IRB #3: Jagger by Marc Spitz

This section was a lot alike to the last one (giving that it is a biography of Mick Jagger and cannot divert much from the linear course of his lifetime). However, in this section, Spitz added a distinctive amount of insight that delved deeper into Jagger’s life, past just what the press said. I can tell that Spitz has done a fine job on his research because, as a reader/part of the audience who loves the Rolling Stones, I learned a lot more than I knew before and I was also able to piece together the information that I brought to the table about this icon. In this section, Spitz describes how Keith and Mick were a part of the “drug-revolution” of the 60’s and how they took the toll of many by spending their time in jail (something of which I never knew!). Spitz also included a quote from a filmmaker that listed the reasons why the Stones were so world-renowned: “‘they were a bit like the Beatles…they [peed] on a garage… [and they had] that famous saying which was going around: ‘Would you let your daughter marry a Rolling Stone?’’”. Basically, this section outlined how they became famous, what happened during the course of this clime and what this fame did to them in the end [it broke up their band/members several times throughout the process – noted by Marc Spitz throughout the book].
            The author’s, Marc Spitz’s, writing, I believe, was extremely effective in projecting his purpose to the audience. Stylistically, he included “rock” jargon or diction all throughout the story as well as elongated syntax with interweaved quotes (from established writers). As for the diction, I didn’t quite understand some of the sayings/words (because it was more directed to established rockers) but the ones I did understand added aesthetics/description to the life of Mick Jagger. He also used rhetorical jargon i.e. “context” and “ethos” which was very interesting and eye-opening! At a rhetorical standpoint, Spitz used a lot of comparison and contrast with other bands c/c to the Stones (like them compared to Beatles). He also included a lot of the Classical Argument structure, details/imagery, and creativeness in the chapter titles while also establishing the ethos of the writers he quoted as well. All of the comparison/contrast within the story had to do with comparing the Stones (and their musical style) to either the Beatles or to the blues/soul bands that the Stones strived to be. As for the CA structure*, Spitz used narration when explaining a certain event/unknown thing that he mentioned (could also stand for short defining essay) and always used refutation/confirmation while supporting the Stones against all others. As previously stated, there was abounding details/imagery included when describing scenes and as for ethos, he always made sure to explain who the person was before quoting them (showing how their info was valuable by expressing their connections to the Stones). The titles of the chapters were also very creative and you could understand their relation to the story in the midst of your reading.
* I realized through this story that you can use any parts of the CA in any order in any type of writing – as long as it works with your topic you are addressing. I.E. when Spitz added narration right in the middle of the story and it worked perfectly!