Rhetorical Analysis #4
Garnet Ray
Jones
English 103:14
4/28/2010
When I was writing the fourth rhetorical analysis I started it the wrong way. Instead of making it a rhetorical paper it was more of an informational paper.
I did not use pathos, ethos, and logos very effectively either. I think I should have either interviewed someone from my work that has been in the industry for more than twenty years. That would have given the paper more ethos given the experience of the individual being interviewed.
With all the experience between us I would have been able to give several examples of ordering one thing and getting something totally different because of the lack of documentation and confusion inside the company that was hired to build the product. The information I believe was easy to read and understand even if it did ramble on a little.
Another view I could have obtained is the side of the vendor. This if anything would have evened out the story and both sides tell there side of it. I feel like I didn’t give the enough details about the projects themselves and the details about it. This would have given credibility to the information.
The audience for this type of paper would be any person that has bought a product that has been custom made or that works for a firm that produces a custom product. When writing about the physical context of the paper I don’t think I covered it that well but it does cover a physical context when talking about the products being designed. The social context was covered but not identified when talking about how the two sides do not communicate to get the correct finished product. Historically speaking this was a weak paper with not a lot of data to back up all the opinions given.
The images in the comic did not have a lot of text with them but visually they told very detailed story but I did not use this information effectively. I could have went into more detail on each image and told the story with more feeling to give the paper more pathos.
I don’t think the style of this paper caught the attention of the audience like I wanted it to. After reading it after putting it away for several weeks I really think I should have changed the format and written it with different order and context. One that would have caught the eye of the audience and kept it throughout the paper.
As a whole the paper was not that bad but it could have been a whole lot better. Looking back I wish I would have put more time and energy into it.
Word Count: 451
Jones
English 103:14
4/28/2010
When I was writing the fourth rhetorical analysis I started it the wrong way. Instead of making it a rhetorical paper it was more of an informational paper.
I did not use pathos, ethos, and logos very effectively either. I think I should have either interviewed someone from my work that has been in the industry for more than twenty years. That would have given the paper more ethos given the experience of the individual being interviewed.
With all the experience between us I would have been able to give several examples of ordering one thing and getting something totally different because of the lack of documentation and confusion inside the company that was hired to build the product. The information I believe was easy to read and understand even if it did ramble on a little.
Another view I could have obtained is the side of the vendor. This if anything would have evened out the story and both sides tell there side of it. I feel like I didn’t give the enough details about the projects themselves and the details about it. This would have given credibility to the information.
The audience for this type of paper would be any person that has bought a product that has been custom made or that works for a firm that produces a custom product. When writing about the physical context of the paper I don’t think I covered it that well but it does cover a physical context when talking about the products being designed. The social context was covered but not identified when talking about how the two sides do not communicate to get the correct finished product. Historically speaking this was a weak paper with not a lot of data to back up all the opinions given.
The images in the comic did not have a lot of text with them but visually they told very detailed story but I did not use this information effectively. I could have went into more detail on each image and told the story with more feeling to give the paper more pathos.
I don’t think the style of this paper caught the attention of the audience like I wanted it to. After reading it after putting it away for several weeks I really think I should have changed the format and written it with different order and context. One that would have caught the eye of the audience and kept it throughout the paper.
As a whole the paper was not that bad but it could have been a whole lot better. Looking back I wish I would have put more time and energy into it.
Word Count: 451
Title.
Paragraph.
