Prior to writing about an article from The New York Times I believed that I was going to

do a music video from a famous YouTuber. After watching the video a few more times I realized

that there was not much for me to analyze so I decided to write about an editorial by a huge

leader in the urban Asian community, Eddie Huang. I chose the article Hey Steve Harvey Who

Says I Cant Steal Your Girl because I thought it was funny yet meaningful. Before writing my

essay I read the article three times and wrote an outline about how I would structure my essay

and what quotes I would use for certain topics. I wrote an outline because I believe outlines make

writing an essay a lot easier than simply scrambling through ideas in ones head. In my essay I

wrote my body paragraphs first because I believe the body paragraphs are the most intricate parts

of an essay and take the most time to write. I organized my paragraphs in the following order:

exigency, purpose, audience, ethos, punctuation, and figures of speech. I chose this specific order

since it seemed the most logical to me.

In revision I realized how unorganized my paragraphs were and how I sometimes jumped

from one topic to another in my paragraphs. When I submitted my rough draft I did not realize

this and neither did my peer reviewer. Professor Enos caught this error and once I read her

comments I made sure to organize my paragraphs better and move around some sentences to

make the paragraphs more fluent. My peer reviewer and Professor Enos stated that my paragraph

about punctuation needed more work so I went back in revision and made that paragraph more

detailed. Another major thing I fixed during revision my paragraph about ethos, it was noted that

I circled around what authority Eddie Huang had in the article so I went back and explicitly

stated that his authority stems from him being a male Asian American. Likewise, it was also

noted that I never talked specifically about the purpose or audience of the article so I added
paragraphs about them in revision. I am really glad that there was a peer review because I would

not have caught the details my peer reviewer and professor pointed out to me.

I believe that I did accomplish some of the learning goals stated on the prompt. I was able

to find a source that fascinated me and one that I could write extensively about in a rhetorical

analysis essay. Through my outline I was able to practice critical reading strategies that would

prove helpful in the actual writing of my essay. Moreover, I used a lot of evidence and analysis in

my essay to prove certain points. I was also able to proper cite and develop a works cited page.

During the peer review I was able to write a review that I believe was helpful to the author.

Ultimately, the process of writing this rhetorical analysis essay helped me accomplish many

learning goals listed on the prompt.