For this blog post, I want you to create the anatomy of a rhetorical analysis based on the chapter on rhetorical analysis. What is a rhetorical analysis composed up—what is in its make-up? Feel free to be creative in this post so long as you evidence what you are saying with the reading.
Per normal: engage with others; shoot for 250-350 words.
Due by class time on Tuesday, October 29, 2013.
Who?: Who is the ad or film or article in question targeting? Why would this be appealing to them? This type of question tries to figure out who the audience of a given piece of media is. If you can figure that out, you are well on your way to understanding it.
ReplyDeleteHow?: How did they choose to represent the media? In some cases the answer is obvious. Remember those kind of corny "Got Milk?" ads, where they would depict celebrities with milk mustaches? In this case, the authors of the ads believed that people would see the ads, and want to imitate their idols. The choice of presentation is fairly simple.
Why?: Why create this media? For an ad, it's obvious: to drum up sales. Similarly, the purpose of a movie is obvious: to make money. But why would a newspaper run an article about something like Obama's foreign policy approach in Syria? Or why make the movie about events leading up to a car crash? It's to try and attract viewers/readers. But figuring out why that particular subject is interesting can help you understand the media in question.
What is the genre?: To better analyze something, it's important to know what is expected of the media in question. A newspaper article is fundamentally different from a movie, and you shouldn't expect anything less from the analysis.
These are some fairly basic categories in which you can analyze a piece for it's rhetorical qualities. It's easy to get more specific, and create more details, but these tools will give you the basic outline and purpose of their argument.
Richard,
DeleteI agree with you that identifying and analyzing how the rhetorician is forming their argument is important to a rhetorical analysis. However, I think that the concepts of ethos, pathos, and logos come into play when doing this. These three are the tools for persuading an audience and understanding how they are used can help us better understand their argument.
The first step to writing a rhetorical analysis in my opinion is to identify what the rhetorician is trying to persuade people of. In an commercial like Victoria’s Secret, mentioned in the reading, the ad is attempting to convince people to buy their underwear.
ReplyDeleteThe next step is figuring out whom they are primarily targeting. Apple targets a different market then Dell, even though they both sell PCs. This causes their advertisements to be dramatically different.
Then, you should determine how they are using ethos, pathos, and logos to persuade. Are they simply laying out a logical, organization of facts on a piece of paper? Are they making you cry while you read their argument? Do they mention what they do for a living or where they graduated college? Regardless of which tool a rhetorician uses the most; all three should be addressed in a rhetorical analysis.
Lastly, how is the style of an argument effective or ineffective? In the reading, it is stated, “readers naturally judge the credibility of arguments in part by how stylishly the case is made – even when they don’t know exactly what the style is.” Recognizing and analyzing the style choice can help understand why an argument would be effective or ineffective.
Lastly, the entire rhetorical analysis should be analyzing the statement made by the rhetorician and the proof that they give. These two concepts are the key to a persuasive argument if done clearly. The rhetorical analysis should also be evidenced throughout, so the reader understands your point and your proof.
I like how your analysis is ordered, it's just like a recipe. Persuade -> Target -> E,P,L -> Credibility -> Proof. It's very simple and really useful as a general guideline to follow when doing analysis
DeleteThis is really good! Just like what Josh said, it's such an ordered guideline that seems really easy to follow during a rhetorical analysis. You made a good point that Apple and Dell are both sellers of PCs, yet they target different audiences so their advertisements are very different.
DeleteRhetorical Analysis is comprised of the links between Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How and Ethos, Pathos, and Logos. Both of those sets of individual analysis join together into a sweet, analytical explanation of a piece of rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteThe first piece of Rhetorical Analysis is found by analyzing the Ethos (Who and Where) of the Rhetoric. Who is writing the piece is essential, the author is the motive and voice of the opinions generated. The Author is the person bringing the ideas into reality and changing our world with their ideas. We must make sure that the author is a credible source for the argument. Where the piece is written is also essential because it begs the question, “what situation is provoking this writing?” If the where is the New York Times Headquarters, we would see much different credibility and standards from an underground blogger in his mom’s basement.
The second piece of Rhetorical Analysis is found by analyzing the Pathos (When and Why) of the Rhetoric. This is truly the essence of the Rhetorical Situation that is provoking the writing. Granted, “some emotional appeals are just plays to win over readers,” but sometimes the emotional appeals are genuine and meaningful. The heart-wrenching rhetoric following 9/11 had extremely pressing when and why explanations and persuaded all readers of the tragedy in sentimental, sometimes angry ways.
The third piece of Rhetorical Analysis is found by analyzing the Logos (What and How) of the Rhetoric. This is the structure of the argument. Does it make sense? Will it work? These questions and many more are answered by the straight facts from what the situation is and how it is approached in the rhetoric. In the Victoria’s Secret commercial with Bob Dylan, the analysis really revolved around what were they trying to persuade and how was that persuasion getting done with Bob Dylan there.
These three pieces make up the structure of Rhetorical Analysis of any situation.
Josh,
DeleteI think that you have a very unique insight on rhetorical analysis! I like how you focus mainly on the analyzing of appeals which is one of the most important things to do. I think it works well to separate each appeal when writing a rhetorical analysis so I like how you did that!
In any rhetorical analysis you need to dive into the item you are analyzing. You need to ask who, what, when, where, and why. The rhetorical analysis is more than a summary.
ReplyDeleteWho: who is the author of the writing or the speaker. Ask yourself what credentials they have over the subject. What makes the author have authority in that field. Also, ask yourself who is the authors audience?
What: when you ask what is the author’s objective for writing the piece you are analyzing, you must dive deep. You have to read between the lines and analyze what words the author is using. What tone is the author portraying?
When: when was the piece you are analyzing written. This is important because it helps with the reasoning why it was written. This helps create ethos and pathos to help the writer persuade an audience. Speaking of 9/11 in October 2001 would be more impact audience’s emotions more than discussing it in October 2013.
Where: helps with the context of the writing. Letters from Birmingham Jail creates more pathos with the audience because Martin Luther King Jr. wrote those letters while he was incarcerated.
Why: is one of the most important questions you can ask when your analyzing. Why helps you get to the bottom behind the authors reasoning for making a speech or writing a piece. Why did the author use the diction he or she used? Why did the speaker pause after saying that? Why did that camera pan over the neighborhood? Why helps you see beyond what he average person may see or think. It helps you think deeper.
I agree that asking why? is one of the most important aspects to analyzing rhetoric. By asking why you can definitely see beyond what the average reader may see or think. Delving into pieces of writing can really help a reader understand the situation or argument in a deeper more complex way.
DeleteI like how you go into detail about the who, what, when, where, and why. It helps me understand deeper into the concept of rhetorical analysis and really grasp the concept that it isn't just a summary. You really do have to ask all these questions to have a successful analysis of a movie or book or what not.
DeleteA rhetorical analysis is composed of many things. Ethos, pathos and logos are three main factors in composing a rhetorical analysis. These three techniques help define the ‘who, what, when, where, why and how’ of the analysis.
ReplyDeleteBy recognizing ethos, the writer can establish who they are and their credibility in the subject they are writing about. Where the piece is being written is also tied in with ethos because this also establishes credibility. As Josh stated, a writer for a profitable newspaper is much more credible than a random blogger at home.
Establishing pathos in a rhetorical analysis can help the reader familiarize with the ‘when and why’ of the writing. By recognizing the emotions put into the piece of writing, the reader can pinpoint why the writer is choosing to write about that subject. For example, articles about the shooting in the Colorado movie theater in 2012 were filled with emotion and explanations as to when and why this happened.
Considering logos can help determine the ‘what and how’ of the argument being made. By using factual information and logic in your writing, it will help the reader understand what the argument really is and how the writer chose to present it. In the article, the picture of the young woman scarred by a fiery accident caused by a drunk driver has a big impact on the readers. The in-your-face picture and slogan of “not everyone who gets hit by a drunk driver dies” helps the writer get the message across very quickly. Without even reading about the accident, the reader immediately knows what the article is about.
A rhetorical analysis cannot be complete without the recognition of ethos, pathos and logos.
The role of a rhetorical analysis is to dissect an argumentation but it’s also an argumentation itself which demonstrates rhetor’s interest.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, the first step is to analyze the process used by the author to create his argumentation. This includes studying the genre, the techniques of argumentation, the kind of arguments used, the audience targeted, the language, evidences or proofs which support the argumentation, the organization... This analysis helps you to understand the main purpose of the argumentation and the means to achieve it. The reading explains that this first step allows figuring out “what strategies the piece employs to move your heart, win your trust and change your mind”.
As part of this analysis, it’s essential to figure out the different rhetorical appeals used by the author. Indeed, examining the way that ethos, pathos and logos are employed we can understand how the author orientates his argumentation and what is his goal. For instance, in the ad campaign against drunk driver, pathos is dominant because the author appeals to the emotions of his audience.
The second step of the rhetorical analysis looks like an argumentation itself. After having analyzed the arguments, the purpose is to explain why they work or not and why the author used such a process to create his argumentation. Moreover, this part can describe what the reaction of the audience to the argumentation is and whether or not audience reacts as expected by the rhetor. Actually, the goal of this second step is to criticize positively or negatively the result got by the argumentation.
A rhetorical analysis is made by answering the questions who, what, when, and why, and is also made by considering the ethos, logos, and pathos in the piece.
ReplyDeleteIt is important to find out whom the ad is targeting and what it’s selling. If you can find that out, it will be much easier to decide whether or not the ad works. For example, normally Victoria Secret ads are targeting women, as they sell lingerie, but with the ad in the article, it was hard to figure out if they still were targeting the same audience, so it was hard to figure out if it worked. If they were still going for women, then it doesn’t really, but if they were going for fans of Bob Dylan, then it’d have a better effect. Who is writing is also important because of ethos. If a fashion consultant is writing about the news, then it wont be as effective. What is important to logos as what the ad is selling must match how they are selling it. The Victoria Secret ad did not have much logos, as it didn’t make much sense for Bob Dylan to be in it.
When is important as if you read say, an article written in 2001 about 9/11, it will be much more emotional than an article written now, as it was written right after the fact and the emotion was still fresh. When is important to pathos, as emotions are stronger right after the event, and the article wont be as powerful if its written some time later. Why is also important because it tells you what the purpose behind the piece is. If you know the purpose, you can figure out what they are trying to convince their audience of.
I totally agree that writing about somethings that just happened have a lot motivation/emotion/ or drive to the argument. I feel like rhetorical analysis have based on bias. Reading/writing/analysis about 9/11 during that period of time would be such as a talk of the town. Therefore, the rhetorical analysis will me a lot more interesting and more persuade of we're talking/analysis about something that current in our time.
DeleteRhetorical analysis are composed of many things, and anyone who writes one can put their own ingredients into a rhetorical analysis. That being said; there are a few essential ingredients that are needed in order to make a delicious rhetorical analysis. It will take some time, effort, and an analytical lens but once it’s done you will feel like a professional baker who’s both intelligent and talented!
ReplyDeleteWhat you will need is:
2 cups of analysis on how the “components of an argument work together to persuade” the audience
½ a cup of finding the rhetorical appeals used and discussing how well they worked (ethos, pathos, and logos)
1tbs of knowing what the context is
1tbs of knowing what genre it is
1/3 cup of quotes to support your own analysis
½ cup of your own analysis either supporting or denying the argument made, how well it connected with the audience, and if the message was effectively portrayed
1 cup of “attention to the details”
1 cup of evidence. Add evidence everwhere after every claim! You want to support your argument as well as you can
¼ cup of organization. Does your analysis make sense? Does it flow?
2 cups of understanding the objective of the argument that you are rhetorically analyzing
1 cup of researching your author before you write your analysis
Directions:
Start with analytically looking at the argument and searching for it’s purpose. Why was it written, who’s the intended audience, ect. Then you must add all the ingredients together, while keeping in mind one important thing to do: look for rhetorical devices and how well they were used. Doing this will enhance your analysis. Make sure to sprinkle a lot of question sprinkles on top to make the piece detailed and yummy. The more questions you ask when analyzing the argument the more detailed your analysis will be. Then put in the oven at 350 degrees and cook for two days. Take out and review you analysis. Is it burnt, did it rise or fall? Then give samples to your friends and find out their opinion on your beautifully delicious analysis. If they approve, then you have successfully baked a rhetorical analysis!
Wow, Super creative. I love the way you explain the rhetorical analysis by using cooking recipe to make it easier to understand. Every writer has their own style of writing. Therefore the out come will be different.
ReplyDeleteSome rhetorical analysis would hit the spot, right about now.
Delete“Understanding the purpose of arguments you are analyzing.” As the author stated earlier on his writing, the rhetorical analysis start from the understanding. It is important to understand the contents of the story. Knowing who claiming what is the essential keys to analysis. Why do we need to understand the piece? Rhetorical analysis have to dig deeper than the “text.” It is the way to look what is the hidden message from the author. In another word, identify the identity (at the DNA level) of the writing, which could reflect the writer as well. Ethos, pathos, and logos are the basic arguments for the audience. It is another way to persuade the audience. To me, rhetorical analysis is the critical thinking that related to rhetorical analysis. Style is also another important thing about this rhetorical analysis. Style is something that we have considered in mind. However, it wouldn’t be strictly about the rules. I feel like style is more of like the genre that apply to the specific topic/ argument. Therefore, not every analysis will have the same format and style. Everything that involved “thinking,” it has to conclude with biases. Argument between the author and the audience could be based on their different biases. Here is my version of rhetorical analysis, read critically and think critically to identify the hidden message.
ReplyDeleteThis might be helping you guys to visualize the rhetorical analysis and the general idea of it.
http://people.highline.edu/acaster/rhetorical_analysis.htm
I love how you said, "It is the way to look what is the hidden message from the author." That is spot on. Most people automatically just summarize and think that is a rhetorical analysis, but if you look for the hidden message and depict it, that would be a successful analysis. Critical thinking is key.
DeleteA rhetorical analysis requires a number of different angles to be taken while analyzing a piece. One must identify the audience (Who is this piece written for?), the topic itself (What is the writer talking about?), the purpose of the piece (Why is the writer saying what he is saying?), and finally the period of time in which the piece was written (Is anything he is saying relevant to our time?). This is an initial, basic place to start;once these questions have been answered one must go deeper into analysis and identify the argument's appeal to ethos, logos, and pathos.
ReplyDeleteI find it easiest to analyze an argument if I can: 1) find out what the argument is about (probably the most important) and 2) analyze the emotional appeal of the piece--if an argument lacks emotion, it fails to persuade the reader to feel that same or a different emotion about the topic at hand, it may actually make the reader disinterested, and therefore are not convinced (or even caused to think) by the argument.
In order to effectively execute a rhetorical analysis, one must breakdown the argument and look at it piece by piece, that is one must go into the mindset of the writer and look at how everything connects (Does it connect?), evidence (Is there sufficient evidence to support the initial claim? Is it reliable evidence?), and the initial claim (Is there even an initial claim to begin with, or is this just a rant about how bacon is bad?). These are only a few of the many building blocks that compose an argument, in order to analyze them, you have to take them down and look at them individually, in other words separate the argument into smaller pieces to be looked at. I like to think of it as a bike--everything is an individual part of the same machine, without one piece the entire machine fails, so inspect your bike parts--or the parts of an argument.
A very common mistake people make in attempting to complete a rhetorical analysis is simply summarizing the piece of work. That is totally incorrect. You must dig deeper and, like Petey said, search for the hidden message from the author. Spend time evaluating the scenes and search for a common thread throughout the film. The author can either have it be “in your face” or more low key. You must look at what each part represents and how it contributes to the thread as a whole, depicting the meaning of each experience.
ReplyDeleteThe first step would be gathering information. Identify the rhetorical situation. Who is the audience? What is the argument? How is the communicator getting the message across? There are three different ways that could dominate the communication: ethos, pathos, or logos. See if the author is trying to tug at your emotions, establish credibility, or persuade through the use of reasoning. This will help because when you are aware which appeal the author is using, your mind opens up to it and can see more secretive ways that the author is continuously contributing to that appeal. For example, if the author is using a lot of imagery, you may not be able to identify with it or see the hidden message behind it until you determine that overall the author is dependent on pathos. Imagery is very affective in pathos.
Ask yourself how and why the author chose these specific rhetorical strategies. How do they emphasize the message? How is the argument strengthened through their rhetoric? Determine these details before writing your rhetorical analysis instead of just scratching the surface as you would in a summary.
A rhetorical analysis is a deconstruction of a work, and the rhetoric in and around it. As Richard did, this can be furthered by asking versions of the seven basic questions about the work. All six of the basic questions are relevant, though they are not always remembered. Who is both the author, and those that they are attempting to communicate with. What is the message that they are trying to tell them. How is the method and medium by which this communication is attempted. Which is the division within those groups such as who in the audience received what parts of the message, who among the authors attempted to communicate what ideas within the work, and similar. Why is both the reason for the author making an effort to transfer that message to those people, and the reason for which it would succeed or fail to do so. When and where the communication began and ended, while the most easily forgotten of the seven basic questions, are within the determination of those questions marked with why, as they speak of the contexts and circumstances within which the idea of communication arose, was conveyed, and was received.
ReplyDeleteThe three modes of persuasion are illustrated in those questions. Ethos is found within the answer to who made the work in question, and the credibility thereof. Pathos is the relation between the method, subject, and audience of the communication. Logos is the message, and the reasoning behind the message and the communication of it. The three modes come together to determine the result of the effort to communicate.
These criteria, when compiled and analyzed, form a rhetorical analysis of a given work, be it a book, film, or even just a situation.