Analysis of "An Inconvinient Truth"
Rhetorical analysis of An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore
An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore is probably one of the most famous documentary films and it is enjoyed and respected all over the world. However the great appreciation of this film is based mostly on the message of the film and not on the way the message is presented. The bad rhetoric of this film, moreover, should not be ignored because it weakens Al Gore’s argument. It is clear to the viewer that Al Gore is trying to induce his audience to take action and respond to what he claims to be the apparent signs of global warming, his attempt of this, however, is not entirely successful. While Al Gore manages to establish a well constructed logos through convincing graphs and data, it is his attempt of establishing ethos and appealing to pathos that falls short. To convey my viewpoint further I will be exemplifying and amplifying some successful and unsuccessful attempts of addressing pathos and setting up ethos Al Gore makes.
Al Gore does manage to successfully appeal to pathos, the examples are few, though, and they all have the thing in common that they do not address any personal incidents of Al Gore’s. At the very start of the movie the viewer is met with an image of a rippling river and a sweet melody of nature sounds, a quiet piano and the soothing voice of Al Gore sounding: “You look at that river gently flowing by. You notice the leaves rustling with the wind. You hear the birds; you hear the tree frogs. In the distance you hear a cow. You feel the grass. The mud gives a little bit on the river bank.” This image that Al Gore paints for his viewers through both visual and auditory elements is relevant as it illustrates what will no longer be if no one responds to his message, furthermore it is convincing because no individual wants to see that image disappear.
On the other hand when Al Gore does address his own personal matters in attempt to establish pathos it does not work as well. It is unfocused
An Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore is probably one of the most famous documentary films and it is enjoyed and respected all over the world. However the great appreciation of this film is based mostly on the message of the film and not on the way the message is presented. The bad rhetoric of this film, moreover, should not be ignored because it weakens Al Gore’s argument. It is clear to the viewer that Al Gore is trying to induce his audience to take action and respond to what he claims to be the apparent signs of global warming, his attempt of this, however, is not entirely successful. While Al Gore manages to establish a well constructed logos through convincing graphs and data, it is his attempt of establishing ethos and appealing to pathos that falls short. To convey my viewpoint further I will be exemplifying and amplifying some successful and unsuccessful attempts of addressing pathos and setting up ethos Al Gore makes.
Al Gore does manage to successfully appeal to pathos, the examples are few, though, and they all have the thing in common that they do not address any personal incidents of Al Gore’s. At the very start of the movie the viewer is met with an image of a rippling river and a sweet melody of nature sounds, a quiet piano and the soothing voice of Al Gore sounding: “You look at that river gently flowing by. You notice the leaves rustling with the wind. You hear the birds; you hear the tree frogs. In the distance you hear a cow. You feel the grass. The mud gives a little bit on the river bank.” This image that Al Gore paints for his viewers through both visual and auditory elements is relevant as it illustrates what will no longer be if no one responds to his message, furthermore it is convincing because no individual wants to see that image disappear.
On the other hand when Al Gore does address his own personal matters in attempt to establish pathos it does not work as well. It is unfocused