The Pleasures Of Eating Rhetorical Analysis

Aristotle once defined rhetoric as “an ability, in each particular case, to see the means of persuasion” or in a simpler term, “persuasion.” The use of rhetoric dates back centuries all the way to ancient Greece. Rhetoric is simply used for everyday communication. It can be defined by three concepts: Logos, Ethos, and Pathos. Logos, Ethos and Pathos is explained in simpler terms as text, author, and audience. These concepts are the back bone of modern day rhetoric and are used to strengthen a rhetorical situation or argument. Rhetoric in turn fuels the concept of critical thinking or analyzing that are useful tools to help determine the validity and soundness of Rhetorical situations. In a glance, critical thinking is the act of identifying
a purpose, question, information, inferences, assumptions, main concepts, and bias. Wendell Berry and his essay “the pleasures of eating” uses rhetoric in attempts to persuade his audience of the issues at hand concerning healthy eating and the decline of the American food industry. However, while Wendell Berry’s essay “The Pleasures of Eating” might appeal to the sympathetic well educated readers of Eco literacy’s website, I find Berry overgeneralizing his assumptions toward the “urban consumer” (1) which weakens his credibility. Wendell Berry’s essay “The Pleasures of Eating,” is a call to action directed towards the “Urban Consumer” (his intended audience) to “Eat Responsibly” (1) and to become more educated on the issue.
To those who share the same viewpoint as Berry will applause and commend this essay because it goes hand in hand with their sympathetic and bias views on the American food industry. However, the “Urban consumer”, which is his intended audience, will find the call to action that Wendell Berry so easy puts it a lot easier said than done. Berry’s approach to the issue puzzles me because he goes about in a way that is critical and extremely bias on the issue instead of being understanding and methodical about the problems his audience is facing along with failing to establish common ground with his intended audience. He criticizes before offering any solution to the problem. Throughout this essay, Wendell Berry will come across as illogical to the readers he attempts to persuade by overgeneralizing his assumptions and reasons in “The Pleasures of Eating” along with providing a lack of supportive evidence to solidify his assertions. This use of oversimplification broadens the categories within the essay which do not adequately qualify his ideas in a persuasive manner. This in turn distances and weakens Berry’s credibly to the reader. Therefore, he does an inadequate job in expressing his ideas and solutions to the “Urban
Consumer.” How is overgeneralization used in the essay? First off, Berry jumps right into his assumption within paragraphs three, four, five and six. He begins by stating that people have become “passive consumers” (3) who are oblivious to the fact of what they are eating. Berry challenges the competence of the “urban consumer” for buying “without protest” (3) of the quality or history of the food claiming that the consumer lacks understanding of the severity for the quality of the food product. In paragraph four, Berry continues to make blatant assumptions towards the “urban consumer” concerning their lack of knowledge. He states that people are incompetent in understanding “what knowledge and skills are involved in farming” (4) and adding that food to them is “an abstract idea.” (4) In paragraph five, Wendell continues to rebuke in a strong tone that “patrons of the entertainment industry have become more passively dependent on commercial suppliers” (5) again stating that consumers have become “uncritical and dependent” (5) on what they eat. Finally, in paragraph six, Wendell takes another hard swing by stating that “the industrial eater is in fact, one who does not know that eating is an agricultural act. (6)” He accuses the “industrial eater” for losing the connection between food and the land. Berry then moves to the criticism of the food industry. “The overriding concerns are not quality and health, but volume and price.” (12) Given these assumptions, Berry’s attitude towards the “urban consumer” and the “American food” industry show that he lacks understanding on how to accommodate and persuade a wavering audience. On this controversial subject, Berry’s intended audience will find his claims lacking of evidence which in turn give Wendell Berry the effect of talking to a brick wall. In other words, this tactic is ineffective in convincing his audience into reversing their eating habits as consumers. They simply need hard evidence in order to not question the overgeneralization that Berry commits. This, however, is not the case with the structure and format of “The Pleasures of Eating.” Instead, this essay takes a different approach to problem solving that is quite radical and unnecessary. Examples of the notorious overgeneralization demonstrated in “The pleasures of Eating” is mostly found in paragraphs ten and eleven. In this section of the essay, Berry reverts from the judgement of the consumer back to the food industry by criminalizing their treatments of plants and animals in a general manner. Wendell points out that the food we are eating “came from a steer who spent much of its life standing deep in his own excrement in a feedlot, helping to pollute local streams.” (10) This is a prime example of overgeneralization because he makes no mention or examples of what food companies or where he has seen such scenes. He continues in later statements of chemicals being added to the land and immoral treatment of animals and assumes that the main goals of the food industry are not “quality and health, but volume and price. (11)” he continues by saying that “The food is produced by any means or any shortcuts that will increase profits” (11) It is common sense to assume that the things do happen, but Wendell Berry makes little effort to provide qualifying evidence to his overgeneralized claims.
With all the underlying evidence, a continuing pattern is formed by overgeneralization on Berry’s part.
He provides little to no solid evidence to back up these straightforward yet discriminating assumptions which in turn weaken the credibility and persuasiveness Berry is trying to achieve. With the examples above, the condescending tone and excessive use of overgeneralization is apparent throughout. His explanations are way too broad and will be considered to be farfetched from the views of his intended audience. His constant use of criticism and overgeneralization mainly found in the middle of his essay diverts the intended audience away from his persuasion which in turn automatically diversifies his credibility as a writer. The constant use of overgeneralization overpowered the main point of “The Pleasures of Eating.”
The overall purpose of “The Pleasures of Eating” was to persuade its targeted audience, “urban consumer” to eat healthier, but instead he fails to persuade the intended wavering audience who he describes as the “Urban consumer” due to his constant use of overgeneralization. Wendell Berry does however appeal to his sympathetic audience who are most likely supporters of the Ecoliteracy website who share his same ideas. Wendell Berry let’s his bias’s consume his writing technique to the point where it’s use of persuasion is little to
none.
In conclusion, Wendell Berry’s essay “The Pleasures of Eating” fails to drive it’s use of persuasion home due to its excessive use of overgeneralization and lack of evidence. These logical fallacies succeed in alienating and objectifying the intended audience to the point of disbelief. Wendell Berry lets his strong bias cloud the knowledge of understanding his audience and he in turn loses traction among his readers.