I think Pathos is most effective when reading anything. Although ethos and logos are crucial when supporting an argument, it's pathos that really effects the reader in a positive or negative way. For example, advertisements feed us propaganda constantly, yet we believe what they're saying because of its emotional appeal and we disregard how accurate the facts really are. I think it's the same with reading. If the essay, or book ignites enough emotion to someone, the accuracy of the facts don't seem to matter as much. I'm speaking for the majority of readers because I know most of us (in English 101) pay way more attention to what we read to not be fooled by solely emotion.
Krakauer uses all 3 pretty frequently, but I'd have to say he establishes his credibility the most. I think he feels he must in order to change the naysayer's point of view. He constantly is putting in letters before every chapter, verifying his research, and mentioning interviews. Half the book is proving McCandless' nobility, so that's why I feel ethos is so crucial in Krakauer's writing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I definitely agree that pathos is the most important form of rhetoric and advertisements are probably the best example of using pathos to affect their viewers/readers, etc. I think we base our most initial decisions on things such as ads, etc. if they spark our emotions. I was watching this inspiring ad once, not knowing what it was because it was talking about all these joyous life experiences but in the end, it turned out to be about scientology and even though that definitely turned me off, I was really inspired and felt good about the commercial.
ReplyDeleteKrakauer does use all of the forms of rhetoric really well. If he only used one form, we definitely wouldn't be apt to read the book, I'm sure.
Sorry I'm so late with the posts but like I said on Alaina's blog I feel that credibility is an effective way of attracting a reader and no having them doubt your work
ReplyDelete