I was going about my day today when something hit me!
Let me rewind a tad bit... I noticed that preceding each chapter of Race was a modern scenario, either specific or hypothetical (although realistic). The scenarios connected some reoccurring modern issue with a problem that was developing way back in the day. And in general, Aronson described the modern one first, but only after reading the chapter do you see the connection. I didn't realize how that was a rhetorical strategy until after I made my previous post.
But now that I have it all figured out I can't help but share...
These scenarios evoked emotion! It's so obvious I feel extra stupid that I didn't see it before.
Thinking on why Aronson included those, I think he felt that more variety of the three appeals was needed (because his writing is largely logos based). Although he describes some truly awful things that happened long ago, they don't do much to evoke emotion because they were so long ago they don't matter- at all. But we do tend to care much more about people who are presently alive, which explains why they got some pathos appeals into his book.
One more thing.. in case I haven't mentioned it yet, Aronson's ethos comes from how much research he obviously did to write this book. That research makes him more knowledgeable, and thus more highly trusted.
Actually I think I did mention that in my first post, but for those of you who didn't read that, it's here too!!!
Until next time!
No comments:
Post a Comment