Alia Dahlan

Bret Zawilski
RC2001
22 September 2016
Rhetorical Analysis Inception
Content Reflection
I believe that I chose articles that are relevant to my field of business. They were also
interesting to me because I have been watching documentaries and studying about the Great
Recession in other classes. I knew that there were differences between the articles a researcher in
the field would write and the articles on Bloomberg and floating around the internet, but I did not
realize how similar they are. Much of my rhetorical analysis say both articles because their
styles and messages were so similar. The articles in the rhetorical analysis and most business
articles I have read just state facts with statistics and figures to back them up. Some articles may
have wow-factor or be click-bait, but they are generally professional explanations and
statements.
Arrangement
At first, I started with a very rigid structure with topics in this order with a paragraph or
less for each: introduction, exigence, audience, constraints, ethos, pathos, logos, kairos,
invention, arrangement, style, memory, delivery, and conclusion. My first two drafts stuck to this
structure. After I met with Dr. Zawilski, I changed the order some to make the rhetorical analysis
flow better with connections between the topics.
Process
I started my process with an outline to organize my thoughts. I started with the headings
and then filled in the bullet points after I read the two articles. I feel that my shitty first draft
was not very bad because I spent a very long time writing it. My second draft has revisions based

on the feedback from three classmates. These changes were mostly just adding more detail. I did
not change the structure or content much between the first and second drafts, but the second draft
was longer. The speed dating comment exercise did not result in a significant amount of
change between my second and final drafts, but I did add some more detail. I made a lot of
changes to the final draft after meeting with Dr. Zawilski. I am aware that I am not very good at
reading my own writing because I usually think that everything I produce is perfect. Everyone
who has given suggestions to me has commented more on content and structure than grammar
and minor details. I may have to improve upon those smaller things more.
Rhetorical Considerations
I feel that my rhetorical analysis is similar to the papers that it analyzes because it is
almost emotionless and nearly completely academic. I tried to use specific examples from the
texts and cite them correctly. I attempted to make my style and intent very clear through the
layout. I also tried not to put too much of my own personality or credibility into it so as not to
retract from the academic tone of the analysis.
General Reflection
I have not had to turn in multiple drafts of something since middle school or my first year
of high school, so this process has been a change for me. As I mentioned before, I rarely see
flaws in my own writing, so I usually depend on others to help make suggestions. Also, the
concepts of pathos, logos, ethos, and kairos are new to me. I have mostly been taught how to
write, as opposed to what writing is about and the processes involved. In order for me to publish
articles in my field, I believe I will have to gain more research and work experience in finance or
whatever career I pursue.