| Joel Montes de Oca. "Journal Entry". 7-4-10 via Flickr. CC A-SA 2.0. |
First Draft:
Julie is credible because she has actually lived it, which means that we can trust the information she gives us. Her audience is really anyone who might read the piece, but it specifically speaks to women in technology, engineering and entrepreneurship. Contextually, she is writing at a time when women are struggling to be taking seriously in these industries. The message is that women should be heard and taken seriously, and that they should also advocate for themselves. Julie employs a host of rhetorical strategies, especially appealing to our emotions and her own credibility in order to make her point. All of these things are important to consider, but as with all rules, they are learned only to be forgotten. Once you’re more practiced at analyzing public speech acts this way, you’ll be able to be more fluent with the rules because your interpretation should be just that: your own.
Draft 2.0:
Who better to speak on an issue than someone who was able to work through it? In her piece, Julie does a great job using rhetoric to paint a picture of a better world. She is writing to a broad group, yet her language is specific enough to touch those affected and inclusive enough to get other people on board with her mission. This is even more impressive because contextually, we are living in the era of this problem and this piece will have the chance to reach everyone involved in this trend. Women must be heard, taken seriously, and given every opportunity that their male counterparts have. This message rings clear as Julie appeals to both our emotions and her own credibility in order to make her point. But when considering the way we interpret this public speech act, it is equally important to note that it is public, thus open to interpretation, and that its meaning is whatever you make it.
No comments:
Post a Comment