Rhetorical Analysis

Hey everyone, and welcome back! Today, I'd like to discuss Michelle Alexander's writing style, and go into detail about the rhetorical devices she utilizes in The New Jim Crow and how they enable her to strengthen her argument.

As I mentioned in the introduction, Alexander appeals strongly to logos in her book. She delves deeply into history and does not need to appeal to pathos as much because of the facts she uncovered that speak for themselves. For example, on page 66 of Chapter 2, Alexander says, "The Court long ago acknowledged that effective use of consent searches by the police depends on the ignorance (and powerlessness) of those who are targeted." Despite merely stating a fact, Alexander makes the reader feel guilty, indignant, angry, or all of them at once because of the injustice shown to the "ignorant" and the "powerless" who are frequently exploited in the criminal justice system. So basically, by appealing to logos, the author is appealing to pathos at the same time, which could be confusing but the author makes it work in The New Jim Crow. This reminds me very much of Fast Food Nation, a book primarily comprised of facts and statistics but very powerful in relating its message to the readers and sparking an emotional reaction all the same.

The author uses quite lengthy sentences and often complicated syntax, enabling her to develop and maintain the tone of her book. By weaving so many facts (many of which alarming and capable of triggering the emotions of the reader) into every sentence, one after the other, she is able to drill home the point that the presence of racism in the criminal justice system is as unrelenting and ever-present as the multitudinous negative choices we as a nation have made in the past. They may also serve to slightly overwhelm the reader and create a heightened sense of urgency. For example, in Chapter 2, Alexander says, "The most visible sign of the failed system is the astonishingly large caseloads public defenders routinely carry, making it impossible for them to provide meaningful representation to their clients." This sentence, though jam-packed with information, ends on a negative note that suggests those in need of legal representation are lacking proper assistance because of the mere quantity of cases their public defenders are responsible for. Ending on a negative note after enhancing the reader's understanding of the topic at hand makes the message of the sentence itself more powerful.

Michelle Alexander structures her chapters in an interesting manner. She writes the chapters themselves and then forms sub-sections within them; otherwise, the material would be extremely dense and would not allow for the readers to distinguish where a particular sub-topic ends and another begins. For example, in Chapter 2, she organizes the chapter entitled "The Lockdown" into sub-sections such as "Rules of the Game," "Unreasonable Suspicion," and "Waging War" to organize the main idea of the chapter into specific sections to help the reader better understand the main idea (in this case, the main rundown of the War on Drugs, how it developed, and how it impacted law enforcement and the African-American race today) as a whole.

Thanks so much for reading my second blog post! Hope all my fabulous readers are having as much fun as I am! See you next time!