SAM'S SPEECH
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEMdXhfO-Wk&NR=1
A:You (Frodo)
B:can accomplish your task
Reason: b/c you will hold on to the good worth fighting for.
IA: Whatever helps Frodo to accomplish his task will also help him hold on to the good worth fighting for.
Audience:
Frodo, charged with the responsibility of destroying the ring, is weighed down and close to giving up. Sam directs his speech to him in the movie. Sam's speech is generally applicable, but is used to persuade Frodo that he must fight to keep going and accomplish his task.
The goal:
To persuade Frodo that he must not give up. He wants Frodo to understand that the darkness that they have faced and will face will pass if he just keeps fighting for it.
How the argument is made:
Sam simplistically appeals to the emotions through pathos as he invites Frodo to remember childhood stories. He made a point to say that the stories that really mattered are the ones that involved darkness and danger and the two being overcome in the end. He creates a relationship with Frodo through Ethos in mentioning this point, as they are both facing a rather dangerous and dark task themselves. Thus Sam's argument is relevant as well as typical as he and Frodo are both in a similar situation and know the stories he alludes to. Obviously, Sam's appeal to Frodo's emotions is the strongest tool in his argument. Filling Frodo with hope of victory and giving him a motive to keep fighting is exactly what he needed in his downtrodden and overwhelmed state.
Is it effective?
I believe it is. Sam's speech was very moving and heartfelt. Right before his speech is given, Frodo nearly kills him, having forgotten everything Sam goes on to remind him of. Sam gives his argument in a simplistic way that appeals to Frodo on a very deep level of friendship that Frodo had suppressed through the length of his journey. It brings him to a remembrance not of their bleak reality, but of a hope he once believed in.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
MY PAPER A (from the viewpoint of my audience)
ARGUMENT:
A: Adopting a stricly Neutralist approach
B: is insufiicient when treating a child with language disorders
Reason: because a Neutralist approach alone does not provide therapy conducive to the bettering of a child's social communication.
IA: Whatever does not better a child's social communication in treatment is an insufficient method
GOAL: That new SLP's adapt both a neutralist and normativist approach to speech therapy.
AUDIENCE: Speech language pathologists recently entering the field. The author seems to portray the audience as fairly inexperienced, as many explanations of terms and concepts are given. These SLP's seem to be at the point that they have yet to decide on what approach they want to adopt, or have been taught and heavily rely on standardized testing in order to understand a child's language abilities.
HOW IT IS MADE:
The author through ethos establishes herself as a credible source on the information being presented. Her representation of the Neutralist approach and tactics, such as standardized and norm-referenced testing seems to be quite fair and accurate, giving credit to it's positive points. She used very little pathos, but logos is another tool used often to show that the information being presented clearly supports her point. However, she does not reveal a logical solution until the very end of her paper.
EFFECTIVE?
Her knowledge and evidence supporting her arguments lack a little bit of solidity, however the information she presented clearly showed that the Neutralist approach alone was not sufficient.
ARGUMENT:
A: Adopting a stricly Neutralist approach
B: is insufiicient when treating a child with language disorders
Reason: because a Neutralist approach alone does not provide therapy conducive to the bettering of a child's social communication.
IA: Whatever does not better a child's social communication in treatment is an insufficient method
GOAL: That new SLP's adapt both a neutralist and normativist approach to speech therapy.
AUDIENCE: Speech language pathologists recently entering the field. The author seems to portray the audience as fairly inexperienced, as many explanations of terms and concepts are given. These SLP's seem to be at the point that they have yet to decide on what approach they want to adopt, or have been taught and heavily rely on standardized testing in order to understand a child's language abilities.
HOW IT IS MADE:
The author through ethos establishes herself as a credible source on the information being presented. Her representation of the Neutralist approach and tactics, such as standardized and norm-referenced testing seems to be quite fair and accurate, giving credit to it's positive points. She used very little pathos, but logos is another tool used often to show that the information being presented clearly supports her point. However, she does not reveal a logical solution until the very end of her paper.
EFFECTIVE?
Her knowledge and evidence supporting her arguments lack a little bit of solidity, however the information she presented clearly showed that the Neutralist approach alone was not sufficient.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
54 Hour Week/ Low Wages
Fred Ellis, 1885-1965.
Crayon, ink, pencil and opaque white. Published in the Daily Worker.
LC-USZC4-6598
© Robert Ellis.
ARGUMENT:
A: Forcing an overwhelming amount of hours and insufficient wages on workers
B: provides unfit labor conditions in society
Reason: because poor working conditions and under compensation lead to the death of a meaningful and provident life.
IA: Whatever provides unfit labor conditions in society also leads to the death of a meaningful and provident life.
AUDIENCE/GOAL:
His audience is the government and the working class of the early 20th century in the United States. Even though the drawling depicts mine workers, the majority of the working class at the time suffered from being underpaid and overworked, not to mention that many workplaces had harsh environmental conditions. Ellis' political cartoon was targeted to those suffering such conditions at the time as a means of giving them a voice. It was also a forewarning and plea to government officials that something needed to be changed.
HOW THE ARGUMNENT IS MADE:
Ellis uses a combination of pathos and ethos to reach his audience. Using ethos he depicts working men of the day, particularly mine workers, as small and helpless in the face of the towering Death above them, who holds their "54 hour week" and "low wages" like their death sentence. In so doing, he forms a relationship with them by saying "I know what you face every day". Using pathos, Ellis portrays Death as a gargantuan task master, unable to be dominated by his subjects. Instead of depicting an actual mine, Ellis' Death seems to be shepherding the workers into what looks more like a slaughter house labeled "Mines". It is as if he is saying that the end result is inevitable. Ellis' drawing is a hyperbole, and clearly not an accurate depiction, yet this works to his advantage and shares the message he desired.
EFFECTIVE?
I believe it is. Ellis' depiction of Death is the most effective element. It takes up the majority of his cartoon and is the immediate attention grabber, gruesome and unavoidable.
A: Forcing an overwhelming amount of hours and insufficient wages on workers
B: provides unfit labor conditions in society
Reason: because poor working conditions and under compensation lead to the death of a meaningful and provident life.
IA: Whatever provides unfit labor conditions in society also leads to the death of a meaningful and provident life.
AUDIENCE/GOAL:
His audience is the government and the working class of the early 20th century in the United States. Even though the drawling depicts mine workers, the majority of the working class at the time suffered from being underpaid and overworked, not to mention that many workplaces had harsh environmental conditions. Ellis' political cartoon was targeted to those suffering such conditions at the time as a means of giving them a voice. It was also a forewarning and plea to government officials that something needed to be changed.
HOW THE ARGUMNENT IS MADE:
Ellis uses a combination of pathos and ethos to reach his audience. Using ethos he depicts working men of the day, particularly mine workers, as small and helpless in the face of the towering Death above them, who holds their "54 hour week" and "low wages" like their death sentence. In so doing, he forms a relationship with them by saying "I know what you face every day". Using pathos, Ellis portrays Death as a gargantuan task master, unable to be dominated by his subjects. Instead of depicting an actual mine, Ellis' Death seems to be shepherding the workers into what looks more like a slaughter house labeled "Mines". It is as if he is saying that the end result is inevitable. Ellis' drawing is a hyperbole, and clearly not an accurate depiction, yet this works to his advantage and shares the message he desired.
EFFECTIVE?
I believe it is. Ellis' depiction of Death is the most effective element. It takes up the majority of his cartoon and is the immediate attention grabber, gruesome and unavoidable.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Cost of Being a Stay-at-Home Mom: $1 Million
MP Dunleavey
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/CollegeAndFamily/RaiseKids/CostOfBeingAStayAtHomeMom.aspx
ARGUMENT:
A: Mothers
B: can financially afford to leave the workforce and stay at home with their children
Reason: because mothers have so many resources to allow them financial security from home.
IA: Whatever gives mothers the resources to allow them financial security from home will also allow them to afford leaving the workforce.
AUDIENCE:
Her Audience consists of working mothers who have considered staying home with their children but do not think that they can afford it. The author lists several reasons why her audience has qualms about leaving the work force, but their main inhibition is in giving up supplemental income. These are obviously mothers who care for their children very much, and would like to be more of a part of their upbringing, otherwise they would not be considering leaving work to stay home. These women are either vacillating between the decision to leave or stay in the workforce or they are neutral on the idea and willing to hear why this option might work for them.
HOW IT IS MADE:
First of all, the author establishes a relationship with her audience right away through the use of ethos by mentioning that she earned an education, has a child and has been in the workforce. She has made the decision to stay at home and she is obviously successful due to her article being published through a legitimate news source (MSN). Her representation therefore is typical. She is also accurate and fair to those who are against leaving the workforce. She very astute in addressing the concerns of her audience. She provides several resources and suggestions to allow them the opportunity she supports. She presents her information in a very down-to-earth, non-condescending tone, which is important when speaking to her audience.
GOAL: Allow working mothers to see that they have more options than staying in the workforce for supplemental income/can afford to do without it in order to stay at home with their little ones.
EFFECTIVE?:
I honestly have had struggles figuring out if I will be able to stay at home with my little ones. The resources and suggestions she gives are very informative and motivating. I think that this is an effective argument for women wanting to be home, but not sure how to accomplish it or on the fence over this issue.
MP Dunleavey
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/CollegeAndFamily/RaiseKids/CostOfBeingAStayAtHomeMom.aspx
ARGUMENT:
A: Mothers
B: can financially afford to leave the workforce and stay at home with their children
Reason: because mothers have so many resources to allow them financial security from home.
IA: Whatever gives mothers the resources to allow them financial security from home will also allow them to afford leaving the workforce.
AUDIENCE:
Her Audience consists of working mothers who have considered staying home with their children but do not think that they can afford it. The author lists several reasons why her audience has qualms about leaving the work force, but their main inhibition is in giving up supplemental income. These are obviously mothers who care for their children very much, and would like to be more of a part of their upbringing, otherwise they would not be considering leaving work to stay home. These women are either vacillating between the decision to leave or stay in the workforce or they are neutral on the idea and willing to hear why this option might work for them.
HOW IT IS MADE:
First of all, the author establishes a relationship with her audience right away through the use of ethos by mentioning that she earned an education, has a child and has been in the workforce. She has made the decision to stay at home and she is obviously successful due to her article being published through a legitimate news source (MSN). Her representation therefore is typical. She is also accurate and fair to those who are against leaving the workforce. She very astute in addressing the concerns of her audience. She provides several resources and suggestions to allow them the opportunity she supports. She presents her information in a very down-to-earth, non-condescending tone, which is important when speaking to her audience.
GOAL: Allow working mothers to see that they have more options than staying in the workforce for supplemental income/can afford to do without it in order to stay at home with their little ones.
EFFECTIVE?:
I honestly have had struggles figuring out if I will be able to stay at home with my little ones. The resources and suggestions she gives are very informative and motivating. I think that this is an effective argument for women wanting to be home, but not sure how to accomplish it or on the fence over this issue.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)