Writing Project 2: Rhetorical Analysis

ROUGH DRAFT DUE: Tuesday, 8 Apr 2008.
FINAL DRAFT DUE: Sunday, 13 Apr 2008.

Here are the groupings for conferences outside of class time. If you volunteered for one of these slots, please have your rough draft emailed to me AND the other student 24 hours before our meeting. Also, each of you should have read the other student's essay BEFORE the scheduled conference. The rest of will meet as a class and perform peer-reviews as per usual.

Tuesday, 8 Apr 2008
1:10PM: Gary & Cady
3:15PM: Samantha & Adam

Thursday, 10 Apr 2008
1:10PM: Scott & Katelynn
3:15PM: Kara & Kody

Writing Project 2: choose a visual or hybrid text that contains an argument (e.g. a political cartoon, television commercial, photograph, or work of art etc). Once you have your primary text selected, analyze the piece by paying close attention to the types of rhetorical strategies (page 31 in “Envision2.pdf”) & appeals (logos, pathos, & ethos) utilized. As such, you will want to ask yourself, & then answer, the following questions: “What is the argument of the text?” “In what ways is the argument structured?” “What types of claims are being made?” & “What design elements are employed to forward the argument?”

The rhetorical analysis requires substantial time and thought, so it’s best to find a text you find interesting or feel passionate about. If you know a topic/text well, you’ll have a sense of what arguments are being made about it, and you’ll likely be eager to undertake sustained analysis & brief research.

A rhetorical analysis looks at the way an argument works (NOT HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT THE ARGUMENT) and may evaluate its effectiveness. You might think of your analysis as an argument about and argument. Accordingly, rather than simply listing every rhetorical detail you see in the texts, you should focus on some specific thesis, or claim. After examining the arguments closely, generate a claim with supporting reasons that describe or assess the way the text works

If you’ve chosen arguments that interest you, readers will sense your enthusiasm and want to learn more. But remember that won’t necessarily be familiar with the text you’re analyzing. You may need to provide background information and enough examples—quotations and images—to show them how the argument works.

When you write a rhetorical analysis, it’s obviously important to study your chosen texts carefully to identify key patterns. It is also important to lay out for each text the basic facts of what is called the rhetorical situation: who is writing about what for which audience. Conduct research in the library or on the internet so that you can accurately identify the argument, where and when it appears, in what medium, and so on. You may need to provide a short paragraph of background information early in your paper to set the context for the argument.

How will you most effectively accomplish this assignment? Examine logical appeals by looking carefully at how well the claims made in a piece are stated, qualified, and supported. Be specific in identifying these appeals, quoting from verbal arguments and describing visual arguments. Examine the emotional appeals by identifying emotions and explain how they are generated. Evaluate their relevance to the claim offered. Again, be specific, quoting or describing the emotional details clearly enough for readers to understand them. Examine ethos and assess the credibility of the writer, artist, or sponsoring institution. Is the argument presented by someone you are moved to trust? Is the appeal honest? Explain why, using specific evidence from the argument you are analyzing.

These analyses will make up the body of your essay. You’ll also need to frame this discussion with an introduction, perhaps outlining your thesis and providing relevant background information, and a conclusion that comments on your focal point and answers the “So what?” question.

Check that the logistical elements of the paper work smoothly: If you’ve incorporated images, are they clear and readable? Have you documented any outside source materials? Does the structure and content of your analysis make sense—can readers move easily from idea to idea as you develop your analysis?

Minimum Criteria: a) 1200 words, b) 4 multi-media elements, c) 7-10 hyperlinks, & e) a works cited section at the end of your post if you utilize secondary sources.

REMEMBER: You will need to construct a clearly articulated thesis statement in your introduction that specifically addresses the argument you will be forwarding about the text you have chosen. Think of this an argument about an argument.

Rhetorical Appeals: How does the author of the text use images to work in conjunction with rhetorical appeals? For instance, does the image reinforce an appeal to reason? Is it designed to produce an emotional effect on the audience? Does the use of a certain style, such as black-&-white authority, contribute to the ethos of the text?

Strategy of Development: What strategy of development does the text rely upon? Narration? Definition? Comparison-contrast? Example & illustration? Classification & division? How do these strategies contribute to the ad’s persuasive appeal?

Finally, refer to your MLA handbook for proper integration of secondary source material.

***************** PEER-REVIEW QUESTIONS ******************

Does the essay begin with an introduction that grabs the audience’s attention? Or, to phrase this statement another way, were you as a reader captivated enough by the introduction that, even if you did not have to read this paper for class, you still would? If not, how could the introduction be improved? Provide specific examples.

Is the thesis a well-articulated, declarative statement that clearly states the purpose of the paper & defines the argument the writer will put forth? If not, how does the thesis fail? Is it purely a statement of fact? Is it a subjective opinion? Is it over-generalized? How could the statement be re-worded so as to make it more effective? What questions do still have about the essay after reading the thesis? How could the answers to these questions be incorporate into the thesis? Be specific.

Has the writer chosen a piece of visual or hybrid rhetoric (i.e. is the text something that can be seen, NOT just text)?

Does the analysis directly engage the images & words found in the primary text? Are there aspects of the primary text that are not dealt with? Should they be? Does the analysis “make sense?” Again, be specific.

Does the writer engage the rhetorical strategies (Read “Envsision2.pdf” page 31 for a list) employed by the primary text? Does the writer discuss how these strategies contribute to the overall argument? If so, are there strategies that are not discussed that are present in the primary text? If the writer does not discuss strategies, what suggestions can you, as reviewer, make?

Does the writer engage the rhetorical appeals (Read “Envision2.pdf” pages 33-49 for the three types of appeals & their uses) employed by the primary text? Does the writer discuss how these appeals contribute to the overall argument? If so, are there appeals that are not discussed that are present in the primary text? If the writer does not discuss appeals, what suggestions can you, as reviewer, make?

Has the writer incorporated secondary sources into the fabric of their essay? If so, is the source properly documented within the essay, as well as at the end in a works cited section? Check the MLA handbook to make sure both in-text & works cited citations are correct.

Suggest 52 places within the text where hyperlink links would be appropriate. It will be helpful to add hyperlinks to words that could provide some additional background information about the subject matter that is not present within the essay.

Outside of the primary text (visual/hybrid rhetoric chosen by the writer as their subject matter), make a suggestion for another multi-media element & where it should be located within the framework of the essay, not at the beginning or end.