Rhetorical Analysis Of The Article 'An Animal's Place'

1261 Words3 Pages

Desolate Darkness
After class each day around noon, college students venture off campus to suppress their appetite for meat. As the nearest drive thru serves students various processed meats, fulfilling their needs, most ignore the life of the animal they have just consumed. Well known writer Michael Pollan writes a compelling article called “An Animal’s Place”, which was published in The New York Times Magazine November, 10th 2002. In this article he defends his speciesism, as he describes the mood of animal activists who demand rights for animals, whom they believe are equal to humans. His purpose is to impress upon readers the idea that eating animals, is part of our existence, but treating them cruelly should not be. In order to accomplish …show more content…

His practical wisdom in the narration of his article provides a clever way to announce his topic, by candidly admitting to eating a rib-eye steak while reading about animal liberation. This creative anecdote enables him to focus on the topic of animal rights. He uses an analogy of slavery to conclude that eating an animal while reading about animal rights do not mix well. Pollan researches several philosophers like Tom Regan and James Rachel’s to name a few, in order to gain a better understanding of his topic, the mention of experts shows his reader how knowledgeable of the subject of animal rights he is which retains his audience’s attention. The mention of Animal Liberation written by Peter Singer provokes Pollan to address the issues of slaughtering animals for meat and puts him on the defensive side. He keeps his readers attention by constantly engaging both sides of the topic. For instance, his introductory statements focus his readers to the discussion of animal rights yet as he approaches his body statements he focuses more on animal cruelty. Eventually, stating “he is not going to become a vegetarian per say, but through his current animal farming and factory experience, he will be considering how his dinner got to his plate” (Pollan para 79). This engages his audience in showing his defensive side of the discussion, and how this has emotionally affected …show more content…

Pollan focuses on the abuse of animals in factories in order to provide grounds to discuss his main idea. He sets the stage for his audience, by addressing beak docking, tail clipping, and small cages crammed air tight with chickens who can barely move. By approaching his topic after he expresses what he has seen in the factories better enables him to argue more convincingly, that animals should freely and naturally be allowed express themselves. With his use of inductive reasoning he puts a face on the animals, humans are consuming through his article. He brings his audience along as he tours a natural farm the kind that has existed for hundreds of years before large franchise took over the food-producing industry. This farm is set up to create the kind of atmosphere, animals thrive in, and nurturing each animal as one would a newborn child. This gives the audience an understanding of how he can morally continue to eat meat. With his knowledge he provides an alternative concern for his audience to find out where their meat comes from. With his use of logic, he justifies getting meat from natural farms where the animals life can be lived to the fullest before providing nourishment for humans. The structure of his argument fulfills the reader’s appetite for knowledge of animal rights and cruelty leaving them

Open Document