Beginning the Rhetorical Analysis, I felt equipped with the skills I needed to write this essay. In class we discussed critical details in Children of Men that made it meaningful, so I thought I was prepared to engage in rhetorical analysis. At the same time, I was extremely uneasy because this marked the longest paper I’d ever written for a writing class. I was afraid of running out of things to talk about before I hit that 1500 word mark. Additionally, this film was something I believed to be very substantial and I didn’t want to underperform.

We were asked to identify meaningful details and think about connections in the movie that Cuarón purposefully added to shape how audiences view the story. Loren suggested we make “walls and bridges” between certain aspects of the film in order to accomplish that. In all honesty, I probably wouldn’t have been able to write as good of a paper if it wasn’t for our in-depth discussion of the movie in class. Before, I wasn’t familiar with Pink Floyd’s Animals, or the Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse, although now I’m glad I do. They’ve granted me insight and helped me understand our world better as a result.

My guiding question for this analysis was “What changes when we see ‘x’ this way?” I began writing by collecting everything I’ve noticed about Cuarón’s techniques and references and describing them, and at the end of each paragraph, I tried to tie it back to my thesis:

“Audiences at first watch may not notice the satirical and rhetorical strategies Cuarón utilized, but after analyzing the details further it is evident that every choice was made to influence how the viewers understand and perceive the story.”

However, after reading Loren's feedback I realize that some of my ideas are scattered and ill-defined. I did not need to include every detail Cuarón incorporated into the film. My paragraph on religion, for example, while it “illustrates awareness of..competing arguments,” fails to connect with the rest of the essay which describes Cuarón’s strategic use of historic figures and events to criticize the U.S. government.

I should have focused and elaborated on one particular point. The core of my essay truly begins when I mention Cuarón’s allusion to the Abu Ghraib torture scandal and Holocaust resemblance, which unfortunately is towards the end of my paper. For my revision, I will sustain a more focused, concise draft that explores the torture and terrorism angle in depth.

This was challenging. Originally, I wanted to touch on all the references and themes and viewpoints Cuarón portrayed, but I contend that’s not the best approach. For this reason, I have to restate a large portion of my paper and delve into a single topic.

At first, I wasn't sure what other points from the movie I could use to support my new thesis:

"By exposing the government’s techniques that aim to divide competing nations, Cuarón forces viewers to notice their unjust nature and leads them to believe that outsiders aren’t the people they should be afraid of."

But during my meeting with Loren to discuss my paper, he asked me questions that guided me towards understanding what I should address and what I should omit from my essay. I was able to further analyze certain scenes of the movie, and consequently became even more absorbed in my writing as I found it to be really fascinating. I decided to keep my paragraphs on art and Bexhill because they seemed relevant, but also added some that described the progressing mood of the movie and the central theme that suggested outsiders are essentially, just like us. To appeal to my audience, I attempted to connect Children of Men to modern day society so they would find meaning behind my writing and leave with new information. In the end, I wanted the reader to extract a lesson that emphasized the importance of citizenship, in that we should all look out for each other and not become oblivious to the intentions of the small percentage of privileged elite that rules society.

In retrospect, I believe there are still many improvements that could be made to my Rhetorical Analysis. After all, no paper is perfect. For example, my thesis would have had a greater effect if it was placed at the end of my introduction as opposed to the center. I could have analyzed the film further to find more cutting evidence to persuade the reader to believe in Cuarón's true intention. Lastly, the transitions between paragraphs could be smoother, and I noticed some grammatical errors that would've been a quick fix as well. 

However, gaining recognition and feedback from Loren is truly uplifting. It's nice to hear positive things from a professional about your writing when you've been constantly doubting your abilities! The Rhetorical Analysis has given me confidence that I have the skills needed for critically analyzing and interpreting a text.