Everyday we find ourselves dealing with rhetorical situations. When you meet someone for the first time you probably take into consideration what they are wearing, how they talk, and whether they are friendly or not. You may analyze them like this so that you can get an idea of what kind of person they are. However, when you study or examine their manners you do not think of these questions. It happens without our knowing. We quickly take the information given to us and make a decision about that person. We see this within media as well.
Media is where this kind of analysis needs to take place. The media works by persuasion and is consistently telling you to buy something or wanting you to believe something is true. This is where we need to analyze the rhetorical situations we see everyday. We must start with the rhetor. Laura Bolin Carroll defines the rhetor as “the way we use language and images to persuade” (46). The rhetor is someone who believes we need a change in reality and we accomplish this change through rhetorical discourse.
The audience, exigence, and constraints help us to better analyze rhetorical situations. The audience of the rhetorical situation are the potential costumers. The exigence is the problem or something that needs to be changed. Lastly, Keith Grant-Davie defines constraints as “factors that limit or focus the response to the exigence (problem or need) in a given situation” (102). After getting an idea of what a rhetorical situation is and what factors attribute to it, I will analyze my own visual argument.
The rhetor of this visual argument would be First World countries and their governments. They keep track of the global population and the declining amount of resources. The audience of my visual argument would be the global population especially Third World countries. We are making the population grow which is putting a struggle on the amount of resources we have. Third World countries still believe having ten children is the way to go because you can all work for the good of the family. However, Third World Countries are starving because there are not enough resources. The exigence of the visual argument is the fact that we, as a human population, are not taking into consideration the resources we have. We are allowing the population to grow even though our resources cannot provide for us all. Thousands of people are starving in East Africa. The constraints of this argument would be that in Third World Countries they do not watch television nor do they have internet so they would probably never see this visual argument. Another constraint would be that in First World Countries they are only having two or three children to a couple. If they were to see this visual argument they would believe they are not contributing to it. Lastly, the fact that it is a cartoon kind of down-plays the issue as a whole.
The specific argument is that as a global population we are running out of resources. Today people are constantly consuming, shopping and buying and if we do not start to think rationally about our resources we will not have any. After ‘reading’ the visual argument, I believe the rhetor hopes people realize that we only have so many resources and we, continually growing as a population, are going to use them all up if we do not change our ways.
Another way of ‘reading’ this visual argument is to look at the ways the rhetor tries to persuade you. Laura Bolin Carroll defines logos as “argument for reason, and it usually appeals to an audience’s intellectual side” (52). The logos of my visual argument would be the fact that we continually have a growing population but there seems to be nothing going on to stop it. Intellectuals would see this as a major problem in our society today. Pathos appeals to the audience’s emotional side. Within my argument the fact that the stork is holding ten babies could have some emotional ties. Babies are viewed as innocent and pure and we see them pulling on our resources. However, we all know it is not the babies fault, but they use babies to show the problem. Laura Bolin Carroll defines ethos as “the credibility of the rhetor - which can be a person or organization” (54). I believe the rhetor of this visual argument would be First World countries and their governments because they keep track of global population and the declining amount of resources. If the government were to show the populations this visual argument I believe more people would really consider what is going on because it is from the government which would prove the credibility and give the argument a better sense of ethos.
Overall, I consider this visual argument to be truthful in the fact that our growing population is weighing heavily on our resources. However, I believe the pathos could be stronger with an issue such as this. Everyone has seen those commercials about starving children in Africa and that is based around the same matter, and they use pathos to their advantage. This visual argument is a cartoon and the stock is a fictional character known for bringing babies to our windows. It demotes the problem to be of lesser importance. Nevertheless, it is a good visual argument for the given issue. Some people cringe when watching those commercials with starving children, and so this cartoon is less heartbreaking and more playful.
References:
Carroll, Laura Bolin. “Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Steps Toward Rhetorical Analysis.” Writing Spaces: Reading on Writing. Vol. 1. Parlor Press. 2010. Pg 45-58. Web. 5 February 2012.
Grant-Davie, Keith. "Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents." Writing about Writing. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2011.119.
"Population". http://students.uta.edu/an/ans4397/1302/va.html
No comments:
Post a Comment