- Considering last class we evaluated the Stein was drawing parallels to the American and Iraq war currently being waged across the pacific ocean in some big metaphor involving a baseball trade; I think his intended audience may have been to academic scholars. I am not sure if that is their official name, but I am not quite sure what else to call them; to be clear I am referencing people that read Shakespeare sonnets for fun. Critics! Literature critics? Whatever, you get my point. His writing style is so incredibly dry and ironic that the basic common everyday person reading the newspaper wouldn’t catch the deeply ironic tones tinging his words on the page. In fact, it almost seems like he wrote it to stir up the public while the academic-writer-types giggle behind closed doors, knowing that they are misinterpreting it. Or maybe he knew the public would react so violently, and he used that emotion to fuel his work being publicized, to reach a broader audience, so to speak. Nevertheless, Stein purposefully dismisses them as commoners, he almost talks down to them in a condescending tone throughout the peace; or so it would appear to the common person. But to me, it almost reads as if he is sitting in a bar with his best buddies and he’s nudging his one buddy and basically saying “Come on! Does no one else see what is so plain in front of them?!” Like when you try and get your friend to understand a concept, so you use an extended metaphor; that’s the tone I read Stein in. Class Notes: The article was published in TIME magazine, so the intended readers would probably be the public; specifically the TIME subscription holders. Everything in the realm of rhetorical reading and writing is always a perspective; there is no wrong or right answer. People like Stein who would READ the irony.
- I did not get to answer this question in enough time, so I will just take Class Notes on this question. Class Notes: Stein refers to the public as “Yankee haters”; which inherently catches the attention of the public. People inherently feel strongly about sports, especially in America. We take it seriously. People either love or hate the Yankees. This is all a tactic in order for Stein to build his argument, it isn’t an objective argument as one would typically view in a STEM field level of argument. But it is still an argument method.
- Other Class Notes Regarding the Stein Reading: Stein’s argument is that America has this “moral authority”; but why do we have the moral authority? What makes us so special that we have the exception and right to be the moral judge and jury? “Americanism”; why? American thinks of itself as bigger and better than the rest of the world –> Does Stein seem to think this is a good or a bad thing? That this idea of American exceptionalism, is it good or bad? Agree or disagree? Yes, they would agree that this sort of American exceptionalism as troubling, at the very least. Assuming, because this was published in TIME, that Stein’s intended audience did already believe his viewpoint and he was just reaffirming those values that everyone already believed in. Stein does not need to persuade his audience, because the audience is already left leaning regarding the mainstream American politics so he is essentially just “preaching to the choir.”
- So then, how does he get his opinion across? How does he throw his opinion at the audience to appeal to them? Stein uses his blunt, and sarcastic tone to basically hammer some sense into the American brain; and so “everyone in the know” feels super smart, but the people on the outside of the academic level of writing, are probably the one’s being ridiculed.
- Stein almost seems to use a slight, twisted form of Confirmation from The Brief Thompson p. 78. The concept of Confirmation is defined as the proof of the argument and thus argues the case, thesis, or main point of the contention. Stein uses it as a way to further prove his point of American exceptionalism by incorporating the large and extended Yankee metaphor. He also does treat his readers as intelligent, as much as the article may seem demeaning, it is written as if him and his audience are equals; if it is misconstrued as anything other than that, then you are not the intended audience. Class Notes: Yes; using Aristotle’s Art of Persuasion. Using a style of argument that works for his argument. Almost said no due to his lack of traditional evidence, however is isn’t working to change anyone’s opinion, he is just reaffirming shared values.
- I believe Stein is specifically targeting the group of people that share his view, but his purpose is not general, it seems to be strictly specific. His verbiage and tone seem to almost want to encourage his audience to foster identification and self awareness of the rampant American exceptionalism that seems to fly pretty quietly under the common person’s radar of notice. It almost feels like he is trying to shake the reader by the shoulders and say “Look around!” It isn’t a call to action by any means, but however I do think it feels like a firm slap of sense to the face of the reader.
Mary's Blog 