What Makes a Good Paper

In order to write a good paper, a writer must be able to do a number of things. He/she should be able to correctly utilize principles of rhetoric—primarily invention, arrangement, and style. Certain strategies must also be used to make certain parts of the paper--such as titles, introductions, and conclusions--effective to the reader.

The invention of an argument is the first step in writing an effective paper. There are a number of methods to develop ideas for an argument, such as trying to define something or trying to compare it to something similar or contrasting. After invention, arrangement needs to be considered because the way the reader interprets what is written depends on how it is presented. In a paper, this generally means the way a paper is structured, such as chronologically or thematically. Finally, style is important in the process of writing a paper. Style is how a writer expresses his/her idea to the audience and involves choosing certain expressions for an argument. A writer’s style is often referred to as his/her persona. It becomes apparent through the writer’s use of metaphors, imagery and similar writing tools.

The title of the paper acts as a frame to the argument of the paper; it can show what the argument is about as well as use some of the writer’s rhetoric to draw in a reader. The introduction, like the title, is a place to use rhetoric to draw the reader in further. It offers insight into the author’s persona to characterize the paper. It should also introduce the reader to the subject at hand. The conclusion at the end of the paper is the final way to leave the reader with a certain impression about the argument the paper has made. It should refer to an earlier statement or quotation to leave an impression, not list the main points made in the paper.

These are the ways to write an effective paper that will draw in, hook, and convince the reader of the author’s argument.

Cartoon

Mike Keefe regularly draws cartoons that comment on current events and politics. This cartoon by Mike Keefe addresses the proposal to pay college football players. Paying the athletes would hopefully discourage them from taking cash incentives from scouts, keeping them at college earning their degree while playing, but many are opposed to the movement.

In Keefe's cartoon, a college football player is running to catch a bag of money, not a football, and audience members speculate that there is no difference between college football play and professional football play. There is no specific references to certain people or places made; it is a college player at a college game to be representative of all of college football.

The audience for this cartoon is American football fans. Some are fans of professional football, others fans of college football. The primary reason for people liking college football more than professional is that the athletes play with for their love of the game, whereas the professional athletes play for their salaries, and the  difference in the level of energy and play is evident on the field.

The cartoon is arguing that paying college players will make the game about money, not the game, and will remove exactly what makes college football unique and, as many would argue, better than the NFL. Keefe has one audience member allude to a classic football fan question by asking, "Which do you like best--college football or the pros?" This represents how the world of football ought to be, with the professional and college teams being different and the fans being able to watch either or both. The man who responds saying "What's the difference?" represents a future football fan if college players are paid. The second fan is ignorant college football as it is now.

The cartoon relies on both the visual and verbal. While the visual alone could certainly make its own point, the verbal emphasizes the negative change that would come from the visual aspect actually happening. The player's face is even desperate in his chase of the money bag, displaying that he is motivated purely by the money.

The tone of the cartoon is somewhat bitter and nostalgic, encouraging the reader to decide if he/she really wants college football to become all about the money.

Rhetoric

I see examples of rhetoric nearly everywhere I go. I was once in an airport convenience store and saw gum that was in an orange and pink pack. I immediately thought of going to Dunkin Donuts with my friends. It took me a few seconds to realize that this was because the gum used the same colors that Dunkin Donuts uses. Without me even knowing it, I associated those colors with Dunkin runs with my friends.

I see rhetoric every day in advertisements. Advertisements targeted at people like me are the ones I see the most because advertising agencies know where to find people like me. I find the most successful advertisements are ones that are humorous. An example is Old Spice Guy advertisements, which, because of their humor, actually have people gladly watching them and sharing them.

Even walking around the campus here at Clemson I see rhetoric. Not only are half of the students wearing orange on any given day, but there are many subtle uses of the Clemson's popular colors throughout the campus. I often do not see them at first. One of my classes actually is actually in a room with orange and purple walls, which I did not realize until the end of my first period there. The gardens around campus are planted with flowers, a vast majority of which are orange or purple.