Reading Response to Charland This side-quest requires that you read “Charland_Co

Reading Response to Charland
This side-quest requires that you read “Charland_Consitutive Rhetoric.pdf” . Once you’ve read the articles, you’re to write a memo that responds to all of the questions below—but not necessarily in the order presented in the list. Your memo should be a minimum of 1000 words.
Things to Include in Your Memo and Minimum Requirements
• No fewer than 1000 words
• Do you agree with the author’s argument? Why or why not?
• What new information did you gain by reading and reflecting on this article that might be valuable to you? If nothing will be valuable to you, explain why not.
• What key rhetorical topics does the article wrestle with? How has your understanding of these topics increased or been complicated and what significance does this have to your everyday life? If there has been no change in your understanding, explain why this is? In other words, how will you move forward after encountering this information?
• Charland privileges Burke’s “identification” as the primary force behind rhetoric, and not “persuasion.” However, one might make the argument that an audience must be persuaded to identify in the first place before anything can happen in the world. Do you think that Charland misses the mark here, or are you convinced that identification is more important than persuasion? Explain your reasoning in the memo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *