Revised final study

Ahmed Eftin
English 1010
4/23/19

Intro
This is a self-study on who I am as a writer, and I did two deep analysis of artifacts
belonging to me. One being a final paper in my political science class which was on the “I Have
a Dream” speech by MLK, and the other being A Ted Talk presented by Dr. Taylor who shares
the story of her life-changing stroke. I have realized that as a writer I like to share a deep
connection with the words that I write, giving my work more personal touch to it. I also
discovered that I use words that will get my audience to express a deeper connection to my
words as well. During this study, I will be analyzing these artifacts rhetorically to discover in
what ways I can improve my writing and gain a greater understanding of what else my writing
says about me.

Artifact 1
In my political science class. I wrote a final paper on an argumentative discussion on the
well known,"I Have a Dream" speech that was delivered by American civil rights activist Martin
Luther King Jr. during the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom on August 28, 1963, in
which he called for civil and economic rights and an end to racism in the United States. I
decided to present this as one of my artifacts and do a deeper analysis of it because the topic of
the paper has significant importance to me.

To support the central argument that MLK’s speech has played a significant role in
history and still plays a significant importance today. I started my process by doing a bunch of
research for a solid amount of time sorting out evidence that fits with my claim. I later then
decided to add many points in which the reader could relate to. A relative point I added, “With
this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail
together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.” I decided to
add this because I knew it would make the reader more connected with the paper on a personal
level which would increase the chance of them being persuaded to lean towards my argument
easier without thought.

In this paper, I use a great deal of Ethos and some added pathos to engage the audience in
a credible way and also an emotional aspect. To do this I used references and quotes from the
credible sources I found while doing my research. I added the touch of Ethos by adding
examples of discrimination due to color. This works well because the majority of the intended
audience are people affected by discrimination.
 The audience of this final would broadly be anyone who has been a victim of inequality
or injustice. On the narrow side, the audience would be those who have been a victim of more
specifically racial inequality or injustice. This final was introduced in a way to make the
audience realize the importance and impact the speech had. I did this by saying, “His speech not
only strongly pressured the signing of the civil right act of 1964 aside from the 1900’s. I then
game my audience a view on how this speech is relevant today by including, “It has encouraged
the people of today to stand up for the rights they believe are theirs.” In writing the final, I
choose to write in a mainly formal style to ensure the audience knew it was a serious matter. To
do this I used many quotes from MLK, concrete evidence, and pulled out the big word
dictionary. A sentence that shows this would be, “Grounded in the nonviolent ideology of King’s
Civil Rights movement to answer the call to show up and be marked as those who believe in a
world that is “equitable, tolerant, justice and safe for all, on in which the human rights and
dignity of each person is protected.” This sentence combines many strong points in a formal
manner to get a serious point across to the reader. I had to make the choice of not adding too
much straightforward emotional text so that it didn’t turn out to be just an emotional rant on
"my" opinion. Instead, I structured it by setting a claim then giving evidence to support that
claim as well as including some stories to add that touch of emotion and life.

Artifact 2
During my time in a Psychology course, I was asked to write a report on my reaction and
understandings of a ted talk presented by Dr. Taylor. In this Ted talk, Dr. Taylor talked about the
stroke she had in which she lost 37 years of her memory shortly afterward. She also discusses her
8-year recovery experience and the psychological connections related to memory loss. To begin
my process of writing this paper I watched the ted talk over and over again to better understand
her story and teachings. I am choosing to analyze this essay because it was the first paper I’ve
ever written for a college course. I felt that I did particularly well with this paper and to get a
chance to analyze it further would give me a better understanding of who I was as a writer then
and who I am as a writer now.

I introduced this essay with the opening “When Dr. Taylor said “brain chatter” she was
referring to her left hemisphere and how it picks out details of details of everything that’s
currently going on and associates that information and details to past information and details to
work up and project future possibilities.” I opened with this right off the bat to let the audience
know that I have a great understanding of the teachings Dr. Taylor presented in her Ted talk.
This gives the audience a reassurance of “credibility” that I know what I am talking about as the
essay continues. To double up on this I stated, “When Dr. Taylor referred to the inner peace of
the right hemisphere, she meant that unlike the left hemisphere that deals with all the analytics
and information processing the right hemisphere basically enjoys the moment that it’s in.” This
does a really good job of even furthering the confidence the audience has in my knowledge on
the ted talk due to the fact that I can further explain the thoughts Dr. Taylor expressed.
 In this paper, I used a greater amount of Pathos to engage the audience and wrote it in a
more personal approach due to the fact that I was asked to give my reflection/opinion. While I
majority of the paper engages the audience with an emotional appeal. I still used Ethos by
utilizing quotes from what Dr. Taylor said and explaining it in further detail to show my
academic understanding of the subject.

In this report, the audience would be those looking for further insight and different
opinions on the ted talk. You can see this because I state, “That’s why she believes that “the
more time we spend choosing to run the deep inner peace secretary of our right hemisphere the
more peaceful we can be and the more peaceful our world can be.” This statement gives the
audience away because it shows that I am stating my opinion for someone who is looking for
further understanding of what she may have meant. This statement also gives off the purpose of
the essay which would be to give a reflection on my understanding and the reaction her story
imposed on me.

Another statement that portrays the intention of the essay would be, “My general reaction
to Dr. Taylor’s experience is that I think it’s mind-blowing and eventful.” This clearly word for
word states I was giving a reflection on my reaction to her story. You can also see from this
statement that I approached this paper with a slightly more or less informal style. I did this to
make it more heartfelt and calmer when talking about a life-changing incident that Dr. Taylor
had. I also added some personal emotional thought as I expressed, “Truly it’s tragic that she had
to go through the pain and 8-year recovery period but I think it’s a courageous thing that she is
going out of her way to share her experience and thoughts to the world so that we can in some
way gain a better understanding of our brain.” This statement really catches my intention of how
I connected with her story on a deeper level. Throughout the paper, I had to make the choice of
adding emotion but not too much so that audience understands that I understand her teachings
but at the same time that I cared on an emotional level too.

Synthesis
Looking at both artifacts and the analysis i made. They both share the idea getting the
audience to look at the paper as more than just a piece text. Whether it be having them connect
personally by stating your opinion or emotional by adding tragic stories relating to the subject
you are talking about. While they do share many similarities, they share the difference of one
being very formal and straightforward mostly information and facts to get an argument across
and the more opinion fact-based to give an insight of thoughts i had about subject. I also see
somewhat a similarity in the structure of presenting a claim an explaining myself.

Conclusion
 Doing this self-study, I've realized that my way of writing has to do a lot with adapting
myself with the subject I am writing about. Not only do I adapt myself in a normal manner but I
also tend to no matter what find a way to add how I feel or at least make the audience feel some
type of connection with the words I write. I also discovered that my purpose of writing is that I
believe my words should mean something other than just text the audience has to read. This self-
study has helped me see that as a writer I am someone who wants to connect on many different
levels to my work and wants the audience to do the same while still being able to realize the
point I am trying to get across.