Rhetorical Analysis of Postman & Larkin, Essay Example

Thesis

Postman’s “The Age of Show Business,” in his “Amusing Ourselves to Death” work focuses on the role of television.  In respect to the presence of television in America, Postman applies it quite well in regards to the name of the chapter.  Postman’s thesis defines the television as entertainment, in all areas and depictions, even where entertainment should not be called for, such as politics, news, and religion.  Postman forms this thesis around the charge that America has become central to entertainment rather than substance.

Larkin’s “Star Power” takes an opposing spin, though the subject matter is slightly different.  Larkin focuses only on presidential elections and campaigns, whereas Postman includes this topic.  At any rate, Larkin analyzes models of celebrity involvement, relative to political advertisement.  Larkin focuses on reform, not rejection, in her thesis.  She seeks utilizing the role of celebrity political activism to serve the greater good.

Personally I feel that both authors make valid arguments.  There certainly is a dynamic in America that stresses entertainment in all walks.  Certainly relevant in politics, it often comes in a form that is not traditionally welcome.  However, this reality is quite grounded in fact, as Larkin outlines in her “soft news coverage” reference, which characterizes television habits.  Perhaps accommodation with some important changes is needed.

Values and Attitude

Postman certainly holds very traditional values in regards to television.  It is quite evident in his attitude towards the current state thereof, which is very critical.  The reader is made aware of Postman’s views and values by way of this.  Postman certainly does not believe that the current state and direction of American television is quite right, where it is saturated with entertainment value.

Larkin is quite the opposite.  While she recognizes the negative habits of American viewers, she even argues that being “baited” into receiving information is worthwhile, believing that the end justifies the means.  Larkin is much more positive, where her standards and attitude are towards a positive direction.  Larkin does not place much value on whether the “entertainment value” of television, politics, and celebrities in her discussion is right.

Major Writing Technique

Postman makes use of pathos and logos accordingly.  Postman mixes logical reading with appeals to the readers, citing ridiculous attempts at entertaining viewers at he characterizes his subject matter.  It even has a hint of irony, for instance, in the fashion concerns of actors in a Beckett play, as he presents the transformation of American culture into that of those who are entertained.

These elements certainly support Postman’s purpose.  By utilizing rational and emotional appeals, Postman reinforces these respective arguments against American media.  They appropriately reach the reader in order to persuade one regarding the negative elements in television within society.

The use of definition takes a central presence in Larkin’s essay.  She uses this at an early stage, such as in the definitions of fame and celebrity.  She extends this throughout her essay, most notably in the depictions of the primary categories of celebrities in political activism.  Other techniques are present, such as in ethos and expert opinion, where Larkin establishes credibility and uses facts to paint a picture of what is happening currently in political activism.  Larkin truly wishes to create an essay that presents the truth to the reader, and not merely one’s outside take on the situation, as found in Postman.

Debate to Views of Postman and Larkin

In my opinion, it is quite senseless to completely follow one’s thesis over the other.  Although they treat slightly different subjects, Larkin’s focus can be reasonably be said to be inclusive in Postman’s analysis.  Although Postman does not exactly concentrate on celebrity political activism, we can compare the two writers for their conservative and progressive takes on media and culture.

Postman’s analysis provides some truthful points to take away.  I don’t agree with the constant references to such views, kind of reminiscent of a “practical treatment,” much like the value of Christianity analyzed under the scope of something irrelevant like church attendance.  We cannot analyze the current movement of television by a lot of disconnected negative events.  At any rate, Postman’s argument finds truth in the prominence of entertainment over anything else.  Even in the higher coverage found on television, such as in religion, news, and related to this analysis in that of politics, entertainment cannot be the primary consideration.  Postman certainly has a point to this standard in American culture.  However, Larkin’s opposition in that of reform, and not rejection, is also truthful in my opinion.

It should be noted that Larkin does not disagree with the current state of television, or American culture for that matter.  As previously touched on, Larkin does outline the negative habits of Americans, as she relates the lack of information consumed by citizens, as noted before in her section on “Infotainment.”  Larkin believes that regardless of whether this is right, this is reality, and some good can come from this.  Larkin believes that we should use this for the good of American culture.  Personally, I feel that Larkin has a point here.  If celebrities represent a way for America to become better informed, then why should we remain hypocritical?

Conclusion

Postman and Larkin certain have opposing views.  Although the subject matter isn’t exactly the same, they are related in their opposing stances on the current state and direction of American television, culture, and entertainment.  Postman sees television as becoming more central to entertainment than information, where Larkin utilizes entertainment to help the American public become more informed.

In these views we see two different sets of values and attitudes towards the situation.  Postman’s views are more conservative, exhibiting a negative stance towards entertainment on television.  Larkin drifts away from the criticisms of Postman, where she actually doesn’t disagree with the views of Larkin.  Instead, Larkin concentrates on utilizing entertainment as a way to inform Americans.  Larkin is certainly less conservative and more for reforming current standards, rather than sitting in opposition to them.

The two texts make use of a range of writing techniques.  Postman concentrates on more isolated techniques, where he attempts to appeal to the reader’s emotions through logic.  Larkin makes use of expert opinion to build credibility and to attempt to resolve the situation.  Neither writer can be said to overtly use one special technique, at least in a comprehensive and noteworthy manner.

Certainly Postman and Larkin provide valuable insights to the situation.  They both, in my opinion, find truth in the current situation of American television, entertainment, and politics.  Perhaps the best way to approach their subject matter is through the joint implementation of Postman’s and Larkin’s points, which could help American culture in both respects.