Your English professor gives you an article titled “A Look at the Dehumanization of Life in Abortion” and tells you to write a rhetorical analysis on it. The goal is to explore the effectiveness of the rhetorician’s techniques but there is a dilemma. You are not allowed to say whether or not you agree with the argument. Tricky right? I would find it challenging to analyze an article without giving your personal opinion on a topic that tends to spark arguments and emotion in many people. Rhetorical analysis only allows you to discuss how the writer makes the argument and whether his or her techniques were used in a successful manner.
However, rhetorical analysis has numerous upsides to it. Although you are not able to provide your perspective on the essay, it teaches the reader how to write a paper that explains how the parts work together to convey a certain effect. The effect can either be to persuade, entertain, or inform. This type of skill gives a writer the capability to write cohesive, meaningful papers since they know how parts flow with each other.
Learning about rhetorical analysis and all of its characteristics has given me a better insight on writing. I have become more aware that every type of composition can be rhetorical since the writer is often trying to reason and/or persuade its reader into their message. Not only can you use rhetorical analysis for essays, but you can also conduct it on a cartoon, advertisement, or a speech.
When looking at both perspectives, the use of rhetorical analysis leans more towards the helpful side.
I really like the introduction. I agree that learning about rhetorical analysis helps a reader see how all the parts go together. It definitely helps people write meaningful papers, but it can also be used badly, depending on what the author is arguing for/against.
ReplyDelete