Rhetoric is in everything we encounter. While we can just look from a distance the next step is to analyze the rhetoric. To analyze is to think about what previous life experiences best relate to the rhetoric at hand and how it’s influencing your opinions. It’s also thinking about how other people with different life experiences will look at the same rhetoric and arrive to another conclusion. When analyzing rhetoric it can be easier if you take the bigger picture and break it down into smaller ones. Doing so will allow you to look at the smaller details and then understand how they all work together to create the bigger picture. Analysis does not solely include the written text but the context of it as well. What was going on in the world or in a particular country at the time that inspired the text? Who is the text written for? Answering these questions can provide a whole new perspective that’ll open up your mind.
In brief, when analyzing a text you are answering the why and the how. Why was the text written? And how does the text serve its purpose? What I found most interesting about the text were the theoretical lenses. I have never encountered the formal names of these theories but have encountered them in readings throughout my years in school. A question I have is regarding whether this is the best method for analyzing any form of rhetoric. Are there other methods? What was the criteria behind choosing this method?
I agree with your response. I found it interesting how these lenses have formal names and hw I hadn’t acknowledged their presence in my previous years of school.