In this speech, you will provide an analysis of a cultural artifact using one of the methods of rhetorical criticism as a critical lens. Your goal in this speech is to explain to your audience the basis for your critical judgment about the artifact.

··Point 1: Context. Describe the artifact, how it came into being historically and/or culturally. Some may find it easy to fit this in the intro for well known objects, but others may need to spend a main point on it.

··Point 2: Answer any of these questions that you find most relevant to addressing how the artifact intentionally or unintentionally persuades someone to think, believe, or act in certain ways. If you choose multiple questions, you may find they need to be split into 2 main points. Be sure to identify what those ways of thinking, acting and believing are:

-How does the artifact create/reinforce/undermine a community’s racial identity?

-How does the artifact create/reinforce/undermine a community’s beliefs/understanding of gender roles, identity, or sexual orientation?

-How does the artifact shape our understanding of citizenship, national, &/or religious identity?

-How does the artifact function in shaping public memory?

You will find what you learned about narrative analysis, social movement studies, close textual analysis, dramatism, etc. to be useful here. So might your responses to the emailed questions from last week. Think about who the audience(s) is/are, What types of reasoning may be used in understanding the arguments, and what style/materials tell us.

··Point 3: Evaluate. What were the consequences or (potential) impact of the object? Were the purposes of the object fulfilled or contradicted by its persuasive stance? Were the principles behind it valid or good?

Note: This speech (based on this outline) should last at least, but no more than, 6–8 minutes. You will be given a 15-second grace period on either end. This time limit is not a suggestion. It is a requirement, and points will be deducted if you go over or under the time limit.

The object you analyze should be well known or easily shown to your audience. Your analysis should focus on claims made by the artifact on the audience in terms of the issue of public identity (race/gender/orientation, citizenship, or public memory). Additionally, your speech should inform us about the context of the artifact by presenting sufficient historical and cultural background for the audience in class. Ultimately, you should be presenting a clear and thoughtful argument about the object as something that can be understood as a material instance of rhetoric. This argument should not be limited to whether the object was merely aesthetic, functional, or in conversation with community standards, but should judge it according to the criteria of how it—intentionally or not—persuades someone to think, to act, or to believe in specific ways.

-Were the purposes of the object (assuming it had an intended purpose) fulfilled by its persuasive stance or contradicted?

-What were the consequences or potential impact of the artifact? Were the principles behind it valid?

This assignment will rely on logos. Logos is one of the rhetorical proofs that lead to judgment by the audience. Logos is based on evidence and reasoning, language, and structure. Your analysis, given in a speech, will demonstrate how you use criticism as a form of civic engagement. What you believe to be the persuasive dimensions of the cultural artifact will demonstrate that you know how to be a critic involved in public life, that you know how to do criticism that is engaged in civic matters, and that this functions in ways that are important for the good of the public.

The full sentence, preparation outline for your speech is worth 40 points.

We have provided an outline shell that will help you structure the body, introduction, and conclusion for your speech.

The outline should be completed as a Word document and submitted here when you submit your video.

The speech, as it is presented in the video you submit, is worth 160 points.

Also review the evaluation criteria established by CAS for the assessment of all speeches.

The time frame for completing and submitting your presentations is indicated on the course schedule.

Provide support for your speech by drawing on what others say about the artifact or about artifacts like it:

–include a minimum of six published sources cited orally in the speech, cited in the outline for your speech where you use them, and listed in the outline bibliography / Works Cited page.

–Four of the six sources must be scholarly (edited, peer-reviewed) publications. Journalistic sources, news-aggregators, and general web pages are not scholarly sources, but they can be used to provide factual information, historical background, or pertinent cultural characteristics and uses.

–The artifact you analyze is not a source: it is the object of your analysis. The textbook for this course is not a source: it is your guide for preparing your speech. Your instructor can be an invaluable resource in developing your perspective: ask your instructor for suggested scholarly readings that will help you conduct your analysis.

–Remember, your purpose is not merely to provide facts in an informative speech, but to use these facts to argue persuasively for the perspective that you are taking.