RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF A CULTURAL ARTIFACT
Your task is to analyze one of the cultural artifacts that we’ve discussed in class. (Source list is at the
Use the lens (theories) of persuasion, empathy, emotion and metaphor and rhetorical elements such
as genre, audience and purpose to frame your points.
Write this for an audience that has not experienced your chosen entity.
While your task is analysis, not summary, you do want to provide some context and description so
that your reader can follow along whether they know the subject or not.
As you look at your subject,
-- What is the significance of the title ?
-- Logos ?
-- Who is the audience for this and how does it appeal to them ?
-- What “elements of persuasion” are present ?
-- What are important metaphors and why are they important ?
-- What “arguments” are being made by their presence ?
-- How are they shaping reality and the way people think ?
-- How or does emotion come into play ?
-- Empathy ?
-- What is the perspective ?
Your thesis for this is the ‘so what’ of your analysis, the argument you are trying to make as a critic
of the artifact you’re analyzing.
Please bring two other sources in addition to the source citation as part of this analysis.
Please use MLA style for citations and a Works Cited page.
This paper will be drafted in phases. The first step: a formal proposal which should include the
cultural artifact you will want to analyze and your rationale for why you chose it. This will be due
May 1. Your draft will be due May 10.
A focused argument that comes out of your close reading/watching to create a rhetorical analysis of
In discussing metaphoric images and language, you support your argument with evidence form the
entity itself, assuming that your readers (whom I would invite you to see as others in this class) have
not seen or experienced the cultural artifact. Also use our course readings as a lens through which
you look at your cultural artifact in new ways, and you cite at least two (2) of our previous readings.
You organize your paragraphs in such a way that your readers can clearly follow your main
argument and how you’re supporting it. You group information together that goes together, you
use a new paragraph when you “switch gears” to a new subject. And lastly, you use transition words
and phrases to signal to your reader where you are going in your trajectory.
You carefully edit and proofread your final draft so that there are no grammar or proofreading errors.
2,000 words / 6 double spaced pages (20% of course grade)
May, 1 Formal Proposal
May, 10 First draft
May, 22 Second draft
Sadie Benning: http://ubu.com/film/benning_diary.html
Janet Cardiff : http://ubu.com/film/cardiff_alter.html
Omer Fast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OksqdsZGkcg
Adrian Piper https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVcXb8En_Tw
Martha Rosler http://ubu.com/film/rosler_semiotics.html
Laurie Anderson PSAs
https://www.moma.org/collection/works/120333 (also look up on You Tube for full
Moyra Davey’s”Notes on Blue”
follow instructions and cite and relate 2 other articles into the paper. I attached 1 and will put 2 other links below
I need a paper that analyzes a video.
Their must be 2 other sources cited