S1

1media type="custom" key="25157886" Video
 * 1) What is the purpose of the speech? Provide a brief statement of context. To describe the work of a critic and how the constant negativity can be entertaining but in reality the thing they are critiquing is often worth more than the critique itself. Critics take a risk when they decide to go past the contemptuous norm and enjoy something new. When Ego decides to report positively on something new he is risking a lot but he realizes through the wonderful meal he had that something he once had hate for is actually extraordinary.
 * 2) Who is the audience? The people of France reading his critique of   Gusteau’s restaurant.
 * 3) Which appeal (ethos, pathos, logos) is most prevalent? How do you know? Pathos because he uses the contrast between his old hate for this restaurant and his new found love for it when he decided to go against the constant negativity of the critic world.
 * 4) Is the argument effective? Were any logical fallacies used? It is very effective he starts off broadly to mention the change in his thoughts to then focus in on his point of the "critique."
 * 5) How could the argument have been strengthened? I'm not sure there is anything that could have been changed, it was very eloquent and well written.