moment of excited passion, I logged on to
Amazon.com
and, for $4.95, ordered a copy of
The
Communist Manifesto. The little book, with its floppy laminated cover depicting a hammer and a
sickle on a glossy black background and plain white block letters
spelling out its title with
inconspicuous innocence, took its place at the head of my bed, where it resided for the next month. Bit
by bit, it began to fill with marks of pensive notation, speckles of yellow appearing in odd places
where the highlighter had bled through, its fragile pages curving with the insistent pen marks that
filled their margins.
As I devoured the words of Marx and Engels, I realized something remarkable. I’m not going to
tell you I agreed with them;
in a lot of instances, I didn’t. But I
did understand what they were saying,
and I was able to respect them both as visionaries
and intellectuals. Where the old voice in my head
would have said, “Wow, what idiots,” my new voice was open to more than just the fundamental ideas,
but the intelligence it must have taken to form them and the thought process behind them.
When I register to vote, I will not be registering as a Democrat. You won’t see me at any PETA
meetings, and you certainly won’t hear me speaking fondly about President Obama’s plans for health
care.
But I can proudly say that The Communist Manifesto taught this Republican what it means to
compromise, and to respect.
REVIEW
This essay does a marvelous job of describing the way in which one’s outlook on life can change
over time. She takes thoughts about her evolving conservative political beliefs and turns them into
something interesting by introducing other characters and using humor throughout.
Danielle’s asides are funny in all the right ways. They generally poke fun at her conservatism
without being offensive. Her line about being both artsy and conservative is a good example of using
humor to convey aspects of one’s personality that may not be immediately apparent in an essay. She’s
a not-too-conservative person who’s also fairly witty? Check.
Her humor also makes the essay exponentially more enjoyable to read. Serious diatribes about
changing ideals are fine, but descriptions that are actually entertaining are far more memorable.
It should be noted that though the essay is about Danielle and her ideological refinement, her use
of other people (namely, Jacob) in her narrative makes the
story seem far more credible, and makes
her seem more relatable. Her interactions with Jacob showcase her ability to compromise and carry
on successful interpersonal relations in spite of glaring political differences.
The essay would have benefited from more development at the end. Her interaction with
The
Communist Manifesto would have been slightly richer had we glimpsed a little more insight into her
thoughts rather than her just saying that she disagreed with most of it. Was there a part that she found
redeeming? While a relatively small critique, more elaboration would ensure that readers would not
be left hanging at the conclusion in an otherwise excellent essay.
—Charlotte D. Smith