The purpose of the assignment is to allow you practice paying attention to rhetorical strategies. I am also watching for how well you follow assignment directions. As we discussed, we bring the legacy of schooling with us when we write. We need to learn to look at what each professor asks for, rather than write for past audiences. And in this assignment I’m going to ask you to do something difficult, and that is separate analysis from evaluation.
As we have been discussing, disabled rhetors employ creative rhetorical strategies to make ableism visible. Posting a “No Crips Allowed” sign on the sidewalk is one example. But the range is wide, from chaining oneself to a fence, to putting tape over one’s mouth, to using words organized in sentences and paragraphs.
Look at everything on the whole site: Words, images, links, videos. Get to know the site well before you start writing.
Give an Brief Overview of no more than two paragraphs of how the site presents and organizes itself. Who claims to be the author/s of the site? Does it invite participation in the form of comments or other ways to contact the authors? Invitations to participate in events or advocacy? Who seems to be the intended audience?
At the end of the overview, instead of a “thesis,” suggest what the main argument or mission of the website seems to be. And then identify the main counter-argument they seem to be speaking against. Are they countering a misconception about who they are, what they can do, whether or not they are “really” disabled, or that they are asking for special treatment?
For the next section, Selection Analysis, select one particular blog entry, image, or video that confronts this challenge.
How does it seem to be representative (or not) of the site as a whole? Where is it on the website (front page or several clicks deep). How does it refigure ability/disability? What rhetorical strategies does it employ to confront the main rhetorical challenge (as mentioned above)?
Lists of rhetorical strategies that might be at play in your assignment can be found at the links. Use them as brain stormers. But I want you to focus on one or two MAIN rhetorical strategies that characterize your disability activist’s style. Use many quotations from the text you are analyzing (or in place of quotations, very precise description of the visual images you’re analyzing) to support your claim of the main rhetorical strategies.
https://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-rhetorical-devices.html
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/588/04/
https://www.miracosta.edu/home/dperales/newrhetorical%20strategies.htm
NOTE: I am less concerned that you have a name for these rhetorical strategies (e.g., ethos, pathos) than that you describe what their purpose is, and who their intended audience seems to be. In fact, you might have to intent a name for the rhetorical strategy your activist employs.
Your role here is not to judge. Don’t say that these strategies are effective or aren’t. You’re just one person reading, and so you can’t say how others would read it. But if there are comments or feedback on your selection, then you can make a claim about how people reacted to it. Don’t say the website is effective or not, or persuasive, or not, or accomplishes its mission.
Evaluative language will lower your grade.
I encourage you to use screenshot or other visual images in your paper if you are working with an image or video.
