RWS 200 Paper #2: Using a Text as a Lens to Analyze Another (200pts.)

Patricia Roberts-Miller investigates the power of demagogic argumentation in the article, “Democracy, Demagoguery, and Critical Rhetoric,” and her shorter, revised version, “Characteristics of Demagoguery.” She examines elements and definitions of “demagoguery,” identifying a number of rhetorical aspects that she believes are central to demagogic discourse.

In this paper, you will present Roberts-Miller’s argument and then use her text(s), and the theories within that text, as a lens on Wayne LaPierre’s Sandy Hook speech. You will investigate how specific characteristics of demagoguery (i.e. polarization, demonization, motivism, scapegoating, etc.) work in LaPierre’s text. You must provide examples of these elements, analyzing how they work, why they may have been used in the context, and what effect they may have on the audience. Additionally, in the process of evaluation, you will highlight one example that you believe is an effective, reasonable and/or ethical argument, and one fallacy identifiable in LaPierre’s text, exploring how/to what extent it reveals a potential weakness in LaPierre’s argument. *Refer to the fallacy handout.

As a recurring theme of the class, I would like for you to consider the rhetorical situation (context) of this text as well. Consider the intended audience and time it was aired. Analyze the ways in which the author seems to be responding to different values and assumptions his intended reader is likely to hold. *This will require you to fully introduce LaPierre’s speech before beginning your analysis.

In this paper, you will:

1. Introduce the topic and Roberts Miller’s work on demagoguery, establishing your lens. Briefly introduce LaPierre, and describe what the paper will do. (Don’t be afraid to use metadiscourse.)

2. Set the scene. Identify what LaPierre is responding to and who his audience is. (This may be in a secondary introduction paragraph.)

3. Identify his central claims and the reasons or evidence he uses to support them.

4. Analyze two elements of LaPierre’s text and discuss the extent to which they conform to Roberts-Miller’s definition of demagogic discourse. Be sure to:

5. Evaluate a strength (one reasonable strategy) and weakness (one fallacy) in LaPierre’s text, explaining how/to what extent it reveals a potential weakness in LaPierre’s argument.

6. Present a conclusion (Answer “So what, who cares?” What is significant about the work you did/things you learned in the course of writing this.) You may wish to discuss what you have learned about criteria for evaluating argument.

Requirements:

• Papers will be 4-8 pages in length.

• 12pt font, 1 inch margins, and in MLA format.

• Work Cited page (MLA Format)

• Use specific quotes and lines of evidence, and when doing so, be sure to give credit where credit is due. (Ex. LaPierre asserts, “….” (p. 5)).

• Refer to your Keys for Writers.

Important Dates:

• First Draft due: Monday, Mar. 7^th for Peer Workshop #2 (Hard copy, full draft)

• Final Draft due: Wednesday, Mar. 9^th at the BEGINNING OF CLASS. (Hard copy, stapled with rough draft and peer review worksheet)