On monsters by stephen t asma

Rhetorical Analysis

In the chapter, "Japan's Nuclear Nightmare: How the Bomb Became a Beast Called Godzilla," by Peter H. Brothers, the key issue that the author discusses is the underlying truths that were featured under then movie Godzilla. Throughout the text, the author shows how the director of the movie, Ishiro Honda, used the monster to represent the metaphor for a nation that was living in doomsday. The scenes of the monster, Godzilla, have been used in the movie to represent the trauma as well as the horror that went on the day the bomb hit the Japanese cities Nagasaki and Hiroshima. On the other hand Stephen T. Asma in the “Monsters are on the Rise” talks about the purpose of the monsters in his article and elaborates how they are replicas of our fears to some of the things that we have been able to experience as well as the things that we have no control over them. There seems to be an increase in the number of monsters because it seems to be representing the anxiety of the people in post 9/11 and the conflict in Iraq. Asma shows the audience that there are different interpretations of monsters in different cultures.

Both Brothers and Asma have used pathos, ethos, and logos to explain how the monsters can be used in modern society. They have as well used rhetorical appeals so that they can elaborate on how the monsters can be used by the audience in modern society to understand the message that the authors were trying to prevail. In my rhetorical analysis essay, I have decided to compare the two articles “Japan’s Nuclear Nightmare: How the Bomb Became a Beast Called Godzilla” and “Monsters are on the Rise” and compare how the two authors have used the rhetorical analysis in the two articles and at the end of the analysis I will determine how the rhetoric choices influence the understanding of the readers.

I like how the authors have used logos, pathos, and ethos to help them in supporting their claims. Brothers have used pathos appeal in his claims so that he can capture the attention of the readers. “he resolves to use the monsters as a metaphor for the growing fears of a nation living in the shadow of doomsday” (Brothers 38, Par3). The author uses this metaphor in his article so that he can capture the attention of the readers. Asma, on the other hand, uses pathos too so that he can capture the attention of the audience, "Monsters are on the rise. People can't seem to get enough of vampires lately, and zombies have a new lease on life” (Asma 1, par1). The author has used this statement in his article to express how the monsters have been increasing lately, and it captures the attention of the audience as it builds some curiosity. The use of pathos by both authors assists them in connecting with their audience.

Brothers had used ethos in his article to make it enjoyable when he used Honda, the creator of Godzilla so that he can portray the aspects of the movie that were used in creating the mood or in connecting the movie with the war. I felt the text was being more credible since Brothers used reasons of the creators on why he portrayed certain aspects of the movie (ethos). I believe that this article was well written, especially when the author was proving that Godzilla is more than just a "giant dinosaur." (Brothers 40, par3). Asma, on the other hand, has as well used ethos in the article to convince the readers that monsters can be used as symbols of human crisis and vulnerability and in that case. Asma proceeds to explain how the monsters play imaginative foils for thinking about the response of the audience to menace, "monsters can stand as symbols of human vulnerability and crisis, and as such, they play imaginative foils for thinking about our responses to menace” (Asma 2, par4).

Brothers have used logos to convince the readers of why Godzilla was created. He argues that Godzilla was created so that he could be used to show the threat of war as well as nuclear, but also, “a legacy which should never be forgotten” (Brother 39, par3). The use of logos is also evident when the author convinced the audience that it was not easy to imagine how the war looked like and how the bombs generally affected the Japanese people, “I saw the pictures which some people were melted or get horrible burnt because of the bombs” (Brothers 37, par2). Another evidence of logos is when the author was illustrating how the atomic bombs are still affecting the Japanese people up to date “atomic cloud that still haunts us Japanese” (Brothers 37, par3). Asma, on the other hand, has used logos to convince the readers how the monsters have been part of our attempts in envisioning the good life, “monsters are a part of our attempt to envision the good life or at least the secure life” (Asma 3, par4). The authors continues to use logos to convince the readers that for one to discover their value, they have to go through some tribulation as well as trials and in such the monsters usually help through the imaginatively rehearse, “we have to face trials and tribulation, and monsters help us imaginatively rehearse” (Asma 3, par4).

The rhetorical choice that Brothers and Asma have used in their articles have a great influence on the understanding of the readers. The use of pathos, ethos, and logos in their articles has made their articles to be easily understood by the readers. The authors used the appeals so that their articles could be persuading for easy understanding by the readers. The authors have carefully considered all aspects of their topics. They have as well used emotions so that they could capture the attention of the readers. The tone that the authors have used in their articles matches with their respective audience hence making their articles easily understood by the readers. For example, when Brothers used logos in his argument of how the bombs have affected the people of Japan even up to date. Asma has also used rhetorical analysis to help the readers understand the significance of the monsters.

Work Cited

Asma, Stephen T. "Monsters and the moral imagination." Chronicle of Higher Education 56 (2009): B11-B12.

Brothers, Peter H. "Japan's Nuclear Nightmare: How the Bomb Became a Beast Called" Godzilla"." Cineaste 36.3 (2011): 36-40.