The Rhetoric Of Master Of None 's Fourth Episode And Reading Aziz Ansari 's Article From New York Times

797 Words Mar 16th, 2016 4 Pages
After observing the rhetoric of Master of None’s fourth episode and reading Aziz Ansari’s article from New York Times, one can see the elaborate ways the author of these two different types of media has used in terms of describing the perspective of an Indian American. Master of None’s “Indian’s on TV” predominantly used a verbal rhetorical device to showcase racism towards Indians that offend Indian Americans. On the other hand, Ansari’s article used narrating to describe his experience in entering the country of his ancestral roots. By discussing the verbal strategy of Master of None’s fourth episode and the narrative device utilized by Ansari in his New York Times article, one can understand the point of view of an Indian American. Master of None’s “Indians on TV” showcased many examples of racist Indian ideas through a verbal device. One of the most predominant examples involved the conversation between Dev and the audition interviewer. It regarded the event when Dev (Aziz Ansari) was asked to give an Indian accent rather than his normal speaking voice for his desired acting role. In examining this scene, one can notice the racist implications when the audition interviewer did not accept Dev’s initial acting for the role with his usual speech. She stated after Dev expressed being uncomfortable in giving an Indian accent for the role, “You know, Ben Kinglsey did an accent in Gandhi and he won the Oscar for it” (Master of None). However, Dev cleverly retorted back by…

Related Documents