Rhetorical Analysis on A Deal In Wheat

Fernando Martinez
University Of Texas at El Paso

Rhetorical Analysis on A Deal in Wheat

A Deal In Wheat is a short story by writer Frank Norris. It creates a story which is divided in
three points, where the price in wheat is moving in wishes for more profit. However, it also
mentions the other side with Sam Lewiston, who is presented to us in the beginning of the story,
a rancher who has to move to the cities in order to survive due to the changes on the price of the
wheat he sells. It is an example of cause and effect of how the greed of wanting more can
become a problem to the people that are below on the economical pyramid.
Frank Norris has a good composition of ethos due to various factors seen thought the story. A
good example of this is seen on the correct grammar and punctuation that holds up from the
beginning to the end of the story. Since this is a story, it does not bring to the table any problems
according to the credibility of the source but rather focuses on making sure the reader is clear
about what is going on. A good example of this can be seen on the language used, since it does
not use complex or specific language, it instead focuses on using short sentences which describe
both the dialogues of the characters and the descriptions of both the characters and settings.
In the aspect of logos, there are many things to be said as Frank Norris does a great job
defending the logic of his argument. One of the biggest strengths of the story and the argument
that it is trying to transmit, is that it starts describing the process from the very beginning. It
shows that the two ends of the wheat operation in the end affected everyone, with little to no
mistakes on the logic as to why does this happen. The major part strength also relates to how the
tension rises during the story, with little people involved and affected by the major problem on
the very beginning of the story. However, the problem persists, which makes the logic that this
story represents raise little by little, making itself present in the very end, where a great number
of people is affected by this problem.

The only major weakness which can be identified in the logic that Mr. Norris is trying to
describe here, is the lack of a third party which controls the economy preventing this kind
of wheat operations, however since the time this story takes place , one can argue that the
author showed a time where there is no laws that regulate this kind of business, which
would indeed give more credibility and logic to this argument as to show that the
economy of a certain object can be indeed controlled by few individuals.
The author also tries to communicate the feelings of the people involved in the story, as
well as how the affected people are feeling at the end of the story, which can be seen specially
with Mr. Lewiston who lost everything due to this wheat operation, from the hope that he feels
when he has a small opportunity in Chicago, to the point where he was denied bread near the end
of the story. However, both ends of the operation also transmit feelings when they find what they
have been doing, which also helps up to the growing tension created in the story.
This strategy is rather effective as a compliment to what is happening on the story, and proves to
be a very useful tool for the author to transmit the context that he wants. It also proves a great
compliment on the very beginning of the story as we can start to feel the anxiety that Mr.
Lewiston is feeling when his wheat has a value of next to nothing, and is forced to move to the
city of Chicago.
In conclusion, the author has a great use of all Ethos, Logos and Pathos. This compliments the
story as to show how useful it really is even if it is on a short story. Not only does it state the
problem with a logic that has little to no loops on it, but it also shows how many people can be
really affected by this kind of problem described on the story. This is true even if it is not
relevant on the very first stages of the problem, as seen on this story. Mr. Norris makes use of

this also by relating it to how few people can start to really get control over a whole economy,
making a point where every problem can escalate where in the end; it affects most of the people
involved.

References
Norris, Frank (1903). A Deal In Wheat. Retrieved November 11, 2014 from:
http://www.readbookonline.net/readOnLine/24917/#top