Rhetorical Analysis Essay Assignment
For the rhetorical analysis essay, we will focus on the rhetorical choices being made in the media that we consume. In class we will use a non-fiction essay called “The Sacred and the Superfund.” This essay, one from a larger collection called Braiding Sweetgrass, by Robin Wall Kimmerer, is an excellent example of the rhetorical modes of persuasion, as well as other rhetorical choices. You will write a 3–4-page essay that examines the major problem/conflict being presented in the essay and the rhetorical devices and choices being used by Kimmerer to present this problem to readers.
This essay will be completed in stages. First you will complete and submit an outline and then you will write the essay.
Topic
For this essay you are going to write about “The Sacred and the Superfund.” Here is what you should address in your essay.
1. Identify the major problem or conflict present in the essay. The author, Robin Wall Kimmerer, paints a picture for readers of a sacred site that has been corrupted by pollution and toxicity. What has caused this problem?
2. What is the author’s stance, or opinion, of this problem? Why is it a problem that matters to her? Does she propose any solutions to this problem?
3. Identify how the author is using rhetorical devices, specifically ethos, pathos, and logos, to present the problem. Consider breaking the discussion down this way:
Does the author have the credibility to be speaking on this topic? Is she a reliable source of information? I know it’s hard to tell from just the one essay excerpt, but Kimmerer is a biologist, botanist, and ecologist. She teaches at SUNY-ESF (State University of New York of Environmental Science and Forestry).
Does the author use logos to present information to the reader? Does she use facts, data, statistics, or research? Is her argument clear and logical? Can you find specific examples?
Finally, does the author use any pathos to elicit an emotional response from readers when presenting information? If so, what sort of language or scenario is she using? How does she change her tactics in her writing to use pathos? What are some examples?
You might also consider discussing the author’s overall tone in the essay. Is the essay so highly technical that one has to be an ecologist like the author to understand it? Or is the language accessible to general audiences?
Who is her audience? Who does she want to reach with this essay? Does she seem to want to reach a broad audience? Can anyone read and understand this essay? Or do you think her target audience is more specialized?
You might also consider how she frames this essay, using a variety of Indigenous myth and storytelling, scientific research, and personal experience.
What Your Paper Should Have
Double Spacing
12-point font, Times New Roman or Arial or Calibri
Proper MLA Heading (like the one I’ve shown in templates)
Title
Page number with your last name at the top right of each page
Left-aligned, 1-inch margins
3-4 pages (the 3-page minimum means to the bottom of page 3)
Works Cited (this is required! You must cite “The Sacred and the Superfund” on your works cited page)
No secondary sources (other articles, essays, books, etc.) are required for this paper, but you CAN do research if you want to and use one or more secondary sources if you want to. Just make sure the focus of the paper stays on a rhetorical analysis of “The Sacred and the Superfund.” If you decide to do any additional research, the source(s) you use must be cited on the Works Cited page.
Other Requirements
Your paper should be making a claim. You are analyzing the rhetorical choices of others, yes, but in doing so you are making a claim about the choices being used, and you are attempting to persuade your own audience (me) of how successful those choices are. Your claim might be as simple as “the rhetorical choices used in the essay do successfully reach the target audience,” but that is still a claim.
One of the main differences between summary and analysis is that while summary remains objective, an analysis is inherently subjective. You are making an argument in an analysis. You are claiming that something is true (your thesis statement) and then backing that claim up with evidence.
What if you think “The Sacred and the Superfund” does not successfully utilize rhetoric to persuade or appeal to an audience? Can you still write a paper on it? Yes. Because you can make the claim that the chosen rhetorical devices were unsuccessful, and you can explain why.
*In rhetorical analysis you are not making an argument about the information that Robin Wall Kimmerer is writing about, but rather if she is presenting that information in a way that successfully uses rhetoric to reach an audience
