For example, she refers to a person named Muriel Spark in her essay without giving any sort of elaboration or explanation of who that person is. First, her article is very unorganized and unclear at times. ![]() Logos is not presented well in Lamott’s “Shitty First Drafts” for several reasons. Including these aspects are all significant parts of logos in a rhetorical argument. Logos includes having good organization, language, and word choices in an article, supporting the argument with effective evidence, and backing up claims with facts and statistics. Logos, the second mode of persuasion Aristotle discusses, refers to the logic of the rhetorical argument. Lamott does not leave it out as she displays in her writing about Muriel Sparks in the article: “One might hope for bad things to rain down on a person like this” (Lamott 22). Her writing is known for being humorous and self-deprecating, which may be good for entertainment, but I believe that kind of writing should be left out of a rhetorical argument. Based on Lamott’s background and writing history, one may say that ethos has a strong and positive presence in the rhetorical argument however, as the reader goes through the article, he may find that through her tone and aggressiveness, she is less credible than what her résumé says. Ethos is important because for the audience to be convinced, they must be able to trust him and what he has to say. Ethos refers to how credible the rhetor is, based on his character, the way he writes, and his background. Aristotle discusses these words as the three aspects necessary for good rhetoric, or modes of persuasion. Much of a persuasive rhetorical argument comes from whether or not it appeals to the concepts of ethos, logos, and pathos. For example, she could include quotes from renowned writers who always write shitty first drafts, or gather statistics from studies that have been done on how people write, etc. I’m not suggesting that Lamott rid the article of all sarcasm and humor, as that is what makes her unique as a writer, but I believe it could be improved immensely by more evidence that supports her rhetorical argument. If Lamott wants to not only convince readers looking for a more enjoyable and amusing read, but readers that are persuaded more by facts, applicable evidence, and argument support, th e an she should turn down the sarcastic tone and make it a more well-rounded article. However, it depends on how young or old the audience reading the paper is, as a younger audience may find it more convincing and entertaining, while an older, more literal audience may find it offensive and lacking in credibility. While the writing is very detailed and descriptive, it is too straight forward and does not appeal to several audiences. This tone is a bit harsh and uncalled for in a rhetorical argument if the writer wants to be valid. For example, in the article, Lamott writes “We do not think that she has a rich inner life or that God likes her or can even stand her,” referring to another writer (Lamott 22). ![]() While this tone may appeal to readers searching for a humorous and pleasurable article to read, it may not satisfy an audience that is more interested in a valid argument focused on strong evidence and support for her thesis. However, her tone, specifically, comes off as a bit aggressive and extremely sarcastic. In the article, Lamott has a very strong voice, which is necessary in a good rhetorical argument. Lamott’s sarcasm in her article is not an aspect that contributes to a convincing rhetorical argument in that it lacks persuasion to some audiences, some aspects of ethos, logos, and pathos, and a well rounded angle of vision. Lamott may be credible in that she is a novelist and non-fiction writer, however, I feel that her argument in this article makes her less credible (“Anne Lammot”). The article is one that is interesting as she is both sarcastic and humorous throughout the article, but I felt it lacked much evidence and credibility. Lamott tries to convince the reader that everyone writes “shitty first drafts” and that many positives come from those first attempts. Anne Lamott’s “Shitty First Drafts” presents a rhetorical argument attempting to rid the audience’s minds of the notion that excellent writers write elegantly on their first drafts.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |