George Monbiot uses many rhetorical strategies in his work to reach out to the reader and strengthen his point. Instead of launching right into a logical appeal or a list of facts, Monbiot opens with a story that shows why he wrote on this subject.
Monbiot also makes himself very accessible and puts himself on the same level as his reader. He mentions that living in a world that was entirely environmentally safe, we would have to give up many modern marvels such as fancy soap and towels. Those these are frivolous examples, he uses them to point out that he likes the comforts of modern life as well as many others. This helps the author relate to an average person who may be worried about becoming environmentally conscious. The reader is encouraged to listen because they share the same views as the writer; he wants to be environmentally safe but enjoys living with conveniences.
Another emotional appeal that Monbiot uses is talking about future generations. He claims that we are fortunate, but that the world may not be the same for future generations if we continue to live the way we do. This is a direct pathos strategy because he appeals to readers who want their children to live well.
Monbiot strengthens his argument by acknowledging the weaknesses or difficulties his plan offers. He explains that changes will have to be made by each country according to size and climate. This shows the reader that he has thought through his proposal many times and has considered the positives and negatives.
Monbiot also offers a large section of facts and numbers, which gives the reader a lot of hard facts to realize how serious the problem is and how quickly it is growing. Not only does this appeal to the logical side of the reader, but it also instills fear which is useful for spurring actions. For example, he talks about how rising sea levels will pollute drinking water in many coastal cities; it is clear that environmental change can have a direct impact on our lives. This also gives the writer credibility, which is central to Faigley’s and Selzer’s tactics for writing an effective argument.
Good analysis,
ReplyDeleteYou definitely hit the extra credit question on the head by recalling his dropping down to the reader's level and admittance of his enjoyment of modern conveniences. I also thought it interesting that you felt some of the future fact references were pathos because they appeal to those with emotions about their children. Nice thought.
Nice write up. I think his beginning was a good way of going about it. Like you said he did not "launch appeal or a list of facts" and I think that helped keep the readers attention.
ReplyDelete