As our final assignment for cornerstone we were tasked with revising our rhetorical analysis. I received a B, 81%, and by the end of my revisions have “A” quality work. During recent assignments and papers for other classes I realized the thesis was one of the first few sentences in the paper. As I was reading my paper I noticed that the purpose of the author writing this wasn 't until almost halfway into the first paragraph. My first revision was to put “The purpose of this article was for the author, Emily Heyer, to express her thoughts and opinions for gay marriage, and to share her views on why Iowa should have been pro gay marriage in 2011.” as the second sentence and make it flow. In the second paragraph it seems to me that I just summarized her work which wasn 't exactly part of the assignment. I went back and added the types of strategies she uses while writing her article and how they connect to the emotions of the reader and it affected the reader 's train of thought. I specified the pathos appeal throughout her article. I also reemphasize the purpose of the article and how she supported it. …show more content…
As I read on and on my rhetorical analysis continued to sound more and more like a summary. The way I changed that is by simply adding directing her writing to the thesis statement and her purpose. Towards the end of a major paragraph I added a sentence or two describing how it supported her purpose. I reread the article she wrote and realized her logical view on gay marriage really strayed away from her overall purpose. One of the reasons gay marriage wasn’t legalized in 2011 was because of their inability to procreate. She basically compared same sex couples and their inability to have children to people who are suffering from medical conditions and not being able to have