Effectiveness of Using Visual Formats with Rhetorical Tools Compared to Textual Formats

One of the premises of this ENGL 102 course is the concept that everything’s an argument. With that premise, well, there sure is a lot to analyze rhetorically in the world. Lucky us! Your assignment for this first essay is to conduct a rhetorical analysis of one topic across two different media. Chapter 6 of our textbook, the appropriately named Everything’s an Argument, is critical in helping guide your inquiry and your analysis. At a minimum, your analysis should address the following for each argument you analyze (from ch. 6) to an appropriate degree:

●        What is the purpose of the argument? What does it hope to achieve?

●        Who is the audience, and how do you know? Who is ignored or excluded? Any stakeholders left out?

●        What appeals or techniques does the argument use--ethos, pathos, logos--and how?

●        What type of argument is it, and how does the genre/medium affect the argument?

●        Who is making the argument? What ethos does it create, and how does it do so? What values does the ethos evoke? How does it make the writer/creator seem trustworthy?

●        What authorities does the argument rely on or appeal to?

●        What facts, reasoning, and evidence are used in the argument? How are they presented?

●        What claims does the argument make? What issues are raised--or ignored or evaded?

●        What are the contexts--social, political, historical, cultural--for this argument? Whose interests does it serve? Who gains or loses by it?

●        How is the argument organized or arranged? What media does the argument use and how effectively? How does that medium limit and/or extend the argument? (Textual limitations? Accessibility limitations or opportunities?)

●        How does the language or style of the argument persuade an audience?

●        Can you identify any logical fallacies in either argument? Explain.

Additionally, your analysis should consider elements of design as they apply to the text/composition. While these questions may not apply to an editorial, for example, they would certainly apply to a web page, a Twitter or Facebook page, a Tumblr, a poster, a brochure, etc. Consider the following, which we’ll continue to study this term:

●        How do the use of white space and balance impact the composition?

●        Discuss hierarchy as it applies to the design/document/text.

●        How do colors and contrast work to develop understanding and rhetorical effect? (Or how do they fail to do so?)

●        How do consistency and repetition of design elements function in the composition?

●        How do selected images impact the design and attempt to influence the reader?

●        How do selected typeface and fonts either help or hinder understanding of the composition?

Process:

1. Select a topic about which there are multiple public opinions. Ideally, the topic would fall somewhere within your professional or personal life, something applicable to you or people of your age.
2. Select your artifacts. Attempt to find an extended piece of public writing about the topic (editorial, essay in a magazine, etc.) and then locate a composition (social media page, brochure, etc.) in a different medium on the same topic.
3. Consider the rhetorical situation. Who are the authors, what are their purposes, who are their intended audiences, and what contexts must be explained or assumed in order for the argument to resonate with that audience?
4. Consider the appeals--ethos, pathos, logos--and consider how kairos applies to the argument.
5. Consider the visual elements discussed above.
6. Submit your proposal to Canvas.
7. Develop a clear thesis statement about the rhetorical effectiveness of the chosen texts/artifacts. (See examples on p. 113.)
8. Support that thesis statement as you analyze the texts/artifacts in essay format. (Not a numbered or bulleted list.)
9. Revise through our peer review processes, your own processes, and with the help of the writing center.
10. Celebrate.

A couple words of caution:

1. Avoid interjecting your own opinion on the matter. This is an analysis, an evaluation, so your opinion is already situated in how you personally interpret these texts/compositions. You’ll be supporting your structured argument in the next essay.
2. Avoid creating a chronological list that addresses each point one by one without substantial development. Remember that this should be in essay format, perhaps in four sections. Final drafts may result in about 2,000 words, give or take.

The essay will be graded as follows (this is also essentially the peer review guide):

1. To what degree does the introduction do each of the following? (25 points)

●     Provide sufficient background to the situation. Consider what questions you have about the topic that aren’t answered in the introduction section.

●     Engage the reader from the first line. Does it have a hook of sorts?

●     Introduce the texts chosen for analysis.

●     Include a claim of evaluation on the rhetorical effectiveness of the chosen texts.

●     Preview the conclusions drawn from the analysis.

2. How thoroughly does the analysis portion of the essay address the questions in the assignment sheet (below), for both artifacts/texts? (25 points):

●     What is the purpose of the argument? What does it hope to achieve?

●     Who is the audience, and how do you know? Who is ignored or excluded? Any stakeholders left out?

●     What appeals or techniques does the argument use--ethos, pathos, logos--and how?

●     What type of argument is it, and how does the genre/medium affect the argument?

●     Who is making the argument? What ethos does it create, and how does it do so? What values does the ethos evoke? How does it make the writer/creator seem trustworthy?

●     What authorities does the argument rely on or appeal to?

●     What facts, reasoning, and evidence are used in the argument? How are they presented?

●     What claims does the argument make (main thesis statement, others)? What issues are raised--or ignored or evaded?

●     What are the contexts--social, political, historical, cultural--for this argument? Whose interests does it serve? Who gains or loses by it?

●     How is the argument organized or arranged? What media does the argument use and how effectively? How does that medium limit and/or extend the argument? (Textual limitations? Accessibility limitations or opportunities?)

●     How does the language or style of the argument persuade an audience?

●     Can you identify any logical fallacies in either argument? Explain.

3. For any texts/artifacts that are include visual elements, how effectively does the author consider the following? (25 points; scale is adjusted for analyses that do not include visual elements, of course):

●     How do the use of white space and balance impact the composition?

●     Discuss hierarchy as it applies to the design/document/text.

●     How do colors and contrast work to develop understanding and rhetorical effect? (Or how do they fail to do so?)

●     How do consistency and repetition of design elements function in the composition?

●     How do selected images impact the design and attempt to influence the reader?

●     How do selected typeface and fonts either help or hinder understanding of the composition?

4. For the conclusion section, how effectively does the author do each of the following? (25 points):

●     Highlight key conclusions from the analysis.

●     Draw connections between the two texts/artifacts.

●     Underscore the implications for this analysis on stakeholders.

●     Leave a lasting impression regarding the significance of this project on the reader.