Marc Adriel’s Comments (group member since Aug 06, 2017)

Marc Adriel’s comments from the AP Lang Summer Work 2017 group.

Jay Heinrichs can be given credit in one way, his self awareness. Many a times in reading the book we can see the author use the rhetorical skills he just presented or he'd use previous skills. A great way to keep the reader engaged and see if their awareness of rhetorical devices have improved. That's his one and only credit, having created a book that is easily digestible for the masses. Would I say there's Kubrick level meaning into the book? Why of course the book wouldn't have that, it's a book of introduction and examples to rhetoric. The examples are from his ordinary life, the man actually 'clickbaited' academic institutions by putting "WHAT ARISTOTLE, LINCOLN, AND HOMER SIMPSON..." as a tasty piece of ethos. All the credit to Heinrichs for using a rhetorical skill in order to sell the book but seeing it used does feel quite cheap as you feel you may have just been scammed, lest it were not intentional and is therefore false advertisement in a way. Aristotle, Lincoln, and Homer are barely used in the book. Therefore in my opinion the book is horribly stale as the author's life, which is by no stretch of my imagination interesting. It may have possibly been my upbringing that my standpoint on arguments have been what the book preached in the beginning, that they are for compromise rather than the precursor to physical engagement. That's basically the book, an array of commonly picked up social skills or social norms. In my point of view as a student, the book is merely a way to rename common skills and norms to a be more academically pleasing rather than being left alone to just existing. Such as the rhetorical skill where one imitates their audience's values, did that really need to be taught? It's such common knowledge that two people with differing values won't handle well together in areas that their values come against. For example, if you'd like to impress someone into becoming your friend and they hold a strong belief in the tenants of the Alt-Right while you hold strong beliefs in Liberalism. In that example you wouldn't try to persuade that person into becoming your friend with conversations that goes against their beliefs. You'd instead find a subject you both agree or are interested in to talk about to grow a friendship. I wouldn't say the book was a terrible addition into my life, but it has given me self awareness that I naturally use rhetorical skills with people. Somehow this awareness has made me feel in-genuine in my everyday life. The book has 'trigger warnings' all around the chapters warning about how some lessons may be 'offensive' to some readers. Offensive no, make me feel self-conscious about what I say to people in order not to accidentally 'manipulate' them yes. I'd write more but I feel as though this 'comment' is a bit too much, my apologies as it seems like a rant- I tried cutting it down to as little as possible.