McAffee 1

Tazia McAffee

Dr. Haslam

ENGL 1010

28 October 2020

Link to article: https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/01/why-do-cartoon-villains-

speak-in-foreign-accents/549527/

I decided to perform my Rhetorical Analysis on the article, “Why Do Cartoon Villains

Speak in Foreign Accents?” by Isabel Fattal. Fattal is the assistant editor for “The Atlantic” and

wrote this article on January 4th, 2018. This article was written to bring awareness to the

problem that foreign accents are often being used as the dialect for an “evil” character. The

author shows many examples of this in past and present animations. In this article, the author

often refers to two experts in the field. The first is Calvin Gidney, an associate professor in child

study and human development at Tufts University who specializes in sociolinguistics; the next is

Julie Dobrow, a senior lecturer at Tufts who specializes in issues of children and media. Fattal

often references these two individuals and the study they collaborated on. The study that Fattal

focused on in this article was a study on how many television programs showed a distinct dialect

difference between good and bad characters. This article was written at a good time to induce

change, because this pattern in television is not only a thing of the past, but it is still happening

today as well in many children cartoons and animations.

Throughout this article, the author makes the point that the main problem is that this is

happening in children's television, and it needs to be changed. This then begs the question of

what this is teaching children about interacting with diversity in the United States. One of the

first points Fattal brings up is the dialect differences in the Disney movie “The Lion King”. Scar
 McAffee 2

is the evil character in this movie, while Mufasa is the hero. Mufasa speaks in an American

accent, while Scar speaks in a British English accent. Fattal continues to tell how Gidney heard

this two decades ago in the theater, and was astonished by this information. In addition to that,

Gidney was shocked by the dialect of the hyenas. The hyenas had an African-Americans or

Latina sounding accent, and this is concerning because the hyenas are also considered evil in this

movie. This shocking realization led to a collaboration between him and Dobrow. They wanted

to find out how those trends played out on other children's television shows and movies. In their

study, Gidney and Dobrow sampled 12 shows. They found that all but two of the shows found a

correlated dialect with the characters personality traits. Gidney was most concerned about the

common denominator of villains sounding different or more diverse than the general population.

Villain is marked by “sounding different” according to Gidney. He goes on to say how

showrunners are more often concerned with finding a “good idea” rather than a “conventional

idea”. Many shows, current and past, have this kind of pattern. In other studies they performed,

they came up with similar results.

In “Why Do Cartoon Villains Speak in Foreign Accents?” Isabel Fattal is very effective

in persuading her readers that change needs to be made in the dialect of supposed “good” versus

“evil” characters. She establishes ethos throughout the article by referencing Calvin Gidney and

Julie Dobrow, two different experts in the field. Next, she demonstrates logos early on by

showing some of the statistics and numbers used during the primary study. Lastly, she institutes

pathos throughout the article by mentioning the factor of kids and how television shapes the

minds of young children.

To begin with, Isabel Fattal establishes ethos early on by referencing work done by

Calvin Gidey and Julie Dobrow. These two individuals accredit her article because they are
 McAffee 3

experts in the field. The definition of ethos is an argument constructed on the credibility of the

person making the argument. Calvin Gidney is an associate professor in child study and human

development at Tufts University who specializes in sociolinguistics. Therefore, he is an expert in

his field and is very credible when talking about dialect. In addition to that, Julie Dobrow is a

senior lecturer at Tufts who specializes in issues of children and media. Therefore, she is an

expert in her field and is extremely credible when it comes to children's media (television shows

and movies). These two collaborated to perform and track a study done on television shows and

their chosen dialects. The study showed that the most wicked accent seemed to be British

English. This was used in “The Lion King” with the character Scar, and in “Aladdin” with the

character Jafar. This study also found that evil sidekicks or henchmen have diverse accents as

well. These are different though because they are associated with “low socioeconomic status,

including working-class Eastern European dialects or regional American dialects such as

‘Italian-American gangster’” Fattal states. These examples and studies, done by experts, help to

accredit her article and show evidence that this is actually happening. This is very important to

the overall article, because without accreditation, people would not trust that the article is giving

correct and scholarly information.

Secondly, Fattal demonstrates logos by the use of facts and statistics to back up her story.

She builds upon the information in a study done by Gidey and Dobrow. In her article, she tells

the specifics of the results of the study, further proving her point. She tells the facts and numbers

of their initial study. For example, Fattal writes, “Gidney and Dobrow had a team of coders

analyze 323 animated TV characters using measures such as ethnic and gender identification,

physical appearance, hero/villain status, and linguistic markers”. Using facts and statistics like

these help to support and validate her article and her use of logos throughout it. This also helps to
 McAffee 4

support the overall intended purpose behind this article because readers will be more inclined to

read her story if they know that what she is saying is backed up by actual evidence. Rather than

just a one-sided opinionated piece.

Last but not least, Fattal institutes pathos by involving children and how they might be

affected by this pattern. Throughout the article, Fattal mentions the effect that these shows might

have on children, considering children are typically the ones who watch these animated shows.

Another big thing she brings up is that this is not only a thing of the past, but it is happening

today as well. One current example is in the television show “Phineas and Ferb”, in this show,

Phineas and the other main characters all have American accents. Whereas the villain, Dr.

Doofenshmirtz has a German sounding accent. This example leads to a good point Fattal brought

up. She claims, “Since television is a prominent source of cultural messaging for children, this

correlation of foreign accents with ‘bad’ characters could have concerning implications for the

way kids are being taught to engage with diversity in the United States”. In other words,

television is used to teach children and if all of the evil characters are foreign, then what is that

communicating to children? This could then lead to children subconsciously correlating

languages and people that are diverse or foreign with being considered the bad guy while making

any American accent with being the good hero. This could be a big problem and everyone can

see that. The purpose of pathos is to appeal to the reader's emotions, and this example definitely

did that. The majority of people are more sympathetic towards children, so that helps to establish

pathos. When we are talking about children and potentially negatively affecting their future

opinions on diversity. That will appeal to the reader’s emotions, and will leave the majority of

people upset, and wanting to induce change.

 McAffee 5

All in all, Isabel Fattal was extremely successful in convincing her readers that foreign

dialects are often associated with “evil” characters, and American dialects are correlated with

“heroic” or “good” characters. She effectively uses ethos, logos, and pathos to strengthen her

overall argument and draw the readers in. She does this by instituting credibility and ethos with

evidence from experts in the field. She then exhibits her use of logos through referencing

statistics and facts drawn from the conclusions of scientific studies. Finally, she uses pathos to

grasp hold of the reader's emotions by discussing how diversity is seen in television shows and

movies, and how this might affect the minds of impressionable young children.

Works Cited

Fattal, I. (2018, January 04). Why Do Cartoon Villains Speak in Foreign Accents?Retrieved

November 12, 2020, from https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/01/why-

do-cartoon-villains-speak-in-foreign-accents/549527/
 McAffee 6

Word Count: 1380

Bryson Kunz Annotations:

● I really like this introduction. It gives the reader a basic understanding of what is going
on.
● This doesn't quite seem as smooth as it could be. I think that either trying to make it one
sentence or by taking away the words, "this is."
● Regardless, this still works. You are welcome to disregard this suggestion.
● The last part doesn't quite sound right. I think if you somehow reorder the sentence, it
might sound a little bit better.
● Right before this sentence, if you add the word "other" it might make the meaning a little
more clear.
● This doesn't quite sound right. I might suggest changing this to, "In other studies they
performed, they came up with similar results.
 McAffee 7

● You already mentioned the name of the article, you won't need to refer to it in this way
again.
○ I chose to not change this. This is because I wanted my thesis statement to be very
clear, and I think restating the name of my article in my thesis helps to establish
clarity.
● Personally, I think that if you said, "Next, she demonstrates logos..." It would flow a lot
better.
● Here, use single quotation marks (apostrophes). This will help the clarify that this is a
quote within a quote.
● This isn't super necessary, but it does help clarify the sentence, so I would put commas
around this.
● I'd reorder this to be, "Because of this, readers..."
○ I chose not to use this suggestion because I don't like to start sentences with
‘because’. I don’t know where I learned this, but I don’t like to start a sentence
with that.
● Do you want 'exclaims' or do you want 'explains' or 'claims'?
● I might change this to single quotation marks, but again up to you. Both are correct.
● I'd separate this into two different sentences. Then change it to, "that. This is why..." This
will make two of the same words be right next to each other.
● I don't quite understand what the "Then building on top of that and..." part means. I think
that the word "and" is a little unnecessary. Also, I think it might be a good idea to
separate the two thoughts before and after the comma.
● Extremely well done. Just a couple of grammatical errors. Otherwise, it flows extremely
well. Nice job!
Bryson Kunz Paragraphs:
● I really liked how well the essay flowed. It was super clean and extremely well
organized. This made it easy to understand the points and the explanations behind them.
One example of this was the introduction and background of the essay. Both gave you the
perfect amount of information to know exactly what was going on during the essay. I
don’t think you really need to add or subtract anything to either of these paragraphs. Your
thesis statement is crystal clear, and is easily understandable throughout the whole essay.
All of the claims point directly to your essay, and it makes it easier to understand the
topic of the essay. The conclusion was amazing! It ended it really nicely, while at the
same time, described how effective the article was at teaching the specific topic. I really
enjoyed how you used a paragraph to briefly explain how they used the rhetorical triangle
in the article. This helped the article flow really nicely once you got into the body
paragraphs. I thoroughly enjoyed how it was organized. In all honesty, reading this after
reading a not very well organized essay was very refreshing. Your points and claims are
extremely easy to understand because of how well it was organized. Honestly, there are
one or two parts where you can improve the grammar, but they are very minor and really
 McAffee 8

don’t need to be fixed. It just comes down to preference and style. Good luck on the
Final! I guarantee that you will do a better job than I will!

Sophia Otis Annotations:

● What was this study? bringing more background on this could help it flow more than it
already does.
● I would try and either rewrite this or add on to it. After reading through your essay it
seems like the author is trying more to make the point that since this is happening in
children's television, it should be changed somehow.
● after using the word shocked already, I would try and change the others that come after to
something else to make it flow more easily.
● just to be more descriptive, you could add children's television shows and movies
because you are referencing both disney movies and shows.
● I would elaborate on this. Try adding more about why in this example it shows that she
used ethos, and then why using ethos helped her overall article.
● How does this strategy support her article? With each example you use you need a
sentence for how that evidence is an example of the strategy and then another for how
that strategy supports the overall intended purpose/audience.
● why is this a good point Fattal brought up? I would just elaborate more so then it is more
of your own words rather than having the example you bring in later answer it for you.
○ I chose not to change this because I do elaborate by saying “In other words” after
I share the quote. I just like the structure of having the quote first and then
elaborating, rather than elaborating first, because then I feel like it won’t flow as
well. This is because it might be hard to understand what I am explaining if I
don’t show what I am explaining (the quote) first.
● I would just rewrite this sentence since it feels a bit confusing, so i'd create kind of a
distinction, such as saying something like:This could then lead to children subconsciously
correlating languages and people that are diverse or foreign with being considered the
bad guy while making any American accent with being the good hero.
● I would try and add more here, such as elaborating on how each of these examples
showed pathos and more on how using pathos developed and added to this article.
● I would add a sentence in this conclusion and possibly somewhere else in the article
about how whether the strategies used were effective or not and sort of expand on that.
Other than that this flows well.
Sophia Otis Paragraph:
● The strengths of this essay I feel are whenever you bring in what demonstrates ethos,
pathos, and logos because it is explained well, especially in the paragraph explaining
ethos. The introduction paragraph does establish the context of the text through
introducing who is behind the study used in the text, but I do feel like there needs to be
more information about the text itself rather than who wrote it. The summary seems to
 McAffee 9

cover an overview of the original text, even as so to give examples while they are
explaining what is going on. The thesis statement is saying how Fattal was effective in
using ethos, pathos, and logos to persuade the reader into thinking that change is needed
to be made in the dialect of good vs evil characters, and does focus on the text. The
conclusion does seem to make an argument about the overall effectiveness as they tie in
and reference what they were trying to talk about in the claim’s separate paragraphs, but
it does just feel like a rewritten but also the same thesis as before so I would just add on
to that to make it flow more. The essay does focus on rhetorical elements of the text but I
feel like as they are then explained they begin to be underplayed and it doesn’t focus on
the strategies themselves. Overall this essay does flow well and focuses on the rhetorical
elements, but there is a need of more elaboration when explaining examples.