assignments ENGL 226 Writing About Writing:
Rhetorical Analysis
|
Need to be in touch with me?
LEE TORDA, PhD 200 Maxwell Library Bridgewater State University [email protected] [email protected] www.leetorda.com |
Fall 2023 Office Hours for Students
M (in-person) 3:15-4:15 W (Zoom) 4:00-5:30 Click here to attend Zoom office hours |
Overview: A bit of History
If the first part of our class was an introduction to the composition part of Rhetoric and Composition, this part of the class explores the Rhetoric part. Rhetoric is a very old field of study. You still see it as part of your own college education most notably in two places: the required composition class that we’ve been exploring and the public speaking course that most incoming students take at most universities. At BSU, you might also see a connection to Foundations of Logical Reasoning. In all three of these classes, how to make a strong argument in a variety of genre is the primary focus of the learning outcomes.
Historically, before there were English departments, there were Rhetoric departments. At Harvard, for instance, The Boyleston Professorship of Rhetoric and Oratory was established in 1804–nearly 75 years before there was an English department. In fact, the study of literature, gradually replaced the study of rhetoric at the university level.
When Rhetoric and Composition began to take hold as a discipline, a branch of scholars looked to rhetoric, and drew a through line, to that rhetorical past to identify what the field was about (they wanted to jettison the image of the field as a bunch of school marms fixing grammar errors). Rhetoric implied a methodology and a content.
But we can go even farther back, of course, to classical Greek and Roman philosophers (like Aristotle, but not just Aristotle), who actively studied and argued about the role of philosophy versus the role of rhetoric.
Rhetoric is Everywhere
Everything has meaning, and how that meaning gets made and communicated is the province of rhetorical analysis. To analyze how meaning is made–in an image, in a text, in a speaker, in an artifact, is to have power over it. To simply accept a message is to be swayed by it. If you do so blindly, you are at the whim of the argument and, thus, potentially a victim of bad argument, bad evidence, bad motives. As the video we watched for class, rhetoric is epistemic. Rhetoric is a way of knowing the world–and, in knowing the world, we can affect change. It’s an incredibly powerful idea.
That said, rhetorical analysis, the actual action of it, should feel familiar to you. Literary analysis is the work of making meaning in a literary text. There are times when Rhetorical Analysis seems to feel exactly like Literary Analysis. However, I would argue that the difference between the two is 1) scope and 2) purpose. Literary analysis is largely about understanding and interpretation, but it is not (typically) about action. Rhetoric, on the other hand, is inherently tied to action in the actual world.
Details
For this assignment, you will be crafting your own rhetorical analysis. We’ll do some work doing rhetorical analysis. We’ll read (and listen to) some examples of rhetorical analysis. You’ll need to identify what you want to do your rhetorical analysis on (you’ll have a chance to talk with me about it before you dig in). This will be a 750-1000 word final product. Essentially you are going to look at what a speaker/text/artifact is communicating and the effectiveness of the choices the speaker/text/artifact makes to communicate it.
In addition to the analysis, you’ll need to do a reflection that identifies the rhetorical lens you used to construct your analysis (500 words).
As you work through your analysis, use these questions as a guide to help you figure out what you want to say:
How you will be evaluated.
The Rhetorical Analysis is worth 15% of your final grade. In order to earn a B for that 15% you must:
To earn an A for that 15% of your grade, you must:
To earn a C for that 15% of your grade, you must:
If you do not meet the requirements for the "C" grade you will fail this 15% of your grade in this class.
If the first part of our class was an introduction to the composition part of Rhetoric and Composition, this part of the class explores the Rhetoric part. Rhetoric is a very old field of study. You still see it as part of your own college education most notably in two places: the required composition class that we’ve been exploring and the public speaking course that most incoming students take at most universities. At BSU, you might also see a connection to Foundations of Logical Reasoning. In all three of these classes, how to make a strong argument in a variety of genre is the primary focus of the learning outcomes.
Historically, before there were English departments, there were Rhetoric departments. At Harvard, for instance, The Boyleston Professorship of Rhetoric and Oratory was established in 1804–nearly 75 years before there was an English department. In fact, the study of literature, gradually replaced the study of rhetoric at the university level.
When Rhetoric and Composition began to take hold as a discipline, a branch of scholars looked to rhetoric, and drew a through line, to that rhetorical past to identify what the field was about (they wanted to jettison the image of the field as a bunch of school marms fixing grammar errors). Rhetoric implied a methodology and a content.
But we can go even farther back, of course, to classical Greek and Roman philosophers (like Aristotle, but not just Aristotle), who actively studied and argued about the role of philosophy versus the role of rhetoric.
Rhetoric is Everywhere
Everything has meaning, and how that meaning gets made and communicated is the province of rhetorical analysis. To analyze how meaning is made–in an image, in a text, in a speaker, in an artifact, is to have power over it. To simply accept a message is to be swayed by it. If you do so blindly, you are at the whim of the argument and, thus, potentially a victim of bad argument, bad evidence, bad motives. As the video we watched for class, rhetoric is epistemic. Rhetoric is a way of knowing the world–and, in knowing the world, we can affect change. It’s an incredibly powerful idea.
That said, rhetorical analysis, the actual action of it, should feel familiar to you. Literary analysis is the work of making meaning in a literary text. There are times when Rhetorical Analysis seems to feel exactly like Literary Analysis. However, I would argue that the difference between the two is 1) scope and 2) purpose. Literary analysis is largely about understanding and interpretation, but it is not (typically) about action. Rhetoric, on the other hand, is inherently tied to action in the actual world.
Details
For this assignment, you will be crafting your own rhetorical analysis. We’ll do some work doing rhetorical analysis. We’ll read (and listen to) some examples of rhetorical analysis. You’ll need to identify what you want to do your rhetorical analysis on (you’ll have a chance to talk with me about it before you dig in). This will be a 750-1000 word final product. Essentially you are going to look at what a speaker/text/artifact is communicating and the effectiveness of the choices the speaker/text/artifact makes to communicate it.
In addition to the analysis, you’ll need to do a reflection that identifies the rhetorical lens you used to construct your analysis (500 words).
As you work through your analysis, use these questions as a guide to help you figure out what you want to say:
- What is the author’s purpose?
- What is the context of this text–what surrounds the communication?
- Do they focus closely on their key claims, or do they discuss various topics?
- What tone do they take—angry or sympathetic? Personal or authoritative? Formal or informal?
- Who seems to be the intended audience? Is this audience likely to be successfully reached and convinced?
- What kinds of evidence are presented? (pathos, logos, ethos)
- What choices did the author make to communicate their message? How effective did you find the communicative event?
How you will be evaluated.
The Rhetorical Analysis is worth 15% of your final grade. In order to earn a B for that 15% you must:
- Produce a rough draft for the in-class workshop
- Respond with care as a reader of other people’s texts
- Produce a revised draft based on feedback from workshop of 750 words by the deadline
- Produce a reflection (500 words) that identifies the approach you took and the rhetorical concepts you used to develop your analysis.
To earn an A for that 15% of your grade, you must:
- Do all of the things required for the B grade
- Have a one-on-one conference with me with your post-workshop draft
- Demonstrate your understanding of key rhetorical concepts in both your 750 word analysis and in your 500 word reflection.
- Demonstrate your understanding of how rhetorical analysis is like and not like literary analysis in your analysis and reflection
To earn a C for that 15% of your grade, you must:
- Produce a daft of your 750 word rhetorical analysis by the deadline
- Produce a reflection (500 words) that identifies the approach you took and the rhetorical concepts you used to develop your analysis.
If you do not meet the requirements for the "C" grade you will fail this 15% of your grade in this class.