Based on the non-fiction materials used in this course, articles demonstrate their point of reference with unique evidence and techniques. The problems associated with this approach allows for a valuable assertion on why each author has selected their approach. Jill McCorkie describes in vivid details the characters and conversation between protagonists in the story ‘Cuss Time’. The use of anger as an emotional and connecting force alludes to the complex formation of behavior patterns as well as social constructs used in the story telling (McCorkie, 2008). In another non-fiction piece by Thomas Emerson, the specifics of freedom and its association or expression are described in great detail. This document provides legislative and political reference points for a historical and rhetorical exploration of freedom and rights (Emerson, 1968). While these two non-fiction pieces address unique parameters of freedom and self-expression, they are equivocally effective in discussing the respective topics that are presented. The strategies that each author uses are characteristic to the style of writing that they employ and the particular nature of their perspective on the issues selected.
At the beginning of ‘Cuss Time’ the author uses a 14-year old girl’s monologue to discuss the implications of rights and basic freedoms that are not shared amongst people around the world. The emotional reaction that the protagonist has at this point in the story indicates a duality in the tone of anger implicit to the arrangement of a girl marrying someone she does not want and the American perspective of having responsibility to ones’ self (McCorkie, 2008). This is a valuable example of the way that the author makes a point about the state of rights and freedoms. The use of an ancillary character as well as presentation of these perspectives through a hypothetical written document within the story create distance between the issue that the author is addressing and the protagonists themselves. This strategy invokes a unique sense of self-awareness regarding the protagonists’ ideas and thoughts as well as creates the necessary space for first person thoughts to address the concepts of freedom in association and expression.
In discussing the concepts of freedom as well as the associations that individuals may have, Emerson takes a unique and highly differentiated path to defining the ethical and logical implication of basic rights. These are strategies that have created an evolution of facts and statistics regarding the struggles of private groups and organizations in gathering and executing mechanisms effectively (Emerson, 1968). While this presents a unique attitude towards the problems and stereotypical challenges asserted within the context of freedom and expression, it is evident that the author cites events of historical significance and cultural relevance. This strategy involves court cases, recent developments and matters of justice that are construed by legislative decisions (Emerson, 1968). Even though this representation lacks the personal and narrative involvement that is distinguished by McCorkie, it does illustrate the strength of freedoms and expression in terms of the applicability to contemporary standards of practice. The argument explores thinking that is both cognizant of ethical implications while mentioning the standard or regulatory perspectives on each area of the expression.
The strategies used by Emerson are variegated and present non-fictional rhetoric that rests upon the explicit evaluation of relevant events and circumstances. His argument is presented after detailed explanations on what each of the fundamental rights are as well as case examples related to governmental institutions. This creates a basis of historical and contemporary facts on which the reader can base their judgment. In this regard, the argument involves ethical and logical statements as a foundation for inquiry.
McCorkie approaches personal freedoms and values from a more personal perspective in the second and third scenes of ‘Cuss Time’. The depiction and vivid details regarding the traditional conditioning are useful in showing what struggles and opposing forces exist to freedom (McCorkie, 2008). Since the relative importance of this virtue is contextualized in this way, the author relies on pathological and emotional elements of voice to connect with the reader. Not only does this engage the topic of freedoms from a personal and candid type of self-expression, but it also promotes an understanding of the way that freedoms and ethical standards can affect individuals by example.
In conclusion, there are variable key attributes of rhetoric that have been suggested in this project. There are clear and consistent techniques that each author uses in order to create a differentiated and lasting impression in the reader’s mind. The use of emotional and logical deductions is shown to provide evidence and characterize each new point. McCorkie demonstrates how a conversation about freedom can involve the personal attributes of an individual as well as the self-realization through emotional and unqiue exploration of what these virtues mean to the individual. Meanwhile, Emerson presents a logical and coherent depiction of the legal and topical aspects of freedom within the larger community system. Both pieces of work indicate strong involvement of the concepts of freedom and its expression, while accomplishing their fundamental task with unique strategies. It can be seen in this analysis that emotional and logical exploration of a topic are highly variegated and appeal to different types of contexts. It can also be seen that the strategy employed by the author will ultimately define the reader’s experience with the topic as well as the subjective internal reaction that can be taken away from the reading.
