.” I do believe that flogging and public humiliation would fall into this category.