Here is an excerpt from KR's essay. What are its strengths? How can he empower it?
"The techniques employed by each individual to get their purpose across also varied. in terms of appeal, Bashir definitely leaned more towards pathos while Eli, along with his comrades, turned to ethos mixed with some logos. It is clear from the very beginning of Bashir's argument, mentioned 'screams' and 'pain' in the first paragraph that she wants to evoke a sense of sympathy from her audience. Elie's direct statements, instead, point to the characters and values that drove people to commit certain actions. He tell how people learned to do things, even interpreting events into a sort of proverb: 'In the end a man is like an animal: you give him a whack on the head or the neck, and down he goes ' (Hatzfeld 2). Such a statement is a way for Elie to prove his background and knowledge which relate to ethos and logos. Bashir's entire argument is portrayed through a slight narration which almost always are pathos related."
This paragraph has a good quote that supports and builds upon the rest of the information written about. One thing that could be improved, i believe this is at fault because of the youth of the year, is the comprehension of logos, ethos, and pathos. They are poorly understood and weak rhetorical devices to writer about a lot.
ReplyDeleteKyle's comparison between typical pathos-centric and ethos-centric works are insightful and I did not think of some of them before. I like all of his points and his quote, and this passage is near perfect except for that last line, which I felt looked out of place.
ReplyDelete