Beckman's Argument Analysis

In 1989 at the Conference on College Composition and Communication, David Bartholomae and Peter Elbow began an extensive debate that would continue for years to come as to the proper method and focus of teaching in undergraduate writing courses. This conversation gained so much attention and popularity that both men ended up publishing pieces to help clarify their stances for the many who wished to explore them, and while each wished to argue his point to the best of his ability, they also both acknowledged the impossibility of completely pinning down their stances on the subject. This fluidity has led to continued discussion by both of these men, and also by numerous others, one in particular being an undergraduate student attending Harvard …show more content…
He builds this partially through his use of tone and dialect, which he uses to help him establish pathos and ethos in his argument. Ethos refers to the authority of the rhetor, which helps to establish trust in the audience, and as such a higher chance that the audience will accept the argument as plausible (JO). Here the rhetor refers to Beckman and the higher authority he is trying to get his audience to trust is that of themselves. Beckman seeks to, through use of shared life history and demographic information, as well as an informal or colloquial tone, convince readers that because he is just like them, they can trust him to have sound and relevant advice for their lives. This bond he seeks to create can be seen before the article even starts in the title “Why I Write Bad”, which is a precursory signal to his target audience of undergraduate students that his paper is likely going to lack the formal and sometimes hard to absorb language frequently found in arguments addressing undergraduate writing practices, enticing them and encouraging them to read on. After this initial hook, he reels the reader in with informal, easy to comprehend language like “gonna”, “lousy”, and “bullshit”, all of which allows his younger target …show more content…
Beckman argues that his experience is one found among the majority of his peers, and that this experience is one that will hinder him and those like him in his future. Unfortunately, none of this has solid evidence backing it up, nor does he detail a clear plan for escaping the broken system he argues against. His argument, and to some extent his thesis, boils down to the phrase “if you don’t have anything to say, don’t say anything at all”. He provides a goal and a motive, one of resistance in order to incur change, but he does not break down for his readers how this change will happen. Students may start writing more what they are interested in, but this does not give a clear answer on how this might change the world of academia, and as such the way that students are educated throughout the system. This vagueness in combination with Beckman’s persuasive and captivating writing abilities lends the piece to be the subject of significant thought, but very little actual action or development of Beckman’s