To Buy or Not to Buy

I’ve chosen to write my Rhetorical Analysis about the article entitled “Buying Into the Green Movement” by Alex Williams.  In this article, Alex writes to all consumers about the need, not only to consume eco-sensitively, but also to consume less.  He attacks those who have developed the mind-set that as long as they make eco-friendly purchases, they can consume just as much as they always have.  He stays on this topic for about the first half of the article.  Then, the author transitions into the subject of how those who make eco-conscious decisions, no matter how much they do or do not sacrifice, are on to something.  He argues that those who are engaged in eco-friendly practices are intrinsically “more committed to more transformative political action on global warming.”  Alex also states that in the end, it is political action, and not individual consumer choices, that will make the difference in saving this planet.

The article is informative, but unfortunately, I didn’t find it very effective because the note that he started the article on – playful, sarcastic – was completely different from that which he ended it on – more serious.  He seemed hesitant or unsure in his rhetorical approach.  Also, the article doesn’t offer any plans of action or solutions, as they are offered in the much more effective “An Inconvenient Truth”.  The whole tone of the article was, “Yeah, we should consume less but, in the end, the government is eventually going to have to take care of the problem.”  Sure, he compiled great sources and included some witty phrases, but I do not feel that this article was effective in convincing its intended audience.  One of the biggest reasons why not is that he first condemns green consumers and then he condones them.  He starts by poking fun at the “light greens” in a condescending way, and by the end of the article he is saying that they’re on to something.  Alex has a good set of credible sources in his article, but he does a poor job in organizing his citations and thoughts into creating an article that might have been more effective in arguing his thesis.  Yet, in the end, his greatest error lies in the fact that he doesn’t stay loyal to his underdeveloped thesis.  This leaves the reader, upon finishing the article, a bit confused about what to think and what the author is really trying to convince them to explicitly do.