Rhetorical Analysis #2: “Who’s Afraid of Michelle Obama?” by K. Emily Bond

For this second rhetorical analysis we were given the option of analyzing one of the articles we selected for our “Experience and Other Evidence” papers, diving deeper into rhetorical strategies and methods. The article I have chosen to use recently appeared in Bust Magazine, and speaks directly about Michelle Obama mainly through the use of ethos, but there is also a clear and evident use of both pathos and logos due to question presented in the title that addresses a fear that the public has about Michelle becoming out first lady, as well as the statistical data found within the article. The intended audience of this article may be college educated women and older, mainly because this is a feminist magazine, however, this article is not limited to only black women by any means. In fact any person aware of the current political situation, male or female, who may have stumbled upon this article would be able to comprehend and react.

Upon my analysis of K. Emily Bond’s article it became evident that the primary rhetorical appeal that she utilizes is ethos. The plethora of sources she cites from various fields in commercial media, both negative and positive, to validate the points she makes about how Michelle Obama distorted image is powered by racial and sexist rumors and slurs. An example Bond gives her audience is the well circulated July issue of The New Yorker where the cover portrays Michelle Obama as an angry, militant black woman complete with army fatigues and an AK-47 strapped to her back. Other sources that Bond uses are address more positive views of the potential future first lady, such as Michelle Obama’s appearance on The View which was portrayed as “everyone’s best friend.” Bond also makes an appeal to our logic with statistical facts and percentages of black students in Obama’s class at Princeton. Of course, both of these appeals are tied into the pathetic appeal initiated by the question of the title, forcing us to think about what really is there for us to fear about this woman.

Stylistically, Bond elegantly intertwines the rhetorical appeals she uses into a cohesive and functional unit that easily flows from one to the other and throughout the article she injects her own commentary and thought based out the cited information she has provided her audience. Based on the intended audience that she is writing to, as well as, the topic she is discussing the structure of her arguments within in the article are strategically placed in order to most effectively drive her points home and she tends to do this more towards the end of a paragraph when all the outside information pertaining to the specific topic of argument is on the table. This approach allows the audience to weigh all the information for themselves. Bond’s style of argument is particularly effective because she shapes and molds the issue at hand so that she has the last say, and that the very last thing you recall from her article is a point that she proves.

Finally, what makes Bond’s argument so effective is that she addresses several topics of stasis theory including conjecture, because of the questions she presents within the title as well as within the article about rumors about Michelle Obama. Another topic touched upon as well is value. Bond’s reference to this topic provides the key to the effectiveness of the argument because the main issue at hand in the article is whether or not the publicity that Michelle Obama is right or wrong, good or bad. Through her rhetorical and stylistic methods K. Emily Bond has successfully argued a position efficiently.