Being able to understand the choices which authors have made when creating texts is an important skill that will stay with you, and remain useful your entire lives.
Although all of the terms we have learned in this section of the course are also applicable to the analysis of (fiction) literature, we will deal here mainly with non-fiction texts.
Authors appeal to three broad senses in their readers. Most effective texts appeal to each of the three categories below, in their own way, although authors usually focus on one "road to the reader's heart" more than others. When referring to these senses in the context of analyzing rhetoric, we use the terminology of Aristotle, who first categorized and studied their use. This is why the words we use are the ancient Greek words for feeling, character (as in moral character), and logic, respectively:
You've probably encountered pathos before, in words like sympathy and empathy. Authors often make an appeal to emotion to get the result they want from an audience.
Although ethos means ethics directly, when we consider the 'moral character' of a speaker, we do it specifically to determine how credible they are as a speaker. With this in mind, you can also think of the author employing ethos as making an appeal to the audience's sense of credibility.
If possible, authors will usually attempt an appeal to intellect, employing claims and evidence to present a logical case to their audience. It is not always possible to do so. Still, even if it is impossible, most authors will at least try to make what they are presenting seem grounded in facts and evidence.
Note well that the clever use of ethos can make it seem that a claim is correct and true, even when there is no logos employed. For example, the use of technical jargon (intelligent-sounding words) can make it seem like the author is putting forth a reasonable case, when they are, in fact, not.
There are two more senses that authors count on for effect, although they are a bit more subtle than the three listed above. They are:
The use, and sense, of timing here is two-fold:
The first has predominantly to do with the context of the piece of writing. No text is read, nor is any speech delivered in a vacuum. Authors need to consider the events of the recent past, and the probable mood of their audience if they want to avoid saying the right thing, at the wrong time.
The second has to do with the delivery itself. Perhaps you've heard the phrase, 'comedic timing'. The idea is that, when it comes to comedy, the joke or story that is being told isn't what makes us laugh, but rather, its effectiveness is in the way it's told, or the timing of its delivery. The same is true of any text, whether written, or spoken. It doesn't matter how receptive an audience is - if the content of the speech isn't executed in a pleasing manner, their engagement level will drop, possibly causing the message to become lost in their disappointment, or apathy.
The meaning behind telos, is a bit nuanced. Taken plainly, it refers to the ultimate aim or purpose of a text.
It may seem strange to think of a texts purpose as being 'sensed' by a reader, but if you think instead of a reader's sense of purpose you might get the idea. If an author can successfully appeal to the reader's sense of purpose through their text, it can have a profound effect. Similarly, a reader might be able to sense the author's intention, through their words. This is the meaning of telos in the rhetorical sense.
At this point, we can begin our rhetorical analysis. Now that we have all of the terminology required, the process is really quite simple:
...and you're done! It's really not so complicated, once you have the right cognitive tools (read: words) for the task.
Back to subject mainpage.