Hump Day and Early Dismissal

Today we have a short class, during which you all completed two SAT questions and listened and responded to the late, great Billie Holliday singing the iconic classic "Strange Fruit."

Good stuff!

Friday is the last day to submit your rhetorical analyses on "Letter from  Birmingham Jail."  Your vocabulary stories are also due on Friday.

Please, please, please come by for help whenever you need it.

Writing about Friday on Saturday

Hello everyone!

On Friday, you submitted your homework, your rhetorical analysis of a portion of "Letter from a Birmingham Jail."  Friday was also the last day to submit your annotations of "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" for a late grade.

You registered for the SAT during class and also received two new homework assignments, which I have copied below.  Your Othello vocabulary sheet is due Tuesday, January 29, 2013; your vocabulary story is due Friday, February 1, 2012.

Othello Vocabulary

Word	POS	Definition
Epithet (7)
Obsequious (9)
Visage (9)
Homage (11)
Vexation (11)
Malicious (13)
Beseech (15)
Lascivious (15)
Rebuke (15)
Extravagant (17)
Deluding (17)
Treason (19)
Contrived (21)
Spite (21)
Promulgate (21)

Palpable (27)
Valiant (31)
Beguiled (33)
Mandate (35)
Imminent (39)
Insolent (39)
Foe
Devour
Tyranny
Equivocal

Please complete this sheet by the beginning of class Tuesday, January 29, 2013.  Easy homework grade.

Please complete a vocabulary story with 20 of these words by the beginning of class Friday, February 1, 2013.  Great assignment.

Monday-Tuesday

Fourth and Fifth Periods:

Today you wrote a paragraph using five "SAT" words - learn them, please.

You also received your PSAT scores.  Please see me if you would like to discuss them.

You also started to focus on one page of "Letter from a Birminghal Jail," which you will present to class as an oral rhetorical analysis tomorrow.

You have homework due Friday - a written rhetorical analysis of two to four pages of "Letter from a Birmingham Jail."

Have a great day!

TGIF!

Fourth and Fifth periods:

Today we completed two SAT QODs.  You also perused your folder and completed a self-assessment for your writing.  We then read and discussed the letter from the clergymen to Dr. King and then began to discuss the magnificent "Letter from a Birmingham Jail."  You submitted your annotations for that piece.  Finally, you received a homework assignment that is due on Friday, January 25, 2013 a copy of which appears below:

Homework due Friday, January 25, 2013

For your homework due Friday, you will write a rhetorical analysis of a portion of “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.”  To complete this assignment, please do the following:

1.                  Choose at least one panel of your handout to analyze.  One panel corresponds to two pages of text.  You may analyze more of the text if you would like, but four pages of text is the maximum length that you may choose to analyze.

2.                  Your first paragraph, as always, will state Dr. King’s purpose.  Please describe this purpose as specifically as possible.

3.                  Now discuss the salient (relevant) features of Dr. King’s text, embedding quotes as you go.  Please note that a feature is NOT salient unless it helps Dr. King achieve his purpose.

4.                  Features that you may choose to discuss include the following: diction (describe it!), sentence structure (syntax), figurative language, tone, tone shifts, ethos, pathos, logos, and repetition.

5.                  Remember your rhetorical triangle.  In other words, at the end of your discussion of each feature, describe the effect (or is it affect?J) of Dr. King’s rhetoric on his intended audience, and explain how this rhetorical feature helps Dr. King achieve his purpose.  (Speaker, audience, purpose – you may want to have these three words tattooed somewhere on your person.)

6.                  Your analysis MUST extend to at least both sides of one page.  You may type your analysis, but a handwritten one is acceptable.  Since this is not an in-class assignment, please make sure that you take the time to pre-write, revise, and re-write your paper.  Of course, you should always pre-write, even for an in-class, timed writing.

7.                  A homework grade is a major grade.  Many of you did not pass last semester because of failure to submit homework.  You are too smart to repeat past mistakes.

8.                  As always, please give this assignment your best effort – make yourself proud! 

9.                  Penultimately, but not least, please see me for any help.

10.              Last, but not least, you are welcome for giving you such a thought provoking and challenging assignment.

Hump Day

The difference between "effect" and "affect"?  How could you be so lucky to learn that?  We completed three questions on that conundrum today.

You then finished your rhetorical analysis on the Rachel Carson prompt.

You have homework due Friday, January 18, 2013 - read and annotate Dr. King's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail."  You are so lucky to have the opportunity to read this piece (no sarcasm intended).  Although you have your own copy of this rhetorical tour de force, I have provided a link to this Letter out of an abundance of caution.

http://www.stanford.edu/group/King//frequentdocs/birmingham.pdf

Enjoy!

Analysis continued

Fourth and Fifth periods:

Today we completed two SAT QODs.  We also read and discussed two student samples from the College Board.  Fifth Period also got to listen to me read Rene Maldonado's rhetorical analysis, which is pretty darn good.

You all wrote on your essays the remainder of the class.  Tomorrow you will continue to write your essays.  If we have time, we will begin to read Dr. King's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail."

I am proud of the effort that you are devoting to your rhetorical analyses.  I know that it is not easy.

Analyze this!

Today fourth and fifth periods wrote a rhetorical analysis of the Rachel Carson prompt from the 2004 AP test.  I gave you a rhetorical analysis that I wrote, as well as my thoughts as I wrote my analysis.  I have copied both of those documents below.  Before you peruse them, however, please note that starting next Tuesday, January 15th, you MUST bring a pencil and a blue or black ink oen to class EVERY DAY.

Have a good weekend!

Rhetorical Analysis – Rachel Carson

                Rachel Carson, indignant and frustrated at an aggressive application of parathion, informs her readers of parathion’s deleterious effects and ultimately calls her readers and herself to task for their and her oblivion to the application’s deadly effects.

                Carson begins her selection with powerfully blunt diction, “habit of killing.”   In addition to this gory diction, Carson implies that this “killing” was not even justified.  In fact, she informs her audience, between dashes, which in themselves telegraph a dramatic statement, that this “killing” was a response to a mere “annoy[ance]” and “inconvenience.”  Carson further emphasizes the reckless nature of this “deadly” parathion application by confirming that its purpose was to “control” “distasteful” birds, almost as one would use a semi-automatic weapon to obliterate a piece of limp lettuce from a gourmand’s dinner plate. 

                In addition to sounding the alarm with warlike diction and accusations of insufficient cause, Carson informs her readers of this poisonous plague with an impressive array of facts, which only bolsters her ethos with her readers.  For example, Carson shores up her sense of alarm by citing the “serious concern” of the Fish and Wildlife Service and provides her likely horrified readers with a “casualty list” of some “65,000” birds.  With the mention of this number, Carson quantifies the enormous scope of this “killing by poison,” and compels the readers to visualize pile upon pile of dead birds, not unlike the photos of mass graves dug by the Nazis during WWII.  To intensify the implication of cruelty, Carson reiterates that this mass murdering was unnecessary, as the farmers’ plight could have been “solved easily by a slight change in agricultural practice” (emphasis added). 

                Carson relentlessly continues, as some of her readers may not be alarmed by avian deaths and thus not yet convinced of her argument that parathion is profoundly toxic.  Accordingly, Carson notes that in addition to the death of “65,000” birds, “rabbits or raccoons or opossums” (emphasis added) have been “doomed” by the application of parathion.  Carson’s use of the polysyndeton in the foregoing phrase seems to make the list of animals injured endless and plodding, as well as implying that the animals’ deaths were numerous and slow and painful. 

                But what if certain readers are not animal lovers and thus not moved by Carson’s reportage?  To tighten the net around potential supporters who may not be fervent animal lovers, Carson describes human “workers handling foliage … [who] collapsed and went into shock” once in contact with parathion.  Carson hits even closer to home by mentioning the parathion poisoning of “boys who roam through woods or fields,” boys like the readers’ sons or brothers, “innocent strollers” who do not deserve to suffer for their “search for unspoiled nature.”  As the poisonous fumes waft ever so close to homesteads and loved ones, how can the readers not be disturbed by the “needless war” against life caused by parathion dumping?

                Once Carson has thoroughly riled her readers, she shifts her tone to hold them accountable in the last paragraph.  First, Carson engages her audience with a series of questions.  Carson uses a simile to make the abstract concept of the ramifications of poisoning more concrete (“this ever-widening wave of death”), for who has not thrown a pebble into a pond and gazed at the ripples?  Carson’s questions then become more pointed until the point – again dramatized by dashes (“who has the right to decide”) – that she accuses the bad actors of seizing or usurping power to sanitize but destroy nature (“a sterile world ungraced”).  Carson’s last sentence is the clincher, however, for it is then that the readers realize that they are likely among the “millions” asleep and unaware as this ecological mayhem  occurred and that it is vital, even “imperative” that the populace act swiftly and vigilantly to help safeguard our planet.  Feeling such guilt at the proof of past inaction, what citizen would not be moved to support Carson’s cause?

Rhetorical Analysis – Rachel Carson – Metacognitive style

Before I begin a rhetorical analysis, I remind myself that rhetoric is persuasive speech.  I also picture our old favorite, the rhetorical triangle, which looks something like this:

 [diagram of rhetorical triangle goes here]

Therefore I know that the speaker, the speaker’s audience, and the speaker’s purpose are all related and that everything I write about should relate to how the speaker persuades the audience to agree with him, which is his purpose.

After this reminder, I read the prompt. I then bracket the task that I am asked to perform.  This task is two-fold.  First I am asked to “define the central argument of the passage,” which is just a fancy way of saying “identify the author’s purpose.”  Then I am asked to “analyze the rhetorical strategies that Carson uses.”  No problem – here goes my first paragraph, which MUST state the author’s purpose.  My first paragraph may be only one sentence.

                Rachel Carson, indignant and frustrated at an aggressive application of parathion, informs her readers of parathion’s deleterious effects and ultimately calls her readers and herself to task for their and her oblivion to the application’s deadly effects.

Next, I am going to discuss the salient (relevant) aspects of Carson’s piece from beginning to end.  I know that I don’t have time to discuss all of Carson’s rhetorical strategies, so I will choose the ones that I can clearly link to Carson’s purpose.  If I can’t think of anything else, I know that I can always discuss diction, the author’s choice of words, as long as I am careful to describe the type of diction the author uses. (No naked diction!).  I also know that the first time I mention the author I will use her first and last name.  From then on, I will refer to her by her surname (last name) only.  I will describe what the author does in present tense and embed quotes to express myself as specifically as possible.

                Carson (surname only) begins (present tense) her selection with powerfully blunt diction (no naked diction!), “habit of killing.” (I embed portions of text into my comments.)   In addition to this gory diction, (I use transitions to lead your reader from one thought to another) Carson implies that this “killing” was not even justified.  In fact, she informs her audience, between dashes, which in themselves telegraph a dramatic statement (drama dashes equal), that this “killing” was a response to a mere “annoy[ance]”(I place brackets around any portion of the quote I amend.) and “inconvenience.”  Carson further emphasizes the reckless nature of this “deadly” parathion application by confirming that its purpose was to “control” “distasteful” birds, almost as one would use a semi-automatic weapon to obliterate a piece of limp lettuce from a gourmand’s dinner plate.  (To inject a bit of voice into my analysis, I will use figurative language, albeit judiciously.)

                In addition to sounding the alarm with warlike diction and accusations of insufficient cause, Carson informs her readers of this poisonous plague with an impressive array of facts, which only bolsters her ethos with her readers. (If in doubt, think about ethos, pathos, and logos.  If I forget these terms, I may use the words credibility, emotional appeal, and logic or facts or statistics.)  For example, Carson shores up her sense of alarm by citing the “serious concern” of the Fish and Wildlife Service and provides her likely horrified readers with a “casualty list” of some “65,000” birds.  With the mention of this number, Carson quantifies the enormous scope of this “killing by poison,” and compels the readers to visualize pile upon pile of dead birds, not unlike the photos of mass graves dug by the Nazis during WWII.  (I don’t want to go too far off topic, but I can use what I know to make my point and give my analysis a bit of context.) To intensify the implication of cruelty, Carson reiterates that this mass murdering was unnecessary, as the farmers’ plight could have been “solved easily by a slight change in agricultural practice” (emphasis added).  (In order to quickly convey my opinion that certain words in this quote are more critical than others, I simply end my quote with a parenthetical “emphasis added.”)

                Carson relentlessly continues, as some of her readers may not be alarmed by avian deaths and thus not yet convinced of her argument that parathion is profoundly toxic.  Accordingly, Carson notes that in addition to the death of “65,000” birds, “rabbits or raccoons or opossums” (emphasis added) have been “doomed” by the application of parathion.  Carson’s use of the polysyndeton in the foregoing phrase seems to make the list of animals injured endless and plodding, as well as implying that the animals’ deaths were numerous and slow and painful.  (If I can’t remember the term “polysyndeton,” I will simply write “Carson’s repetition of the conjunction “’or.’”  However, I will learn to spell “repetition” correctlyJ.)

                But what if certain readers are not animal lovers and thus not moved by Carson’s reportage?  To tighten the net around potential supporters who may not be fervent animal lovers, Carson describes human “workers handling foliage … [who] collapsed and went into shock” once in contact with parathion.  Carson hits even closer to home by mentioning the parathion poisoning of “boys who roam through woods or fields,” boys like the readers’ sons or brothers, “innocent strollers” who do not deserve to suffer for their “search for unspoiled nature.”  As the poisonous fumes waft ever so close to homesteads and loved ones, how can the readers not be disturbed by the “needless war” against life caused by parathion dumping? (Just as Carson does, I add a question of my own to engage my reader.)

                Once Carson has thoroughly riled her readers, she shifts her tone to hold them accountable in the last paragraph.  (AP readers love to see a student notice a shift in tone or approach.) First, Carson engages her audience with a series of questions.  Carson uses a simile to make the abstract concept of the ramifications of poisoning more concrete (“this ever-widening wave of death”), for who has not thrown a pebble into a pond and gazed at the ripples?  (If I can’t remember the word “simile,” I will write “figurative language” or “comparison.”  The important thing to remember is that figurative language or comparisons often help a reader see an abstract concept in concrete images, which helps an author achieve her purpose.) Carson’s questions become more pointed until the point – again dramatized by dashes (“who has the right to decide”) – that she accuses the bad actors of seizing or usurping power to sanitize but destroy nature (“a sterile world ungraced”).  (I am getting tired and running out of time.  Therefore, instead of embedding this last quote, I stuck it in parentheses at the end of my sentence – better than nothing.) Carson’s last sentence is the clincher, however, for it is then that the readers realize that they are likely among the “millions” asleep and unaware as this ecological mayhem  occurred and that it is vital, even “imperative” that the populace act swiftly and vigilantly to help safeguard our planet.  Feeling such guilt at the proof of past inaction, what citizen would not be moved to support Carson’s cause?

Welcome Back!

Fourth and Fifth Periods:

Today you completed two SAT QODs.  If you missed today, you need to complete and hand these in by next Tuesday.

We also started reading and analyzing a piece for rhetorical analysis. 

Tomorrow I will not be at school.  You will have an SAT packet to complete.  Please complete it carefully and submit it to the substitute before you leave class tomorrow.

Thanks!