Unit One Portfolio

- Danny

Cover Sheet

- What is your thesis? How did this particular argument come about?

What I set out to accomplish here was to revisit the actual nature of rhetoric and persuasive language. I try to entail some form of guidelines in the first paragraph of the essay in order to set the standard for the different aspects of this topic that I wanted particularly to address. Since there are multiple related answers that I feel are all necessary to answer the umbrella question of "What is rhetoric?," you will find that the first paragraph provides an outline for the remainder of the essay. If you have concerns about the direction that the essay is going at any point, refer to that first paragraph as it does address one of the topics introduced there. My argument is that rhetoric and persuasive language are elevated to a status beyond which they are due. My goal was to break down this elevated status by examining the true nature of the thing while simultaneously not forgetting the true value of rhetoric. One might consider this a sort of redefinition. I wanted to define rhetoric as I see it by breaking apart the societal notions of what it is, if only to rebuild something new from the ruin. I was inspired to do this primarily because I have long believed that word-peddlers (people who make their livings and build their egos with words) control the societal understanding of persuasive language and thus distort that understanding to suit themselves. I wanted to break this in order to keep things in a more universal perspective.

- Who's your audience and what techniques do you use to make your writing speak to their concerns and interests?

I really intend for my audience to be students or other persons of academia. I expect my audience to have my perceived misunderstandings of this topic and so I write in such a way as to break them down. Often, I devalue the persuasive skills of the reader and the reader's peers with the specific intention either offending them or distressing their understanding such that they will reevaluate it. I try to do this by making very robust claims that devalue rhetoric. This goes almost to a point of exaggeration, but not quite. My intention here is to shift the paradigm which I believe is too skewed in favor of the value of rhetoric, and therefore I apply generous counterbalance. After having broken the preconceived notions of the reader, I approach the subject with my most rational and logical pen with the intention of building ethos. Hopefully, this does well to gain the trust of the reader in my rational such that I can convince them of my argument.

- Upon reviewing your completed composition (and process), what aspect of your work (or it's process) most surprised you?

Truly... I was must surprised that my reviewers were not outraged by some of the claims I made. I hope perhaps that I said something that might jar the powers at be into giving me feedback as well. I just assumed that the claims I made were enough to have offended someone. It is possible, however, that I write with more logic than I give myself credit for.

- Did you learn anything new while growing your composition? Explain.

To be honest, this was not a composition based on research. I was not out trying to find specific information to broaden my understanding of the topic. This was more my elaboration of a thought experiment. By asking myself the question "What is rhetoric?," I had to think of answers and then think of ways to communicate them. The support that I provide for my topic serves less as proof, and more as demonstrative teaching tools to coax the reader to my state of mind. This is perhaps where I learned something. I realized as I was writing that I was using exactly the techniques I was trying to describe in order to describe them. This was a source of much amusement to me as I love recursive ironies.

- When you use secondary sources, do those sources contribute to ethos, logos, or pathos appeals?

Ethos, I think. They do provide logical evidence, but do more to set a sort of ethos standard. My goal is not so much to prove a point as it is to lead readers into my same state of mind. As such, I attempt to add legitimacy to my claims by offering credible evidence that do well to fit my goals. Hopefully this makes my ideas seem more credible as well.

- When considering peer feedback as you revised your rough draft, which advice/suggestion/question/criticism/edit was most useful/helpful?

The most useful suggestion was actually just to explain things a little bit more. It seems that I used some terms in the process of defining another that themselves required definition for my readers. Unfortunately, I could not make these changes in taking account my intended audience. Taking the time to define terms every time I use them would break the flow of the essay fundamentally. Perhaps instead I will include a glossary...

- On your final version, where would you like to see the most feedback and attention from graders?

Please, please focus your feedback on evaluating my success in leading you to the same ideas that I believe about the subject. My goal is to convince you, how well have I done this?

Portfolio Contents

Polished Essay

Rough Draft

Peer Editing

Reaction to peer review

**Grading

James Fleeting's Grading Page

- James, I should note that my word count shows 2340 words, not 1810. (not that this bothered you particularly, I just wanted to note the disparity) - Danny