A Modern Day Rhetorician

           

 The creative style is known for many things, but perhaps the most popular is its heavy use of rhetorical devices.  Jon Acuff, a speaker, author, and blogger, is well acquainted with the creative style.  He also understands quite necessarily that certain tools are required if a successful blog post is to be created.  Acuff writes many blog entries, but the one analyzed for this critique was published on October 28, 2013 and entitled, “The #1 word that kills dreams.” Acuff strategically and skillfully uses multiple rhetorical devices to keep his readers attentive, interested, and to drive home a point that they will not forget anytime soon.

            Jon Acuff is a seasoned writer and inspirational speaker.  He has published four books and is a New York Times bestselling author, as well as speaking at hundreds of colleges, conferences, churches, and companies.  He became popular after his first book and subsequent blog, “Stuff Christians Like.”  Identifying himself as Christian, Acuff believes it is important to find humor in one’s life.

His more recent books relate to motivation, such as his latest entitled, “Start: Punch Fear in the Face, Escape Average & Do Work that Matters.”  He has garnered many followers and fans through Twitter (200,000 followers) and his blog, which is read by over 4 million people.  Such a wide net obviously includes a diverse range of people.  There are Christians, people who love satire, people who enjoy his sense of humor, people who feel motivated by his posts, a mix of any of these (since none are exclusive) and infinitely more types of people who would read his blog.  In general, it is safe to assume that whoever is reading Acuff’s blog is looking for an entertaining, memorable, and motivational note-worthy entry.

They are also looking for positive affirmation.  Acuff is not only motivational, but also optimistic.  He is able to lighten a day through his words, while also providing thought-provoking social commentary.  The difference between Acuff’s writing and those of others is that it is not nearly as negative.  He recognizes the problems of the world, as do his readers, but instead of simply complaining about them he provides solutions, or at least provides a way of looking at the world that is not all doom and gloom. 

The majority of the people who read Acuff then, no matter their nationality, religion, or political views, are those who wish to do something to positively change the world.  They recognize there are problems, but they also recognize there is hope.  Additionally, they appreciate that there is always something to laugh about, even if it is at oneself.  With this audience in mind, Acuff uses several rhetorical devices to successfully reach them.

Two of the most frequently used rhetorical devices, and both used by Acuff, are those of metaphor and parenthesis.  A metaphor is referring to something as if it were something else, making an implicit comparison.  In Acuff’s blog he writes, “Fear is a powerful poison but it’s not the most dangerous toxin when it comes to dreaming.”  Acuff makes a comparison between fear and a poison or a toxin.  While many might agree with this metaphor, it is clearly not literal and makes good use of the rhetorical device. 

Acuff uses metaphor with purpose and intention.  He hopes to enliven the imagination of his readers and keep things interesting.  He may be a blogger, but he is also an entertainer.  It is his job to write interesting and entertaining blog posts.  To accomplish this objective he must use metaphors, and similar rhetorical devices, to keep the post exciting and compelling.  Metaphors also help people relate to the writing, and look at the concept from a different perspective, perhaps not associating the two items being compared before.

Parenthesis is the inserting of an aside into the middle of a sentence or string of sentences.  It is a very natural conversational thing to do.  When people are talking they often - at least it seems often - insert an aside into a sentence.  It makes the writing feel much more informal and spoken, instead of stoic and non-relatable.  Acuff uses parenthesis in the following section: “If we said, ‘I will never chase my dream’ the finality of that would shame us into action.  But we don’t, instead we believe the lie of someday. (Steven Pressfield writes brilliantly about this very thing in The War of Art.).”

            Acuff brilliantly combines metaphor with auxesis simultaneously.  He calls the word he keeps referring to a “dragon” and a “demon lurking just outside your door.”  In addition to being metaphor, the use of this language can also be termed auxesis.  Auxesis is when the importance of something is magnified by referring to it with a disproportionate name.  In this case it is referring to the word “someday” as a dragon and demon.  By exaggerating the comparison Acuff draws significant attention to the word, which helps the reader focus.  This tactic is in line with Acuff’s mission of making the reader remember the blog post as much as possible, as well as his other task of keeping the reader entertained and interesting.

            When Acuff asks the questions, “What dragon is this?  What demon lurking just outside your door?” he accomplishes several things.  First, he maintains the curiosity and interest of the reader.  The demographics of the particular reader matter little.  When questions like this are raised most people are thinking to themselves, “Well, what is it?  What IS the dragon?  What IS the demon?  Just tell me already!”  The use of questions stimulates the reader.  It is doubtful that any reader of the blog was wondering what the demon was after Acuff started talking about a special word, but they were most likely curious as to what the word itself was.  In a fashion that is natural and comfortable, Acuff proceeds to immediately answer.  The sentence following the two questions reads, “It’s the word ‘someday.’”

            Asking questions and then proceeding to answer them is the rhetorical device known as hypophora.  As already explained, this device brings about a more conversational flavor while stimulating curiosity and keeping the reader interested.  You may already be noticing a few patterns amongst the rhetorical devices Acuff used.  Most of them directly relate to keeping the audience captivated, entertained, and/or making the writing memorable.

            Repeating the last word or words of a sentence at or near the beginning of the next sentence can help the reader focus by calling attention to that specific word.  By calling attention to a specific word, it is easy for the reader to acknowledge the word as being an important idea - something they should pay attention to and remember.  The reader’s continuity of thought is maintained with the similar words being reused, and the concept is reinforced by this rhetorical tool known as anadiplosis.  Like the previously mentioned devices, Acuff uses anadiplosis to keep his readers focused and following along with the blog.  It is his intention to have his entire blog post read and remembered, and to do that he must help the readers along so they remember the main idea and do not fall off the track.  During his post, his use of anadiplosis can be seen in the following: “It’s the word ‘someday.’ Someday is where most of us store our dreams.”  Clearly, Acuff is emphasizing “someday,” which makes sense since the entire blog post is about “someday.”  After all, it is a demonic dragon or something of similar comparison.

            While Acuff continues to use several other rhetorical devices, the final one that will be analyzed for this critique will be his use of anaphora.  Anaphora is repeating a word or words at the beginning of successive phrases, clauses or sentences.  Acuff drives home the idea of “someday” by repeating it over and over: “It’s the word ‘someday.’ Someday is where most of us store our dreams.  Someday I will write a book.  Someday I will start a business.  Someday I will ask her out.  Someday I will let him know how I really feel.  Someday I will go on that trip.”

            While anaphora can be an aggressive device, it certainly grabs the reader’s attention by creating a hammering effect.  Grabbing the reader’s attention is precisely what Acuff is striving for in this blog post.

            Although Acuff uses a wide variety of rhetorical devices during the blog post, once analyzed a few patterns start to appear.  Almost all of the devices he uses help to capture the attention of whoever is reading the blog, and drive home the main idea.  Repetition is key, as is making the post sound like a casual and natural conversation the reader is having with a friend.  This natural and repetitive nature is used for the purpose of making the blog post memorable.  Acuff wants readers to remember his post about “someday.”  To make that happen he must make the post easy to follow along with (conversational) and memorable (repetitive, reinforcing).

            The other obvious pattern that arises through analysis is Acuff’s attempts to make his writing entertaining.  By asking questions and then immediately answering them, exaggerating words and their importance (referring to a word as a dragon/demon), and making eyebrow-raising metaphors Acuff creates a piece of writing that is driven by interest and entertainment.  Acuff may be a blogger who is simply trying to do his part to add good in the world, but in order to remain popular he must write pieces that keep readers’ interest.  He is, in effect, an entertainer.

One may wonder how a blogger is able to so expertly interweave his text with classic rhetoric.  The answer is simple: Acuff is an orator.  Just as the classic rhetoricians honed their skills through oral presentation, Acuff has traveled the country giving speeches to a wide variety of audiences.  To be a successful speaker he has to constantly adapt and change for those he is speaking to, and can easily tell whether he is successful or not since the faces of those he is speaking to say it all.

The devices Acuff has learned while speaking, whether unconscious or not, are used to keep the piece entertaining and informal.  Acuff’s writing would certainly be less entertaining if the devices were not used, and if the creative elements were removed.  Contemplating the use of so many devices in so short a blog causes one to wonder whether these types of devices are necessary for the success of a blog.

In this age of the Internet, social media, and instant gratification it is absolutely necessary to keep the attention of one’s audience.  There are a limitless amount of potential distractions for every reader, so how can Acuff keep them reading his blog instead of others?  He is a story teller.

The way Acuff writes could easily be understood as a transcription of a conversation.  While one reads his words it is easy to imagine sitting across from him at a coffee table or listening to him in an auditorium.  This relaxing, conversational style creates an element of humanness that is often so lacking in the current digital world.

Perhaps the excitement of the digital age is starting to wear off.  Perhaps people are starting to realize there is a deep longing for personal interaction.  Reading Acuff’s blog does not meet these needs.  But his style of conversational writing paired with the ability to feel like a part of the conversation by being able to post comments and share with friends creates an illusion that a dialogue is actually taking place.

            The success of a blog does not depend solely on the use of rhetorical devices or making it sound informal.  The success of a blog is dependent on the ability of making the reader feel human, to make the reader feel connected with other readers and with the world around them.  One way to achieve this humanness is through a heavy use of rhetorical devices that lend themselves to conversational flow.  This type of rhetorical usage comes naturally to trained and gifted orators, and it just so happens that Jon Acuff is a trained and gifted orator.

-M.C. Reynolds

A Guide in Plain Style

The 2003 book Change of Heart: The Bodhisattva Peace Training of Chagdud Tulku compiled and edited by Lama Shenpen Drolma, and published by Padma Publishing, is a book for those wishing to change their hearts, minds, and the world. It is intended as a guide for the transformation of one’s life and that of others, which can ultimately lead to contentment and peace. A high school English teacher of mine suggested I read this book, as an interest in religious studies, particularly Buddhism, and meditation had sparked in me. This book is written at a 9.9 grade level and is therefore a generally reader-friendly read, perhaps more so for those at a high school reading level and above. Since this book functions as a guide or manual for peace training and meditation based practice, several plain style rhetorical devices are utilized. Devices such as exemplum, meaning a specific or concrete example is provided to further explain the text’s implications, distinctio, or providing the meanings of specific words to prevent ambiguity, and conduplicatio, or repeating a key word from a preceding sentence near the beginning of the next sentence or paragraph. These devices provide for a clear, accessible, and fairly smooth reading of the text. The significance we can formulate then is that the compiler aims to provide a practical reading of peace training while simultaneously taking into account the ethical implications of her language use.

Throughout the excerpt I have chosen from the text, the compiler appears to continually and conscientiously guide the reader through understanding what peace training consists of as if to ensure the reader that they will be able to successfully practice what is put forth. The compiler does this by using inclusive language, such as the word “we,” along with the clear consideration of “others.” A sensitive, sensible tone is prompted in return. This is exemplified in the following sentences:

We begin with the sincere wish to benefit others as much as ourselves. Recognizing that they want to be free of suffering and find happiness as much as we do, we seek ways of caring equally and simultaneously for ourselves and others. Over time, we expand the scope of our motivation, increasingly placing others’ needs before our own. (Drolma 5)

            Chagdud Tulku was a Tibetan meditation master who ordained Lama Shenpen Drolma as a lama in 1996. Lama Shenpen Drolma collaborated with Chagdud Tulku on several books and eventually compiled his teachings into the book I am now discussing. This information provides an outlook on the credibility of the editor, Lama Shenpen Drolma, and the person, Chagdud Tulku, she has drawn and compiled the spiritual practice from. These people can be trusted by those, especially in South America, who have experienced extreme corruption and violence. It is also tailored to just about anyone who wishes to find peace and contentment in their life, as I mentioned in the beginning of this writing.

Many of Chagdud Tulku’s teachings took place in various places around South America and the United States. The audience that attended his oral deliveries mainly consisted of students as bodhisattva’s or people who are motivated by a great sense of compassion that wish to attain Buddhahood. The term bodhisattva is also clarified further later on in this paper. The audience for the book however, likely consists of a wide range of people from a wide range of places in the world afflicted by the world’s seeming chaos. These people also consist of those who simply wish to change their hearts and minds for the sake of peace and contentment.

Focusing on the compilation of this text, we take into consideration the factors that went into the arrangement, which involved taking oral delivery and transferring the information into a written delivery. In doing so, I suspect the compiler must have had to condense much of what was delivered orally, as Chagdud Tulku must have communicated his practice many times equaling many hours of advice. This required the gathering of ideas communicated orally and in turn, caused an appropriation or setting apart to occur in the process of writing these ideas down in a clear, concise manner. In effect, the ideas most likely weren’t changed, but the overall delivery of the product could have been affected. For example, we don’t get to hear Chagdud Tulku’s voice or inflection of his words and the structure of his sentences. We instead read what Lama Shenpen Drolma has gathered and written of what Chagdud Tulku has spoken. This could result in the emphasizing or de-emphasizing of certain phrases or ideas reformulated in the text. Accordingly, the reader’s reaction to the teaching, compared to the attendees’ reaction, could be affected as well. In example, according to his students, Chagdud Tulku in his oral teachings stressed the idea that the bodhisattva students be compassionately motivated when spiritually practicing, whereas Lama Shenpen Drolma perhaps went so far as to de-emphasize that idea by emphasizing the idea that the reader simply focus on practice and usage of the spiritual methods provided in the book. This could be due to the fact that Lama Shenpen Drolma wished to make the book accessible to an audience of more variety than just Chagdud Tulku’s students.

            The guide is written concisely, yet not oversimplified to the extent that the reader is either offended or bored by the reading. Again, certain rhetorical devices mediate the concision. An example of exemplum is present, “Like mending a hole in our pants by sewing on a patch, we must use the methods of the spiritual path to stitch our understanding to the fabric of being” (Drolma 4). The compiler uses metaphor within a concrete example in this case to further explain the text’s implications. Distinctio is also found in the writing, “Bodhi refers to wisdom mind, which is completely selfless. Sattva can be translated as “hero” (Drolma 5). The compiler clearly provides the meaning so as to ward off any ambiguity that might initially be present when referring to the term “bodhisattva.” Conduplicatio is also applied:

We cultivate boundless, unbiased compassion—not just for our children, friends, parents or associates, but for all beings alike, without preference.

Such compassion—the desire to alleviate the suffering of all beings equally—is part of the meaning of the Sanskrit term “bodhitsattva.” (Drolma 5)

In this case, the key word “compassion” is repeated in close proximity.

            After an in depth look at the way rhetorical devices, inclusive language and gentle guidance are employed, the cultural function of the text becomes clearer. Both Chagdud Tulku and Lama Shenpen Drolma intend to make an impact on the lives of those struggling with corruption and violence, as well as on those who simply wish to find peace in what at times seems to be an ever more chaotic world. The desired outcome is to create a more peaceful outlook on life, living and loving across a plane of diverse beings. The desired outcome is given in the following sentences:

If we are to fulfill the short-term goal of resolving conflict, and the ultimate goal of eliminating all our flaws and making evident our positive qualities, we must rely on spiritual methods. Intellectual understanding alone will not make possible the profound inner peace that can influence others. (Drolma 4)

            In conclusion, the use of the rhetorical devices I mentioned above, inclusive language and gentle guidance create a safe space for a diverse set of readers to explore the potential of peacekeeping that they possess. To further this conversation, I would like to take into account the question of whether or not this kind of guidance book would be an acceptable classroom tool used for teaching and practicing peace not just in South America, but in the United States as well.

-Mariah

A Creative Style Critique of Pale Fire

The 1962 book Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov, published by Alfred A. Knopf, a division of Random House, Inc., is a novel presented as a 999-line poem by the name of “Pale Fire” written by the fictional character, John Shade. The poem is also commented on or narrated by another fictional character, Charles Kinbote, Shade’s neighbor, who is more or less concerned with himself rather than with what John Shade has written. Assumingly, to capture the complexities of experiences of the characters, the novel is known to be a form of metafiction, fiction in which the author self-consciously alludes to the fiction of the work by parting from conventions of the novel. The story essentially narrates the process of the creation of the poem.  I stumbled upon this book when looking for excerpts of experimental fiction. The book is an interestingly unparalleled read due to its supposed extensive allusions and references to other forms of literature. The book has even been criticized as ‘unreadable’ by the U.S. author Dwight MacDonald. I have chosen to critique an excerpt of it though, because it provides a great example of some of the rhetorical devices used in creative writing.

            The audience this book is directed at is an audience exploring experimental, postmodern, or metafiction. The book provides a great foundation for the interplay of references, allusions, and creative rhetorical device usage. The excerpt I chose from the book is considered to be a fairly easy read, rated a 7.7 grade level. However, the references involved change the entire pace of the reading of the book, making it much harder to actually understand.

            Throughout the writing that I have analyzed, Canto 1, which explores the author’s encounters with death, the author uses many creative rhetorical devices such as onomatopoeia, a word that imitates the sound it makes, epizeuxis, repeating a word or phrase immediately after saying it, personification, giving human characteristics to something not human, and a clarifying device, distinctio, giving the specific meaning of the word to prevent ambiguity. In the first line of the first stanza on the page of the passage I have chosen from the book, the author writes out the sound that a mockingbird makes, “To-wee, to-wee; then rasping out: come here” (27). This is a clear example of onomatopoeia, “to-wee”, and following, an example of personification when the bird is mentioned to have rasped out “come here”. The next line in the first stanza of the page furthers the personification, “Come here, come herrr’; flirting her tail aloft,” (27). Both what the mockingbird is supposedly saying, along with the fact that her tail is “flirting” are examples of personification. The repetition of the phrase “come here” is also known as epizeuxis, again the repeating of a word or phrase immediately after stating it. The remainder of the stanza continues with end rhyme, as do the rest of the stanzas in the excerpt I have chosen. The second stanza of the excerpt I have chosen to analyze explains the author’s experience with death, “I was an infant when my parents died…And ‘cancer of the pancreas’ to her” (27).

            In the third stanza, the author utilizes a clarifying rhetorical device most used in the plain style of writing, distinctio, in a way that seems to be clarifying what a particular word means, but instead I notice he has used his definition as a way to explain what the word does. The following sentence, “A preterist: one who collects cold nests”, defines what a “preterist” does rather than what a “preterist” is, because a preterist according to Dictionary.com is a person who maintains that the prophecies in the Apocalypse have been fulfilled. Therefore, I think that the author is saying that this person who believes the prophecies of the Apocalypse have been fulfilled collects empty nests, perhaps referring to the prophecy of the Apocalypse that nothing living on earth will be saved and it will die. The reason I think this is because of the previous stanza mentioning the death of his parents, as well as the rest of the current stanza mentioning that he is going to pray for everybody to be well “I listened to the buzz downstairs and prayed/For everybody to be always well,” (27). So, as we can see the writing of this poem includes references such as the reference I just discussed and is most equivalent to an activity of hunting, finding, and educationally guessing what the lines are referring too. This could be fun or it could be a chore. Whichever it might be, the author clearly has a dense background of reading, studying, and condensing a lot of that information into one piece where it could potentially be understood as a linear story. My question then is, could this also be considered an esoteric piece of writing due to the nature of the references by the author? Or could many people relate on the same level if they have come across the information alluded in their time as well? Esoteric meaning understood or meant for a select few who have special knowledge or interest. If so, who might the select few, the people who understand the references, of the audience be?

            My response to this is that perhaps those who are sincerely interested in uncovering the mysteries of the book are those who might be able to understand what Nabokov is getting at. There exist many interpretations of Nabokov’s book, one in particular by Brian Boyd, who suggests a different take on the number of narrator’s involved in the book’s telling. The different take involves the idea that a reader should be able to discover many things about the book in a first reading and discover even more things about the book by following a series of clues carefully placed by Nabokov the second time around. He even suggest the reader read the book a few more times around to see the clues take effect. This is just one interpretation however, and it may even seem to narrow the audience just a bit more. Either way, Boyd suggests that a person need to read the book several times to fully understand the references involved.

            A way I like to look at this issue however is through the idea that perhaps the author wasn’t exactly interested in who understood the book, but rather that he could comfortably write a message, even if that meant it would be reasonably hidden from the reader. This may be the circumstance for many authors and artists, but in this case, the intentions may be different. The intentions of Nabokov may be that he recognizes that he is intelligent in a series of ways; through science, literature, philosophy, etc. Using those areas of intelligence, he possibly could have aimed to integrate his ideas into this book in a uniquely aesthetic, experimental way that still satisfied the conditions of presenting a sensitive subject. Therefore, it seems that any person could pick this book up and read it, assuming they are free to do so.

What separates just any person from the select few of this apparently esoteric work though is the curiosity that arises when the reader picks up on the few clues that suggest what Nabokov is really presenting. The clues or ideas presented may in effect, make the reader uncomfortable, but it is the reader’s willingness to experience this discomfort and explore their own uneasiness that helps them to further understand the text. I am not denying the idea however, that the reader may also have to be fairly intelligent of their own accord, along with being a kind of literary critic, having read and analyzed at least a few other literary works. Though the book may have acquired many interpretations, only a select few will most likely truly understand its nature; a select few that particularly include those willing to read the book more than twice.

-          Mariah

Plain Game: Simple Instructions for a Complex Sport

           The concept of golf is fairly simple. Start from the tee-box, and get your ball into the hole on the green. It may sound like an easy task, but the attests of countless amateur golfers prove that to be false. Part of the reason why golf is so challenging is because there are so many aspects of the swing that need to be carefully coordinated and sequenced in order to make an effective pass at the ball. Even the rules of golf are extensive and need thorough consideration. Because the game of golf is so complex and difficult to pick up in a short amount of time, I thought it would be interesting to look more closely at an online golf “cheat sheet” guide from Dummies.com (http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/golf-for-dummies-cheat-sheet.html), the well-known black and yellow company that makes the … For Dummies book series.

The first section of the instructional “cheat sheet” claims,

Even if you’re new to golf, you can still look and act like you know what you’re doing. Making sure you have the right equipment in your bag and making intelligent decisions about which club to use can get you off to a great start. Offer to keep score and propose a couple of fun bets, and you can really impress your fellow golfers, no matter how long they’ve been playing the game.

The introduction is written in very simple, easy to read language; clearly prompting an instructional atmosphere trough implementation of plain style. This allows for readers to feel like the information they are about to read will be easy to follow, and ultimately improve their game, even if they are new to the sport. Essentially, by only reading the introduction of the “cheat sheet” the reader will feel confident that they will learn techniques that will advance their ability to play the game.

            One problem that I have with this “cheat sheet” is the fact that it claims new golfers will learn how to look like they know what they are doing. Usually newcomers to the game do not have the prettiest swing, which results in high scores and slow play; and most experienced golfers do not enjoy slow play, especially when one player in the group is hacking all over the course. Learning how to play quickly and hit effective shots takes a lot of time and practice; it cannot be learned from a “cheat sheet” or any other method besides practice and repetition. I think that the façade of a simple game that it easy to pick up creates false hope and misinforms readers, planting an inaccurate image of the sport within their heads. Plain style could still be used to describe the game quickly, but I believe that there should be some sort of disclaimer stating that there is much more to being a good golfer than what is on the “cheat sheet”.

            Another problem I have with the “cheat sheet” is the content. The sub-topics within the guide include: knowing which club to use, “essential” items to carry in your golf bag, different scoring names, how to assess penalties (briefly), and how to make golf bets. There isn’t even any indication of the golf swing or how to conduct oneself on the course, and yet the “cheat sheet” is claiming that it will teach the reader to look like they know what they are doing, even impressing their experienced friends.

Many golfers would agree that knowing the proper terms and having the right items in your bag are no brainers, not impressive feats. What would really impress an experienced golfer is a new player with a proper swing that is consistent and fundamental. The guide should have included some quick tips to keep in mind so that people trying to learn how to improve their swing would have something to base their game off of.

            Making a complex sport seem easy is no simple task. But using the proper presentation of information can make all the difference. Effective use of the plain style takes the pressure of learning a seemingly impossible game, and makes it far less intimidating. Even though the “cheat sheet” has some flaws, it still does a good job of being inviting to new players, and making them feel welcome. I believe that with a brief inclusion of how a fundamental swing should be conducted, the novice golfer might actually be able to benefit by reading this “cheat sheet”.

 

-M. Walters

 

Strange and Plain: A Plain Style Critique

 AJ Donaldson

            In the news reporting industry, there are often times stories so strange and obscure they require the plainest language in order to be clearly reported.  A prime example of this type of story would be Deadspin.com’s breaking of former Notre Dame linebacker Manti Te’o’s fake online girlfriend.  As you read that last sentence, it probably made you say, “Wait, what? A fake online girlfriend?”  Right now, we know that we are dealing with a complex, strange news story. 

            Before I discuss the effects of the plain language used in the article, a little background information on what actually happened would be helpful.  Manti Te’o played middle linebacker for the University of Notre Dame.  He allegedly met a girl after a game against Stanford in 2009 and continued an online relationship until it was reported that the girl had died in 2012.  Long story short, someone was pretending to be this girl and communicating with Te’o via social media and phone messages, but in reality, the girl did not exist.  It was a hoax.  This is a very strange and twisted story, and it requires some careful, plain language in order to be effectively reported.  I feel like Deadspin did a very good job of clearly mapping out what happened. 

            When I put this story in the readability calculator, the following results showed up:

Readability Formula	Score
Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease	63.2

Readability Formula	Grade
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level	8.1
Gunning-Fog Score	9.1
Coleman-Liau Index	10.4
SMOG Index	7.9
Automated Readability Index	6.8
Average Grade Level	8.5

            According to this analysis, this is a very readable text.  The average eighth grade student could read this text and make sense of it.  It is important for Deadspin to make this article easily readable, because it is such a strange story.  How many times have you heard of a big-name athlete having an online girlfriend who turned out to be fake?  Given the analysis here, Deadspin did an admirable job in making the article very readable.

            Within the text, many elements of the plain style are present.  Here is a sample from the text:

Manti Te'o did lose his grandmother this past fall. Annette Santiago died on Sept. 11, 2012, at the age of 72, according to Social Security Administration records in Nexis. But there is no SSA record there of the death of Lennay Marie Kekua, that day or any other. Her passing, recounted so many times in the national media, produces no obituary or funeral announcement in Nexis, and no mention in the Stanford student newspaper.

Nor is there any report of a severe auto accident involving a Lennay Kekua. Background checks turn up nothing. The Stanford registrar's office has no record that a Lennay Kekua ever enrolled. There is no record of her birth in the news. Outside of a few Twitter and Instagram accounts, there's no online evidence that Lennay Kekua ever existed.

The photographs identified as Kekua—in online tributes and on TV news reports—are pictures from the social-media accounts of a 22-year-old California woman who is not named Lennay Kekua. She is not a Stanford graduate; she has not been in a severe car accident; and she does not have leukemia. And she has never met Manti Te'o. (Deadspin.com)

            I’ve already touched on the reading ease and lower grade levels of this piece as an element of the plain style, but other elements would include short, simple sentences, clearly emphasized subjects and verbs, as well as the rhetorical device of parallelism, which means using similar grammatical structure for important ideas.  These are the elements that really jumped out at me in this passage, but are obviously not the only ones.  This passage is located at the end of the introduction of the article and acts as somewhat of a thesis statement.  The rest of the article is a timeline of how the events unfolded, and this part really lays out the hard facts of the story.  It is imperative that this be written in plain style in order for readers to grasp the main idea of the story so they can understand the loaded timeline that follows.

            Another example of very plain, straightforward language being used comes towards the end of the article, after the timeline of events has been presented.  At this point, readers have had a lot of information tossed their way.  The story has taken all kinds of twists and turns, potentially leaving readers confused.  Then, Deadspin gives us a recap in the plainest of plain styles:

                  There was no Lennay Kekua. Lennay Kekua did not meet Manti Te'o after the Stanford game in 2009. Lennay Kekua did not attend Stanford. Lennay Kekua never visited Manti Te'o in Hawaii. Lennay Kekua was not in a car accident. Lennay Kekua did not talk to Manti Te'o every night on the telephone. She was not diagnosed with cancer, did not spend time in the hospital, did not engage in a lengthy battle with leukemia. She never had a bone marrow transplant. She was not released from the hospital on Sept. 10, nor did Brian Te'o congratulate her for this over the telephone. She did not insist that Manti Te'o play in the Michigan State or Michigan games, and did not request he send white flowers to her funeral. Her favorite color was not white. Her brother, Koa, did not inform Manti Te'o that she was dead. Koa did not exist. Her funeral did not take place in Carson, Calif., and her casket was not closed at 9 a.m. exactly. She was not laid to rest. (Deadspin.com)

In addition to containing the same plain style elements as the previous example, this passage contains anaphora (starting successive sentences with the same word), and a little bit of hyperbole (exaggerating the importance of something to emphasize a point), as well as diazeugma (having a single subject for multiple verb phrases).  The anaphora element creates a hammering effect that drills ideas into the reader’s head and is present throughout the passage.  Diazeugma is present in the following sentence: “She was not diagnosed with cancer, did not spend time in the hospital, did not engage in a lengthy battle with leukemia.”  The subject here is “she” and the verb “did” is used to present the last two ideas without restating the subject.  This creates a break in the normal structure where each thought contains a subject and a verb.  The hyperbole element comes in when statements like, “Her favorite color was not white,” and, “…(she) did not request he send white flowers to her funeral,” are said.  These are pretty minor details for the story, but Deadspin puts them in the passage to emphasize that this girl did not exist in any way. 

            Now the question of if writing in such plain language does this story justice, because it is so strange and obscure, must be asked.  If Deadspin had not done a good job of making the language very clear in this article, it could have been very confusing for readers because it is a strange story that not many people could even dream of.  I know when I first heard the story on ESPN, I was extremely confused by all the things they were throwing out there.  But after reading this article it is pretty clear to me what happened.  In conclusion, through the use of various plain style elements, Deadspin makes a very clear, understandable article, which I applaud them for, given the unusual nature of the story.

AJ Donaldson