Rhetorical Analysis Of Jeremy Lin In The Film '

735 Words2 Pages

Lin is an important public figure of this decade, yet it is awful that it has taken years for an Asian American to be a part of the NBA. In the documentary, Lin demonstrated that even as an underdog he never gave up, and he had many reasons why he should have. Lin is also perceived as a someone with many financial difficulties, but in reality he had all the resources to be successful: parent’s support, financial support, education support, and athletic support. The documentary is biased because it makes him appear as a one in a million who was able to make it pro. Linsanity is powerful in sharing and inspiring minorities, but because the movie is biased about social status, and no other minority has struggled in the league. Lin was labeled middle class, had help from his family in school work, and had …show more content…

After observing their stats, I had seen that most of them other than Lin, Yi Jianlian, Yao Ming, and Rex Walters did not play enough games to improve their numbers. Meanwhile Lin has played more than anyone one of them which is a huge step forward for Asians. On the other hand, the documentary makes it seem like he has been the only Asian player who has done good, but we cannot say that for sure. Jeremy Lin in his rookie year was able to play 29 games with the warriors meanwhile Yuta Tabuse had only played four games with the Suns during his career. Given the fact that because these other players were not played or kept in the league, they were not able to show or prove that they are good guards, forwards, or centers. If Linsanity was produced to show the improvements Lin has made in his career, then why not also make a Mingsanity. According to ESPN Yao Ming as a first year made on average 13.5 points to 25 while Lin made 2.6 and increased to 14.6. Both have made important impacts in the NBA spotlight/ stage, but why not have both Linsanity and

Open Document