A Rhetorical Analysis Of 'Fight Or Flight' By Ben Martin

Why We Fight, a 2005 documentary that was directed by Eugene Jarecki synthesizes multiple sources and uses various rhetorical techniques to raise questions about America’s motivations for combat historically and in the present day. In George Orwell’s Shooting an Elephant, a british police officer experiences effects of Imperialism even as the oppressor in Burma during the time of British Imperialism. Although these two different work involves different situation, there is still an idea of imperialism that is running through. United States is acting as an imperialist country, trying to spread its policy throughout the world while Burma was going through British Imperialism. In the documentary, Why We Fight, Jarecki argues that the reason we

Throughout In Cold Blood Capote goes through the lives of the killers, Dick and Perry. Both convicts released from jail and at first glance seem to have a lot in common, but as the book continues the reader can see that the two characters are in fact very different. To characterize the killers Capote frequently uses flashbacks into their pasts, giving the reader a sense of what their lives were like and why they became who they are. Capote also utilizes detailed descriptions of the men’s appearances, quirks, and habits to characterize the murderers.

Rhetorical Analysis Paragraph, "The Terror" Notorious essayist and writer, Junot Diaz, in his essay, "The Terror", reflects on the fear a middle school beating implemented on him. Diaz's purpose is to express the life altering effect the power of fear can have on someone. The writes establishes an empathetic diction through the use of empathetic phrases such as, "white middle-class bigotry was cutting the heart out of me. "

The Perils of Indifference speech by Elie Wiesel is one that is well crafted and that sends a strong message to the audience. Wiesel, a survivor of the Holocaust, addresses the issues of the 20th century in his speech while at the same time explaining the dangers of indifference. Wiesel’s appeals to his audience, as well as his strong message and arguments are what make this speech so effective.

“He was finally free, but there was no joy in his heart. He thought there never would be again”. This quote stated by Elie Wiesel from his speech, “The Perils of Indifference”, refers to the day Elie Wiesel got liberated from the Holocaust when he was young. The Holocaust was just one of the many horrific tragedies that occurred during that century. In hopes of changing the future for the better, Wiesel decides to deliver a speech about helping the victims of injustice. He gives this speech intended for the President, Mrs. Clinton, members of Congress, Ambassador Holbrooke, Excellencies, and friends hoping that they will make positive changes for the future. By using rhetorical strategies such as anaphora, rhetorical questions, and ethos, Wiesel tries to help the victims of injustice and prevent future tragedies from happening.

Many people wish they can drop everything important to them and isolate themselves from society; very few people will even attempt this, but Chris McCandless breaks societal norms to accomplish this goal. In Into the Wild, John Krakauer tells the story of this young man’s life to inspire the audience to chase their dreams through the use of logos, involved sentence, and anecdotes.

Award winning journalist and author, Jon Krakauer, in his book, Into the Wild, analyzes the life of Chris McCandless as well as the events that ensued his death. Krakauer’s purpose is to inform the reader about how and why Chris McCandless decided to embark on a journey into the wilderness of Alaska. He adopts an empathetic tone in order to impart to his readers that Chris McCandless was a very misunderstood young adult.

To begin with Equality believes his eventual assessment of his sins are wrong. He is too tall and too smart. He feels so absolutely terrible about how he looks. He truly believe he is sinning by looking the way he does. He discovers electricity, he wants to tell the Council of Vocations. He is very scared that he is going to get into a lot of trouble and be banished. Equality wants to be a scholar, but he knows that the Council of Vocations will not allow that. Equality states “we know that we are evil, but there is no will in us and no power to resist it.”(Pg. 18) This statement proves that Equality honestly believes he is evil, terrible, and a horrible sinner.

"The Most Dangerous Game" by Richard Connell is a thrilling short story written about two men and their struggle to beat each other in a hunting game. The men appear to be civilized, but the question is whether the men are truly civilized. What evidence could prove if the men are civilized? As the story continues, the characters build up on their known traits and they show their true colors. Are the two men, General Zaroff<Spelling errors> and Sanger<Spelling errors> Rainsford, civilized men?

Krakauer’s argument is, “McCandless wasn’t “stupid, tragic, and inconsiderate,” but instead paints a sympathetic picture of a young man with a profound moral compass seeking a higher truth”. His effective case justifying McCandless’s behavior, which may include potential biases, is effective for most personages. This contretemps is feasible, but there are some personages, like Peter Christian, that see the flip side of Krakauer’s assessment. Peter, who “arrived in Alaska in 1992” with McCandless, said “Alaska is populated with people who are either running away from something or seeking themselves in America’s last frontier” he came to Alaska with the same intentions. In his article he states that he was one of those young man.

Chris Hedges is the well-known author of “The Cost of Resistance”, an article written in November 2016. He is an award-winning New York Times best-selling author and ordained Presbyterian minister. Hedges has created a specific audience for this article by the religious references and literary appeals he uses. He shows humility within himself by not including a biography which would highlight his religious and scholarly affiliations but instead using examples from historic and expert references. Hedges uses this article by way of rhetoric appeal to warn and inform readers of the past repeating itself and the cost’s associated with it.

A rhetorical device is defined as, “a technique that an author uses to convey to the listener or reader a meaning with the goal of persuading him or her towards considering a topic from a different perspective, using sentences designed to encourage or provoke an emotional display of a given perspective or action.” The speech, “The Perils of Indifference” by Elie Wiesel, given on April 12, 1999, contains many rhetorical devices. The speaker, Elie Wiesel, born in 1928 in Romania, is a Holocaust survivor and a Nobel Laureate who met suffering and torture firsthand when he was taken to Aushwitz concentration camp as a teenager. Throughout the speech, Wiesel recalls his enslavement and hunger at Aushwitz to emphasize the purpose that the audience

On April 12 1999 in Washington D.C., Elie Wiesel delivered a powerful speech called, “The Perils of Indifference”. He was invited by then President Bill Clinton and First Lady Hillary Clinton to give a speech for the Millennium Lecture Series hosted by the White House. He used various rhetorical devices to persuade his audience of the consequences of being indifferent to injustices. He used tone in his voice during very emotional portions of his speech. He also used examples of pathos, logos, and ethos throughout his speech to bolster his argument. Wiesel also used repetition in order to provide emphasis on certain words and to also deter define a term to the audience. He also used imagery to help the envision details to them that they may have not ever experience themselves. He also used anaphora and anadiplosis in his speech to help his points come across smoothly and to bring greater emphasis. By using these various rhetorical devices in his speech, Wiesel was able to give a memorable and convincing speech about not being indifferent to injustice.

Wart is curious about why there are sentries around, so he insistently asks Lyo-Lyok if the geese are fighting with other armies of geese. She is appalled by the questions he asks because she cannot understand how members of the same species would want to harm each other. She says that there are natural enemies of the geese, so there should be no reason for the geese to fight each other instead of fighting those enemies. In this transformation, Wart learns another type of government: socialism. Everything that is done is done for the best of the community. He learns from Lyo-Lyok that this method of government is good, too.

Rhetoric involves the scrutiny of the way an author, speaker, or artist utilizes language or words to sway the target audience. Rhetorical analysis thereby denotes a criticism or essay that breaks the non-fictional works into subsections, hence elaborating how every section works in association with other parts to introduce certain effects, such as information, entertainment, and persuasion of the intended audience. In common instances, the scrutiny also deliberates on every involved rhetorical situation or circumstance, on the basis of context, purpose, as well as the audience. One can conduct a rhetorical analysis of various literary works including journals, books, plays, cartoons, adverts, or any other oral performance like speech. One of the most popular and interesting play that has been read and used widely in different learning institutions for literature studies is An Enemy of the People. In this piece, the author, Henrik Ibsen, portrays the major character, Doctor Stockmann, as an enemy of everyone. However, despite being branded as the enemy of the people, Doctor Stockmann has been used to expose the rots happening within town municipality in Norway. Indeed, Doctor Stockmann is not an enemy of the people as portrayed in the play, but the ‘savior’ of the Norwegian township.