What are you having problems with, specifically?

>>336
Rhetorical analysis essays

>>338
Because in AP classes they take rhetorical analysis seriously. Which is a catch-22 because rhetorical analysis is entirely conjecture and has no basis in factuality. Basically it means your teacher is an asshole who doesn't agree with your ideas.

>>339

>blame the teacher

Real helpful, Whoreos.

Rhetorical analysis is simply the breaking down of a text to find out why an author used the literary devices, syntax and vocabulary he did. Go paragraph by paragraph at first, and make notes on peculiar word choices, interesting metaphors, and sentence structure. Then explore your notes, and ask why. ex: Why would Marlowe have Edward the II be executed by means of a burning red hot poker, and why was he betrayed by a "mower"? (because he was a extremely open homosexual who was literally "reaped" for the gain of his ambitious court) Then find a theme, a thread that ties it together, and explain how the devices you found affect the theme. To continue my example, the execution and betrayal stress that the killing Edward was not necessarily out of the need to secure a strong royal figurehead, although that played a factor, but also out of some sense of homophobia and the usurpers personal power-mongering; this makes him a significantly more sympathetic character, highlighting the theme of the play: Edward, despite his status, is a stranger in his own court rejecting his own power.

I know I fucked up using a fictional(ish) play but I've had Marlowe on my mind lately.

>>405
I didn't say it was going to be helpful. The harsh reality is that the majority of rhet. analysis will never be verified by the author, so it is by definition, conjecture. It's easy to 'find' patterns which do not intentionally exist.
Sure, an explanation could be correct, but unless we have a direct conversation with the author, we cannot provide irrefutable evidence to prove the association.

Humans are imperfect by nature. Maybe OP is actually a lazy student who doesn't put much effort into their analysis. Maybe the teacher is biased and disagreed with OPs findings and made an unprofessional decision to give them a poor grade. Maybe OP just isn't cut out for AP English. We don't know the truth here.

Dumbledore didn't come across as gay in the Harry Potter books, and he wasn't revealed to be within any of the books. However the author stated afterward that he was, therefore it is true. She created the characters, she can do as she pleases with them, however unpopular the change may be.

The final word on the meaning of any work of art belongs exclusively to the creator of said work. Everything else is interpretation which may be be unique in every individual. Arguing over the true meaning has no value if either party refuses to accept that they do not know for a fact while neglecting to cite an explanation by the author. What is important is how you apply your perceived meaning to your life.

>>410

That was pretty scatterbrained, bro.

OP might be a lazy student (he is on an imageboard after all) or his teacher might suck, but rhetoric analysis isn't one of those 'just write your opinions' things. Well, it is, but it isn't that simple. You need evidence for your opinion, drawn from the text.

The problem with your example, Harry Potter, is twofold:

>modern teen literature
JK Rowling is still alive, and thus is fully capable of pandering to the gay community and eschewing what is actually on paper. But more importantly, it's also a book for kids. The themes are simple (family, independence, fighting for what's right) and the subtext is practically nonexistent.

>There's no commentary to proves/disprove.
Spencer, when he wrote the Fairy Queen, was working under the Virgin Queen's wing, so he obviously couldn't say anything bad about her. So the characters that are modeled after her are nearly perfect. But there are other characters in the play who carry some of Elizabeth's less endearing traits, so scholars can read the text and come away with a different understanding of what character symbolizes what, which in turn alters your perception of the motifs and themes in the series.

OP needs to dig around in the book and find out what is being said without being said. Read between the lines and all that.

but it doesnt really matter because ITS SUMMERTIME LOVING IN THE SUMMERTIME

just for the record, when dumbledore's homosexual nature was announced a lot of people were all "oh, that explains his relationship with grindelwald"

because that subtext was actually there

>>420

Oh, it was? Frankly, I stopped being a teen when the fifth book came out and never bother to finish the series. Oh well, guess you shouldn't assume things.

cool get bro