A rhetorical analysis looks at how an argument -- in this case an urban legend -- is put together. What words does the author use? What is her audience, and how does she make connections with these readers? How does she deal with counter-arguments? How does she establish herself as a trustworthy, knowledgeable writer? The rhetorical analysis uses techniques of close reading, paying careful attention to every word, phrase, and choice of style and structure.

For your third short essay assignment you are to write a rhetorical analysis of an urban legend of your choice. Your thesis should run something like

The "kidney harvester" urban legend succeeds in convincing its audience because of its primary ethos appeal to the credibility of the wife of the Houston firefighter/EMT. It backs up this ethos appeal with a strong pathos appeal to our fear of being ambushed by a danger we can't detect or anticipate.

Length: 2-3 pages.

Due: Tuesday, April 9.

Grading Criteria: In addition to the standard criteria that applies to all assignments (i.e. grammar, spelling, page format, paragraph development, length, etc.), I will be evaluating how well you analyzed the urban legend in terms of its rhetorical components, and how well your analysis supports your thesis.

Helpful Hints:

• Though you may begin your essay with a brief description of your urban legend, do not retell the entire story. Limit your description to one or two sentences. Assume that your reader is already familiar with the tale. For example, "The 'kidney harvester' is a horrifying tale about an unsuspecting business traveler who awakens in an ice-filled bathtub only to find that he has been drugged and his kidneys surgically removed."
• Make sure that your opening paragraph contains a thesis that explains what is particularly convincing or unconvincing about this urban legend.
• The bulk of your essay should be the rhetorical analysis of your urban legend, particularily those elements that support your thesis. Remember, rhetorical elements are appeals to one of three major categories:
  1. Logos (logic/evidence): Is the story believable or too bizarre to be believed? What specific details contribute to (or detract from) the story's believability? Is any "evidence" offered?
  2. Ethos (writer/storyteller): How does the storyteller establish credibility? What is his or her source for the story? Did the fact that the story was told to you by a friend, family member, or classmate make it more believable? How did the setting or the manner in which the story was told contribute to the storyteller's ethos?
  3. Pathos (audience): Who is the intended audience of this urban legend? Does the story contain local variants that make it particularily appealing to its intended audience? What themes or motifs do this urban legend exploit that make it emotionally connect with that audience?