Seaver is “The Real Thing”
On behalf of the Coca-Cola company, Mr. Herbert writes to Grove Press requesting that they stop using the slogan “It’s the Real Thing”, claiming that it belongs to his company. Herbert uses an arrogant tone, and assumes that Grove Press will accommodate the demand immediately due to Coke’s reputation as a powerful company. His reliance on this intimidation results in weak arguments with a pretentious tone. In his response, Mr. Seaver refutes each one of the claims and mocks Herbert’s pretentiousness with sarcasm. Seavers logical refutation of each of Herbert’s claims and use of a sarcastic tone create a more persuasive argument. Herbert’s convoluted writing includes elaborate phrases and word choice that make him …show more content…
Seaver addresses each of Herbert’s points individually, using sarcasm to point out their flaws. He begins the letter with excessive niceness, and sets up his use of sarcasm for the refutation of Herbert’s claims. For example, when responding to one argument, he pretends to expresses his understanding while actually pointing out the absurdity that “the public might be confused… and mistake a book… for a six pack of Coca-Cola”. While this offers up the pretense of being considerate, Seaver uses false sincerity to reveal how absurd Herbert’s point is.The overall effect of Seaver’s sarcasm is to discredit Herbert’s one main point that Coca-Cola’s use of the phrase prohibits all others from using …show more content…
In his letter, Herbert uses Coke’s history with “It’s the Real Thing” to claim the sole use of this slogan. In his rebuttal paragraph, Seaver mirrors Herbert’s format by describing Grove Press’s history with this type of issue, making it clear that they have experience winning cases like this one. Seaver continues to elaborate upon each of Herbert’s arguments to a point which makes Herbert’s conclusions absurd. This format lets Seaver disqualify Herbert’s arguments while using wit and sarcasm to appeal to the audience. By focusing on Herbert’s arguments one by one and mirroring their structure in his rebuttal, Seaver’s strategy is effective at undermining the case that Herbert was trying to
On behalf of the Coca-Cola company, Mr. Herbert writes to Grove Press requesting that they stop using the slogan “It’s the Real Thing”, claiming that it belongs to his company. Herbert uses an arrogant tone, and assumes that Grove Press will accommodate the demand immediately due to Coke’s reputation as a powerful company. His reliance on this intimidation results in weak arguments with a pretentious tone. In his response, Mr. Seaver refutes each one of the claims and mocks Herbert’s pretentiousness with sarcasm. Seavers logical refutation of each of Herbert’s claims and use of a sarcastic tone create a more persuasive argument. Herbert’s convoluted writing includes elaborate phrases and word choice that make him …show more content…
Seaver addresses each of Herbert’s points individually, using sarcasm to point out their flaws. He begins the letter with excessive niceness, and sets up his use of sarcasm for the refutation of Herbert’s claims. For example, when responding to one argument, he pretends to expresses his understanding while actually pointing out the absurdity that “the public might be confused… and mistake a book… for a six pack of Coca-Cola”. While this offers up the pretense of being considerate, Seaver uses false sincerity to reveal how absurd Herbert’s point is.The overall effect of Seaver’s sarcasm is to discredit Herbert’s one main point that Coca-Cola’s use of the phrase prohibits all others from using …show more content…
In his letter, Herbert uses Coke’s history with “It’s the Real Thing” to claim the sole use of this slogan. In his rebuttal paragraph, Seaver mirrors Herbert’s format by describing Grove Press’s history with this type of issue, making it clear that they have experience winning cases like this one. Seaver continues to elaborate upon each of Herbert’s arguments to a point which makes Herbert’s conclusions absurd. This format lets Seaver disqualify Herbert’s arguments while using wit and sarcasm to appeal to the audience. By focusing on Herbert’s arguments one by one and mirroring their structure in his rebuttal, Seaver’s strategy is effective at undermining the case that Herbert was trying to