AP Lang Unit 4: Week 1 Objective: Identify and describe the overarching thesis of an argument, and any indication it provides of the argument’s structure. Review Questions: 1. What is a thesis statement? ______2. What is exigence? ______3. What is connotative language? ______4. What is denotative language? ______5. What are the three main components of the rhetorical triangle? ______

Determining the thesis statement of a text. How can we determine the author's thesis even when it's not explicitly stated? Thinking about the subject, exigence, and tone of a text can help you determine the author's thesis. The following excerpt is from then President Ronald Reagan's 1986 address to the nation, after NASA's Challenger space shuttle broke apart 73 secs into its flight, killing all 7 of its crew members on live television:

“And I want to say something to the school children of America who were watching the live coverage of the shuttle's takeoff. I know it is hard to understand, but sometimes painful things like this happen. It's all part of the process of exploration and discovery. It's all part of taking a chance and expanding man's horizons. The future doesn't belong to the fainthearted; it belongs to the brave. The Challenger crew was pulling us into the future, and we'll continue to follow them."

-Subject, Tone, Exigence • Based on this excerpt, the reader can infer that the subject of the text is advancement of man. Regan makes a point to center exploration, discovery, and expansion as the central focus of his speech. • In using those words, (exploration, discovery, and expansion), Regan sets an adventurous almost heroic tone. He also relies on pathos to instill a sense of pride and wistfulness in his audience by stating that the future belongs to the brave. • As is evidenced by this mention of bravery, the exigence of this text is rooted in Regan's plea to his target audience: a call to action for the youth of America to not give up on the science of discovery. • Combining what we have gathered about the subject, tone, and exigence of Reagan's speech, the reader can infer that the following statement would work as a thesis for this text: Tragedy is a part of the trial and error of human advancement; that unforeseen circumstance, while horrific, should never deter man from trying to reach new, figurative heights. Read the passage below and answer the accompanying questions: (The following passage is excerpted from an op-ed published in 2018.) America’s boys are broken. And it’s killing us. The brokenness of the country’s boys stands in contrast to its girls, who still face an abundance of obstacles but go into the world increasingly well equipped to take them on. The past 50 years have redefined what it means to be female in America. Girls today are told that they can do anything, be anyone. They’ve absorbed the message: They’re outperforming boys in school at every level. But it isn’t just about performance. To be a girl today is to be the beneficiary of decades of conversation about the complexities of womanhood, its many forms and expressions. Boys, though, have been left behind. No commensurate movement has emerged to help them navigate toward a full expression of their gender. It’s no longer enough to “be a man”—we no longer even know what that means. Too many boys are trapped in the same suffocating, outdated model of masculinity, where manhood is measured in strength, where there is no way to be vulnerable without being emasculated, where manliness is about having power over others. They are trapped, and they don’t even have the language to talk about how they feel about being trapped, because the language that exists to discuss the full range of human emotion is still viewed as sensitive and feminine. Men feel isolated, confused and conflicted about their natures. Many feel that the very qualities that used to define them—their strength, aggression and competitiveness—are no longer wanted or needed; many others never felt strong or aggressive or competitive to begin with. We don’t know how to be, and we’re terrified. But to even admit our terror is to be reduced, because we don’t have a model of masculinity that allows for fear or grief or tenderness or the day-to-day sadness that sometimes overtakes us all. Case in point: A few days ago, I posted a brief thread about these thoughts on Twitter, knowing I would receive hateful replies in response. I got dozens of messages impugning my manhood; the mildest of them called me a “soy boy” (a common insult among the alt-right* that links soy intake to estrogen). And so the man who feels lost but wishes to preserve his fully masculine self has only two choices: withdrawal or rage. We’ve seen what withdrawal and rage have the potential to do. School shootings are only the most public of tragedies. Others, on a smaller scale, take place across the country daily; another commonality among shooters is a history of abuse toward women. To be clear, most men will never turn violent. Most men will turn out fine. Most will learn to navigate the deep waters of their feelings without ever engaging in any form of destruction. Most will grow up to be kind. But many will not. We will probably never understand why any one young man decides to end the lives of others. But we can see at least one pattern and that pattern is glaringly obvious. It’s boys. I believe in boys. I believe in my son. Sometimes, though, I see him, 16 years old, swallowing his frustration, burying his worry, stomping up the stairs without telling us what’s wrong, and I want to show him what it looks like to be vulnerable and open but I can’t. Because I was a boy once, too. There has to be a way to expand what it means to be a man without losing our masculinity. I don’t know how we open ourselves to the rich complexity of our manhood. I think we would benefit from the same conversations girls and women have been having for these past 50 years. I would like men to use feminism as an inspiration, in the same way that feminists used the civil rights movement as theirs. I’m not advocating a quick fix. There isn’t one. But we have to start the conversation. Boys are broken, and I want to help. From The New York Times, February 21, 2018 © 2018 The New York Times. All rights reserved. Used by permission and protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States. The printing, copying, redistribution, or retransmission of this Content without express written permission is prohibited.

1. What is the subject of this article? If you could sum up what the article is about in one word what would it be? (Think about what the author seems to talk about the most) ______2. What specific parts of the article led you to believe this is the subject matter? Cite at least one line from the article below? ______3. What is the tone of this article? What adjectives can you use to describe the feelings the author (attempts to) invoke(s) with their use of diction, imagery, rhetorical devices etc?______4. What is this author's exigence in this article? What does the author want the reader to walk away knowing, feeling, or understanding? ______5. What specific parts of the article led you to believe this is the author's exigence? Cite at least one line from the article below ______6. What would be a working thesis statement for this text?______

Formulating A Thesis Statement In 1933 British journalist and writer (1893–1970) published , a volume of memoirs that depicted her coming-of-age and maturation during the years 1900–1925. The following passage is an excerpt from Brittain’s memoir in which she reflects on her early educational experiences. Read the passage carefully. Compose a thesis statement you might use for an essay analyzing the rhetorical choices Brittain makes to convey her perspective on education for British girls in the early twentieth century. Then select at least four pieces of evidence from the passage and explain how they support your thesis. In your response you should do the following:

• Respond to the prompt with a thesis that analyzes the writer’s rhetorical choices. • Select and use evidence to develop and support your line of reasoning. • Explain the relationship between the evidence and your thesis. When I was eleven our adored governess departed, and my family moved from to a tall grey stone house in , the “mountain spa,” in order that Edward and I might be sent to “good” day-schools. His was a small preparatory school of which a vigorous Buxton man was then headmaster; mine inevitably described itself as “a school for the daughters of gentlemen.” My brother’s school, which certainly gave him a better grounding than I received from mine, will always be associated in my recollection with one significant experience. Soon after Edward went there I happened, on my way to the town, to pass the school playground at a time when the boys were uproariously enjoying an afternoon break. Seeing Edward, I stopped; he called several of his newly made cronies, and we spent a few moments of pleasant “ragging”1 across the low wall. I felt no consciousness of guilt, and was unaware that I had been seen, on their return home along an adjacent road, by my mother and an aunt who was staying with us. At tea-time a heavy and to me inexplicable atmosphere of disapproval hung over the table; shortly afterwards the storm exploded, and I was severely reprimanded for my naughtiness in thus publicly conversing with Edward’s companions. (I think it was the same aunt who afterwards informed me that the reason why our letters had to be left open at my school was “in case any of the girls should be so wicked as to write to boys.” Probably this was true of most girls’ schools before the War.) The small incident was my first intimation that, in the eyes of the older generation, free and unself-conscious association between boys and girls was more improper than a prudish suspicion of the opposite sex. It aroused in me a rebellious resentment that I have never forgotten. I had not heard, in those days, of co-educational schools, but had I been aware of their experimental existence and been able to foresee my far-distant parenthood, I should probably have decided, then and there, that my own son and daughter should attend them. I do not remember much about my day-school except that when I first went there I was badly bullied by two unpleasant little girls, who soon tired of the easy physical advantage given them by their superior age and stature, and instead endeavoured to torment my immature mind by forcing upon it items of sexual information in their most revolting form. My parents, who had suffered such qualms of apprehension over my entirely wholesome friendliness with Edward’s riotous companions, remained completely unaware of this real threat to my decency and my peace. I never mentioned it to them owing to a bitter sense of shame, which was not, however, aroused by my schoolfellows’ unaesthetic2communications, but by my inability to restrain my tears during their physical assaults. So ambitious was I already, and so indifferent to sex in all its manifestations, that their attempts to corrupt my mind left it as innocent as they found it, and I resented only the pinchings and wrist-twistings which always accompanied my efforts to escape. Though my school took a few boarders,3 most of its pupils were local; in consequence the class-room competition was practically non-existent. At the age of twelve I was already preening the gay feathers of my youthful conceit in one of the top forms, where the dull, coltish girls of sixteen and seventeen so persistently treated me as a prodigy that I soon lost such small ability as I had possessed to estimate my modest achievements at their true and limited worth.