10-24-12 Blog

When discussing "flow" of a paper, I had a very hard time grasping the concept.  I understood when a paper didn't "flow" well, but I had hard time pinpointing exactly how I could improve the "flow" of a paper. Sometimes, I find myself more concerned with transitioning between paragraphs and making the paper seem seamless  rather than arguing my point.  I think Prendergrast's suggestions are helpful because I struggle with this process and I have a better understanding of the concept. 

During the workshop we didn't discuss style directly, but a lot of the critiques made by my peers were indeed on matters of style.  I realize that credibility as an author is defined by avoiding  grammatical  and spelling errors but style is what makes an article interesting. I do believe the workshop has helped me improve my style, because having my peers read my arguments gives me great insight on how relatable and  interesting my paper is. 

10/15/12

A rhetorical analysis  is a "close reading of a text to find how and whether it works to persuade" (97).  A rhetorical analysis does not debate the argument being made by the author, but rather how the author uses evidence and analysis in order to persuade the reader to the point being made. 

I realize I must effectively answer the questions: what is the purpose, who is the audience, what emotional appeals does the author implement, how facts are used to persuade, and who is making the argument?  By answering these questions I will have a better understanding of the argument being made, and then I can effectively provide my own rhetorical analysis.  

When the authors says "show readers where and why an argument makes sense," he means that the readers must first be informed about the issue.  Then, you must "show" the readers your evidence by laying it out in a clear and concise way that makes sense and persuades the reader to your position.  This is different than "telling" the reader because "telling" a position doesn't always mean that you were  successful in attempting to persuade.  By showing the reader an argument and why it makes sense, you have successfully provided sufficient material to make your claim believable.   As the old saying goes "seeing is believing."

10-10-12

The Axe ad analyzed by Josh I think in a lot of way s is way off.  The main focus of this ad is to sell cologne by using comedy.  In the ad, Axe uses sex to sell their product but that is a normal practice for ads catering to both men and women.  I also believe Josh is wrong when he claims the message of the ad " appears to be that if men use Axe Essence body spray, they will attract sexy women in lingerie, and will lust for those women over their ordinary girlfriends."  I think the message is quite clear, Axe believes men are made of two equal parts:  the upper half is a nice guy casually making small talk with his girlfriend.  The bottom half is the bad side craving sexual sex.  Axe's message is that the product is for both sides of you.  

Josh focuses his review only on sex and totally forgets there is a comedic point to the ad.  Axe often uses sex in an over the top manner to  be funny and gain attention for their product not with the intention to make a statment.  Josh is looking too deep into a very shallow ad.

 I would have added a negative expression on the woman's face as she observed his lower half looking at the mannequin.  Generally, people seem amused by  a male with a high sex drive getting busted by his girlfriend and I think that could have add another layer to this ad.