AP English Language and Composition AP Summer Institute – Brassil

Course Development Resources

Rhetorical Analysis

1

2

3

Guidelines for Reading a Text

I. What is your response to the author’s text (essay, speech, public statement, letter, etc.)?

a. What questions do you have for the author?b. What did you find in the text that surprised, pleased, puzzled or annoyed you?c. Did the text or portions of it remind you of an experience you've had or heard / read about? What were the experiences? Did your experiences reinforce or contradict the message of the text?

II. What is the purpose (aim or intent) behind the author's message?

a. What goal did the author have when she/he fashioned this text? How do you know?b. What language features or sentences in the piece reveal the author's goals? (see IV.)c. How did you respond to the author's message and purpose?d. What message would you convey if you had a similar purpose? Why?

III. What is the audience for what the author has to convey?

a. What sentences, ideas, or other features help you identify the nature and character of the intended audience?b. How are you like / unlike the intended audience for the text?

IV. What strategies does the author use in order to convey his or her thinking?

a. How does the author catch and hold (“engage”) audience attention?b. How does the author establish, or perhaps vary, the tone of the text?c. What are some of the effects the author achieves with words and language? How do these effects help communicate important ideas? d. What has the writer said and done using language? What particular strategies (analogy, figurative language, vivid description, powerful diction) do you see at work in the text?e. What moves involving language features allow the author to better convey his or her message?

AP English Language and Composition Brassil

4

AP English Language and Composition Annotating a Text -- Brassil When you annotate a text you generate a record of response to your reading. Such a record can prove valuable to you later when you proceed to analysis. Annotating a text is not the same thing as underlining a few words or highlighting several lines. Annotating a text involves interacting with a text’s language and images. This approach should help you discover what you find important, what you want to explore, and/or what you find puzzling about a text. Approach a text as if you were entering into discussion with it. While a text cannot literally speak, its written words, images, and phrases do indeed communicate. At certain points a particular text’s meaning may be clear, while at other points it may be unclear. Either way, you can note such encounters and offer comments. Your discussion with a text occurs as you initially engage with and subsequently think over its words, phrases, and ideas. These thoughts can find their way onto the text’s margins and between the lines. As you underline telling phrases, note ideas, link portions of the text, and raise issues and questions around particular observations, you establish a written record of your interactive discussion. After annotation, you will be better able to identify the text’s message and discern both its purpose and argument. If you fail to note what you find remarkable, the initial ideas and important questions you have while reading may be lost to you. By annotating a text, you can return to it later to rethink what you considered important. Techniques for annotating a text will vary since each reader generates his or her own reading, each person will identify upon different portions of a text as noteworthy, interesting, or remarkable. Here are some questions to guide your annotations: What’s remarkable? Where do you engage with this text? Where do particular claims, ideas or assertions pull you in or capture your attention? What arguments take shape in or emerge from this text? What language or rhetorical features are at work? Do any patterns emerge from your markings? Do particular portions of this text link or connect with each other? Do key words, phrases, and ideas crop up in several places? Have you asked questions? How have you answered them? Given multiple readings, how have your annotations changed? Have any questions been answered? Have any new questions emerged? When you review your annotations, what do you discover? Are there places where the author’s message is made clear? Are there segments that continue to puzzle or vex you? Can you link this text with others you have read?

5

September 4, 1990

President Saddam Hussein c/o Ambassador al-Machat Dear Mr. President:

I am writing to you to send my student son, Thomas Hart Benton Ewald, home to his family. He was taken, I think, from the SAS Hotel in Kuwait City.

I feel I have the obligation to appeal to you for two reasons. First, my family has been a staunch friend to the Arabs. My husband, Tom’s father, was on the White House Staff when President Eisenhower caused the French, British, and Israelis to pull out of Suez. One of the first non-Arab meetings at the Washington Mosque was the one which I, as president of the Radcliffe (Harvard) Club of Washington, arranged to explain Muslim culture. I am also a poet who has written about Arabia. I have sent my youngest, well-loved son to work in an Arab country, hoping he would help bring peace between our cultures. Instead, after two days, he was caught up in war. It seems unjust that I, who have given to you so generously, should have my son taken away from me in return. You have the power to right that wrong.

Second, my son is asthmatic, so severely crippled as a child that we thought we could never raise him. He needs medication and a doctor’s care. I beg you, in the name of Allah, let my son go.

Yours truly,

Mary Ewald

6

It's halftime. Both teams are in their locker room discussing what they can do to win this game in the second half.

It's halftime in America, too. People are out of work and they're hurting. And they're all wondering what they're going to do to make a comeback. And we're all scared, because this isn't a game.

The people of Detroit know a little something about this. They almost lost everything. But we pulled together, now Motor City is fighting again.

I've seen a lot of tough eras, a lot of downturns in my life. And, times when we didn't understand each other. It seems like we've lost our heart at times. Then the fog of division, discord, and blame made it hard to see what lies ahead.

But after those trials, we all rallied around what was right, and acted as one. Because that's what we do. We find a way through tough times, and if we can't find a way, then we'll make one.

All that matters now is what's ahead. How do we come from behind? How do we come together? And, how do we win?

Detroit's showing us it can be done. And what's true about them is true about all of us.

This country can't be knocked out with one punch. We get right back up again and when we do, the world is going to hear the roar of our engines.

Yeah, it's halftime America. And our second half is about to begin."

IMPORTED FROM DETROIT ™

RAM DODGE JEEP CHRYSLER

------------------------------------------

production, including script: Oregon ad agency of Wieden+Kennedyspeaker: Clint Eastwood

------------------------------------------

Considerations for rhetorical analysis:

• What is the text’s context? (rhetorical situation/circumstance) What’s the “exigence” here?

• What is the text’s message? (argument)

• What is the text’s content?

• What are the credentials of the speaker? (what quality does the speaker bring to the circumstance?)

• What is the nature of the audience? (what are audience expectations, beliefs, anticipated actions?)

• What “moves” influence or move the audience toward appreciation of the text’s message? (What are the rhetorical features that “matter” or “make a difference”? How do these moves answer the “so what?” question?)

AP English Language and Composition Rhetorical Analysis “Halftime in America”

7

Clint Eastwood's 'Halftime in America' Ad a New Ballgame by Christopher Correa, Forbes Magazine

Another Super Bowl, another slew of ads. It’s become a predictable–perhaps, at this point, even rote–occasion: A volley of commercials insinuate themselves into our homes, packaged in either tidily clever trappings or whimsically left-field vignettes, that have less to do with selling the items than justifying the need to celebrate them. Super Bowl ads are often more eagerly anticipated than the 60 minutes of gameplay stringing them together like trinkets on a bracelet. They’re often admired for their ability to distract, whet or surprise.

But every once in a while, an ad comes along that doesn’t just stop the game, it changes the game. It happened in 1984, when Apple hired Blade Runner director Ridley Scott to shatter perceptions (both literally and figuratively) of personal computing. It happened in 1993, when McDonalds benefitted from basketball legends Michael Jordan and Larry Bird challenging each other to sink utterly implausible baskets (off the scoreboard; from the Hancock Building; over the river: “nothing but net”) to score a burger. It happened with Clara Peller’s t-shirt-slogan-in-the-making “Where’s the beef?” and it continued with a trio of frogs croaking their love for Budweiser in concert.

This year another advertisement entered a crowded field, without pomp but predicated on real-world circumstance–Chrysler’s “Halftime in America,” featuring a weathered but resolute Clint Eastwood. He isn’t exactly selling anything in the spot, which is filmed to resemble a political ad if it were produced by Paul Haggis (Eastwood’s collaborator on Million Dollar Baby and the director of Crash). Instead, he aims to jolt, then scold, but ultimately soothe, the viewer. First seen walking from the shadows of a hazy football game, he hunches his shoulders and walks with a tired grace. Speaking in a voice so gravelly you could walk across it, he declaims that the American auto industry’s primary focus has been compromised by “fog, division, discord and blame,” but America “knows how to come from behind to win.”

The narration baldly but earnestly offers a commentary on the notion of halftime representing a rebirth not just for athletes, but for John Q Public, the American economy and the city of Detroit. Although Chrysler isn’t mentioned in his speech–which accompanies a montage of faces, flags, factories and automotive products–the evocation is clear and packs a wallop.

Also, it’s difficult to not be reminded of President Reagan’s “Morning Again in America” commercial. Here’s a snippet of Reagan’s 1984 political ad, which was narrated against a similar montage of men and women going to work:

“Today more men and women will go to work than ever before in our country’s history…It’s morning again in America, and under the leadership of President Reagan, our country is prouder and stronger and better.”

The recession of 2007-2009 threw Motor City’s economy into tumult; the jobless rate peaked at 16.6 percent in July of 2009. Today it is 9.7 percent. “They almost lost everything,” Eastwood growls. “But we all pulled together. Now Motor City is fighting again.”

It was a bold move for the car maker to not feature its product line during the two-minute spot, but it resonated all the more because of it. Eastwood represents Hollywood, another made-in-the-U-S-A industry, and has been a seminal actor and director for five decades. His most recent role (and his last, according to interviews) was in a film about a retired car factory worker in Detroit. It could have been a controversial move, too politically charged for prime time sports, somber even. But there is hope scattered among the physical flotsam of metal and welding sparks and hidden beneath the harsh tones. It is an ad that attempts something a little different than suggest one buy a product; it depicts the history, the present state and the possible future for, a country that experienced a mechanical renaissance partly forged by it.

AP English Language and Composition Rhetorical Analysis “Halftime in America”

8

US Election 2012: Clint Eastwood defends himself over 'political' Super Bowl adClint Eastwood has defended himself against Republican claims his Super Bowl ad was essentially an endorsement of Barack Obama's re-election campaign.

By Raf Sanchez (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/raf-sanchez/) , Washington6:00AM GMT 07 Feb 2012

The two-minute spot for American car giant Chrysler had the gravel-voiced Dirty Harry star declaring that it to be "half-time in America" as rousing images showed the resurgence of Detroit, the city at the heart of the United States auto industry.

"They almost lost everything," Eastwood said in the commercial, which was broadcast to a Superbowl audience of 111 million people. "But we all pulled together, now Motor City is fighting again."

What the ad doesn't mention is that Chrysler is back to work following an $12.5 billion government bailout from the Obama administration - part of a series of measures to rescue the "Big Three" of American car production from bankruptcy.

Despite enormous controversy at the time, the 2009 bailout is now widely seen to have saved thousands of jobs and is likely to be at the heart of Mr Obama's re-election efforts.

The president has already made several references to the decision's opponents - a thinly veiled attack on Mitt Romney, the Republican frontrunner, who penned an article for the New York Times entitled “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html).

The ad was almost immediately decried by Republicans as support for Mr Obama.The row has reached such volume that even Eastwood - an 81-year-old who has traditionally voted Republican but describes himself as more libertarian than traditional conservative - felt compelled to refute claims it was to support the president's re-election campaign.

"l am certainly not politically affiliated with Mr Obama," he told Fox. "It was meant to be a message about just about job growth and the spirit of America."

He said he given his fee for the spot to charity.

AP English Language: ContextThe Telegraph (UK) perspective on Super Bowl “Morning in America” advertisement

9

I'm only going to talk to you just for a minute or so this evening, because I have some -- some very sad news for all of you -- Could you lower those signs, please? -- I have some very sad news for all of you, and, I think, sad news for all of our fellow citizens, and people who love peace all over the world; and that is that Martin Luther King was shot and was killed tonight in Memphis, Tennessee.

Martin Luther King dedicated his life to love and to justice between fellow human beings. He died in the cause of that effort. In this difficult day, in this difficult time for the United States, it's perhaps well to ask what kind of a nation we are and what direction we want to move in. For those of you who are black -- considering the evidence evidently is that there were white people who were responsible -- you can be filled with bitterness, and with hatred, and a desire for revenge.

We can move in that direction as a country, in greater polarization -- black people amongst blacks, and white amongst whites, filled with hatred toward one another. Or we can make an effort, as Martin Luther King did, to understand, and to comprehend, and replace that violence, that stain of bloodshed that has spread across our land, with an effort to understand, compassion, and love.

For those of you who are black and are tempted to fill with -- be filled with hatred and mistrust of the injustice of such an act, against all white people, I would only say that I can also feel in my own heart the same kind of feeling. I had a member of my family killed, but he was killed by a white man.

But we have to make an effort in the United States. We have to make an effort to understand, to get beyond, or go beyond these rather difficult times.

My favorite poem, my -- my favorite poet was Aeschylus. And he once wrote:

Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God.

What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness, but is love, and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or whether they be black.

So I ask you tonight to return home, to say a prayer for the family of Martin Luther King -- yeah, it's true -- but more importantly to say a prayer for our own country, which all of us love -- a prayer for understanding and that compassion of which I spoke.

We can do well in this country. We will have difficult times. We've had difficult times in the past, but we -- and we will have difficult times in the future. It is not the end of violence; it is not the end of lawlessness; and it's not the end of disorder.

But the vast majority of white people and the vast majority of black people in this country want to live together, want to improve the quality of our life, and want justice for all human beings that abide in our land.

And let's dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world. Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and for our people.

Thank you very much.

Robert F. Kennedy on the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. April 4, 1968 Indianapolis, IN

10

The stranger in the photo is meby Donald M. Murray

BOSTON GLOBE CORRESPONDENT

The author in England, 1944.

I was never one to make a big deal over snapshots; I never spent long evenings with the family photograph album. Let’s get on with the living. To heck with yesterday, what are we going to do tomorrow? But with the accumulation of yesterdays and the possibility of shrinking tomorrows, I find myself returning, as I suspect many over 60s do, for a second glance and a third at family photos that snatch a moment from time.

In looking at mine, I become aware that it is so recent in the stretch of man’s history that we have been able to stop time in this way and hold still for reflection. Vermeer is one of my favorite painters because of that sense of suspended time, with both clock and calendar held so wonderfully, so terribly still.

The people in the snapshots are all strangers. My parents young, caught before I arrived or as they were when I saw them as towering grown-ups. They seemed so old then and so young now. And I am, to me, the strangest of all.

There is a photograph of me on a tricycle before the duplex on Grand View Avenue in Wollaston I hardly remember; in another I am dressed in a seersucker sailor suit when I was 5 and lived in a Cincinnati hotel. I cannot remember the suit but even now, studying the snapshot, I am drunk on the memory of its peculiar odor and time is erased.

In the snapshots I pass from chubby to skinny and, unfortunately, ended up a chub. Looking at the grown-ups in the snapshots I should have known.

In other snapshots, I am cowboy, pilot, Indian chief; I loved to dress up to become what I was not, and suspect I still am a wearer of masks and costumes.

It would be socially appropriate to report on this day that I contemplate all those who are gone, but the truth is that my eyes are drawn back to pictures of my stranger self.

And the picture that haunts me the most is one not in costume but in the uniform I proudly earned in World War

II. I believe it was taken in England from the design of the barracks behind me. I have taken off the ugly steelframed GI glasses, a touch of dishonesty for the girl who waited at home.

My overseas cap with its airborne insignia is tugged down over my right eye, my right shoulder in the jump jacket is lower because I have my left hand in my pocket in rakish disregard for the regulation that a soldier in that war could never, ever stick a hand in a pocket.

The pockets that are empty in the photograph will soon bulge with hand grenades, extra ammunition, food, and many of the gross of condoms we were issued before a combat jump. This GI item was more a matter of industrial merchandising than soldierly dreaming — or frontline reality.

The soldier smiles as if he knew his innocence and is both eager for its loss and nostalgic for those few years of naiveté behind him.

I try once more to enter the photograph and become what I was that day when autumn sunlight dappled the barracks wall and I was so eager to experience the combat my father wanted so much for me. He had never made it to the trenches over there in his war.

When that photograph was taken, my father still had dreams of merchandising glory, of a store with an awning that read Murray & Son. I had not yet become the person who had to nod yes at MGH when my father asked if he had cancer, to make the decision against extraordinary means after his last heart attack. When this photo was taken, he had not yet grown old, his collars large, his step hesitant, his shoes unshined.

Mother was still alive, and her mother who really raised me had not died as I was to learn in a letter I received at the front. The girl who wrote every day and for whom the photo was taken had not yet become my wife, and we had not yet been the first in our families to divorce two years later.

I had not yet seen my first dead soldier, had not yet felt the earth beneath me become a trampoline as the shells of a rolling barrage marched across our position.

I had no idea my life would become as wonderful or as terrible as it has been; that I would remarry, have three daughters and outlive one. I could not have imagined that I actually would be able to become a writer and eat — even overeat. I simply cannot re-create my snapshot innocence.

I had not had an easy or happy childhood, I had done well at work but not at school; I was not Mr. Pollyanna, but life has been worse and far better than I could have imagined.

Over 60 we are fascinated by the mystery of our life, why roads were taken and not taken, and our children encourage this as they develop a sense of family history. A daughter discovers a letter from the soldier in the photograph in England and another written less than a year later, on V-E day. She is surprised at how much I have aged. I am not.

I would not wish for a child or grandchild of mine to undergo the blood test of war my father so hoped I would face as he had not. In photos taken not so many years later I have a streak of white hair. It is probably genetic but I imagine it is the shadow of a bullet that barely passed me by, and I find I cannot enter the snapshot of the smiling soldier who is still stranger to me, still innocent of the heroic harm man can deliver to man.

11

AP English Language & Composition Then & Now: The Strangers in Your Photos Through memoir, writers represent and make sense of selected life experiences. Consider this excerpt from Annie Dillard's introduction to Modern American Memoirs:

Memoirs offer a powerfully fixed point of view. From a picket in the past, the retrospective narrator may range intimately or intellectually across a wide circle of characters and events. The memoirist may analyze ideas or present dramatic scenes; the memoirist may confess, eulogize, reflect, inform, and persuade. By convention, memoirists tell true stories about actual people. Their tones may be elegiac, confiding, scholarly, hilarious, or all of these...

Dillard concludes her remarks by citing Charles Wright, who asserts that memoir writers celebrate "all the various things that lock our wrists to the past." The "picket" in your past is not staked as far down life's road as Don Murray's, Annie Dillard’s, or Tobias Wolff's. However, you do enjoy the perspective of a person who stands at the boundary of adulthood, one whose childhood, however “wonderful and terrible” it might have been, is receding. You have earned a perspective. Writin g Ta sk : For this piece you will write a memoir of your own. Like Murray's essay, your piece will relate to a particular photograph (or, if you wish, a sequence of photographs) in which you appear. The text you fashion needs to be purposeful and lead your reader somewhere. Reflect upon the photo then write. Use details, memories, perceptions, and ideas that can be gathered up then purposefully arranged. Where does your photo (or do your photos) take you? Reach beyond an image’s edge toward other memories, details, sensations, situations, and moments that have left traces in your head and your heart. As you plan, write and revise: * A question: how do the above remarks by Dillard and Wright relate to your work? Consider how your reflections on other readings this year inform your concept of memoir. * Keep message and purpose in mind. What do you want the reader to get out of reading your piece? What do you leave in? What do you take out? * Get the words right; diction matters. Choose words that will make a difference as you shape your piece. * Be particularly mindful of how your piece opens and concludes. What kinds of choices have you made in connection with those portions of your essay? You will confer with me and with your peers. Please consult the scoring guide during your work. Da te du e:

12

AP English Language & Composition Then and Now: The Strangers in Your Photos Personal Memoir Scoring Guide

Rhetorical Purpose 4 The piece is clearly purposeful, featuring insightful (perhaps even profound) observations and thoughtful commentary. 3 The piece is consistently purposeful; meaningful observations and comments are evident. 2 The piece’s purpose is hard to discern; memories may be simply collected and described without sufficient effort to make sense of them. 1 The piece’s purpose fails to emerge; events or circumstances may merely be recounted without any attention to their importance.

Substance & Strategy 4 The piece is carefully fashioned, drawing on memory, sharing anecdotes and reflecting in order to convey a deep appreciation of the meaning of experience. 3 Not just anecdotal, the piece is developed and conveys an appreciation of the meaning of experience. 2 The piece shares memories and anecdotes, but does not sufficiently connect them with an appreciation of the meaning behind experience. Development may be lacking. 1 The piece is unacceptably brief and undeveloped.

Diction & Details 4 Superior word choice is evident; details, imagery, description, and narration help create a powerful commentary and portrait. 3 Effective word choice is evident; specific and effective concrete details, imagery, description, and narration sufficiently convey a view of the author. 2 Words are chosen with insufficient attention to their effect; the piece’s details, imagery, description, and narration inadequately convey a view of the author. 1 Words are carelessly chosen; the piece’s details, imagery, description, and narration are shallow and fail to generate a view of the author.

Lead & Conclusion 4 The opening engages the reader, suggests and connects with the piece’s subject and occasion, and establishes a clear direction. The conclusion accents or embellishes the purpose of the piece. 3 The opening brings the reader into the piece, provides some sense of the piece’s subject and/or occasion, and sets the piece off in a direction. The conclusion aptly punctuates the piece. 2 The piece opens without establishing much direction / focus, or hinting at content / subject / significance. The conclusion seems largely unrelated to the piece as a whole. 1 The piece opens without detail, direction, or focus. The piece merely stops.

Writing Process 4 Abundant evidence of steady, high quality work exists in the form of preliminary drafts; purposeful conferences were held. 3 Solid evidence of steady work exists in the form of preliminary drafts; preparation for writing conferences was evident. 2 Preliminary drafts and efforts to revise may have been half-hearted or incomplete; preparation for writing conferences may have been lacking. 1 Preliminary drafts have been sketchy or simply not produced. Student failed to prepare for writing conferences. The piece shows little if any attention to performance demands.

Correctness 4 Any errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, and usage are rare and insignificant. 3 Errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, and usage are few and do not distract the reader or detract from the piece. 2 While errors in correctness do not interfere with overall sense of the piece, they are frequent enough to distract the reader. 1 Errors are so severe that they interfere with clarity and sense.

OVERALL GRADE: Additional comments appear below, on piece, or on back.

13

14

15

Date:Name:

Text's author and title / Comment?

Consider the rhetorical situation. What circumstances bring this text forward? What is its audience?

Explain the author's primary purpose. Inform the audience? Persuade? Entertain? Call for action?

Cite a passage that illustrates the author's message (major point/thought) and discuss it.

Cite content moves that develop / support / illustrate the author's message. What claims does the author make? How does the author assert his/her presence and knowledge?

16

Describe the tone of the text: What particular words and phrases reveal the text's tone?

What else did you find remarkable or engaging about the author's moves with his/her text? Explain.

Point out other particular, prominent moves (e.g. contrasts, shifts, emphasized lines, words, andphrases) and discuss how such elements contribute to substance of the text and its appeals.

How does the message take shape through the author's organization of his/her chosen content?

17

Scoring Close Reading in AP English Language and Composition Scoring your annotations: When I review your annotations, I look for a record of your conversation with the text. 4 = There is compelling evidence that you have delved into the text. An authentic record of your thinking is on the page. 3 = There is sufficient evidence that you have engaged and interacted with the text. It appears that you’ve done some solid thinking in connection with your reading. 2 = There is limited evidence that you have engaged or interacted with the text. 1 = There is little if any record of engagement or interaction with the text. Scoring your Reading Sheets: When I review your Reading Sheets, I look for a record of your initial analysis of the assigned text. 4 = There is compelling evidence on the Reading Sheets that you have mindfully and thoroughly analyzed the assigned text. A record of strong initial thinking and serious rhetorical analysis is on the page. 3 = There is sufficient evidence that you have considered and analyzed the assigned text. A record of satisfactory initial thinking and rhetorical analysis is on the page. 2 = There is limited evidence that you have attentively considered the text. A record of predominantly undeveloped responses indicates limited analysis. 1 = There is little evidence of attention to the text. A record of perfunctory responses with scant analysis indicates inattention to course demands.

18

AP English Language and Composition - Brassil Says/Does Analysis - A Technique for Close Reading and Rhetorical Analysis When reading a text closely, consider what it does as well as what it says. When you do this, you are thinking about how language functions, a dimension that's distinct from what language says. “Says” statements summarize the content of text. “Does” statements describe author moves with as little reference to content as possible. Basically, says/does analysis involves grappling with the difference between the content (says) and the author's moves (does) evident in a text as seen in its language. While distinguishing between moves and content may seem challenging, it is a useful tool during close reading and analysis of text. Often, an author's moves can be related to how a writer conveys his or her message, thesis, central idea, claim, or proposition. So ask-- what is the author's message and what is he or sheattempting to get across to his or her audience? You may find that it is more difficult to write does statements than says statements. Most of you have been asked to write content summaries, so says statements probably will seem more familiar. Here are the first three paragraphs from Donald Murray's “The Stranger in the Photo Is Me.” Each paragraph followed by a says statement then a does statement:

Paragraph 1 I was never one to make a big deal over snapshots; I never spent long evenings with the family photograph album. Let's get on with the living. To heck with yesterday, what are we going to do tomorrow? But with the accumulation of yesterdays and the possibility of shrinking tomorrows, I find myself returning, as many over 60s do, for a second glance and a third at family photos that snatch a moment from time. Says: Photos were never really important to the author; he wants to live life, not dwell on the past. However, as he ages and reflects on his dwindling future, he finds that he, like others his age, looks at family snapshots again and again. Does: In paragraph 1 the author introduces a subject and conveys his initial attitude toward it. He notes a change in his attitude and refers to a related change in his habits. Paragraph 2 In looking at mine, I become aware that it is so recent in the stretch of man's history that we have been able to stop time in this way and hold still for reflection. Vermeer is one of my favorite painters because of that sense of suspended time, with both clock and calendar held so wonderfully, so terribly still. Says: As a result of looking at these pictures, the author realizes the relatively short time people have been able to capture moments with a camera. He states that Vermeer, one of his favorite artists, did so in his paintings, long ago. Does: In paragraph 2 the author further reflects on the general subject. He elaborates on this idea; he illustrates his thinking with a historical reference, explaining a personal preference with references to common objects.

19

Paragraph 3 The people in the snapshots are all strangers. My parents young, caught before I arrived or as they were when I saw them as towering grown-ups. They seemed so old then and so young now. And I am, to me, the strangest of all. Says: Looking at family photos again, he notes that the people look different in the photos taken when he was just a child. Looking at the images, he remembers that back then these people seemed and looked so old, and now they look so young. He then says that his own images strike him as the most strange. Does: In paragraph 3 the author focuses on particular, personal objects associated with his subject. Extending his observations, he cites a paradox. He then focuses more narrowly on the subject and himself. A “says/does analysis” of a text results in what Kenneth Bruffee calls a descriptive outline. Here are some words and phrases that describe what the language of a particular text or portion of it might do: describes states a proposition narrates provides history lists categorizes itemizes predicts explains reasons compares traces illustrates provides an example evaluates synthesizes cites elaborates exemplifies develops offers a hypothesis deepens supports contrasts introduces emphasizes claims contradicts AP English Language and Composition Says/Does Analysis Scoring Guide 4 Exemplary performance. All says statements clearly and accurately account for the content of the text; all does statements clearly and accurately account for the text’s function and the rhetor’s moves. 3 Suitable performance. Nearly all says statements adequately account for the content of the text; nearly all does statements adequately account for the text’s function and the rhetor’s moves. 2 Uneven or inconsistent performance. While a portion of the says or does statements provide at least adequate accounts of content, function and/or the rhetor’s moves, too many inadequately do so. 1 Inadequate performance. Most of the says/does statements provide inadequate accounts of content, function and/or the rhetor’s moves. Typically accounts are imprecise, mistaken, or cursory, or otherwise unsuitable.

20

Rhetorical Analysis: Arguing through close analysis how an author (writer or speaker) purposefully articulates and conveys his or her message, to his or her audience in a particular circumstance.Through the planning, design, and execution of your essay’s content and form, purposefully develop and illustrate your thinking._______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In midsummer of 1981, during the first months of the Reagan administration, the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO), the nation’s union of air traffic controllers, called a strike. PATCO sought higher wages and improved working conditions for its members. President Ronald W. Reagan held a news conference on August 3, which he opened by making the following remarks regarding PATCO’s actions. Read Reagan’s remarks (both his opening statement and his responses to several questions) carefully. Then write an essay in which you analyze the rhetorical strategies President Reagan uses to purposefully convey his message. Support your analysis with specific references to the text.

The President. This morning at 7 a.m. the union representing those who man America's air traffic control facilities called a strike. This was the culmination of 7 months of negotiations between the Federal Aviation Administration and the union. At one point in these negotiations agreement was reached and signed by both sides, granting a $40 million increase in salaries and benefits. This is twice what other government employees can expect. It was granted in recognition of the difficulties inherent in the work these people perform. Now, however, the union demands are 17 times what had been agreed to — $681 million. This would impose a tax burden on their fellow citizens which is unacceptable. I would like to thank the supervisors and controllers who are on the job today, helping to get the nation's air system operating safely. In the New York area, for example, four supervisors were scheduled to report for work, and 17 additionally volunteered. At National Airport a traffic controller told a newsperson he had resigned from the union and reported to work because, "How can I ask my kids to obey the law if I don't?" This is a great tribute to America. Let me make one thing plain. I respect the right of workers in the private sector to strike. Indeed, as president of my own union, I led the first strike ever called by that union. I guess I'm maybe the first one to ever hold this office who is a lifetime member of an AFL - CIO union. But we cannot compare labor-management relations in the private sector with government. Government cannot close down the assembly line. It has to provide without interruption the protective services which are government's reason for being. It was in recognition of this that the Congress passed a law forbidding strikes by government employees against the public safety. Let me read the solemn oath taken by each of these employees, a sworn affidavit, when they accepted their jobs: "I am not participating in any strike against the Government of the United States or any agency thereof, and I will not so participate while an employee of the Government of the United States or any agency thereof." It is for this reason that I must tell those who fail to report for duty this morning they are in violation of the law, and if they do not report for work within 48 hours, they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated.

Q. Do you think that they should go to jail, Mr. President, anybody who violates this law?The President. I told you what I think should be done. They're terminated.

Q. Mr. President, will you delay your trip to California or cancel it if the strike is still on later this week?The President. If any situation should arise that would require my presence here, naturally I will do that. So, that will be a decision that awaits what's going to happen. May…I just say one thing on top of this? With all this talk of penalties and everything else, I hope that you'll emphasize, again, the possibility of termination, because I believe that there are a great many of those people — and they're fine people — who have been swept up in this and probably have not really considered the result — the fact that they had taken an oath, the fact that this is now in violation of the law, as that one supervisor referred to with regard to his children. And I am hoping that they will in a sense remove themselves from the lawbreaker situation by returning to their posts. I have no way to know whether this had been conveyed to them by their union leaders, who had been informed that this would be the result of a strike.

Q. Your deadline is 7 o'clock Wednesday morning for them to return to work?The President. Forty-eight hours. 11 o'clock Wednesday morning.

AP English: Rhetorical Analysis Question (Public Policy) Brassil

21

The Santa Ana WindsAccompanying this assignment are two texts written by two different California authors: one by Joan Didion, the other by Linda Thomas.

First, your reading and annotating:• Read and annotate each text with care.• On your annotated copy, write a brief statement in which you identify each author’s message and

purpose. Explain how you know.• Complete a Reading Sheet for each text.

Second, on to your composition (MLA format):In a prepared, polished essay, explore the ways in which the Didion and Thomas texts intersect with and diverge from each other. Through your analysis, consider the particular message and focus of each text and how the respective authors give shape to their respective messages by means of particular moves. Cite and discuss portions of each text that support and illustrate your analysis as you distinguish and connect them.

Third, the timeline:• Present your annotations, analytical reading sheets and a discovery draft of your paper on November 8. • Final version due date: November 16 (include Nov. 8 work with your final submitted version).

AP English Language and Composition Brassil The Santa Ana Winds - Prepared Rhetorical Analysis: Comparison

22

“Brush Fire” by Linda Thomas It is October in southern California. I know this because this morning I awoke to air so dry that the graze of my nightgown against the down comforter created tiny orange sparks. The winds that blew all night snapped branches from the black pine in my neighbor's yard. The temperature is already seventy degrees at 6 a.m. I have a roaring sinus headache. And as I make the drive to work, I find myself beneath a smoky sky the color of fire. This is chaparral country. "Chaparral" is a common word here in the lower third of the state, and it refers to the vast expanses of low-lying brush that naturally cover the hills and canyons. Chaparral foliage ranges from ground-level wild flowers that require a magnifying glass, to eight-foot scrub oak and sage bushes. In its most undisturbed state, chaparral is gorgeously beautiful--from the crooked red-brown wood of the manzanita, to the sturdy shaft of the yucca topped with spikes of creamy blossoms, to the brilliant orange threads of the dodder vine. In October, chaparral burns, usually during three to five-day periods of strong dry northeast winds, known as Santa Ana winds. The burning of chaparral during these winds is natural. Some plants in the chaparral--such as the padre's staff--require the heat of a flame to crack open their seed pods and prepare for germination. Most of the plants store water in their root systems, and the roots--undamaged by fast-moving, wind-driven brush fires--send out new growth in the spring. Fire in the chaparral is an amazing sight. The Santa Ana winds pass over desert and arrive in the foothills of southern California in hot, bone-dry, ten to forty mile-per-hour gusts that lower the relative humidity to three percent. The condition is perfect for fire that can rush up a canyon like a locomotive, roaring and exploding brush as it rages. After a particularly wet spring, chaparral shrubs such as buck brush, ceanothus, and coast lilac can grow so densely that with the heat of summer and the moisture-sapping Santa Ana winds, they are kindling for the fire that devours them in whirlwinds of flame. During such fires, chamise lives up to its common name--greasewood--by burning with an intense, waxy heat that can smolder for a day and longer. As a native, I know that within six weeks of one of these brush fires, I can walk in the blackened path of the fire and find new shoots already pushing up from the burl of a chamise. And by the following spring, the same swath of fire-blackened land will be burnished with blue lupine and red Indian paint brush. All of this would be no more than the stuff of natural history were it not for the land developers who have bulldozed chaparral zones in southern California to make way for homes, schools, and businesses. Right in the path of natural fires. This development is nothing new. As long ago as forty years, developed canyon areas of Riverside and Orange Counties burned in Santa Ana wind-driven brush fires that consumed homes right along with the clumps of mistletoe that hung from the upper branches of scrub oak. The fires make no distinction between natural assemblies and human construction. But neither have the fires deterred developers from building in deep, once isolated canyons and ridges that have a history of burning down in October. A few years ago, places like Bee Canyon and Peters Canyon in Orange County were accessible only by dirt

23

roads or horseback. Now, elaborate toll roads and corridors border and lead right into such chaparral areas. As a result, on days like this when the sky is dark with smoke, not only can I smell the odors of burning sagebrush, brush the ashes from my clothes, and down another sinus tablet, but I can also drive to the intersection of a local thoroughfare and watch the flames lick up a hillside. And I am not alone. On this evening, my neighbors have arrived, too, their dogs and children in tow. Some have brought soft drinks. Most have cameras. In the backseat of a small import car, a teenage couple has lost interest in the brush fire and, instead, is lost in embrace, passionate kisses no one seems to notice. We are here to watch the orange flames color the sunset. Later, on the TV news, we will hear what has burned down. It will be more than the chaparral that has burned, but in the spring, only the chaparral will return. Linda Thomas, a native of southern California, has been writing poems, stories, and essays for 25 years, and her work has appeared in numerous print journals, including American Poetry Review, Hawaii Pacific Review, and the University of New Mexico's Blue Mesa Review. She holds an MFA from the University of California, Irvine, and is a community college professor of writing and literature. Source: http://www.wowwomen.com/tapestry/arch_rambles/brushfire.html

24

“The Santa Ana” by Joan Didion There is something uneasy in the Los Angeles air this afternoon, some unnatural stillness, some tension. What it means is that tonight a Santa Ana will begin to blow, a hot wind from the northeast whining down through the Cajon and San Gorgonio Passes, blowing up sand storms out along Route 66, drying the hills and the nerves to flash point. For a few days now we will see smoke back in the canyons, and hear sirens in the night. I have neither heard nor read that a Santa Ana is due, but I know it, and almost everyone I have seen today knows it too. We know it because we feel it. The baby frets. The maid sulks. I rekindle a waning argument with the telephone company, then cut my losses and lie down, given over to whatever it is in the air. To live with the Santa Ana is to accept, consciously or unconsciously, a deeply mechanistic view of human behavior. I recall being told, when I first moved to Los Angeles and was living on an isolated beach, that the Indians would throw themselves into the sea when the bad wind blew. I could see why. The Pacific turned ominously glossy during a Santa Ana period, and one woke in the night troubled not only by the peacocks screaming in the olive trees but by the eerie absence of surf. The heat was surreal. The sky had a yellow cast, the kind of light sometimes called "earthquake weather." My only neighbor would not come out of her house for days, and there were no lights at night, and her husband roamed the place with a machete. One day he would tell me that he had heard a trespasser, the next a rattlesnake. "On nights like that," Raymond Chandler once wrote about the Santa Ana, "every booze party ends in a fight. Meek little wives feel the edge of the carving knife and study their husbands' necks. Anything can happen." That was the kind of wind it was. I did not know then that there was any basis for the effect it had on all of us, but it turns out to be another of those cases in which science bears out folk wisdom. The Santa Ana, which is named for one of the canyons it rushes through, is foehn wind, like the foehn of Austria and Switzerland and the hamsin of Israel. There are a number of persistent malevolent winds, perhaps the best known of which are the mistral of France and the Mediterranean sirocco, but a foehn wind has distinct characteristics: it occurs on the leeward slope of a mountain range and, although the air begins as a cold mass, it is warmed as it comes down the mountain and appears finally as a hot dry wind. Whenever and wherever foehn blows, doctors hear about headaches and nausea and allergies, about "nervousness," about "depression." In Los Angeles some teachers do not attempt to conduct formal classes during a Santa Ana, because the children become unmanageable. In Switzerland the suicide rate goes up during the foehn, and in the courts of some Swiss cantons the wind is considered a mitigating circumstance for crime. Surgeons are said to watch the wind, because blood does not clot normally during a foehn. A few years ago an Israeli physicist discovered that not only during such winds, but for the ten or twelve hours which precede them, the air carries an unusually high ratio of positive to negative ions. No one seems to know exactly why that should be; some talk about friction and others suggest solar disturbances. In any case the positive ions are there, and what an excess of positive ions does, in the simplest terms, is make people unhappy. One cannot get much more mechanistic than that.

25

Easterners commonly complain that there is no "weather" at all in Southern California, that the days and the seasons slip by relentlessly, numbingly bland. That is quite misleading. In fact the climate is characterized by infrequent but violent extremes: two periods of torrential subtropical rains which continue for weeks and wash out the hills and send subdivisions sliding toward the sea; about twenty scattered days a year of the Santa Ana, which, with its incendiary dryness, invariably means fire. At the first prediction of a Santa Ana, the Forest Service flies men and equipment from northern California into the southern forests, and the Los Angeles Fire Department cancels its ordinary non-firefighting routines. The Santa Ana caused Malibu to burn as it did in 1956, and Bel Air in 1961, and Santa Barbara in 1964. In the winter of 1966-67 eleven men were killed fighting a Santa Ana fire that spread through the San Gabriel Mountains. Just to watch the front-page news out of Los Angeles during a Santa Ana is to get very close to what it is about the place. The longest single Santa Ana period in recent years was in 1957, and it lasted not the usual three or four days but fourteen days, from November 21 until December 4. On the first day 25,000 acres of the San Gabriel Mountains were burning, with gusts reaching 100 miles an hour. In town, the wind reached Force 12, or hurricane force, on the Beaufort Scale; oil derricks were toppled and people ordered off the downtown streets to avoid injury from flying objects. On November 22 the fire in the San Gabriels was out of control. On November 24 six people were killed in automobile accidents, and by the end of the week the Los Angeles Times was keeping a box score of traffic deaths. On November 26 a prominent Pasadena attorney, depressed about money, shot and killed his wife, their two sons and himself. On November 27 a South Gate divorcée, twenty-two, was murdered and thrown from a moving car. On November 30 the San Gabriel fire was still out of control, and the wind in town was blowing eighty miles an hour. On the first day of December four people died violently, and on the third the wind began to break. It is hard for people who have not lived in Los Angeles to realize how radically the Santa Ana figures in the local imagination. The city burning is Los Angeles's deepest image of itself. Nathaniel West perceived that, in The Day of the Locust, and at the time of the 1965 Watts riots what struck the imagination most indelibly were the fires. For days one could drive the Harbor Freeway and see the city on fire, just as we had always known it would be in the end. Los Angeles weather is the weather of catastrophe, of apocalypse, and, just as the reliably long and bitter winters of New England determine the way life is lived there, so the violence and the unpredictability of the Santa Ana affect the entire quality of life in Los Angeles, accentuate its impermanence, its unreliability. The wind shows us how close to the edge we are. “The Santa Ana” is the first and most prominent portion of a longer essay titled “Los Angeles Notebook” in Slouching Towards Bethlehem © 1968 by Joan Didion. Born in California in 1934, Didion frequently writes about the area of her birth. Her most highly esteemed work is her essays. She has contributed tirelessly to The New Yorker and The New York Review of Books, among other publications.

26

Scoring Guide

8 and higher These exemplary papers purposefully explore the distinctions and connections involving the Thomas and Didion texts. The writing demonstrates insightful appreciation of the rhetorical content of each text. These well-developed essays support their observations regarding important text connections and distinctions with compelling text references and commentary. The writing demonstrates stylistic maturity by an effective command of sentence structure, diction, and organization. The paper is carefully prepared and reveals the writer’s ability to choose from and control a wide range of the elements of effective writing. Preliminary work is produced on schedule and is consistent with the final version.

6 and higher These solid papers identify, explore, and discuss important distinctions and connections associated with rhetorical elements of the Thomas and Didion texts. The writing demonstrates mindful appreciation of the rhetorical moves made by each text’s author. While not as full or successful as the top papers, these essays respond to the task with illustrative analysis, supplying suitable text references and commentary. Although occasional lapses in syntax and diction may be present, the writing demonstrates sufficient control of the elements of composition to convey the writer’s ideas. The paper has been prepared with sufficient attention to the assignment’s demands.

5 These adequate papers are uneven; the execution of the assignment simply suggests, rather than indicates, sufficient facility with analysis. Although elements associated with essays scored 6 and higher are present, the paper’s inconsistencies vie with its achievements. The paper has been prepared with necessary attention to the assignment’s demands.

4 and lower These insufficient papers show some understanding of the distinctions and connections involving the Thomas and Didion passages but at the same time offer piecemeal observations and / or demonstrate organizational inconsistencies. A responsive concept is generally present, but the analysis and commentary is insufficiently clear or unrealized. Often, papers at this level focus upon the content (the “what”) rather than the author’s rhetorical choices (the “how”). While generally communicative and broadly responsive to the task, these papers may demonstrate inconsistent control over the elements of composition. Although preliminary work has been produced, it may be perfunctory or inattentive to the assignment’s demands. These papers may contain nagging spelling errors or grammar flaws.

2 and lower These ineffective papers inadequately respond to the task, often skirting or ignoring its essential elements. Often, these papers not only fail to explore connections or distinctions involving the Thomas and Didion passages but also neglect to account for the rhetorical elements of the texts. These papers may be poorly written on several counts, featuring problems such as thin development, insufficient elaboration, or incoherence. Preliminary work may be sparse or missing. Finally, these essays often reveal consistent weakness in grammar or other fundamental elements of composition.

AP English Language and Composition Mr. Brassil The Santa Ana Winds - Prepared Rhetorical Analysis: Comparison

27

Response to Writing by Date The Santa Ana Winds: Rhetorical Analysis / Comparison What do you see as Didion’s primary focus? What one sentence in your paper comes closest to representing her message? What do you see as Thomas’s primary focus? What one sentence in your paper comes closest to representing her message? What do you want another reader to understand as a result of reading your paper?

28

From Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood

THE car was parked on a promontory where Perry and Dick had stopped to picnic. It was noon. Dick scanned the view through a pair of binoculars. Mountains. Hawks wheeling in a white sky. A dusty road winding into and out of a white and dusty village. Today was his second day in Mexico, and so far he liked it fine-- even the food. (At this very moment he was eating a cold, oily tortilla.) They had crossed the border at Laredo, Texas, the morning of November 23, and spent the first night in a San Luis Potosi brothel. They were now two hundred miles north of their next destination, Mexico City.

"Know what I think?" said Perry. "I think there must be something wrong with us. To do what we did."

"Did what?" "Out there." Dick dropped the binoculars into a leather case, a luxurious receptacle initialed H.W.C. He was

annoyed. Annoyed as hell. Why the hell couldn't Perry shut up? Christ Jesus, what damn good did it do, always dragging the goddam thing up? It really was annoying. Especially since they'd agreed, sort of, not to talk about the goddam thing. Just forget it.

"There's got to be something wrong with somebody who'd do a thing like that," Perry said. "Deal me out, baby," Dick said. "I'm a normal." And Dick meant what he said. He thought himself

as balanced, as sane as anyone-- maybe a bit smarter than the average fellow, that's all. But Perry-- there was, in Dick's opinion, "something wrong" with Little Perry. To say the least. Last spring, when they had celled together at Kansas State Penitentiary, he'd learned most of Perry's lesser peculiarities: Perry could be "such a kid," always wetting his bed and crying in his sleep ("Dad, I been looking everywhere, where you been, Dad?"), and often Dick had seen him "sit for hours just sucking his thumb and poring over them phony damn treasure guides." Which was one side; there were others. In some ways old Perry was "spooky as hell." Take, for instance, that temper of his. He could slide into a fury "quicker than ten drunk Indians." And yet you wouldn't know it. "He might be ready to kill you, but you'd never know it, not to look at or listen to," Dick once said. For however extreme the inward rage, outwardly Perry remained a cool young tough, with eyes serene and slightly sleepy. The time had been when Dick had thought he could control, could regulate the temperature of these sudden cold fevers that burned and chilled his friend. He had been mistaken, and in the aftermath of that discovery, had grown very unsure of Perry, not at all certain what to think-except that he felt he ought to be afraid of him, and wondered really why he wasn't.

"Deep down," Perry continued, "way, way rock-bottom, I never thought 1 could do it. A thing like that."

"How about the nigger?" Dick said. Silence. Dick realized that Perry was staring at him. A week ago, in Kansas City, Perry had bought a pair of dark glasses-- fancy ones with silver-lacquered rims and mirrored lenses. Dick disliked them; he'd told Perry he was ashamed to be seen with "anyone who'd wear that kind of flit stuff." Actually, what irked him was the mirrored lenses; it was unpleasant having Perry's eyes hidden behind the privacy of those tinted, reflecting surfaces.

"But a nigger," said Perry. "That's different." The comment, the reluctance with which it was pronounced, made Dick ask, "Or did you? Kill

him like you said?" It was a significant question, for his original interest in Perry, his assessment of Perry's character and potentialities, was founded on the story Perry had once told him of how he had beaten a colored man to death.

"Sure I did. Only-- a nigger. It's not the same." Then Perry said, "Know what it is that really bugs me? About the other thing? It's just I don't believe it-that anyone can get away with a thing like that. Because I don't see how it's possible. To do what we did. And just one hundred percent get away with it. I mean, that's what bugs me-- I can't get it out of my head that something's got to happen."

Though as a child he had attended church, Dick had never "come near" a belief in God; nor was he troubled by superstitions. Unlike Perry, he was not convinced that a broken mirror meant seven years' misfortune, or that a young moon if glimpsed through glass portended evil. But Perry, with his sharp and scratchy intuitions, had hit upon Dick's one abiding doubt. Dick, too, suffered moments when that question circled inside his head: Was it possible-- were the two of them "honest to God going to get away with doing a thing like that"? Suddenly, he said to Perry, "Now, just shut up!" Then he gunned the motor and backed the car off the promontory. Ahead of him, on the dusty road, he saw a dog trotting along in the warm sunshine.

29

MOUNTAINS. Hawks wheeling in a white sky. When Perry asked Dick, "Know what I think?” he knew he was beginning a conversation that

would displease Dick, and one that for that matter, he himself would just as soon avoid. He agreed with Dick: Why go on talking about it? But he could not always stop himself. Spells of helplessness occurred, moments when he "remembered things"-- blue light exploding in a black room, the glass eyes of a big toy bear-- and when voices, a particular few words, started nagging his mind: "Oh, no! Oh please! No! No! No! No! Don't! Oh, please don't, please!" And certain sounds returned-- a silver dollar rolling across a floor, boot steps on hardwood stairs, and the sounds of breathing, the gasps, the hysterical inhalations of a man with a severed windpipe.

When Perry said, "I think there must be something wrong with us," he was making an admission he "hated to make." After all, it was "painful" to imagine that one might be "not just right"-- particularly if whatever was wrong was not your own fault but "maybe a thing you were born with." Look at his family! Look at what had happened there! His mother, an alcoholic, had strangled to death on her own vomit. Of her children, two sons and two daughters, only the younger girl, Barbara, had entered ordinary life, married, begun raising a family. Fern, the other daughter, jumped out of a window of a San Francisco hotel. (Perry had ever since "tried to believe she slipped," for he'd loved Fern. Shewas "such a sweet person," so "artistic," a "terrific" dancer. and she could sing, too. "If she'd ever had any luck at all, with her looks and all, she could have got somewhere, been somebody." It was sad to think of her climbing over a window sill and falling fifteen floors.) And there was Jimmy, the older boy-- Jimmy, who had one day driven his wife to suicide and killed himself the next.

Then he heard Dick say, "Deal me out, baby. I'm a normal." Wasn't that a horse's laugh? But never mind, let it pass. "Deep down," Perry continued, "way, way rock-bottom, I never thought I could do it. A thing like that." And at once he recognized his error: Dick would, of course, answer by asking, "How about the nigger?" When he'd told Dick that story, it was because he'd wanted Dick's friendship, wanted Dick to "respect" him, think him "hard," as much "the masculine type" as he had considered Dick to be. And so one day after they had both read and were discussing a Reader's Digest article entitled "How Good a Character Detective Are You?" ("As you wait in a dentist's office or a railway station, try studying the give-away signs in people around you. Watch the way they walk, for example. A stiff-legged gait can reveal a rigid, unbending personality; a shambling walk a lack of determination"), Perry had said "I've always been an outstanding character detective, otherwise I'd be dead today. Like if I couldn't judge when to trust somebody. You never can much. But I've come to trust you, Dick. You'll see I do, because I'm going to put myself in your power. I'm going to tell you something I never told anybody. Not even Willie-Jay. About the time I fixed a guy." And Perry saw, as he went on, that Dick was interested; he was really listening. "It was a couple of summers ago. Out in Vegas. I was living in this old boarding house-- it used to be a fancy cathouse. But all the fancy was gone. It was a place they should have torn down ten years back; anyway, it was sort of coming down by itself. The cheapest rooms were in the attic, and I lived up there. So did this nigger. His name was King; he was a transient. We were the only two up there-- us and a million cucarachas. King, he wasn't too young, but he'd done roadwork and other outdoor stuff-- he had a good build. He wore glasses and he read a lot. He never shut his door. Every time I passed by he was always lying there buck-naked. He was out of work, and said he'd saved a few dollars from his last job, said he wanted to stay in bed awhile, read and fan himself and drink beer. The stuff he read, it was just junk-- comic books and cowboy junk. He was O.K. Sometimes we'd have a beer together and once he lent me ten dollars. I had no cause to hurt him. But one night we were sitting in the attic, it was so hot you couldn't sleep, so I said, 'Come on, King, let's go for a drive.' I had an old, car I'd stripped and souped and painted silver-- the Silver Ghost, I called it. We went for a long drive. Drove way out in the desert. Out there it was cool. We parked and drank a few more beers. King got out of the car, and I followed after him. He didn't see I'd picked up this chain. A bicycle chain I kept under the seat. Actually, I had no real idea to do it till I did it. I hit him across the face. Broke his glasses. I kept right on. Afterward, I didn't feel a thing. I left him there, and never heard a word about it. Maybe nobody ever found him. Just buzzards.”

There was some truth in the story. Perry had known, under the circumstances stated, a Negro named King. But if the man was dead today it was none of Perry's doing; he'd never raised a hand against him. For all he knew, King might still be lying abed somewhere, fanning himself and sipping beer.

"Or did you? Kill him like you said?" Dick asked. Perry was not a gifted liar, or a prolific one; however, once he had told It fiction he usually. stuck

by it. "Sure I did. Only-- a nigger. It's not the same." Presently, he said, "Know what it is that really bugs

30

me? About that other thing? It's just I don't believe it-- that anyone can get away with a thing like that." And he suspected that Dick didn't, either. For Dick was at least partly inhabited by Perry's mystical-moral apprehensions. Thus: "Now, just shut up!" The car was moving. A hundred feet ahead, a dog trotted along the side of the road. Dick swerved toward it. It was an old half-dead mongrel, brittle-boned and mangy, and the impact, as it met the car, was little more than what a bird might make. But Dick was satisfied. "Boy!" he said-- and it was what he always said after running down a dog, which was something he did whenever the opportunity arose. “Boy! We sure splattered him!" End of passage

Mountains. Hawks wheeling in a white sky. Two segments of text found on pages 107-113 of In Cold Blood offer distinct points of view on the same span of time. These passages also represent, as well as any passage of text in the book, Truman Capote’s style: his diction, syntax, and selection and arrangements of detail makes these passages powerfully provocative and expressive. But given the presence of these two accounts, there is a question that begs to be asked: “What is the impact of the juxtaposition of these two related-but-distinct accounts of the same time span?” The assignment: Write an essay that explains the presence of these two representations of the same time span in In Cold Blood. Account for the content and stylistic differences in the two representations of the time span. Focus on language features that distinguish each version; consider the author’s purpose. This means that you will need to cite and discuss sentences, words and phrases (language) that support and illustrate your argument. A major conference over a complete draft is required. Length—typically, 4-5 word-processed, double-spaced pages Due date for full draft: March 12. No draft = final paper due on March 13. Due date for final paper: Tuesday/Wednesday, March 17/18.

31

AP English Language and Composition Macbeth Rhetorical Analysis - On Demand On the following two pages are excerpts from a crucial scene in Macbeth. Macbeth considers the prospect and consequences of killing King Duncan. He announces the results of his deliberations to Lady Macbeth. She responds to his remarks by continuing her efforts to persuade him to murder Duncan. Read the excerpts carefully. Then write an essay in which you analyze the rhetoric of both Macbeth’s and Lady Macbeth’s arguments and explain why you think Macbeth is persuaded by his wife. You may want to consider such elements as use of appeals, choice of details, and understanding of audience.

32

Macbeth. If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well It were done quickly: if the assassination Could trammel up the consequence, and catch With his surcease success; that but this blow Might be the be-all and the end-all here, But here, upon this bank and shoal of time, We'ld jump the life to come. But in these cases We still have judgment here; that we but teach Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return To plague the inventor: this even-handed justice 10 Commends the ingredients of our poison'd chalice To our own lips. He's here in double trust; First, as I am his kinsman and his subject, Strong both against the deed; then, as his host, Who should against his murderer shut the door, Not bear the knife myself. Besides, this Duncan Hath borne his faculties so meek, hath been So clear in his great office, that his virtues Will plead like angels, trumpet-tongued, against The deep damnation of his taking-off; 20 And pity, like a naked new-born babe, Striding the blast, or heaven's cherubins, horsed Upon the sightless couriers of the air, Shall blow the horrid deed in every eye, That tears shall drown the wind. I have no spur To prick the sides of my intent, but only Vaulting ambition, which o'erleaps itself And falls on the other-- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Macbeth. We will proceed no further in this business: 30 He hath honour'd me of late; and I have bought Golden opinions from all sorts of people, Which would be worn now in their newest gloss, Not cast aside so soon. Lady Macbeth. Was the hope drunk Wherein you dress'd yourself? Hath it slept since? And wakes it now, to look so green and pale At what it did so freely? From this time Such I account thy love. Art thou afeard 40 To be the same in thine own act and valour As thou art in desire? Wouldst thou have that Which thou esteem'st the ornament of life, And live a coward in thine own esteem, Letting "I dare not" wait upon "I would," Like the poor cat i' the adage? Macbeth. Prithee, peace: I dare do all that may become a man; Who dares do more is none. 50

33

Lady Macbeth. What beast was't, then, That made you break this enterprise to me? When you durst do it, then you were a man; And, to be more than what you were, you would Be so much more the man. Nor time nor place Did then adhere, and yet you would make both: They have made themselves, and that their fitness now Does unmake you. I have given suck, and know How tender 'tis to love the babe that milks me: 60 I would, while it was smiling in my face, Have pluck'd my nipple from his boneless gums, And dash'd the brains out, had I so sworn as you Have done to this. Macbeth. If we should fail? Lady Macbeth. We fail! But screw your courage to the sticking-place, And we'll not fail. When Duncan is asleep-- 70 Whereto the rather shall his day's hard journey Soundly invite him--his two chamberlains Will I with wine and wassail so convince That memory, the warder of the brain, Shall be a fume, and the receipt of reason A limbeck only: when in swinish sleep Their drenched natures lie as in a death, What cannot you and I perform upon The unguarded Duncan? what not put upon His spongy officers, who shall bear the guilt 80 Of our great quell? Macbeth. Bring forth men-children only; For thy undaunted mettle should compose Nothing but males. Will it not be received, When we have mark'd with blood those sleepy two Of his own chamber and used their very daggers, That they have done't? Lady Macbeth. Who dares receive it other, 90 As we shall make our griefs and clamour roar Upon his death? Macbeth. I am settled, and bend up Each corporal agent to this terrible feat. Away, and mock the time with fairest show: False face must hide what the false heart doth know.

34

AP English Language and Composition Scoring Guide: Macbeth Rhetorical Analysis The score will reflect the teacher’s judgment of the essay’s quality as a whole. The essay will be judged by standards appropriate for on-demand writing tasks. 9-8 Exemplary (A- or higher): The essay insightfully analyzes the rhetoric of both Macbeth and Lady Macbeth and thoroughly explains what leads Macbeth to acquiesce to his wife. The essay refers to the text, explicitly and/or implicitly, assessing the specific elements of each argument and Macbeth’s ultimate decision. The prose is fluent, clear, and engaging. There are few, if any, errors. 7-6 Effective (B- to B+): The essay effectively analyzes the rhetoric of both Macbeth and Lady Macbeth and offers a viable explanation of what leads Macbeth to acquiesce to his wife. While the essay refers to the text, explicitly and/or implicitly, the explanation and discussion of the elements of each argument and Macbeth’s ultimate decision are less full or convincing. The prose is generally clear with no serious errors. 5 Adequate (C+ to C) The essay adequately analyzes the rhetoric of both Macbeth and Lady Macbeth and offers a generally sufficient explanation of what leads Macbeth to acquiesce to his wife. Although the essay refers to the text, explicitly or implicitly, the explanation is unevenly or inconsistently developed. While suitable observations are made, discussion of rhetorical elements and analysis of argument is just sufficient, more limited than in effective papers. The prose is generally clear with few remarkable errors. 4-3 Inadequate (C-): The essay is uneven, inconsistent, and inadequate. It provides superficial or limited explanation of the rhetoric of the speakers or demonstrates a limited understanding or analysis. While the essay may include references to the text, the explanation and discussion of the elements of each argument and Macbeth’s ultimate decision are unconvincing. There may be insufficient discussion of key elements (rhetorical strategies, appeals, audience) or excessive paraphrase and limited analysis. The prose generally conveys the writer’s ideas but with one or two vexing lapses in clarity or coherence. 2-1 Weak (D+ to F): The essay offers little if any substantive analysis or explanation. Scant understanding is evident as key elements associated with the task (references to and discussion of rhetorical strategies, appeals, audience, etc.) are ignored. The essay may be off topic, offering little more than plot summary. The writer’s ideas are conveyed with insufficient clarity or coherence. The prose may show consistent weakness with frequent errors in expression.

35

American radio broadcaster Paul Harvey delivered the following speech at the 1978 convention of the National Future Farmers of America, an agricultural education group. Read the speech carefully. Then analyze how Harvey conveys his message to his audience. Look for effective word choice, powerful imagery, strong selection of detail and other author “moves” that allowthe author to achieve his purpose.

And on the eighth day, God looked down on his planned paradise and said I need a caretaker- So God made a Farmer.

God said I need somebody willing to get up before dawn, milk cows, work all day in the field, milk cows again, eat supper then go to town and stay past midnight at a meeting of the school board – So God made a Farmer.

I need somebody with arms strong enough to wrestle a calf and yet gentle enough to deliver his own grandchild; somebody to call hogs, tame cantankerous machinery, come home hungry, have to wait lunch until his wife's done feeding visiting ladies, then tell the ladies to be sure and come back real soon, and mean it - So God made a Farmer.

God said I need somebody willing to sit up all night with a newborn colt, and watch it die, and dry his eyes and say maybe next year. I need somebody who can shape an axe handle from a persimmon sprout, shoe a horse with a hunk of car tire, who can make harness out of hay wire, feed sacks and shoe scraps, who planting time and harvest season will finish his forty hour week by Tuesday noon and then, paining from tractor back, will put in another 72 hours – So God made a Farmer.

God had to have somebody willing to ride the ruts at double speed to get the hay in ahead of the rain clouds, and yet stop in midfield and race to help when he sees the first smoke from a neighbor's place - So God made a Farmer.

God said I need somebody strong enough to clear trees and heave bales, yet gentle enough to tame lambs and wean pigs and tend the pink-combed pullets, who will stop his mower for an hour to splint the broken leg of a meadowlark.

It had to be somebody who’d plow deep and straight and not cut corners; somebody to seed, weed, feed, breed, and rake and disk and plow and plant and tie the fleece and strain the milk and replenish the self-feeder and finish a hard week’s work with a five-mile drive to church.

Somebody who would bale a family together with the soft, strong bonds of sharing; who would laugh and then sigh, and then reply with smiling eyes when his son says he want to spend his life doing what dad does – So God made a Farmer.

36

Speech to the Troops at Tilbury 1

My loving people, We have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit our selves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear, I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good-will of my subjects; and therefore I am come amongst you, as you see, at this time, not for my recreation and disport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live and die amongst you all; to lay down for my God, and for my kingdom, and my people, my honour and my blood, even in the dust. I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realm; to which rather than any dishonour shall grow by me, I myself will take up arms, I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field. I know already, for your forwardness you have deserved rewards and crowns; and We do assure you in the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. In the mean time, my lieutenant general shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble or worthy subject; not doubting but by your obedience to my general, by your concord in the camp, and your valour in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over those enemies of my God, of my kingdom, and of my people.

AP English Language and Composition Brassil -- Rhetorical Analysis

1 Delivered by Queen Elizabeth I to the land forces assembled at Tilbury to repel the anticipated invasion of the Spanish Armada, 1588.

37

(Available time-- 40 minutes. Please use blue or black ink and put your name on page 1.)

The passage below is a from a speech by U.S. Army General George S. Patton delivered to headquarters staff at Peover Hall in Cheshire, England, on March 24, 1944. The occasion was Patton’s assumption of command of The Third Army in advance of the Allied invasion of France. Read the passage carefully. Then write an essay in which you identify the purpose of Patton’s message and analyze the rhetorical strategies he uses to achieve his purpose. Support your analysis with specific references to the text.

I have been given command of Third Army for reasons which will become clear to you later on. You made an outstanding record as an able and hard-working staff under my predecessor. I have no doubt you will do the same for me. We now have two staffs merging into one, each with its own procedures. By working harmoniously and intelligently together a third staff will be developed with a third procedure, which should be better than either of the other two.

I am here because of the confidence of two men: The President of the United States and the theater commander. They have confidence in me because they don't believe a lot of goddamned lies that have been printed about me and also because they know I mean business when I fight. I don't fight for fun and I won't tolerate anyone on my staff who does.

You are here to fight. This is an active theater of war. Ahead of you lies battle. That means just one thing. You can't afford to be a goddamned fool, because, in battle, fools mean dead men. It is inevitable for men to be killed and wounded in battle. But there is no reason why such losses should be increased because of the incompetence and carelessness of some stupid son-of-a-bitch. I don't tolerate such men on my staff.

There are three reasons why we are fighting this war. The first is because we are determined to preserve our traditional liberties. Some crazy German bastards decided they were supermen and that it was their holy mission to rule the world. They've been pushing people around all over the world, looting, killing, and abusing millions of innocent men, women, and children. They were getting set to do the same thing to us. We had to fight to prevent being subjugated.

The second reason we are fighting is to defeat and wipe out the Nazis who started all this goddamned son-of-bitchery. They didn't think we could or would fight, and they weren't the only ones who thought that, either. There are certain people back home who had the same idea. Both were wrong.

The third reason we are fighting is because men like to fight. They always have and they always will. Some sophists and other crackpots deny that. They don't know what they're talking about. They are either goddamned fools or cowards, or both. Men like to fight, and if they don't they're not real men.

If you don't like to fight, I don't want you around. You'd better get out before I kick you out. But there is one thing to remember. In war, it takes more than the desire to fight to win. You've got to have more than guts to lick the enemy. You must also have brains. It takes brains and guts to win wars. A man with guts but no brains is only half a soldier. We licked the Germans in Africa and Sicily because we had brains as well as guts. We're going to lick them in Europe for the same reason.

That's all and good luck.

AP English Language and Composition Rhetorical Analysis: On Demand Essay Brassil

38

Scoring Guide Rhetorical Analysis: Patton Speech to Third Army Headquarters Staff

9 Essays earning a score of 9 meet the criteria for 8 papers and, in addition, are especially full or apt in their analysis or demonstrate particularly impressive control of language.

8 Essays earning a score of 8 effectively analyze the rhetorical strategies that General Patton uses to achieve his purpose. They refer to the passage, explicitly or implicitly, and explain the function of specific strategies. The writing is effective but not flawless.

7 Essays earning a score of 7 fit the description of 6 essays but provide a more complete analysis or demonstrate a more mature prose style.

6 Essays earning a score of 6 adequately analyze the rhetorical strategies that Patton uses to achieve his purpose. They refer to the passage, explicitly or implicitly, but their explanation of how specific strategies work is less effective or less developed. The writing is generally clear but may contain lapses in diction or syntax.

5 Essays earning a score of 5 analyze Patton’s strategies, but they may provide uneven, inconsistent, or limited explanations of how these strategies work. The writing usually conveys the writer’s ideas but may contain lapses in diction or syntax.

4 Essays earning a score of 4 respond to the prompt inadequately. They may misrepresent Patton’s purpose, analyze his strategies inaccurately, offer little discussion of specific strategies, or rely too much on paraphrase. The writing generally conveys the writer’s ideas but may suggest immature control.

3 Essays earning a score of 3 meet the criteria for the score of 4 but are less perceptive about Patton’s strategies or less consistent in their control of language.

2 Essays earning a score of 2 demonstrate little success in analyzing Patton’s strategies. These essays may offer vague generalizations, merely list techniques, seriously misread the passage, or substitute simpler tasks such as summarizing the passage. The writing often demonstrates consistent weaknesses.

1 Essays earning a score of 1 meet the criteria for the score of 2 but are undeveloped, especially simplistic in their discussion, or weak in their control of language.

AP English Language and Composition Rhetorical Analysis: On Demand Essay Brassil

39

(Available time- overnight; aim for 50 minutes. Please use blue / black ink and put your name on page 1.)

The passage below is an excerpt from a presidential campaign speech by U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy, delivered to an audience at the University of Kansas, on March 18, 1968. Read the passage carefully. Then write an essay in which you identify Kennedy’s message and analyze the rhetorical strategies he uses to purposefully convey it. Support your analysis with specific references to the text.

There is much more to this critical election year than the war in Vietnam.!!!! It is, at a root, the root! of all of it, the national soul of the United States.! The President1 calls it "restlessness."! Our cabinet officers, such as John Gardiner and others tell us that America is deep in a malaise of spirit:! discouraging initiative, paralyzing will and action, and dividing Americans from one another, by their age, their views and by the color of their skin and I don't think we have to accept that here in the United States of America.!!!! Demonstrators shout down government officials and the government answers by drafting demonstrators.! Anarchists threaten to burn the country down and some have begun to try, while tanks have patrolled American streets and machine guns have fired at American children.! I don't think this a satisfying situation for the United States of America.!!!!! Our young people - the best educated, and the best comforted in our history, turn from the Peace Corps and public commitment of a few years ago - to lives of disengagement and despair - many of them turned on with drugs and turned off on America.!!!! All around us, all around us, - not just on the question of Vietnam, not just on the question of the cities, not just the question of poverty, not just on the problems of race relations - but all around us, and why you are so concerned and why you are so disturbed - the fact is, that men have lost confidence in themselves, in each other, it is confidence which has sustained us so much in the past - rather than answer the cries of deprivation and despair - cries which the President's Commission on Civil Disorders tells us could split our nation finally asunder - rather than answer these desperate cries, hundreds of communities and millions of citizens are looking for their answers, to force and repression and private gun stocks - so that we confront our fellow citizen across impossible barriers of hostility and mistrust and again, I don't believe that we have to accept that.! I don't believe that it's necessary in the United States of America.! I think that we can work together - I don't think that we have to shoot at each other, to beat each other, to curse each other and criticize each other, I think that we can do better in this country.! And that is why I run for President of the United States.!!!! And if we seem powerless to stop this growing division between Americans, who at least confront one another, there are millions more living in the hidden places, whose names and faces are completely unknown - but I have seen these other Americans - I have seen children in Mississippi starving, their bodies so crippled from hunger and their minds have been so destroyed for their whole life that they will have no future.! I have seen children in Mississippi - here in the United States - with a gross national product of $800 billion dollars - I have seen children in the Delta area of Mississippi with distended stomachs, whose faces are covered with sores from starvation, and we haven't developed a policy so we can get enough food so that they can live, so that their children, so that their lives are not destroyed, I don't think that's acceptable in the United States of America and I think we need a change.!!!! I have seen Indians living on their bare and meager reservations, with no jobs, with an unemployment rate of 80 percent, and with so little hope for the future, so little hope for the future that for young people, for young men and women in their teens, the greatest cause of death amongst them is suicide.

AP English Language and Composition Rhetorical Analysis: On Demand Essay Brassil

1 U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson

40

!!!! That they end their lives by killing themselves - I don't think that we have to accept that - for the first American, for this minority here in the United States.! If young boys and girls are so filled with despair when they are going to high school and feel that their lives are so hopeless and that nobody's going to care for them, nobody's going to be involved with them, and nobody's going to bother with them, that they either hang themselves, shoot themselves or kill themselves - I don't think that's acceptable and I think the United States of America - I think the American people, I think we can do much, much better.! And I run for the presidency because of that, I run for the presidency because I have seen proud men in the hills of Appalachia, who wish only to work in dignity, but they cannot, for the mines are closed and their jobs are gone and no one - neither industry, nor labor, nor government - has cared enough to help.!!!! I think we here in this country, with the unselfish spirit that exists in the United States of America, I think we can do better here also.!!!!! I have seen the people of the black ghetto, listening to ever greater promises of equality and of justice, as they sit in the same decaying schools and huddled in the same filthy rooms - without heat - warding off the cold and warding off the rats.!!!! If we believe that we, as Americans, are bound together by a common concern for each other, then an urgent national priority is upon us.! We must begin to end the disgrace of this other America.!!!! And this is one of the great tasks of leadership for us, as individuals and citizens this year.! But even if we act to erase material poverty, there is another greater task, it is to confront the poverty of satisfaction - purpose and dignity - that afflicts us all.! Too much and for too long, we seemed to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things.! Our Gross National Product, now, is over $800 billion dollars a year, but that Gross National Product - if we judge the United States of America by that - that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage.! It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them.! It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl.! It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities.! It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife2, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.! Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play.! It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials.! It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.! And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans.

AP English Language and Composition Rhetorical Analysis: On Demand Essay Brassil

2 Charles Whitman and Richard Speck were notorious, guilty of multiple murders

41

Scoring Guide Rhetorical Analysis: Robert F. Kennedy U. of Kansas Speech

9 Essays earning a score of 9 meet the criteria for 8 papers and, in addition, are especially full or apt in their analysis or demonstrate particularly impressive control of language.

8 Essays earning a score of 8 effectively analyze the rhetorical strategies that Senator Kennedy uses to purposefully convey his message. They refer to the passage, explicitly or implicitly, and explain the function of specific strategies. The writing is effective but not flawless.

7 Essays earning a score of 7 fit the description of 6 essays but provide a more complete analysis or demonstrate a more mature prose style.

6 Essays earning a score of 6 adequately analyze the rhetorical strategies that Senator Kennedy uses to purposefully convey his message. They refer to the passage, explicitly or implicitly, but their explanation of how specific strategies work is less effective or less developed. The writing is generally clear but may contain lapses in diction or syntax.

5 Essays earning a score of 5 analyze Kennedy’s strategies, but they may provide uneven, inconsistent, or limited explanations of how these strategies work. The writing usually conveys the writer’s ideas but may contain lapses in diction or syntax.

4 Essays earning a score of 4 respond to the prompt inadequately. They may misrepresent Kennedy’s message, analyze his strategies inaccurately, offer little discussion of specific strategies, or rely too much on paraphrase. The writing generally conveys the writer’s ideas but may suggest immature control.

3 Essays earning a score of 3 meet the criteria for the score of 4 but are less perceptive about Kennedy’s strategies or less consistent in their control of language.

2 Essays earning a score of 2 demonstrate little success in analyzing Kennedy’s strategies. These essays may offer vague generalizations, merely list techniques, seriously misread the passage, or substitute simpler tasks such as summarizing the passage. The writing often demonstrates consistent weaknesses.

1 Essays earning a score of 1 meet the criteria for the score of 2 but are undeveloped, especially simplistic in their discussion, or weak in their control of language.

AP English Language and Composition Rhetorical Analysis: On Demand Essay Brassil

42

Good evening, London.

Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of every day routine — the security of the familiar, the tranquility of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke. But in the spirit of commemoration, whereby those important events of the past, usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, are celebrated with a nice holiday, I thought we could mark this November the 5th, a day that is sadly no longer remembered, by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat.

There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth.

And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission.

How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night I sought to end that silence.

Last night I destroyed the Old Bailey, to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than 400 years ago a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words, they are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you then I would suggest that you allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you to stand beside me one year from tonight, outside the gates of Parliament, and together we shall give them a fifth of November that shall never, ever be forgot.

V’s televised speech, November 5th

43

Context:

V for Vendetta is a 2005 film set in a dystopian future United Kingdom, where V, a mysterious anarchist wearing a Guy Fawkes costume, works to bring down an oppressive fascist government, profoundly affecting the people he encounters.

In the near future, Britain is ruled by “Norsefire,” a totalitarian government. Early in the story, Evey Hammond, a young woman who works at a state-run TV station, is rescued from an attempted assault by members of the government’s secret police by a Guy Fawkes-masked vigilante, a rebel known as "V". V leads Evey to a rooftop to watch his destruction of the Old Bailey, London’s most prominent courthouse, at midnight on Guy Fawkes Day. In the aftermath of V’s act, Norsefire publicly explains the incident as a planned demolition. However, V exposes the lie by taking over a state-run television station the next day. He broadcasts the following message, in which he urges the people of Britain to rise against the oppressive government exactly one year later, on November 5, by meeting him outside the Houses of Parliament.

Imagine an AP analysis question associated with V’s speech:

Context: (A succinct version of the more elaborate context statement seen above.)

Direction: “Read the speech carefully.”

Then... “Then write an essay in which you...”

V’s televised speech, November 5th

44