Persuasive Letter

at
Categories
Tags

 

Rhetorical Mode
The goal of persuasive writing is to get a reader (your audience) to agree with your point of view. Persuasive writing blends facts and emotion to convince the reader that the writer is right. This genre relies on opinion and emotion to a greater extent than argumentative writing, but in moving a reader, the successful persuasive letter also deploys logically sound argumentation and quite often researched support and fact.

Rhetorical Considerations
Purpose:
The purpose of drafting a persuasive letter is to move your reader to agree with your point of view. Persuasion is single-minded; it is based on a conviction that a particular way of thinking or acting is the only way to go; all of the energy of the letter works toward this end. As a writer, you will present one side–your side. While an opposing point should be mentioned, it is only mentioned to be refuted or dismissed in the service of your position.

Audience:
Persuasive writing is almost always written with a particular audience in mind. For this piece of writing, you will direct your persuasive letter to one person. Thus, your audience is not imagined, but rather very real, and that person and their characteristics will inform many of the choices you make as a writer. The persuasive letter requires constant negotiation with another person’s mind. At every phase of the writing process, as you prewrite, draft, and revise, this assignment will ask you to imagine and anticipate how your reader feels, responds, and thinks.

Form:
This piece of writing will be presented using a letter format. Thus, while you still need an MLA-style heading to format your work for submission, you will address your letter directly to your reader with a formal letter salutation.

Five Features of a Persuasive Letter
Rhetorical Situation: Persuasive Writing vs. Argumentative Writing: Persuasive writing, in a way, is a form of argumentative writing; however, the goal of persuasive writing is to get a reader or group of readers to agree with you/your point of view on a particular topic, and the goal of argumentative writing is to get the reader to acknowledge that your side is valid and is worth considering. Persuasive writing blends facts with emotion in an attempt to convince the reader that the writer is “right,” while in argumentative writing, the writer cites relevant reasons, credible facts, and sufficient evidence in order to convince the reader to consider a particular perspective. The nuances are subtle but important to consider. (Later in this course you will be crafting an argument and will see the differences in these genres of writing with greater clarity. The letter makes balanced use of the three rhetorical appeals to persuade a reader to change a behavior or belief. The three appeals, which come to us from that consequential deceased Greek, Aristotle, are:

Ethos: a writer’s or speaker’s credibility. In your letter, therefore, ethos is you, sort of. It’s the “you” that your writing transmits to your reader, the sum total of your tone and language choices, and also the values and intelligence that your writing communicates. Therefore, be vigilant with your work because ethos is the appeal that’s most immediately harmed by faulty word choices, punctuation mistakes, and lapses in tone.

Pathos: the appeal to a reader’s emotions and values. Get your reader to feel. Play (in a non-evil way) on their emotions–their compassion, their fears, their sense of community.

Logos: the appeal to a reader’s logic or reason. Ensure your claims are logical, free of fallacies, and backed with specific support.

Organization: Organize using argumentative structure: an introduction with a thesis/main claim, body paragraphs that advance points in support of the thesis/main claim, and a conclusion.

Transitions: Uses transitional phrases to connect your ideas and move the reader forward smoothly and logically between sentences.

Known Audience: The letter’s appeals are personalized to the reader’s characteristics–their professional role and its obligations, as well as their values and emotions.

Formal or Informal Writing? The tone of the letter depends upon the recipient and your relationship and also upon subject matter. The tone should enhance the letter’s persuasive efforts, not undermine them. Always strive for a respectful approach.

Mini-Lesson on ETHOS – PATHOS – LOGOS
Plan to use these appeals heavily throughout your Persuasive Letter.

Ethos

This is an ethical appeal. It relies on your reliability and credibility as the author.

Includes reliable sources

Is written from an unbiased perspective

Shows the writer’s expertise through the presentation of careful insight and research

Pathos

This is an emotional appeal. It relies on the construction of careful connection between the claims presented and the emotions of the readers.

Includes the writer’s values and beliefs

Uses stories or examples that convey emotion

Contains broader appeal and focus

Logos

This is an appeal to logic and reason. It relies on facts and figures that can convince the reader of the claims.

Relies on fact and opinion

Focuses on reasonable claims and organization of ideas

Only includes relevant material with a narrow focus

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sample Solution

re are several interpretations which explore the main reason for the end of the Cold War such as the Afghanistan War, Reagan’s Presidency, Gorbachev’s leadership, the economy and the independence of Eastern European countries. The main factor that led to the end of the Cold War was the debilitated relationship of the Soviet Union with Eastern European countries which meant that countries such as Poland and Hungary gained independence. As Levesqué argues, the independence of Eastern European countries led to the end of the breakdown of the Soviet Union, ultimately ending the Cold War because of the lack of focus on the East and the increased focus on the West. Moreover, the Soviet Union could not maintain their power and control over the Eastern European countries and could not provide financial aid when requested by Eastern European leaders. Thus, they saw Soviet control and support as inadequate. Although Oberdorfer sees Gorbachev’s leadership as the most important reason for the end of the Cold War, it is not true because the gaining of independence was the most detrimental factor which completely dissolved the Soviet Union, hence why the gaining of independence of Eastern European countries was the most impactful factor that led to the end of the Cold War. Levesqué: Levesqué believes the main reason for the end of the Cold War was the lack of control Gorbachev had over the Eastern European countries. Ultimately, this led to the end of the Cold War because the countries broke away from the Soviet control, which further led to the rapid downfall of the Soviets. Levesqué argues Gorbachev tried to have “the best of both worlds” by having “change and relative stability” in the Eastern European countries. Gorbachev was too focused on the West, disregarding the Eastern European countries which led to their independence because “first priority was given to the East-West rapprochement”. Therefore, the Eastern European countries were a significant reason for the end of the Cold War because the Soviet Union lost control over them as their power was minimised. Additionally, Levesqué depicts how historians in the past thought that Soviet Union leaders had “very poor information on the situation in Eastern Europe”. His argument is based on newly released documents, such as the report from the Bogomolov Institute, which clearly reveal problems at the time – they were just not acted upon. Eastern countries e.g Bratislava were looking to become independent because they disliked the Russian control, but this desire for independence was negative since it meant that the Soviet Union had less control over reforming them. Gorbachev wanted the leaders themselves to implement the changes, supporting the idea of freedom and democracy, but this ultimately led to the Cold War’s end as many were hesitant and refused to implement changes. “Gorbachev was convinced that reform could work in Eastern Europe, but he believed that the initiative had to come from the top leadership of these countries”, supports Oberdorfer’s central argument of his leadership being the main reason of the Co

This question has been answered.

Get Answer