The JungleThis section of Upton Sinclair's The Jungle is very rich with many different rhetorical techniques. The section begins with the character ethos establishing that the characters are very aware of the horrors the author is going to describe. Since Sinclair wants to delve into the terrible conditions of meat packing, he properly sets up characters who are experts in the horrors he will describe. By creating experts, it establishes credibility and thus gains public trust. Following this sentence, Sinclair uses a more formal-sounding sentence to get his point across, describes the meat with more formal diction (instead of rotten, he says "spoiled") and mixes it with more informal diction and words shorter ones like “chop”. a mechanical and disgusting feeling in the reader. Before moving on to a more vivid pathos section, Sinclair then uses another established character, Jonas, to give more insight into the horrific conditions. He then uses a phrase repeated earlier in the text that he will repeat several times about the horrible conditions. This sentence is clever and cynical and uses simple working class language of the time. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay Jonas, the previously established expert, then uses many short and simple words such as "sour", "chopped" and "smell" to talk as to how meat packers can turn rancid meat into “edible meat”. It is very vivid and creates a mental image that disgusts the reader with this diction. Additionally, Sinclair uses asyndeton to put all of these horrible things into a list and without using conjunctions, it's almost like they're triggered as an attack. It feels almost mechanical but raw, which I think is what Sinclair was going for. In the next sentence, Sinclair then uses meatpacking jargon (or special terms for a field) and uses more formal diction. He does this because he wants us to see him in a more sophisticated light while also seeing that he is absolutely despicable, which the reader will rightly notice. Sinclair then describes the process of making rancid meat "good" again and he uses very vivid pathos in describing the smell, the pickling process, the heating of the meat bones and many other aspects of the process. It is deeply descriptive and revolting. Following this, Sinclair then describes many commercially known products and, using the slang of the time, he describes what these products that the general public eats actually are. In doing so, he gives his audience stomach aches. Sinclair then launches into the process of making sausages using more vivid pathos, supported by jargon ("flyers") and more formal descriptive words about the process. Sinclair also uses, in this and the next sentence, polysyndeton to describe the horrible processes in their disgusting order. He goes further to describe the storage conditions and the rat dung that often makes the sausages, more pathetic, and uses periodic phrases that trick the reader into seeing how bad things are getting. Almost always, the situation gets worse when making Sinclair's points. These sentences all happen at the same time or could happen, and this parallelism creates a feeling of disgust that so many things could go wrong at the same time. His use of polysyndeton in the next sentence again creates that horrible feeling and one could argue that it is yet another parallelism. Sinclair then does.