Rhetorical Analysis

In Derek D. Miller’s essay on Kurt Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle, the author uses the novel to show how Vonnegut’s work is an example of the post-modern aesthetic http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/512/postmodernism-in-vonneguts-cats-cradle. Miller attempts to illustrate the ways in which Vonnegut presents the dystopic world of Cat’s Cradle as one of disorder and contradictions, two ideas that post-modernist writers emphasize.

The essay’s structure is one that most high-school students are taught: the topic sentence states the main idea of the paragraph, and he supports his topic sentences using evidence from the book. The main focus of this piece is postmodernism and how it connects directly to Kurt Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle.  This is not a controversial topic. He uses many quotes from the text to prove his thesis as well as quotes from Powell. This evidence is fairly important to prove his thesis because it accents Vonnegut’s dark sense of humor regarding religion and the meaning of life. This was a good move on Miller’s part because nothing can really persuade an audience of an author’s point of view other than a direct quote from that author’s work. The topics he quoted were good because they had a direct correlation between Vonnegut and post-modernism. He wrote about science and destruction which are key components in post-modernism. Although his topics were good, his introduction and his first body paragraph seemed redundant. Miller gives examples of post-modernist themes, but never explains why they relate to post-modernism. It would have been more helpful for his audience to explain that post-modernism was a reaction to modernism and a sense of order. A better and more detailed explanation of post-modernism is needed in a piece like this, but his was very drawn-out and kind of ambiguous to those who do not know much about post-modernism.                                       

The transitions were effective. Miller started each body paragraph stating the exact topic to be discussed. His content was good and his diction related well to the novel because Vonnegut uses casual jargon in Cat’s Cradle  and Miller analyzes the work with equally straight-forward language, which I think fits this essay well. He uses many specialized terms in the essay such as: Bokonism and Ice-nine, but never forgets to define the terms, so no one feels alienated. Miller does not utilize any figurative language, which fits this essay because of the casual nature of the writing. 

Having read Cat’s Cradle, I don’t think Miller is an authority on the text. His failure to adequately explain a quote makes me doubt his knowledge of the book. His quotes seemed like fillers instead of vital evidence to support his thesis. The quotes felt random as though they were picked out of a hat, making Miller less credible.

I learned a few useful things a from this essay. Miller’s focus on content is more sophisticated than most high-school writing. I also thought his topic sentences were strong. However, I didn’t think his essay had personality, which does not mesh well with Vonnegut’s creative style.