The rhetoric article "The Rhetorical Stance from week 1 by Wayne Booth provided what a rhetorical piece needs to make it more appealing to the audience. I like how towards the beginning he outline that an effective work needs an argument about the topic, appealing to the audience, and a tone of voice from the author. Throughout the article I recognized how each point affected another. The subject of the rhetoric that provides the argument interests the audience, while the tone makes the work keeps the audience entertained. In the article "A Kind Word for Bullshit: The Problem of Academic Writing," I noticed that a point the authors were making was that the facts are not false of a writing that is considered bullshit. Instead, it is the intentions and voice that are considered bullshit. I do not see this as a negative quality of a work because sometime writers are called to create pieces that are not necessarily their specialty. A college student may need to tone down their lighthearted vocabulary and style of writing for a formal biology lab report. According to this article, "bullshit does not necessarily involve a misrepresentation of facts," but instead is an alteration of the writer's voice through their creativity. The author's voice in writing may be misrepresented from how he or she acts in person, but it is voice that allows the author to connect to the audience. For writers, their audience is crucial to their success, as noted by the author from Booth's piece who named his book after what 90% of businessmen found to be the most interesting. What may be considered academic bullshit to some is the cause of popularity for most writers.
"The Rhetorical Stance"
"A Kind Word for Bullshit: The Problem of Academic Writing"
