Every book
that we have read is making the argument that something is wrong with humans
and with the world. Each author bases their argument based off of what will
rhetorical grab the audience’s attention the most. All three authors use
research and facts to support their argument but Spiegelman’s argument is much
more thrived from emotion. I think I enjoyed his writing the most because I
emotional connected to it the most. The spectrum ranges form Carrs no emotional
attachment to the technology debate, Foer’s mediocre emotional attachment to
are treating of animals, and then Spiegelman’s true story of humans treating
other humans as animals. I find Spiegelman’s story to be mind grappling and
just an amazing story of how little we respect life of all living things. Foer
and Spiegelman have parallel’s in their argument with the harsh treatment of
living things, except with The Maus to obviously have more effect on me because
of them being human. Both used unique editing and graphics to grab attention.
Foer uses themes of chapter, and Spiegelman uses comics in a unique and sort of
comical way. Of course, to be successful in winning an argument you must form
you’re facts and build the book in the way that will get the audience to agree
with you. I am glad we had the opportunity to read all three books so I can
point out the successful and unsuccessful tactics in rhetorical arguing.
No comments:
Post a Comment