Bitzer's Metatheory in Professor Thorgi

I will preface this post by stating that Peter Parker, the Amazing Spider-Man, has always been my hero. I blame 90s television for this. 

It was just always so good. From the 90s cartoon my love for Peter only grew; I started reading the comics when I was thirteen and I have been ever since. Ever since, until last year when Dan Slott, the current writer of the Spider-Man series, killed him, replacing his consciousness with the consciousness of Otto Octavius, AKA Doctor Octopus. 

This made me, and many other fans, less than happy. I could rant about this for days, but instead I’ll just get in to the rhetoric-y stuff. (Excuse the non-use of pronouns in reference to Professor Thorgi. I just started reading the blog, so I do not yet know the writer’s gender and dumb English has no gender neutral pronoun, so it is what it is).

The very first of these Rhetoric Blogs will be an analysis, through the lens of Lloyd Bitzer’s Metatheory, of the audience of Professor Thorgi’s blog post, “An In Depth Look at the Superior Spider-Man and the Return of Peter Parker,” which can be found here:

 

At the very beginning of the post, Professor Thorgi acknowledges the two different groups who may be reading his blog: those who “think Superior Spider-Man is the greatest book out there, or [those who] think it’s the worst thing ever.” Only after acknowledging these two groups, does the professor give a personal opinion on the matter: “I don’t think its either, I think it comes pretty firmly right down the middle…” By acknowledging both groups and then revealing the controversial opinion, Professor Thorgi treats the audience like they are made up of sentient beings capable of forming intelligent opinions.

Professor Thorgi realizes that the only people who are likely to read the blog are fans of either Amazing or Superior Spider-Man, so the professor does not waste time with plot details. Instead, the professor jumps in by qualifying the professor’s long background as a fellow fan, establishing that the professor is just like those reading the blog. After this, Professor Thorgi addresses both opinions by listing what the professor sees as the good and bad qualities of the comic book, thus alienating neither party.

One interesting thing about this blog is the professor’s address towards an idealized audience. In the final section of the post, Professor Thorgi discusses what the professor finds to be the biggest problem with the Spider-Man series and presents multiple options of how it can be fixed. At this point, the professor directly addresses Marvel head-honchos (who probably aren’t actually reading the post) warning them of dire consequences their can have if they continue doing ridiculous things to this beloved character just to keep the story going: “MARVEL FANS LIKE SEEING CHARACTERS GROW AND PROGRESS! YOU WILL GET HIGH SALES FOR A BIT AND THEN IT WILL CRASH! JUST LOOK AT THE NEW 52! I REPEAT, NOBODY WANTS THIS OPTION.” By addressing this fictional branch of the audience, Professor Thorgi shows the real audience how they can be change agents if they, like the professor, do not agree with how Marvel is treating their hero simply by speaking up.