Analysis Of Aristotle's Rhetoric Audre Lorde

Of Aristotle’s three modes of rhetoric, Audre Lorde’s essay is comprised largely by logos complemented by pathos and the least by ethos. Ethos is obvious when she describes herself in terms of social groups, giving credibility to herself to justify her assertions. In her words, Lorde is a “forty-nine-year-old Black lesbian feminist socialist mother of two, including one boy, and a member of an interracial couple.” She explains at the beginning of her essay that she has been identified as an active member of these socially taboo groups and thus has the right to demand attention to her claims. Logos is seen throughout her essay, often following a bold statement. Her arguments not only consist of reasoning but also personal experiences and real-life occurrences, such as Lorde’s question of the lacking representation of poetry by Back women and the horrifying female circumcision supported by Jomo Kenyatta in Africa. Lorde’s use of logos is very effective because it gives the reader a relatable narrative to better understand her bold conclusions. The third mode of Aristotle’s rhetoric is pathos, which Lorde uses to a slightly lesser degree than logos but just as effectively. Examples of Lorde’s use of pathos are her descriptive language, metaphors and lists.

All of Lorde’s forms of pathos effectively engage the reader into imagining themselves in the situations she reasons through and encourage the reader into thinking about how he or she may have contributed to these wrongs being described with such fierce language. Lorde expertly weaves together the three modes of rhetoric into a structured argument to reflect on the causes of a fragmented society.
Ethos, pathos, and logos are strategically placed throughout this essay to support statements and engage the reader. At the beginning, the reader is grabbed by pathos in the form of a list of oppositions that the reader should be familiar with by experience. Then Lorde defines the two sides of the opposition in terms of society and social groups, using logos to explain the relevance of the list of opposition to the central argument of the essay. The author gives herself credibility in the beginning her work to establish a firm understanding between the reader and herself to accept her arguments as genuine observations by an experienced activist. Lorde then gives the purpose of the essay and explains its necessity. She states the causes of the rejection of several social minorities while supporting her claims with reasoning, personal experiences, and real-life occurrences all of which are brought to life by vivid language and metaphors. The conclusion of this argument is very forgiving and hopeful as opposed to the rest of the essay. Reasoning explains that change can be difficult but we should still work to change our hatred for our differences. Finally, pathos in the form of a list is used to give a sense of togetherness in a common struggle.