rhetorically analyzing visual arguments  · web viewwhat might the illustrator not have...

Rhetorically Analyzing Visual ArgumentsSatire: the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

Answer the following questions about your selected grouping of images:

1. What might the argument of each image be? Which audience(s) does this speak to? Is it effective/to whom? What warrants does the creator assume the audience values? How might the visual persuade wider audiences?

2. How does the cartoon appeal to the emotions of the “reader”? What kind of reaction is rendered?

3. What evidence is presented? Is it figurative, exaggerated, and/or does it point to a reality/real incident to support its case?

4. What might the illustrator not have included/thought of/missed in their argument? What are possible counter arguments?

5. How do the illustrations compare/contrast? How do their arguments differ? How does their evidence compare? Is one more or less persuasive than the other; why or why not; to which audience(s)?

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

Group 5

Group 6

Group 7

Group 8

Group 9

Group 10