Analysis of Articles - Assessed Assignment

Analysis of Articles

Halloween Costumes – What not to wear written by Rhiannon Cosslett is a comment article on the traditions of Halloween and how society has gone wrong where costumes are concerned. It had a multitude of purposes, most importantly to advise and persuade as well as entertain. 

By the strapline of the article, an informal register is presented. For example, she uses the term ‘bye bye’ to simulate speech, and a neologism ‘Slutoween’. However the article varies between formal and informal depending on the piece of advice Cosslett is giving. When she suggests ‘dress your baby up’ the content isn’t to be taken seriously then later in the article she talks of the ‘Trayvon Martin’ murder and the ‘disrespect’ shown to other people’s cultures, which are serious matters. 

This lack of definition in register can make it hard to show the audience of the article.

Cosslett uses imperatives as subtitles, such as ‘Make sure you’re easily identifiable’, which is a suitable sentence mood for her ‘new rules’ of Halloween dressing. Imperatives can be forceful, reiterating her opinion on how people should dress. 

‘Don’t disrespect other people’s cultures’ is used as a persuasive technique. Within this section of the article she directly addresses the reader with the pronoun ‘you’. This singles out the reader, creating a more personal relationship between them and the writer. In some cases this can be inappropriate, yet in the context of culture, Cosslett sees no alternative. The use of the pronoun ‘we’ would be too vague and generalised. By using ‘you’ it shifts the blame from everyone to only the reader, making them feel solely guilty. 

Rhetorical questions, like ‘Can’t you just put down that native American headdress?’, are used for the same purpose.

In the last section of the article, Cosslett uses an anecdote about someone inappropriately dressing in ‘a maid’s costume’ bought from Ann Summers to add humour to her writing. The socially awkward situation of ‘repeated requests for vodka’ by drunken men sounds both embarrassing and exaggerated. This emotion is used to discourage the reader from making the same mistake, and gives the impression that by following the rules Cosslett has written situations like this could be avoided. 

A man’s perspective on why engagement rings are a joke written by Tauriq Moosa has similar purposes compared to Cosslett’s article. Primarily it is to persuade, secondarily to entertain. Though the topic is equally as serious as Halloween costumes, it is written in a much more formal manner, accompanied by the use of facts and figures to corroborate his opinion. 

The target audience of the comment article are men, specifically men in a ‘monogamous’ relationship. However, the title states ‘a man’s perspective’ which could be used to drawn the attention of females, so they may see the a man’s opinion of the subject of engagement rings. 

First of all, the picture that pairs with the article is one of Kim Kardashian showing off her engagement ring ‘on Instagram’. The article mentions Kim Kardashian nowhere, so is used to highlight the ridiculously of women needing to show off wedding rings to anyone who will listen. This is a stereotype of women used throughout the article, like in his concluding sentence when he says 'if you need a ring to prove your love, it's not your lack of a ring that's the problem.' This declarative gives his article a strong conclusion, invoking thought from the reader as a result. 

Within the second paragraph, Moosa uses a lot of base form adjectives to describe wedding rings, for example 'expensive', 'useless' and 'insulting'. All these words have negative connotations, which reinforce his idea that engagement rings are 'a joke'. These technique, is called 'rule of three' or 'triplets', when three words are put together for emphasis.

Moosa uses a strong metaphor, saying that 'We've turned into zombies' when it comes to love. The use of the word zombies suggests unconscious thought, that we just do things without thinking about them. It could also be used to symbolise disgust at the way people are spending so much money on rings and the 'heart-shaped horror' of Valentine's day. He also completes his paragraph negative by saying how it's hard to believe 'you haven't murdered each other', which correlates with the zombie imagery. It is also hyperbole about how married couples act around each other. This could be seen as an attempt at humour, but using 'murder' suggests a sincerity to his point.   

He tactically uses the the pronoun 'we' to suggest that everyone is to blame for the hyperinflation of the importance of engagement rinks. Similar to Cosslett's use, it shifts the blame from one reader to every reader. 

As the article progresses, Moosa uses facts and figures to illustrate his point on the expense of wedding rings, stating that 'nearly 12% of US couples spend more than $8000 for an engagement ring' The use of facts makes your opinion sound like fact and strengthens your argument as another source is used.

Both articles accomplish their purposes with the use of persuasive language features and audience inclusive techniques, such as rhetorical questions and direct address.