Rhetorical Analysis of Arizona State Museum Building - Essay Example

Rhetorical Analysis of Arizona State Museum building located in the University of Arizona Photo Building number: 2.00 Statement of purpose Purpose: The main objective of this paper to analyze the use of rhetoric appeals within the Arizona State Museum building that is located on the main campus of the University of Arizona. This will take into consideration of the context, audience and the visual impact. I hope to comprehend and convey to the reader how this type of building is designed and the type of collections of the building employ the use ethos, pathos, and ethos. Audience : My audience will be the teacher of my English class. He has in depth comprehension of rhetorical appeals, in this regard I must present my argument using the accurate knowledge of rhetoric. I am obliged to avoid advocating and generalizing. Context: My paper will be one of the papers that my teacher will read this assignment, so I have to be insightful and creative in my analysis. I have to make arguments in order to grab his attention. Outline Introduction: I plan on using my introduction to establish my own ethos as well as describe the the structure and design of the building that is being analyzed. I will describe my experience in and outside of the Arizona State Museum building which will help the reader to understand that I had the opportunity to analyze the building at is significance in the University of Arizona. This approach will help me to describe the building and lead to my thesis Thesis: The Arizona State Museum building utilizes a well established, ethos, effective pathos and clear logos to create uncomfortable circumstances which in his audience should confront the social stereotypes. Body: It will look at the background of the of the building and the use of ethos. It will analyze the historical context . The use of visual elements will help to create the use of pathos appeals and discuss the social stereotype that relate this building. There will also be an analysis of the logos by discussing the message or narrative associated with the building. Conclusion. This will reinstate the thesis and summarize the major points. It will also point out the arguments to show the degree of success that the Arizona State Museum building has achieved for each rhetorical appeal. Introduction When we think about teaching rhetoric and critiquing rhetorical acts, we base out thoughts on text and artifacts that are primarily oral or written. Nonetheless, our day to day experiences are saturated with the rhetorical invocation that move beyond the written word to visual. The objective of this essay is to explore the multi – modality of the rhetoric and illustrates how we think about the rhetoric on a wider perspective. The arguments regarding architecture particularly invoke this focus that deals with the nature objects, spaces and artifacts (Rosteck 45). This case study looks at one specific building known as Arizona State Museum building in order to show how this type of rhetoric takes place. Despite the distinct content of the building, the visual, textual and experimental are all used mimetically. This means that multi- model rhetoric on this site imitates the form a function of a natural history museum in order to persuade its visitors of its legitimacy. The Arizona State Museum building is the oldest and the largest anthropology museum located in the southwest region of the campus was established in 1893 by the Arizona Territorial Legislature. This building is the state’s official permitting agency for archeology and paleontologist projects. This is one of the oldest research units at the University of Arizona. It is known for hosting numerous researchers around the world and allow them to use the collection to expand their frontier of their knowledge in enthology, ethnohistory and archeology. The museum resides among several buildings. Most of these buildings look similar as they are made of stone colored concrete slabs and reflective windows. There are numerous parking lots around the building. The Arizona State Museum building collections and experts are regarded as the world most significant resources for the study of culture and evolution. It holds a comprehensive collection of catalogue archeological facts, ethnographic artifacts and numerous volumes or rare and hard to find cordage representing the evolution of mankind. This building holds the archives, original field notes and paper of anthropology gainst like Edward Spicer, Emil Haury and Grenvill Goodwin (Caudill 56). Question regarding the origin and the age of the things cannot be determined by observational scientific. This means that no one can prove scientifically whether creation or evolution take place since it is beyond our observation. Nonetheless, we can study on the results of the past process in light of our world perception. The message conveyed is that both the evolutionist and creationist will interpret evidence from different worldview. When a visitor comes to visit this museum there is evidence of creation against evolution. Since most of the museum all over the world are evolutionist in nature, Arizona State Museum building also provides that of a creationist nature. The Arizona State Museum is able to present both the story of evolution and creation fairly. A brief description of the layout of the Arizona State Museum is necessary to understand its rhetorical structure. The museum guides the visitor through a variety of rooms that hold the numerous collections and experts . Since the medieval period, the rhetorical strategy of imitation has on a variety of meanings and uses. Robert McKeon identifies the different classical definition of imitation.I draw on his definition that deals with pedagogical and rhetorical uses of imitation. A major use of imitation is the attempt to appear as they are part of the scientific enterprise and community. While the textual and legal arguments for the legitimacy of creation science are a large part of Arizona State Museum building effort. The move to put their arguments into the space of the museum which is typically used to promote evolution and the status quo. This is an indication of the desire to arguments of the Museum building to appear visually and physically similar to that of other museums that other visitors have visited. Not only are the spaces and the visuals of the Arizona State Museum is similar to other natural history museums, the science in this building is also similar to that of other museums. There are several pamphlets explaining that helps in explaining creation science. In this regards, the Arizona State Museum was built on the basis offer research for over 100 years go. This cut crosses many fields and different disciplines. It is able to offer or conduct research on the prehistoric migration. It has been able to compile thousands of records in the computer database with regards to colonial history. Holding up evolution as a standard, the Arizona State Museum attempts to portray the validity of creation science on the basis of its similar for evolution (Henry 67). From the analysis, it is clear that scientific evidence for creation for discipline geology, anthropology and other sciences show that data in the Arizona State Museum support the creation model as opposed to the evolution model. In conclusion, The Arizona State building contains information that challenges the well established, ethos, effective pathos and clear logos to create uncomfortable circumstances which in his scientist try to differentiate from the evolution model and the creation model. Through the demonstration that the creation science which is just as legitimate that of evolutionary science, the equipments and information in the the museum's attempt to establish the credibility of the research they conducted. It attempts to imitate the visual imagery,space and scientific credibility of a standard natural history museum that establish credibility with their audience hoe the creation model and evolutionary model that is subject to criticism. Works cited Caudill, Sally, Celeste M. Condit, and John L. Lucaites. Contemporary Rhetorical Theory: A Reader. New York [u.a.] [u.a.: Guilford Press, 2009. Print. Henry, Jim. Writing Workplace Cultures: An Archaeology of Professional Writing. Carbondale [u.a.: Southern Illinois University Press, 2000. Print. Rosteck, Thomas. At the Intersection: Cultural Studies and Rhetorical Studies. New York: Guilford Press, 2008. Print. Read More