1

Amanda M. Labrado

ENGL 100

Prof. Webb

2/28/10

An Analysis of Rhetoric

“Horace’s Compromise,” an excerpt from Horace’s School by Theodore Sizer, is a

fictional narrative about an experienced teacher named Horace Smith. Mr. Smith works at

Franklin High School. Over the years, he has witnessed the problems that force teachers to make

compromises – such as the overload of students, or the insufficient amount of time the teachers

have for each student – which hinder their ability to produce great students. Horace wishes to fix

these problems, and even has given up the option of retirement to do so; however, neither he nor

his colleagues have any power to change the system. Horace and his colleagues are under the

jurisdiction of the state and the district, which control all aspects of the school that need to be

changed (185). Though, if the way the school operates were to be changed, anything altered

would affect everything else, “an honest evaluation of the school’s compromises will open a

Pandora’s box. Everything in the school affects everything else” (185). For example, more time

cannot be given to the teachers to get to know and help their students as individuals. This is

because a time change would affect the teacher’s salaries, and most likely cost the school more.

Such a dilemma has caused Sizer to use Horace’s character to argue that high schools are often

“not nearly what [they] could be”(179), and even though many high schools may be seen in a

“good light” by their surrounding communities, “The good light in which [a] community sees [a]

school is not deserved”(179) because the kids are not doing as well as they possibly can due to

the high school system’s problems. Sizer successfully persuades his audience to believe his

arguments by using Horace’s thoughts and life story to appeal to their emotions; Sizer’s readers
 Labrado 2

can readily believe Horace because he always presents both the faculty side of the issue and the

student side – and he is given veteran status, the audience can hold interest in Horace’s character

throughout the presentation of the argument because Horace is associative, and they can pity

Horace as a result of the aspects of Horace’s life that Sizer has strategically positioned

throughout his narrative.

Horace Smith is credible because he is introduced as a fifty-nine year old English teacher

with years of experience. Mr. Smith is considered an influential faculty member by parents and

graduates, and is “respected by his colleagues” who “find him the professional’s professional,

even to a fault” (179). From this, the reader can surmise that Horace is wise, experienced,

respected, and trustworthy, because he is a “veteran” teacher at Franklin High school who is

respected by both parents and graduates. These distinctions convince the reader that Horace is

credible because he epitomizes the ideal teacher. Furthermore, because Horace has universal

characteristics, he could easily be similar to someone the reader knows, or he might be the

person the reader would like to be, causing the reader to be inclined to believe Horace. The

reader’s inclination to believe Horace drives them to recognize the reasons why the

aforementioned “good light is not deserved”. In addition, the reality is that the audience is not

given a straight argument – with which they could probably find grounds on which to argue –

nor are they given facts about why the “good light is not deserved” at Franklin High; instead they

are shown what is wrong with the school from Horace’s perspective, that is to say, from Sizer’s

experience. By being persuaded through the credible perspective of Horace, the audience’s

opinions also sway toward Sizer’s other argument – that high schools “are not nearly what they

could be” – mainly because Horace’s experiences and observances are irrefutable. For example,

when Horace describes how kids make treaties – regarding what is on their tests, what grades

they will receive, the requirements of their papers, and when they need to read a number of pages
 Labrado 3

by – with their teachers to “lessen the work, lessen the pain of thinking anew. […] Treaties to

protect the Good Life” (180), Sizer gives no concrete evidence that can be disproved. Just to

make sure that this example cannot be argued against, Sizer has Horace call himself a cynic and

bring the adults into the situation as well, “What a cynic I am. Aren’t we adults that way too,

excessively so? What are all of us coming to?” (180), by doing this Sizer reveals to the audience

that Horace doubts society, but wishes to change it through education and understanding. By

making Horace a cynic, Sizer is able to present his arguments fairly because Horace’s

personality forces him to look at both who contribute to the issue; Sizer believes that it is a fault

of the system which brings the negative characteristics out of both the teachers and the students.

Sizer’s argument that “The good light in which [a] community sees [a] school is not deserved”

(179) is also fairly presented by way of Horace’s cynicism when Horace explains that the

school’s curriculum is organized poorly, “How is the school’s curriculum organized? By

subjects, most of which are poorly defined and each of which is planned in almost total isolation

from the others. The stuff of these subjects is offered up to students in fifty-two-minute slivers of

time, rapid fire […]”(185). Horace’s cynicism plays an important part in the fair presentation of

the issue presented in this quote because he uses derogatory phrases such as “poorly defined”

and “total isolation” to refer to the organization of the school’s curriculum, giving any effort to

solve the “curriculum”-matter a sense of futility. The phrase “rapid fire” allows the audience to

assume that the students must try to makes sense of all the subjects they are learning given a very

short amount of time to comprehend each. “Rapid fire” also shows that an attempt to change the

curriculum would be futile because the teachers wish to concentrate on their own individual

subjects, as illustrated by the sentence that follows, “the mathematics sequence has no planned

connection with science courses; and the teachers of literature, art, music, and drama pay

attention only to each art separately […]” (185). This quote shows that the teachers set up their
 Labrado 4

courses in a manner that makes it difficult for the students to understand the practical

applications of each subject and make it hard for the students to understand how their subjects

have anything to do with one another, so much to that point that “Making sense [of it all] is even

tough for adults […]” (185). Sizer goes on to mention that “The faculty doesn’t like to hear any

sort of fundamental criticism. We’re tired of being the butt of all the griping, they say […]”

(185), showing that the teachers feel that they cannot do anything about what the students are

learning or about whether they are comprehending it all; therefore one can assume that the

teachers are complacent with the school, and don’t want to see any changes. Sizer then states that

Horace and his coworkers give the colleges what they want, and school the kids in “intellectual

chaos” as to make the colleges happy; in short the teachers at Franklin High “Give a little, get

along, compromise […and] the kids compromise too, taking what is offered, observing that to

which they are exposed, more or less cranking out the tests, and then forgetting most of it.

Feeling good is important, not only about oneself but also about the school. Franklin Pride”

(185). The author includes that “the kids compromise too” to show that they are not helping the

problem at all either. The last sentence of the quote is meant to illustrate to the audience that in

the end, no matter what Horace does, both the teachers and the students live with the issues at

their school and both still go home happy, but not Horace. Horace sees the real deal, and Horace

thinks the reason the good light is not deserved, is because the kids can’t make sense of their

subjects nor do they ever remember much.

Ultimately, Horace and Sizer are credible because no reader can refute someone’s – in

this case Horace and Sizer’s – experience taking place, or about someone observing something.

Experiences and observances are also very easy to relate to, and many of the teacher’s who may

read Horace’s Compromise may be familiar with many of the observances Sizer presents

through Horace’s character.

 Labrado 5

Horace is a critical character in Sizer’s narrative because he makes it easier for the

audience to hold interest in Sizer’s argument. The reason for this is because Sizer has given

Horace the characteristics of someone the audience can relate to, meaning he has given them

something to look forward to; Horace’s attributes and experiences may be familiar to them

because they may experience them in their everyday surroundings. Sizer essentially uses

common ground to induce acquiescence toward his argument. One example of the common

ground Sizer finds to induce acquiescence is when Sizer asserts that students bargain with their

teachers for less work: “The kids play a game with the school, making deals with us, striking

bargains. What will be on the test, Mr. Smith?” (180).This quote is implying that students are

trying to make school easier on themselves. Sizer also implies that students should not be

allowed to do so because he refers to the students’ bargaining as a “game”. By saying that the

kids “make […] deals with us”, Sizer suggests that teachers are subjects of immoral and covert

actions that should not be done. Most teachers can say they have had this experience because I

myself have done this to them, and so do other students all the time, teachers just might not think

of it as “bargaining”. Sizer’s attempt to induce acquiescence is successful in this instance

because most teacher’s can relate and can effortlessly agree. A second example of Sizer’s

attempt to gain common ground to win over his audience is when Sizer presents the fact that

“age grading hurts some kids [because] young people grow intellectually, physically, and

socially at different rates […and teachers] cope […] largely by not being careful, by deliberately

not attending to the record and specialness and stage of growth and disposition of each

youngster” (183): Through this quote, Sizer illustrates that teacher’s may be hurting some of

their kids through “age grading”, or by presuming that their students “all know the same

things”(183); In this quote, Sizer is both presenting his experience, and constructively criticizing

the teachers so that they will know that “age grading” is wrong, and hopefully do their part to fix
 Labrado 6

it. Sizer’s audience can acquiesce with his argument that age grading hurts kids because they

may have witnessed that fact that young people grow at different rates. Sizer uses Polysyndeton

to prove to his audience that they are not paying attention to some of the most important aspects

of the student. He creates a climax by repeating “and” because he begins at “record”, then goes

on to “specialness”, then to “stage of growth”, then finally to “disposition” which all of the

former constitute, putting an emphasis on that fact that teachers are not taking into consideration

the “disposition of each youngster” when they teach; meaning that some teachers will respect

Sizer – for showing them their mistakes –, and others will just agree with his argument because

they know each of their students is unique. In addition to the problem of age grading, Sizer puts

forward that teachers are also given an insufficient amount of time to work with their students,

meaning some will not do as well as possible because they may not be able to get all the help

they need. Sizer uses his observance of the lack of one-on-one time that is “valuable for

students”(182) as something his audience can relate to as a way to create in them an incliniation

to agree with him effectively when he says, “Horace knows he should insist on a writing

assignment from [them] every day […] but with 120? Impossible”(182). Sizer knows that with

more than 100 students, it is hard to grade the students’ papers, and work in general, in a manner

that will help them. Students need to understand why they got something wrong, and one of the

best ways for them to learn this is from one-on-one sessions with the teachers. Teachers know,

though, that it is almost impossible to do so adequately with such a large load of students,

meaning that Sizer successfully induces acquiescence because the teachers understand how

Horace feels, making them prone to agree with Sizer.

Finding familiar ground with his audience and frequently referring back to it, allows

Sizer to hold the attention of his audience throughout the presentation of his argument.
 Labrado 7

This technique also allows him to control the thoughts of his audience on his argument by

triggering their emotions instead of their logic. For example, Sizer brings up the hardships

Horace faces outside of Franklin High school to make the audience feel pity for him: “And this

in addition to all the rest he has to do outside those contact hours in class with the kids, not to

mention his evening work at the family’s liquor store to help meet the household bills” (Sizer

182). In this instance, Sizer is talking about the time Horace must spend with his students going

over their school work that cuts into the time it takes him to do other things, such as work. In

essence, Sizer gains support from his audience mainly through an emotional appeal that involves

hardship, suffering, and determination; Sizer uses an appeal to emotion, instead of logic, to

create a logical fallacy. This is because Sizer is able to use Horace’s thoughts and perspectives

on the quality of the school and the improvements it needs as a medium through which he has the

power to persuade. Sizer is also able to appeal more to his audiences emotions than to their logic

because Horace is the ideal person: he’s passionate, hardworking, determined, altruistic, and

given his background, wise because of his age and trustable because of his status; Horace does

not seem to have any flaws. Sizer tells the story, but includes Horace to comment on the aspects

of his story that he finds especially moving. For instance, Horace comments on how many

students he has, and the futility with which he states this fact gives the matter emphasis, grabbing

the audiences’ attention, and triggering their emotions, keeping them focused and interested.

Horace is an innocent medium that cannot be judged like the author can making is easy for the

audience to proclaim Sizer’s narrative is credible. Through Horace’s Compromise, Sizer has

successfully created an appeal to his audience’s emotions to gain their support for his arguments,

and create a desire in them to better the high school education system through Horace’s

experiences and cynical nature.

Labrado 8