So sorry for the bright red text. it's the only way you can see the highlighter. Hope your eyes can survive. (it was easier to change the text color than the highlighter color.)
I really like to write. I like to tell myself I'm pretty good at it. So I took Freshman Writing my first semester of college. If I'm a good writer, I should smoke the class, no?
Turns out writing is a little bit different here. I find myself more and more convinced that whatever is going on over on the east coast is right and people here are absolutely insane.
My professor is a grad student, Ms. Collins, who has a british accent. Sometimes the british accent is all that has kept me in class.
It's 2 AM and i've churned out 4 solid pages on this paper that's due friday. I have to get a rough draft to my 3 peer editors later today. We had a big talk about revision in class monday. Collins says that a final draft should look like a sumo wrestler with a tummy tuck (not in those exact words) compared to a rough draft (completely different). I disagree. Revision is only for papers that weren't thought out well enough in advance so that they require a second attempt on to try and hash everything out. it's also for finding things that spellcheck didn't catch.
So i come to college and get to write about facebook. #stoked. oh wait, hashtags are for twitter morons. THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING ON FACEBOOK. <<<<<<thesis right there. Let me give a shout-out to my dad for being conscious of what website he is on and not using embarrassing hashtags whilst on facebook. You are hip man. keepin up. I sincerely mean that.
So 3 people have to read my draft of this paper about whether or not this article about facebook is rhetorically structured well. I went with the affirmative because it's a bit easier. I decided that i'd let my peer editors have a little bit to work with. Here's the paper. I highlighted the "uncensored" parts. Let me preface this with letting you know that the last paper i wrote was marked down because there wasn't "enough voice" in it. Take this. Can you tell where Jacob left the room and Captain Insano took over?
Rhetorical Analysis
Jacob H. Ankney
Corrine Collins
Writing 150
Friendless.
Jacob H. Ankney
Corrine Collins
Writing 150
Friendless.
In his article “You Have No Friends” Farhad Manjoo attempts to persuade us through the use of various rhetorical devices that there is no legitimate reason to stay off of Facebook in today’s world, and further condones its use in our daily lives. He wisely represents both sides of the argument, which makes his statement more believable and valid, then anticipates and answers burning questions that his readers may have about the subject. He effectively structures his argument and presents it in a convincing enough way to change someone’s perspective about Facebook.
Manjoo, after giving us a brief lesson in Facebook history, defines his audience. The anticipated audience and how he chooses to address them is key in his argument. There is no mystery as to whom Manjoo is talking to, because he clearly states in the second paragraph of the article that the article is written expressly “to those readers who are not on Facebook, especially the ones who have consciously decided to stay away.” This is not alienation of the audience, but merely a simple way for him to state his objective-that “there is no longer any good reason to avoid Facebook.” Arguably, a longtime Facebook user could quit reading the article right then and there, which would be counterintuitive for Manjoo as a writer, seeing as he would want as many people reading his writings about Facebook as possible. Tailoring the article to readers who are NOT on the social network eliminates at least 500 million possible readers. But, for some reason, the human fascination with all things Facebook makes everyone, Facebook users and non-Facebookians alike, to read this article. If Facebook’s name is on it, people will go for it. Manjoo has just defined his objective: he wants to catch the people running buck the other way from Facebook, cut their Achilles tendons, and drag them back to Facebookopolis (from which there is no escape). Insert allusion to 1985 and loving Big Brother here.
The attitude towards the non-Facebookians that is conveyed in this article is key to supporting Manjoo’s argument. His neutrality of diction lures the reader into a sort of psychological apnea. He talks conversationally, almost as if he were a lifelong friend, but let’s remember he’s a writer and that those people cannot be trusted. Phrases such as “ “ and his use of the indefinite second-person pronoun “you.”The last one is the biggest. The indefinite “you” makes it seem like there is a big finger pointing out of the page at the reader, stating boldly, “I WROTE THIS FOR YOU SO KEEP READING.” “You” is informal. The article is a one-sided conversation. Like a high school cheerleader, Manjoo talks until his breath runs out, and just when you think he’s stopped, he shotguns the reader down with a plethora of testimonials, generalizations, and other pointlessly unpersuasive devices.
Let me talk for a minute about the fork. The fork is the ultimate utensil. If I were trapped on an island and everything I could see was edible in a very Willy-Wonaka-Ish kind of way, I would want a fork at my side. Where a knife will slice your tongue and a spoon will just leave you dilapidated from trying to fish that one last noodle out of your soup, the Fork stands tall. The four prongs of the fork represent the four values that any man must base his life on: self-respect, wisdom, diligence, and a complete disregard for anything feminine (such as horseback riding, nail-painting, and watching movies for the plot). It cuts on its side, it pokes right side up, you can twirl noodles around it, and completely defeats the need for spatulation in your kitchen.
Manjoo talks about how Facebook, like the fork, is an essential item to be used in daily life with the similaeic expression “[Facebook] is now so widely trafficked that it’s fast becoming a routine social aid, like e-mail or antiperspirant.” That’s right. It’s a routine social aid. Imagine life without deodorant. That would stink. Manjoo uses everyday items that people use to interact with each other to illustrate his point. There is a certain stigma attached to people who do not use email these days. We may call them technologically challenged, behind the times, or Amish. Still, it is socially acceptable for someone not to email every day, or even own a computer. This is why Manjoo takes the simile to the next level and discusses antiperspirant. The negative emotions that swirl around the non-deodorant-wearer in a group of people are almost enough to make them a social outcast. Deodorant is arguably one of the most widely used social norms in America, probably second only to toilet paper.
Questions are asked to the reader periodically throughout the article. Manjoo uses these questions as a springboard to bring about his next point. “Can I call you friends?” establishes his connection with the audience, “What’s the social utility to Facebook-why why should you join?” leads to a discussion of Facebook’s myriad benefits. Answers to implied questions like “are you staying off of Facebook because you’re worried about people knowing your business?” and “Why isn’t Facebook just a hub for the socially awkward?” show a carefully planned response to questions that people may collectively have about the network.
The icing on the cake of the whole argument is the ironic story of Darcy Stockton that is told at the end of the article. Stockton, who “held nothing back in describing her hatred of Facebook,” talking to magazines and the like about it, is shown as the ideal Facebook convert. She goes from utter, unbridled hatred of Facebook to the opposite side of the spectrum, similar to a man who is an atheist converting to scientology. Manjoo holds true to every tempter’s slogan-“if you just try it (Facebook), you will be guaranteed to like it.” Ending the article with a real-life scenario where a socially prominent fashion photographer vows herself to Facebook after years of hating it does nothing but strengthen every claim Manjoo has made thus far.
So in the end, the article is rhetorically sound. On a personal note, I cannot completely judge it objectively, because I am a Facebook user. I have a bias towards Facebook because it helps me stay connected with my mother, high school friends, and waste time when I should be writing papers for my college classes. Someone who has never even heard of Facebook, like an Australian Aborigine, would have to be the judge of that. Again, the use of simile, loaded questions, conversationalism, and the ironic testimonial at the end make “You Have No Friends” a very persuasive article.
The End.
So yeah, my peer editors have stuff to work with. I just thought if i wrote the paper poorly then i'd have stuff to revise. Lesson: Write crappily so that you can make revisions and it looks like you're doing work. If you're a runner, run really slow at the beginning of the season and then speed the freak up at the last meet so you can get the coveted "most improved" award.....not synonymous with the "hardest worker" award.

