Commentary #2

For the Rhetorical Critique I peer reviewed Samie's essay which she chose to complete on Susan Sontag's article "9/11". Her introduction did a great job of setting up the background I formation necessary. She made a point to include the depth of the disaster which I get was helpful to her argument that Susan Sontag did not emply rhetorical appeals in a way to help support her article.
The one suggestion I had for Samie on her introduction was to include a concise thesis that stated her position. This information was no difficult to discern based on her body paragraphs but was never really stated as a matter of fact.
Samie did a great job of critiquing Sontag's misuse, or rather lack of, kairos. She used this as her final body paragraph which I think was instrumental to concluding her essay as it was her strongest point.
Samie also discussed Sontag's use of pathos. There were some appeals that she felt were successful and others that she thought did not enhance Sontag's work. I suggested to Samie that she clearly state whether or not the specific passages she quoted were ones that she felt were successful. All together I think that she used strong arguments with solid passages to support them. Samie had not included examples of Sontag's use of ethos or logos in her initial draft, but we did discuss some of those uses in class together and she will be incorporating them in her final draft.
I also suggested that she rearrange a couple of her body paragraphs so that each rhetorical appeal was grouped with the other paragraphs of it's kind.
Overall I believe that with a few minor changes and the addition of ethos and pathos critiques Samie's paper could successfully convince someone that Sontag's peice was not wholly effective in swaying an audience.