Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

Rhetorical Analysis Outline

A. Introduction
! ! 1. Summarize Text: Through her amusing erudition of French literature ! from the 1200- present, senior scholar at Stanford, Marilyn Yalom ! presents for us the ( ) by which the French invented love as we know it. Yalom !shows us the cultural developments around the ideals of love, passion, relationships,! sex, marriage, homosexual desire, and amorous friendship, period by period, through the popular literature thought to best represent societal ( s) of the time. Her thorough and convincing analysis of media clearly leads us to believe that the French did, indeed, create the most colorful and most adored ideas of love that the world has ever seen. ! ! 2. Guiding Thesis: Through her careful and impressive analysis of French ! literature through the ages, Yalom presents to her readers a convincing picture of how and why it is the French who have envisioned, invented, and championed love (as we know it).

B. Author
! ! 1. Who is the author?

-Scholar, professor, and author, specializing in gender studies -Marilyn Yalom: Senior scholar at the Clayman Institute for Gender Research at ! Stanford University, and served as director of the Clayman institute from ! 1984-1985. She also worked as a professor of French at Stanford University. She ! has a number of well-respected publications on the nature of gender, love, and ! relationships, such as "Birth of the Chess Queen" (2004), "A History of the ! Wife" (2001), "Inside the American Couple" (2002), among others. -Also an avid love of France and French culture, has spent several years studying ! French history, specically literature. Spent time in la belle France as well. ! ! 2. Why does she have the right to write this?

-The book itself is an extensive erudition of French literature, art, and some other media. -Personal experience (direct and indirect). Ex: She begins the book with a personal story about a close friend of hers who maintained a very respectable love affair in modern-day France, as many people do. Later, she describes to us some of her own experiences with l'amour la franaise.

3. How does she establish her credibility?

-The rst time the author herself describes to us her scholarly experience is in the ! second chapter of this book, called "Gallant Love: " She tells us that, "That winter, when I was still teaching French literature and Western Civilization at a state ! university in California, I was asked to review the 1973 edition of the Norton ! World Masterpieces Since the Reinaissance. . .that did not include a single ! selection from a woman! ... ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! "I made my case to Norton on the basis of La Princess se Clves. Surely, this was a !masterpiece in every sense of the word and deserved to be included in the next edition of World Masterpieces. I'm pleased to say that every subsequent edition of the Norton anthology has included sections written by women" (pg. 69-70). "My experience in 1976 forced me to rethink what I was doing in a department of literature. . . I chanced upon the newly created Center for Research on Women at Stanford University. There I was able to nd a home as a senior research scholar and, later, as one of its directors. Since that transition I have been engaged in writing about women's cultural history, with a special focus on women in France and the United States." -This is key (pg. 69-70)

-She sites credible sources and lists a selected bibliography of scholarly resources (pg. ! 371-390). ! ! 4. What is her motivation?

-"Thinking about women, I have never been far away from their relationships with men. I ! have tried to understand how men and women see themselves within a given ! culture and historical moment. I have read, with fascination, their accounts of ! how they acquired gender-specic traits and roles. While males and females in ! France and the United States pass through the same biological stages of infancy, ! childhood, adolescence, young adulthood, maturity, and old age, each of these ! stages is so shaped by a person's specic time and place that they often bear ! little resemblance to each other across the divide of language, region, and ! class, not to mention sex. . . Love, too, we are forced to admit, is socially ! constructed." (pg. 70-71) -Firstly, how culture shapes our understanding of society and self, especially in France ! and the United States. -Secondly, how each of those cultures, specically France with America as its main foil, ! have constructed love as part of their society. How France did it, and why it has ! become recognized and self-proclaimed as the 'worldwide epitome of love.'

C. Audience ! !
1. Who is this book written for?

-Educated Americans, maybe scholars, especially those interested in the nature of love, sex, and relationships in the context of literary history as well as cultural comparison of the United States and France. -For example, a Sociology undergrad with an interest in families and intimate relationships! ! ! 2. What do readers have in common with author?

-American sentiments, values, etc. General familiarity with American ideas and experiences of love. -Some type of fascination/reverence for love. (How many of us have loved?!) ! ! 3. What prior knowledge might readers need?

-There is a denite call for an understanding of some English, American, and Greek ! literature and historical characters. ! ! ! Ex: Sites Queen Guinevere, King Arthur, and Guinevere's lover, Lancelot (pg. 25). Also sites Dido in Virgil's Aeneid and Hester Prine in Hawthorne's The Scarlett Letter (pg. 42).

-Familiarity with American values, norms, and mores regarding love, sex, and ! relationships. ! ! ! ! Ex: SItes American outrage over President Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky and French indifference. Conservative French politician in parliament even said, "He loves women, this man! . . . It's a sign of good health!" (pg. 42) ! 4. How does establish a relationship with her reader?

-Begins the book with 'A Note to the Reader.' -Addresses "Reader" throughout the book. -Shares personal stories with 'us.' (ex: pg. 73, she ran off to Paris for a summer).

D. Argument/Purpose

!
!

!
!

1. What is the premise of her argument? 2. Why was the book written?

-"Americans of my generation thought of the French as purveyors of love. From their ! books, songs, magazines, and movies, we concocted a picture of sexy romance ! that was at odds with the airbrushed 1950's American model. How did the French ! get that way? This book was written to answer that question." (Note to the ! Reader) ! ! 3. What assertions is she making about the subject?

-The French invented and mastered many different types of 'love' throughout history that we still acknowledge and participate in today. -French love is the epitome of 'love.' -Love is a social construct. -French literature and media are the maps by which to trace this rich history of societal construction and cultural development. -The French ideas of love are different from American, and it is this comparison that highlights l'amour la franaise. ! ! 4.How is her argument presented?

-She presents us with the history of French thought in the context of love through the vehicle of 'popular' literature form 1200-present. -opens her claims to debate (pg. 16) ! ! 5. Contributions to her overall rhetoric:

!
!

!
!

!
!

a. Specic claims: b. Organization:

-Organized chronologically from 1200- present. Associates each bracket of time with a ! specic type of love and gives literature/media to back that claim. ! ! ! c. Argument Strategies:

-Deductive reasoning- makes claims about the time period, then develops her claim ! through pieces of literature. ! ! ! d. Types of evidence:

-Based on French literature, art, and songs. -This literature is constantly compared to English and American literature, as well as ! some Greek. It is also compared to the cultural norms of America, and ! occasionally Great Britain. ! ! ! e. Style: ! ! ! -Conversational, reader-friendly.

E. Limitations ! !
1. How does intended reader limit author?

-Because it is targeted at Americans, the piece operates on the basis of comparison to ! American culture (and some British) only. Would her conclusions still be valid if ! compared with another culture instead? ! ! 2. How does author's knowledge limit her ability to argue the book?

-Because her research and evidence is mostly limited to literary works, her argument cannot necessarily lend itself directly to reality. It is arguable whether or not her claims are relevant to real French society (but she acknowledges this). ! ! ! ! 3. What ! limit her presentation?

a. emotions:

-Her preference for l'amor la franaise over all other cultural (expressions) of love ! tends to present itself. That France is the summit of love, and that all other ! cultures aspire to be like that (in terms of love). ! ! ! b. perspectives:

-She is an American woman (although one very studied in the French language and ! culture) studying French culture. Because of ethnocentricism, no matter how ! well-read she is, is it possible that she could be coming up with incorrect ! conclusions? ! ! ! c. values:

!
!

!
!

4. How do !

factors inuence her assertions?

a. historical:

-Carefully selected pieces from each (200) year period. Can it be considered to encompass all of that era? Also, because of her studies, focuses on women more than men, although men are included as part of the dichotomy. ! ! ! ! ! ! b. social: c. political:

-The French Revolution: When discussing it, she never states whether or not it did more harm than good, but she does emphasize the toll it took on the women of the time, and the prices they had to pay. -Heated disagreement with Sarkozy over La Princesse de Clves, like many other ! French people (thus, her emphasis on the topic). Could it be skewed because of ! political interest?

F. Conclusion !
! ! ! ! !

!
! ! ! ! !

1. Summarize four main points: ! ! ! ! a. Author: b. Audience: c. Argument/Purpose: d. Limitations:

2. Thesis- Was author effective or not?