An Open Letter to all MPs in Parliament

The rhetorical situation is that the text “An Open Letter to all MPs in Parliament” is an open letter written by professional football player Marcus Rashford, addressed to Members of the UK Parliament. The topic of his letter is free meals for poor children during the Coronavirus pandemic. The intended audience consists of the UK’s Members of Parliament, but also of the people who might get involved and help those in need.

When it comes to composition, the text takes the form of a parallel between Rashford’s poor past and the present situation created by the Coronavirus pandemic. Rashford uses the comparison to suggest that the UK is in danger of failing its most vulnerable citizens.

The style of writing used by Rashford in his letter is formal. Some informal features can be seen when he talks about his past.

Rashford uses several rhetorical devices, including direct address, metaphors, and rhetorical questions, which are meant to convince the readers of his claims.

The forms of appeal used in the letter are ethos, pathos, and logos. Rashford relies on ethos to establish his authority and personal involvement in relation to the topic. Logos is mainly used when Rashford provides data and statistics as proof of his arguments. Pathos is used to appeal to the emotions of the readers so they sympathize with the poor.

You can read a full analysis of the text in the following pages.

Further help

Do you want additional help with analysis of non-fiction? See our general guide to non-fiction analysis.

Excerpt from the study guide:

Rashford uses two rhetorical questions in his letter. The first one is: “Political affiliations aside, can we not all agree that no child should be going to bed hungry?” (ll. 34-35). This question implies that providing free meals for poor children should not be a political issue, but one related to compassion and empathy. What is more, the rhetorical question is meant to highlight the idea that humanity should overcome political interests.

Another rhetorical question is introduced when Rashford talks about struggling adults who cannot support their families: “Do you know how much courage it takes for a grown man to say ‘I can’t cope’ or ‘I can’t support my family’?” (ll. 66-67). With this rhetorical question, Rashford suggests that not being able to support one’s family is a devastating matter. Moreover, he implies that most people would feel embarrassed to ask for help or to admit that they are having financial difficulties.

Rashford metaphorically refers to the food poverty situation as a “pandemic that could span generations” (l. 36). Using this word Rashford associates food poverty with the covid pandemic. This underlines the enormity of the food crisis since everybody understands that the covid pandemic is a huge crisis.

Through this metaphor, Rashford tries to convince his readers that the issue of food poverty is as important as the issue of the pandemic and should be taken just as seriously. Moreover, this also hints that food poverty could become worse during the pandemic, when many people are losing their jobs or no longer have access to previous benefits.