Illiteracy post - structural element

Jonathan Kozol begins The Human Cost of an Illiterate Society with general information about illiteracy, including a few statistics, giving some background on the subject. He states some heavy claims about our failure as a society to truly be democratic. As I read I thought, “he better back this claim up really well.” And of course, he makes for a strong argument with numerous devices, but most importantly through the use of parallel structure. 

Kozol begins the bulk of his argument with the phrase, “Illiterates cannot read the menu in a restaurant.” Similarly, the next two paragraphs begin with the same two words, “Illiterates cannot,” and then continues to explain what it is they cannot do. A bit later in the essay, more paragraphs begin the same way. This parallelism gives a rather mundane voice to the piece. However, it does serve a greater purpose. The repetition of the words “illiterates cannot” portrays the idea that the list of things that illiterate people cannot do is very lengthy, almost as if it is un-ending. 

In between paragraphs beginning with “illiterates cannot” there is one that begins “illiterates do not.” This is striking because it disrupts the flow that we were used to (“illiterates cannot”). Since it contrasts the commonly occurring parallelism, the phrase, “do not” is very powerful and implies that they are inherently barred from this action. In this case, it is not that they are lacking the ability, they simply do not, no questions asked. 

The repetition of the term “illiterates” also contributes to the overall theme or message of the essay. When I think of the word “illiterate” I think of someone who is very poor and lacking any type of intelligence. Basically, it has a very negative connotation. The author chooses to repeat the word, instead of calling them “people who cannot read” or “nonreader” or “the unread” or “analphabetic.” Perhaps he is commenting on the way the rich and educated view the illiterate. They are grouped together into one, and can be paralleled to the untouchables in the Indian caste system. Maybe that’s a bit severe, but they are somewhat related; both do not truly have a voice in the government (due to lack of knowledge in the illiterates case), and cannot provide for their families with a stable income. Both are looked down upon by other members of society. 

Although the parallelism of the opening phrase of many paragraphs is not found throughout the entire essay, it provides the framework for the author’s evidence of his belief that America is not truly a democracy due to the large population of people who are illiterate. It is also striking that he never invokes a shift in the tone; the essay is consistently using phrases such as “illiterates cannot” and “they do not.” This further shows his disappointment in the failure of society to do something to solve the problem of illiteracy.