Stephen H. Webb's "How Soccer Is Ruining America: A Jeremiad," is a satirical take on our nations biggest problem: soccer. At least this is what the audience realizes in the later duration of the essay. Webb starts his piece criticizing the sport of soccer while introducing clever word play such as: "Soccer is running America into the ground." Most readers jump into this piece expecting a concrete argument against soccer, and look passed this play on words. Webb does this to emphasize the satirical tone of the piece, but this tone is not fully realized until the last page. The reason why the phrase "Soccer is running America into the ground" is so comical is because it links two worlds: soccer and English. Soccer is a sport where you literally run a ball on the ground, whereas a popular English term for destruction/degradation is "running __ into the ground." As Webb builds up his "argument" against soccer, he uses facetious claims to prove his contentions. Webb mentions that soccer is "a liberals dream of tragedy," after mentioning leftist views earlier in the passage. This statement is meant as satire, but it could be deemed as true in some instances, For example, the common image of Liberals consists of over necessary equality for everybody, including soccer players. Is Webb a Democrat? Republican? Does it even matter? Webb's use of political opinion strengthens the satirical tone for those who have caught on, but increases the "argument" against soccer for those who have not. This build up keeps the reader hooked, wondering where Webb is going to take his argument. The next paragraph talks about the use of feet in sports. Webb mentions that feet are often signs of disrespect, alluding to Bush's "shoe attack." Not only does Webb retell humorous stories of feet, but he makes purposefully asinine comments regarding one's feet. Some examples include "have you ever seen a deaf person trying to talk with their feet?" and " Do kids say "smell my hands" on Halloween?" These questions are so out of place, yet they share a common sense of humor. Trying to imagine a blind person talk with their feet is a pretty funny thing to imagine.(I'm sorry, but it is) Having a kid ask you to smell their hands on halloween is something that you would expect out of an immature child. In an attempt to be funny the replaced a common term with its polar opposite. But that's exactly what Webb is trying to do. He's adding these childish and humorous elements to emphasize the satire in his essay while showing that his arguments are quite childish and absurd.
At this point it is pretty obvious that Webb is changing his tone to satire. The people unaware of this are now reading his essay in confusion: "Is this guy serious?" Just when the reader is certain that the essay is satire, Webb reverses his train-wreck of an argument and introduces interesting opinions. Webb states that old sports, especially boy's sports, offered a greater risk for playing. For example, baseball is extremely embarrassing when you strike out, and dangerous when you have 60 mile per hour balls flying at your unprotected body. Soccer really offers none of that risk, and it's a whole lot of running back and forth. Unfortunately/fortunately for Webb's "argument", he spirals into saying sexist remarks about sports of both genders. Based off of the text, Webb's goal is to anger and confuse the reader to a degree where they start to heavily analyze the paper that they are reading. It's like when a friend treats you nicely and does cool things for you, and then admits that they never liked you. Have you ever fought extremely hard to fight for a political opinion for years, just to have your argument destroyed and your view changed in a matter of minutes? This is exactly what Webb is doing to the reader. Webb manipulated readers into thinking that they were on his side, both for and against soccer. But the truth of the matter is that "How Soccer Is Ruining America: A Jeremiad" is so chaotically organized that nobody knows what side they are on anymore. This doesn't only become apparent here, but throughout the course of the essay. When I was reading this I noticed my view( or lack of one) fluctuate depending on the arguments that Webb presented. Webb then dives deeper into his "argument" by stating things parallel to stereotypical conservatives and liberals. Things like "soccer is a foreign invasion", and "The political left worked so hard to bring European despair to America." As Webb adds more political opinions, the reader starts to finally realize that this is a piece of satire. This realization only skyrockets after Webb calls soccer an escape from parenting, and Admits that his children all play sports so he can get some piece and quiet. Webb completely back stabbed his entire argument, crashing what he had left to the ground. Finishing his essay saying that he annoys his daughter by reading books on the sidelines kind of funny, and it ties the ending together well. Stephen H. Webb's "How Soccer Is Ruining America: A Jeremiad" was a roller coaster of confusion, anger, interest, and hilarity. Webb does a great job of fulfilling the satirical role of his piece, and gave readers and soccer enthusiasts alike a chance to go back and laugh, even at themselves.
At this point it is pretty obvious that Webb is changing his tone to satire. The people unaware of this are now reading his essay in confusion: "Is this guy serious?" Just when the reader is certain that the essay is satire, Webb reverses his train-wreck of an argument and introduces interesting opinions. Webb states that old sports, especially boy's sports, offered a greater risk for playing. For example, baseball is extremely embarrassing when you strike out, and dangerous when you have 60 mile per hour balls flying at your unprotected body. Soccer really offers none of that risk, and it's a whole lot of running back and forth. Unfortunately/fortunately for Webb's "argument", he spirals into saying sexist remarks about sports of both genders. Based off of the text, Webb's goal is to anger and confuse the reader to a degree where they start to heavily analyze the paper that they are reading. It's like when a friend treats you nicely and does cool things for you, and then admits that they never liked you. Have you ever fought extremely hard to fight for a political opinion for years, just to have your argument destroyed and your view changed in a matter of minutes? This is exactly what Webb is doing to the reader. Webb manipulated readers into thinking that they were on his side, both for and against soccer. But the truth of the matter is that "How Soccer Is Ruining America: A Jeremiad" is so chaotically organized that nobody knows what side they are on anymore. This doesn't only become apparent here, but throughout the course of the essay. When I was reading this I noticed my view( or lack of one) fluctuate depending on the arguments that Webb presented. Webb then dives deeper into his "argument" by stating things parallel to stereotypical conservatives and liberals. Things like "soccer is a foreign invasion", and "The political left worked so hard to bring European despair to America." As Webb adds more political opinions, the reader starts to finally realize that this is a piece of satire. This realization only skyrockets after Webb calls soccer an escape from parenting, and Admits that his children all play sports so he can get some piece and quiet. Webb completely back stabbed his entire argument, crashing what he had left to the ground. Finishing his essay saying that he annoys his daughter by reading books on the sidelines kind of funny, and it ties the ending together well. Stephen H. Webb's "How Soccer Is Ruining America: A Jeremiad" was a roller coaster of confusion, anger, interest, and hilarity. Webb does a great job of fulfilling the satirical role of his piece, and gave readers and soccer enthusiasts alike a chance to go back and laugh, even at themselves.