RHETORICAL ANALYSIS: THOREAU’S “RESISTANCE TO CIVIL GOVERNMENT”

For this assignment, you will work with your group to analyze Thoreau’s “Resistance to Civil Government” (AKA “Civil Disobedience”). Your goal is to analyze a small section of Thoreau’s essay in depth, then to present your findings to the class.

Sections: Your group will be assigned one of the following segments of the essay to analyze. You are only to analyze that section, not the essay as a whole.

1—paragraphs 1-2 2—paragraphs 3-6 3—paragraphs 7-10

4—paragraphs 11-13 5—paragraphs 14-18 6—paragraphs 19-21

7—paragraphs 22-24 8—paragraphs 25-27 9—paragraphs 28-35

10—paragraphs 36-41 11—paragraphs 42-43 12—paragraph 44 to end

1.  Your group will analyze the Content of Thoreau’s argument.

a.  Appeals: logos, ethos, and pathos. However, DO NOT say Thoreau uses logos, ethos, or pathos—specific the emotion, the logic, or the source of credibility.

b.  Inductive reasoning

c.  Deductive reasoning

d.  Syllogisms

2.  Your group will analyze the Style of Thoreau’s argument

a.  Diction

b.  Imagery

c.  Details

d.  Language

e.  Syntax

f.  Additional Stylistic Elements To Look For: Thoreau employs a broad variety of stylistic tools in making his argument. The following rhetorical and stylistic devices are characteristic of the work, and you should look for examples of them in your section (your section may not include all of these).

ü Use of italics as a form of emphasis

ü Aphorisms

ü Allusion

ü Antithesis

ü Rhetorical questions

ü Analogy

ü Dashes as appositives

ü Parallelism

ü Periodic sentence

ü Use of dashes for emphasis or delay

3.  Finally, you will analyze the Structure of Thoreau’s argument.

Structure refers to the various rhetorical modes or patterns of development that the author uses to make the argument

Thoreau makes use of the following rhetorical modes/patterns of development in the essay, and you should look for examples of these in your section:

ü Division and Classification: this pattern works by grouping ideas into categories, or “classes.” Often, writers

will further develop their ideas by defining the characteristics of the categories or groups that they establish.

ü Exemplification: this refers simply to the use of examples to support an idea or a point in an argument.

ü Comparison and Contrast: this includes analogy and extended metaphor, as well as any other form of comparison or

contrast.

4.  Once your group has complete the analysis, you will write your “mini-essay”: here, you will look for connections between the other parts: content, style, and structure you will try to determine the underlying patterns and strategies used by Thoreau to convey his argument. The mini-essay should tie together all of the concepts, and should be written like you would any rhetorical analysis essay—include a clear thesis and thorough commentary.

Once you have completed the analysis, you will present your analysis to the class. The expectations for your analysis and presentation are described in the rubric below.

RUBRIC

Quality of analysis / 10 pts: your analysis is complete and insightful. You notice a number of important features in the text and analyze them effectively. / 8 pts: your analysis is complete and accurate. You notice a reasonable number of important features in the text and analyze them effectively. / 7 pts: your analysis is complete, but with some inaccuracies or minor omissions. You notice some of the important features in the text and analyze them, but may overlook some important text features. / 6 pts: your analysis is incomplete, frequently inaccurate or omits many important elements. You may overlook a number of the important features in text.
Evidence / 10 pts: your textual evidence is well-chosen and supports the points you make in your commentary. / 8 pts: your textual evidence is usually well-chosen and usually supports the points you make in your commentary, with only minor lapses / 7 pts: your textual evidence is often well-chosen and supports the points you make in your commentary, though some evidence may not clearly relate to the commentary. / 6 pts: your textual evidence is ineffective and often does not support the points you make in your commentary, or the connection is simply unclear.
Commentary / 10 pts: Your commentary is accurate, clear, and well-written. / 8 pts: Your commentary is accurate and clear, and mostly well-written. / 7 pts: Your commentary is sometimes inaccurate or unclear. The writing may be occasionally confusing or obscure. / 6 pts: Your commentary is often inaccurate or unclear. The writing may be confusing or obscure to the point that the meaning is sometimes lost.
Mini-essay / 20 pts: your mini-essay insightfully links the various strategies used by the author in order to present an effective, clear analysis of the rhetoric used in the text. The writing is clear and effective throughout. / 16 pts: your mini-essay links the various strategies used by the author in order to present a clear analysis of the rhetoric used in the text. The writing is mostly clear and effective. / 15 pts: your mini-essay links some of the strategies used by the author, but shows a less complete grasp of the rhetoric of the text, or contains significant omissions. / 14 pts: your mini-essay links few of the strategies used by the author, or does not make necessary connections. The mini-essay may be simply incomplete.