Rhetorical Analysis Of Bowling For Columbine

938 Words4 Pages
Rhetorical Analysis of Bowling for Columbine Michael Moore’s film Bowling for Columbine examines the use of guns and related violence. Moore’s main argument in the film is that Americans are kept afraid of each other, which is what causes disproportionate gun violence, as compared with other nations. It is especially evident that the film is intended to appeal to an audience of individuals who are against guns or are advocates of gun control and safety. Moore’s appeal aims to take the audience through an exploration of the history of guns and violence, while stirring up the question of when young people commit violent acts, who should be blamed? Bowling for Columbine follows a rhetorical format that applies heavy use of ethos, pathos, and logos to form his message of a “trigger-happy” America. In the film, Moore employs various techniques of persuasion such as the use of ethos, pathos, and logos. One technique Moore uses is ethos, or credibility. Moore establishes his credibility throughout the movie by interviewing both sides of the gun issue. For example, he not only interviews victims of the Columbine massacre, but also NRA (National Rifle Association) President Charlton Heston. By doing this, Moore demonstrates that he is interested in getting to the bottom of the problem by getting all of the facts, not just the ones that support his argument the most. Another example of Moore’s use of ethos is appeal to authority. For instance, he interviews the principal at the Michigan elementary school, where a 6-year-old was shot to death by a classmate. He also interviews various law enforcement, such as a Sheriff of a Michigan county. A third example of apparent ethos is through appeal to celebrities. Moore interviews musician Marilyn Manson and “South Park” co-creator Matt Stone. He also uses a clip from one of comedian Chris Rock’s standup routines

More about Rhetorical Analysis Of Bowling For Columbine

Open Document