Analyse af 'My seven-year-old son the boxer'

“Parenthood” is for some people something they hope to achieve one day, and for others it is one of the greatest joys in life. For the people who have achieved parenthood, they often view their children as the best thing that have ever happened to them. They would therefore avoid to see them get hurt. When the child suddenly becomes interesting in an activity that could hurt that person, it leaves the parent with a struggle of whether or not to support their child’s new interest. The article “My seven-year-old son the boxer”, published in The Guardian in 2017, written by Sarah Hughes, problematises the struggle of being a mother and whether or not to support her son’s new hobby.

Hughes uses rhetorical questions and relatable situations in attempt to engage the intended reader. Hughes intrigues the reader from the beginning of the text by postulating, “I blame The Force Awakens” (l. 1) By postulating in the first sentence without further explanation, she intrigues the reader’s curiosity. Thereby the reader wants to keep reading to make the connection from the title “My seven-year-old son the boxer” with the first sentence. She describes her personal experiences with her son to seem more relatable, “I expected his excitement to dim. Like most six-year-olds he was prone to sudden enthusiasm – pirates, Furbies, football cards” (ll. 19-22) By describing a relatable situation for most parents she succeeds at maintaining the reader’s attention. It also becomes clear from the described situation that the intended reader is other parents with a similar struggle or parents with children who has a similar interest as her son. Another way she tries to intrigue the reader is in the use of rhetorical questions, “Given I remembered that thrill, did I have any right to deny it to my son?” (ll. 113-114) By using a relatable rhetorical question and because she does not directly answer the question, she maintains the reader’s interest and she thereby makes sure the reader keeps reading to find the answer. She also uses discussion markers as “on the other hand” (l. 153), which makes it unclear for the reader what the solution is to the dilemma. The reader is thereby forced to read the whole text to get a conclusion. By using rhetorical questions and discussion markers she maintains the reader’s interest and the incorporation of personal experiences makes her successful at engaging the intended reader.