Guide to Writing a Rhetorical Analysis

1. Finding a Topic (please select from the group of speeches in your Week Three folder.
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=9&v=zrp-v2tHaDo OR
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=71&v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

A rhetorical analysis is usually assigned: you’re asked to show how an argument works and to assess its effectiveness. When you can choose your own subject for analysis, look for one or more of the following qualities:

• a complex verbal or visual argument that challenges you — or disturbs or pleases you
• a text that raises current or enduring issues of substance
• a text that you believe should be taken more seriously

Look for arguments to analyze in the editorial and op-ed pages of any news- paper, political magazines such as the Nation or National Review, Web sites of organizations and interest groups, political blogs such as Huffington Post or Power Line, corporate Web sites that post their TV ad spots, videos and statements posted to YouTube, and so on.

2. Researching Your Topic

Once you’ve got a text to analyze, find out all you can about it. Use library or Web resources to explore:

• who the author is and what his or her credentials are?
• if the author is an institution, what it does, what its sources of funding are, who its members are, and so on
• who is publishing or sponsoring the piece, and what the organization typically publishes?
• what the leanings or biases of the author and publisher might be
• what the context of the argument is — what preceded or provoked it and how others have responded to it

3. Formulating a Claim

Begin with a hypothesis. A full thesis might not become evident until you’re well into your analysis, but your final thesis should reflect the complexity of the piece that you’re studying. In developing a thesis, consider questions such as the following:

• How can I describe what this argument achieves?
• What is the purpose, and is it accomplished?
• What audiences does the argument address and what audiences does it ignore, and why?
• Which of its rhetorical features will likely influence readers most: ethos of the author? emotional appeals? logical progression? style?
• What aspects of the argument work better than others?
• How do the rhetorical elements interact?

Here’s the hardest part for most writers of rhetorical analyses: whether you agree or disagree with an argument usually doesn’t matter in a rhetorical analysis. You’ve got to stay out of the fray and pay attention only to how — and to how well—the argument works.

4. Examples of Possible Claims for a Rhetorical Analysis

• Some people admire the directness and confidence of Hillary Clinton; others are put off by her bland and sometimes tone-deaf rhetoric. A close look at several of her speeches and public appearances will illuminate both sides of this debate.
• Today’s editorial in the Daily Collegian about campus crimes may scare first-year students, but its anecdotal reporting doesn’t get down to hard numbers — and for a good reason. Those statistics don’t back the position taken by the editors.
• The image board 4chan has been called an “Internet hate machine,” yet others claim it as a great boon to creativity. A close analysis of its home- page can help to settle this debate.
• The original design of New York’s Freedom Tower, with its torqued surfaces and evocative spire, made a stronger argument about American values than its replacement, a fortress-like skyscraper stripped of imagination and unable to make any statement except “I’m 1,776 feet tall.”

5. Thinking about organization

Your rhetorical analysis is likely to include the following:

• Facts about the text you’re analyzing: Provide the author’s name; the title or name of the work; its place of publication or its location; the date it was published or viewed.
• Contexts for the argument: Readers need to know where the text is coming from, to what it may be responding, in what controversies it might be embroiled, and so on. Don’t assume that they can infer the important contextual elements.
• A synopsis of the text that you’re analyzing: If you can’t attach the original argument, you must summarize it in enough detail so that a reader can imagine it. Even if you attach a copy of the piece, the analysis should include a summary.
• Some claim about the work’s rhetorical effectiveness: It might be a simple evaluative claim or something more complex. The claim can come early in the paper, or you might build up to it, providing the evidence that leads toward the conclusion you’ve reached.
• A detailed analysis of how the argument works: Although you’ll probably analyze rhetorical components separately, don’t let your analysis become a dull roster of emotional, ethical, and logical appeals. Your rhetorical analysis should be an argument itself that supports a claim; a simple list of rhetorical appeals won’t make much of a point.
• Evidence for every part of the analysis.
• An assessment of alternative views and counterarguments to your own analysis.

Rubric

Rhetorical Analysis Rubric

Guide to Writing a Rhetorical Analysis

Finding a Topic

A rhetorical analysis is usually assigned: you’re asked to show how an argument works and to assess its effectiveness. When you can choose your own subject for analysis, look for one or more of the following qualities:

• a complex verbal or visual argument that challenges you — or disturbs or pleases you
• a text that raises current or enduring issues of substance
• a text that you believe should be taken more seriously

Look for arguments to analyze in the editorial and op-ed pages of any news- paper, political magazines such as the Nation or National Review, Web sites of organizations and interest groups, political blogs such as Huffington Post or Power Line, corporate Web sites that post their TV ad spots, videos and statements posted to YouTube, and so on.

Researching Your Topic

Once you’ve got a text to analyze, find out all you can about it. Use library or Web resources to explore:

• who the author is and what his or her credentials are
• if the author is an institution, what it does, what its sources of funding are, who its members are, and so on
• who is publishing or sponsoring the piece, and what the organization typically publishes
• what the leanings or biases of the author and publisher might be
• what the context of the argument is — what preceded or provoked it and how others have responded to it

Formulating a Claim

Begin with a hypothesis. A full thesis might not become evident until you’re well into your analysis, but your final thesis should reflect the complexity of the piece that you’re studying. In developing a thesis, consider questions such as the following:

• How can I describe what this argument achieves?
• What is the purpose, and is it accomplished?
• What audiences does the argument address and what audiences does it ignore, and why?
• Which of its rhetorical features will likely influence readers most: ethos of the author? emotional appeals? logical progression? style?
• What aspects of the argument work better than others?
• How do the rhetorical elements interact?

Here’s the hardest part for most writers of rhetorical analyses: whether you agree or disagree with an argument usually doesn’t matter in a rhetorical analysis. You’ve got to stay out of the fray and pay attention only to how — and to how well—the argument works.

Examples of Possible Claims for a Rhetorical Analysis

• Some people admire the directness and confidence of Hillary Clinton; others are put off by her bland and sometimes tone-deaf rhetoric. A close look at several of her speeches and public appearances will illuminate both sides of this debate.
• Today’s editorial in the Daily Collegian about campus crimes may scare first-year students, but its anecdotal reporting doesn’t get down to hard numbers — and for a good reason. Those statistics don’t back the position taken by the editors.
• The image board 4chan has been called an “Internet hate machine,” yet others claim it as a great boon to creativity. A close analysis of its home- page can help to settle this debate.
• The original design of New York’s Freedom Tower, with its torqued surfaces and evocative spire, made a stronger argument about American values than its replacement, a fortress-like skyscraper stripped of imagination and unable to make any statement except “I’m 1,776 feet tall.”

Thinking about organization

Your rhetorical analysis is likely to include the following:

• Facts about the text you’re analyzing: Provide the author’s name; the title or name of the work; its place of publication or its location; the date it was published or viewed.
• Contexts for the argument: Readers need to know where the text is coming from, to what it may be responding, in what controversies it might be embroiled, and so on. Don’t assume that they can infer the important contextual elements.
• A synopsis of the text that you’re analyzing: If you can’t attach the original argument, you must summarize it in enough detail so that a reader can imagine it. Even if you attach a copy of the piece, the analysis should include a summary.
• Some claim about the work’s rhetorical effectiveness: It might be a simple evaluative claim or something more complex. The claim can come early in the paper, or you might build up to it, providing the evidence that leads toward the conclusion you’ve reached.
• A detailed analysis of how the argument works: Although you’ll probably analyze rhetorical components separately, don’t let your analysis become a dull roster of emotional, ethical, and logical appeals. Your rhetorical analysis should be an argument itself that supports a claim; a simple list of rhetorical appeals won’t make much of a point.
• Evidence for every part of the analysis.
• An assessment of alternative views and counterarguments to your own analysis.