Dear future APELC member...
First of all, don't be too intimidated by the course outline (or Mr. Yost). If you enjoy reading and writing, you'll probably enjoy this class. I know I did. There will be a lot of writing, entirely non-fiction, so brushing up on some rhetorical terms or writing tips would be a good idea. Essay-writing will make up a bulk of the focus and activities of the class, so be prepared to write a lot. Some writing tips to keep in mind, whether you are writing Analysis, Argument, or Synthesis are: make sure your thesis is clear, link EVERY SUPPORTING TOPIC back to your thesis, and write clearly-the less convoluted the better. These are three big items that always have room for improvement. Another major assessment grade will be group projects (3 or 4 in the year). It is important to do well on these, and two key ways to do that is communicate ideas with your group and PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE. The more smoothly the presentation goes the better. Since the groups will be different every time, it is important to get to know your whole class. My APELC class was very friendly and connected to each other, which helped a lot with the general classroom dynamic, as well as when it came time for group activities.
You may run into some bumps along the way, but fear not, with a little help you will succeed. First, don;t be afraid to ask Mr. Yost or Ms. Pronko for help. They don't bite. If you want help or advice on revising an essay, understanding a reading passage, or on any assignment, definitely go to them before it is too late to seek help. You should also be open to asking your fellow students for help, which is why, as I mentioned before, it is great to have a connected, tightly-knit class. One major bit of advice I have is DO NOT PROCRASTINATE. I made this mistake in the beginning of the year and unfortunately suffered from it. Start a take-home essay four days before it's due if possible, or even sooner. This leaves plenty of time for writing, revising, and seeking help if you need it. If you have questions as to whether an argument or analysis is viable or not, again, do not be afraid to run it by Mr. Yost. He is always ready and happy to help. Make use of his office hours and I/Es. With help and guidance from your teacher and peers, there is no doubt that you can reach a 5 on the test in May. If you find you're using all these tips but are still struggling, again, talk to Mr. Yost. He will be able to help you identify and work on the problem and get your grades up in no time.
Those are the words of wisdom I have for you as you step into the world of AP English Language and Composition. To recap, the most important things to remember are: continue to improve your writing skills, establish friendly links to the rest of your fellow classmates, and do not be afraid to seek help when you need it. Believe me, you do not want to neglect seeking help you know you need. Mr Yost and/or Ms. Pronko want the best for each of their students, and are fully willing and capable to provide guidance-if you are brave enough to seek it. If you are drawn to reading and writing, this course is a great one to take. You get to read non-fiction books of your choice (but must be approved by Mr. Yost) and some of the essay topics you will write about are actually pretty interesting. Good luck with APELC and good luck on the AP Exam-with diligence and support you'll reach that 5.
Monday, June 9, 2014
Tuesday, June 3, 2014
TOW #29-Documentary Part 2
One of the key claims that the Food, Inc. documentary stresses is how mass-produced foods can often lead to serious health problems. For example, numerous cases of food poisoning are reported daily, most of them from mass-produced meats. This problem is also spreading towards foods like spinach and other grains and vegetables. Although recalls are made each time an illness is reported, due to the millions of pounds of food being produced and shipped out each day, with the high possibility that at least one animal or ingredient was carrying a harmful pathogen or bacteria, it is impossible to completely solve the problem. With mass food production companies constantly getting larger and larger and producing more and more, subsequently they are spreading bad pathogens increasingly far and wide. This claim is true because of the many food recalls, and the many cases of food-related illnesses that are reported.
There was an article from the Huffington Post in June of 2013 about the recall of over 20,000 pounds of ground beef being recalled nationally in that month due to the possibility of an e-coli contamination. There was another article from some time ago in the New York Times about California issuing the largest beef recall in U.S. history, nearly 140 million pounds, from schools. 140 million pounds of possibly contaminated meat in one state, and in schools at that, where the children would be the majority of victims. The fact that so much contaminated meat could be in schools is truly scary. The mass-production methods of large food producing businesses often do not thoroughly inspect their animals before killing them and shipping the meat out to consumers. It would simply cost them too much time and money to conduct a rigorous examination of each animal to make sure it is free of any harmful pathogens, bacteria, or diseases. In addition, the animal does not have to be sick itself to be harmful. If the animal is weak, undernourished, or maltreated, it's meat can often have harmful effects on anyone who eats it. In my house, if we store meat in a plastic bag for any period of time, once we use the meat we immediately throw the bag away. For other foods, like fruit, vegetables, sandwiches, etc... we can wash and reuse the plastic bag (saves money). However, if it was used to store raw meat, we immediately throw it out because it cannot be used to store anything else. If the meat was tainted, we want to be sure that it will not taint any other food. This is how dangerous contaminated meat can be. The most common diseases carried by meat are salmonella and e-coli, and children are often warned against touching any meat that looks unusual or has been left un-refrigerated for a period of time. These dangers stem from the fact that the great majority of meat produced is mass-produced (i.e. with inferior conditions for animals and inadequate examinations), and now the danger is spreading to mass-produced grains and vegetables to (although the risks are not as prominent).
Evidence of how dangerous mass-produced foods can be can be seen in how many food-related illnesses are reported. in 2010, the CDC (Center for Disease Control) reported nearly 30,000 food-borne illness reports, of which e-coli and salmonella represented the bulk of causes. 30,000 illnesses in a year is roughly 82 reports a day across the nation. Each day about 82 people report an illness caused by some type of contaminated food. of these 82 people per day, it is highly likely that most (if not all) of them ate fast food or ate food produced by a major farming corporation. These illness might be avoided if the major corporate farming businesses put more revenue into better food, housing conditions, and treatment of their animals, and into examining the animals for potential harmful pathogens. However, these big businesses' main concern is growing bigger, producing more, and gaining more profit. The consequence is that as they produce more likely-contaminated food, and that food is sent all over America and even into foreign nations, they are further spreading diseases like e-coli and salmonella. This results in food recalls, which costs the companies time, money, and prestige. Ultimately, by not investing enough in healthier animals, the mass production companies are not only harming themselves, but are also harming the general population of consumers.
Food, Inc. is correct in its analysis that mass produced foods are often the cause of serious consumer health problems. Millions of pounds of food (mostly meat, and of meat it is mostly beef) are recalled every month, and thousands of food-related illnesses are reported each year. Many of these recalls and illnesses could be avoided if the producers would spend more time and money in ensuring the health of their animals. By not doing so, the companies like Tyson and Cargill are harming both themselves and their customers.
There was an article from the Huffington Post in June of 2013 about the recall of over 20,000 pounds of ground beef being recalled nationally in that month due to the possibility of an e-coli contamination. There was another article from some time ago in the New York Times about California issuing the largest beef recall in U.S. history, nearly 140 million pounds, from schools. 140 million pounds of possibly contaminated meat in one state, and in schools at that, where the children would be the majority of victims. The fact that so much contaminated meat could be in schools is truly scary. The mass-production methods of large food producing businesses often do not thoroughly inspect their animals before killing them and shipping the meat out to consumers. It would simply cost them too much time and money to conduct a rigorous examination of each animal to make sure it is free of any harmful pathogens, bacteria, or diseases. In addition, the animal does not have to be sick itself to be harmful. If the animal is weak, undernourished, or maltreated, it's meat can often have harmful effects on anyone who eats it. In my house, if we store meat in a plastic bag for any period of time, once we use the meat we immediately throw the bag away. For other foods, like fruit, vegetables, sandwiches, etc... we can wash and reuse the plastic bag (saves money). However, if it was used to store raw meat, we immediately throw it out because it cannot be used to store anything else. If the meat was tainted, we want to be sure that it will not taint any other food. This is how dangerous contaminated meat can be. The most common diseases carried by meat are salmonella and e-coli, and children are often warned against touching any meat that looks unusual or has been left un-refrigerated for a period of time. These dangers stem from the fact that the great majority of meat produced is mass-produced (i.e. with inferior conditions for animals and inadequate examinations), and now the danger is spreading to mass-produced grains and vegetables to (although the risks are not as prominent).
Evidence of how dangerous mass-produced foods can be can be seen in how many food-related illnesses are reported. in 2010, the CDC (Center for Disease Control) reported nearly 30,000 food-borne illness reports, of which e-coli and salmonella represented the bulk of causes. 30,000 illnesses in a year is roughly 82 reports a day across the nation. Each day about 82 people report an illness caused by some type of contaminated food. of these 82 people per day, it is highly likely that most (if not all) of them ate fast food or ate food produced by a major farming corporation. These illness might be avoided if the major corporate farming businesses put more revenue into better food, housing conditions, and treatment of their animals, and into examining the animals for potential harmful pathogens. However, these big businesses' main concern is growing bigger, producing more, and gaining more profit. The consequence is that as they produce more likely-contaminated food, and that food is sent all over America and even into foreign nations, they are further spreading diseases like e-coli and salmonella. This results in food recalls, which costs the companies time, money, and prestige. Ultimately, by not investing enough in healthier animals, the mass production companies are not only harming themselves, but are also harming the general population of consumers.
Food, Inc. is correct in its analysis that mass produced foods are often the cause of serious consumer health problems. Millions of pounds of food (mostly meat, and of meat it is mostly beef) are recalled every month, and thousands of food-related illnesses are reported each year. Many of these recalls and illnesses could be avoided if the producers would spend more time and money in ensuring the health of their animals. By not doing so, the companies like Tyson and Cargill are harming both themselves and their customers.
Tow #28-Documentary Part 1
Food, Inc. is a 2008 documentary by Michael Pollan and Eric Schlosser that analyzes corporate farming methods in the United States.The documentary stresses how Americans are so far removed from the actual source of the food they consume that most do not know where their food came from. It also illustrates how mass farming methods over the years have become increasingly more unhealthy and the majority of the market has become concentrated in the hands of four main/large companies (Tyson, Cargills, Smithfield, and Perdue). The first part of the film is about the meat production industry, the second part is about grains and vegetables, and the third portion of the documentary deals with the economics. The intended audience is for the average American consumer, but also extends to the four main companies themselves, all of which refused to be interviewed. In this documentary, Pollan and Schlosser use appeals to pathos and facts from primary sources to show how mass food production methods (a large portion of which is for the benefit of fast food companies) in the United States is, inhumane for animals, unhealthy for consumers, and exploitative of workers and farmers.
Throughout the documentary are scenes of the conditions animals are kept in before being slaughtered for meat. Many of these images show severely cramped, unhygienic conditions. Most of these images are used as appeals to the pathos of the audience, since it is highly likely that the majority of viewers are against animal abuse. For example, one primary source, Carole Morison, a Perdue grower, allowed Pollan to view the inhumane chicken house conditions on the land she managed owned by Perdue. She said that, "“It is nasty in here. There is dust flying everywhere, there is feces everywhere. This isn't farming, this is mass production just like in a factory." However, the conditions the animals are kept in aren't the only thing inhumane about the industry. In the case of these chickens, they are fed and bred to encourage rapid instead of natural growth, so they will become fatter and ready-to-eat sooner. Yet, “their bones and internal organs cannot keep up with the rapid growth.” The consequence is that the birds are often in pain or can barely walk.
The majority of this documentary consists of interviews of primary sources; people who have first hand knowledge of the facts about the mass food production methods occurring in America. Many of these interviews provide evidence of how unhealthy the results of corporate farming are for consumers. A segment was shot of Allen Trenkle, a Ruminant Nutrition Expert at Iowa State University examining the contents of a live cow (painlessly for the cow) who was being fed a diet of cheap corn. In the stomach he found millions of dangerous e-coli bacteria. This is because when cows, whose natural diet is grass, are fed corn (which is cheaper for the large companies), it results in the evolution of acid-resistant e-coli. The bacteria then becomes part of the meat that is packaged and sold in stores and restaurants. One tragic case of this was Barbara Kowalcyk, food safety advocate, whose son died at 2 1/2 of e-coli found in hamburger. New cases of meat-related illness are being reported daily. Another reason why mass food production is detrimental to consumers' health is because, in most cases, the less nutritious a food is, the less expensive it is. For example, you can buy a whole hamburger at a fast food place for 99 cents, but you cannot buy even a head of broccoli at the grocery store for the same price. According to Pollan, this is because, "we have skewed our food system to the bad calories" because the bad calories are cheaper to produce.
The last segment of the video is devoted to the economics of the corporate farming business. These large companies like Smithfield and Tyson are exploitative of their workers and farmers. The farmers are kept bound to these large companies because of debts, and workers in the companies' factories are often composed of the poor minorities of the population (e.g. immigrants). These companies often pay only minimum wage, and do not pay enough attention to safety precautions in their factories. Most of these factories like a Smithfield slaughterhouse that was secretly videotaped by workers provide very poor conditions for both workers and animals. One worker reports there being "blood, urine, and feces everywhere" and that getting injured or sick was a high possibility.
Pollan and Schlosser want to make the American people more aware of how their food comes to be at their tables. Even "Farm Fresh" products are produced by mostly the same few companies that hold a virtual monopoly over the industry. The fact that none of the major companies would allow themselves to be interviewed, and even discouraged their farmers' to refuse interviews, begs the question of what they have to hide. However, this is not the focus of the documentary. The focus of the documentary is to highlight how dis-attached Americans are to the source of their food, and to inform American consumers across the country of how these mass food production methods are inhumane towards animals, harmful to consumers themselves (especially consumers of fast food, i.e. the majority of the nations), and how the major corporate farming consolidations exploit their farmers and workers.
Throughout the documentary are scenes of the conditions animals are kept in before being slaughtered for meat. Many of these images show severely cramped, unhygienic conditions. Most of these images are used as appeals to the pathos of the audience, since it is highly likely that the majority of viewers are against animal abuse. For example, one primary source, Carole Morison, a Perdue grower, allowed Pollan to view the inhumane chicken house conditions on the land she managed owned by Perdue. She said that, "“It is nasty in here. There is dust flying everywhere, there is feces everywhere. This isn't farming, this is mass production just like in a factory." However, the conditions the animals are kept in aren't the only thing inhumane about the industry. In the case of these chickens, they are fed and bred to encourage rapid instead of natural growth, so they will become fatter and ready-to-eat sooner. Yet, “their bones and internal organs cannot keep up with the rapid growth.” The consequence is that the birds are often in pain or can barely walk.
The majority of this documentary consists of interviews of primary sources; people who have first hand knowledge of the facts about the mass food production methods occurring in America. Many of these interviews provide evidence of how unhealthy the results of corporate farming are for consumers. A segment was shot of Allen Trenkle, a Ruminant Nutrition Expert at Iowa State University examining the contents of a live cow (painlessly for the cow) who was being fed a diet of cheap corn. In the stomach he found millions of dangerous e-coli bacteria. This is because when cows, whose natural diet is grass, are fed corn (which is cheaper for the large companies), it results in the evolution of acid-resistant e-coli. The bacteria then becomes part of the meat that is packaged and sold in stores and restaurants. One tragic case of this was Barbara Kowalcyk, food safety advocate, whose son died at 2 1/2 of e-coli found in hamburger. New cases of meat-related illness are being reported daily. Another reason why mass food production is detrimental to consumers' health is because, in most cases, the less nutritious a food is, the less expensive it is. For example, you can buy a whole hamburger at a fast food place for 99 cents, but you cannot buy even a head of broccoli at the grocery store for the same price. According to Pollan, this is because, "we have skewed our food system to the bad calories" because the bad calories are cheaper to produce.
The last segment of the video is devoted to the economics of the corporate farming business. These large companies like Smithfield and Tyson are exploitative of their workers and farmers. The farmers are kept bound to these large companies because of debts, and workers in the companies' factories are often composed of the poor minorities of the population (e.g. immigrants). These companies often pay only minimum wage, and do not pay enough attention to safety precautions in their factories. Most of these factories like a Smithfield slaughterhouse that was secretly videotaped by workers provide very poor conditions for both workers and animals. One worker reports there being "blood, urine, and feces everywhere" and that getting injured or sick was a high possibility.
Pollan and Schlosser want to make the American people more aware of how their food comes to be at their tables. Even "Farm Fresh" products are produced by mostly the same few companies that hold a virtual monopoly over the industry. The fact that none of the major companies would allow themselves to be interviewed, and even discouraged their farmers' to refuse interviews, begs the question of what they have to hide. However, this is not the focus of the documentary. The focus of the documentary is to highlight how dis-attached Americans are to the source of their food, and to inform American consumers across the country of how these mass food production methods are inhumane towards animals, harmful to consumers themselves (especially consumers of fast food, i.e. the majority of the nations), and how the major corporate farming consolidations exploit their farmers and workers.
Sunday, April 27, 2014
TOW #25-Visual: Lint Roller
This advertisement is by the company 3M which sells various technological innovations around the world. The particular product being promoted here is a lint roller. The focus of this advertisement is on the image of the lint roller itself, made striking by the image itself as well as its background. These two visual considerations together, the lint roller with the image of a cat on it and its neutral resting space, work together to create an intriguing, striking advertisement that is meant to catch people's attention and make them want to buy the product.
In this advertisement, the consumer's eye is immediately drawn to the white lint roller. However, in this case you cannot actually see that part of the tool itself. Instead what is shown is the image of a white cat rolled up on the lint roller. The detailing on this part of the image is done quite well, including minute details such as the pads of the cat's feet and individual strands of hair that make the image more realistic. The message is obvious: this lint roller is so powerful and effective that it can easily catch enough hair from a surface to make up an entire cat, all without a new sheet needing to be used. The picture of the cat rolled up on the roller catches the viewer's immediate attention, since it is an innovative and intriguing way to advertise such a product. It is also a testament to how efficient the lint roller is, fulfilling 3M's ultimate goal: to persuade people to buy the roller.
The second important thing to consider regarding the visual effectiveness of this advertisement is the background/resting place of the roller. It is obviously some type of fabric (likely a suit of some kind), based on the wrinkles and the apparent texture. This is more effective than having the roller rest on a table or hard surface, since the primary purpose of the lint roller is to remove hair/lint from clothing. The color of the background is also important. It is a neutral color that ensures that people's eyes go immediately to the bright contrasting color: the white cat/lint roller. The thin white stripes on the background are also significant because, while still allowing for the rolled-up-cat to be the primary focus of the viewer, they make it easier to see the handle of the lint roller as well, so people can see the entire product. If the background were a solid dark color, the handle of the lint roller might not be seen. Then the product would simply look like a rolled up cat resting on a blanket; a confusing image.
The appeal of this advertisement is mainly in its visual aids: the cat rolled up on the lint roller and the neutral yet complimentary background. The only text appearing on the advertisement is the name of the company (to give the advertisement ethos) and the name of the product ("Lint Roller") in case anyone should be confused as to what the image is or does not understand what the product is supposed to be. Overall, the combination of striking imagery and mostly lack of textual advertising makes the advertisement more successful, striking, and persuasive to its audience: consumers (esp. consumers with pets who shed pet hair and fur on the furniture, clothing, etc...)
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
TOW #24-Digital Wild West
Goals: Reading-Identify most prominent rhetorical devices
Writing: Clearly, persuasively analyze devices/relevance to author's purpose
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/opinion/taming-the-digital-wild-west.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
The primary use of the internet when it was first introduced was mainly to provide information for people who sought factual answers. However, that is not the case anymore. The Internet has evolved. It's purpose is no longer solely to inform, but now encompasses creating and dealing with changes in everyday life, especially for consumers since many companies have online sites. In this article, Eric Schneiderman uses clear examples and personal experiences to show how online companies should be subject to/cooperate with government regulations and the regulators themselves.
The bulk of this article is devoted to examples both of companies that have opposed regulation, and those that have cooperated, and how the companies that cooperated were better off in the long run. Schneider calls to attention the hotel-apartment company Airbnb and the cab company Uber. The purpose of Airbnb is to allow users in nearly 200 different companies to turn their homes into rentable apartments. "In 2010, the state of New York passed a law confirming that short-stay rentals were generally illegal in apartment buildings....Airbnb “hosts” rent out apartments every day in violation of this law." When regulators attempted to step in, they were fought by the Airbnb law team. A subpoena on the company was obtained, but the day before the court date, Airbnb removed nearly 2,000 listings from New York, implying that the regulators were right to be concerned. This act, according to Schneider, lowered the confidence users felt toward the site from that point on. As for Uber, during bad weather this last year, they charged New Yorkers nearly 8x the regular price, violating New York laws against price gouging. Uber has already attempted to defend its prices, and will likely not work quietly with regulators. In both cases, battling against regulations would only result in legal actions being taken and the company losing consumer confidence and its reputation.
Schneider also gives example of a company that has cooperated with regulations, and therefore suffered no ill effects. In 2013, Yelp cooperated with law enforcement on an investigation that resulted in fines against 19 companies that had been hired to fraudulently inflate rankings for clients (other companies), as well as hurt their clients' competitors. "This furthered the public interest, but also burnished Yelp’s reputation for reliability." By working with government regulators, Yelp kept itself out of legal difficulties, was able to eliminate illegal companies from its website, became viewed as the "good guy" by the public, and managed to bolster its reputation and good standing as a company. Had Yelp fought against investigations, it may have been labeled as an accomplice to the fraudulent companies and faced possible consequences for obstruction of justice (an investigation).
The author also gives descriptions of his personal experiences as a regulator to establish himself as someone qualified to speak about this topic, as well as make the article itself more persuasive towards his overall purpose. He says that, "The cold shoulder that regulators like me get from self-proclaimed cyberlibertarians deprives us of powerful partners in protecting the public interest online. While this may shield companies in the short run, authorities will ultimately be forced to use the blunt tools of traditional law enforcement. Cooperation is a better path." Companies that oppose government regulations will only be injuring themselves in the long-haul, when more pressing methods are used against them (e.g. the subpoena brought against Aibnb). Cooperation would be both quicker, easier, and avoid any legal troubles or loss of consumer interest/confidence. He goes on at the end of his article to say, " we are now living in an online world, one that offers great promise but is also becoming one of the primary crime scenes of the 21st century." It is up to regulators like him to manage these new online companies to ensure they dont step out of line at the expense of their clients, or treat this new online-oriented world as a "digital Wild West."
Through clear-cut examples and his own experiences as a government regulator of online companies, Schreidner attempts to show how cooperation with regulations is actually beneficial for online companies in the long-haul. Battling with regulators will only lead to negative consequences such as legal troubles and loss of client usage. In the blooming digital age, regulations are even more necessary to protect consumers and ensure that no online companies exploits others or its consumers through illegal methods.
Schneider also gives example of a company that has cooperated with regulations, and therefore suffered no ill effects. In 2013, Yelp cooperated with law enforcement on an investigation that resulted in fines against 19 companies that had been hired to fraudulently inflate rankings for clients (other companies), as well as hurt their clients' competitors. "This furthered the public interest, but also burnished Yelp’s reputation for reliability." By working with government regulators, Yelp kept itself out of legal difficulties, was able to eliminate illegal companies from its website, became viewed as the "good guy" by the public, and managed to bolster its reputation and good standing as a company. Had Yelp fought against investigations, it may have been labeled as an accomplice to the fraudulent companies and faced possible consequences for obstruction of justice (an investigation).
The author also gives descriptions of his personal experiences as a regulator to establish himself as someone qualified to speak about this topic, as well as make the article itself more persuasive towards his overall purpose. He says that, "The cold shoulder that regulators like me get from self-proclaimed cyberlibertarians deprives us of powerful partners in protecting the public interest online. While this may shield companies in the short run, authorities will ultimately be forced to use the blunt tools of traditional law enforcement. Cooperation is a better path." Companies that oppose government regulations will only be injuring themselves in the long-haul, when more pressing methods are used against them (e.g. the subpoena brought against Aibnb). Cooperation would be both quicker, easier, and avoid any legal troubles or loss of consumer interest/confidence. He goes on at the end of his article to say, " we are now living in an online world, one that offers great promise but is also becoming one of the primary crime scenes of the 21st century." It is up to regulators like him to manage these new online companies to ensure they dont step out of line at the expense of their clients, or treat this new online-oriented world as a "digital Wild West."
Through clear-cut examples and his own experiences as a government regulator of online companies, Schreidner attempts to show how cooperation with regulations is actually beneficial for online companies in the long-haul. Battling with regulators will only lead to negative consequences such as legal troubles and loss of client usage. In the blooming digital age, regulations are even more necessary to protect consumers and ensure that no online companies exploits others or its consumers through illegal methods.
IRB Intro #4
For my fourth IRB I hve chosen The Nazi Officer's Wife: How One Jewish Woman Survived The
Holocaust. In this book, the author, Edith Hahn tells of how she survived the Holocaust as the wife of a Nazi party member in Munich. She was sent to a ghetto and then a labor camp by the Gestapo when she was a young woman. She managed to return home after a few months, but was forced underground for fear of being hunted. She created a new identity, Grete Denner, and moved to Munich where a Nazi Party member named Werner Vetter fell in love with her and kept her secret that she was Jewish. Edith tells of the suspician she and her family faced, how her husband was captured by Soviets and her house was bombed. However, despite all the dangers, she kept all records (including this partial autobiography) of her life and events which are now kept at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C.
Sunday, March 30, 2014
TOW #23-Historic Letter
Source: http://marxists.org/archive/zola/1898/jaccuse.htm
In 1894, military officer Alfred Dreyfus was
accused of providing secret military information to Germany via a secret
“memo.” In his open letter to the President of the French
Republic Emile Zola speaks out against what he deems the unjustified
imprisonment of Dreyfus by pointing out the miscarriage of justice that
occurred, explaining an affair that proved Dreyfus to be innocent but was
largely ignored, and enumerating the wrongdoings of those involved in the
Dreyfus case, attempt to convince the President of Dreyfus’ innocence.
Zola begins his letter by identifying
commander Paty de Clam as the main orchestrator of the Dreyfus investigation,
and the one who ultimately turned into an “affair.” Zola accuses de Clam of using several
unethical methods in an effort to get Dreyfus to confess, among which were
things such as shocking Dreyfus into confessing to threatening the man’s wife
if she should protest her husband’s arrest. “One could not conceive of
the experiments to which he subjected unhappy Dreyfus, the traps into which he
wanted to make him fall, the insane investigations, monstrous imaginations, a
whole torturing insanity." However, de Clam was not alone in this
miscarriage of justice. He had three main accomplices, Generals Mercier,
De Boisdeffre, and Gonse, who, at the very least, were guilty of failing
to ensure that justice would be carried out fairly.
The letter finishes with Zola
recapping the reasons for Dreyfus’ innocence by issuing accusations against
those who convicted Dreyfus of a crime he didn't commit. Zola accuses the military
department and the judge/jury of the trial of being affected by the feelings of
antisemitism, making them already biased toward Dreyfus (a Jew) before the
trial had even begun; the military officials involved in the miscarriage
of justice and then the concealment of a possible correction to this wrong;
and the handwriting experts who provided a study of the memo of
submitting falsified reports/evidence.
Through his letter, Zola seeks to
bring the French President's attention to a grave miscarriage of justice that
had been committed in the French military. To do this, he cites the
illegitimacy of the investigation, the cover-up attempt by high ranking
military officials, and recaps the various crimes the convictors of Dreyfus
themselves are guilty of. Zola speaks out for Dreyfus' innocence, and was
ultimately successful. Not long after the publishing of J'Accuse in
a public French newspaper, Dreyfus' case was reexamined, culminating in his
ultimate acquittal.
Friday, March 14, 2014
TOW #21-Visual-Samsung
Further analysis will reveal the true meaning behind this advertisement. It is really a clever idea by Samsung. It implies that the Mp3 player is so good that it will sound like the singer of the song being listened to is actually right inside the ear of the listener. This is an attempt to convince consumers of the impressive sound quality of the Samsung Mp3, and it may work with many consumers who only spend a moment or two to consider the ad.
However, a key flaw in this ad is actually what the ad is based on. According to this analysis, the miniature person represents an earbud. Therefore, this ad could be perceived as actually an advertisement for a pair of earphones, earphones so good that it makes it sound as if the music is right in the listener's ear. Thus someone who took that spin on the add, would only be confused by the mention of the Mp3 player in the lower right hand corner of the ad. In fact, there is no Mp3 player visible anywherein the advertisement. This represents a kew weakness that this ad holds. If it were an ad for a pair of earphones, it would be extremely effective. As it is, as an ad for Samsung's Mp3 player, it is not as effective an argument when analyzed closely. Luckily for Samsung, most people who look at this ad will not be doing an in-depth rhetorical analysis. When taken in with just a cursory glance, this ad is safely effective as a means of promoting the product. However, anyone who has taken Mr. Yost's English class will not be fooled.
Monday, March 3, 2014
TOW #20-IRB Rhetorical Analysis-Pelzer (part I)
Reading goal: identify prominent/relevant rhetorical devices
Writing goal: clearly analyze/offer evidence for each device
This portion of David Pelzer's memoir, the first half of the second book in his trilogy, describes how he was rescued from his abusive home by concerned teachers, placed in his first foster home, and the trial/events leading up to the trial that ultimately freed him from his abusive mother. In this part of his book, Pelzer uses a distinctive dedication, a flashback in the present tense, and unsophisticated diction to describe his own personal journey, and to encourage awareness about cases of child abuse that often go unseen or unrecognized.
The Lost Boy features a dedication that is distinct in several ways, making the book itself stand out immediately. Instead of a simply, few-lines dedication like most books contain, Pelzer's book holds many names and titles. Most importantly, it features "the teachers and staff who rescued me [Pelzer]," "the angel of social services," and his own parents, among many other friends and mentors. The first two dedications, to his teachers and social worker, show immediately that Pelzer went through experiences that many others have not, and show also that he wishes to show those people the utmost gratitude for helping him. The dedication to his parents may be surprising to many readers, because in his first book, A Child Called "It," Pelzer's parents are described as neglectful, on his father's part, and physically/verbally abusive on his mother's part. The addition of their names in his book, shows Pelzer's willingness to forgive those who hurt him, and that he has not turned bitter toward them, as most people might have done. The full description of his journey toward forgiving his parents is described in his final book of the trilogy, A Man Named Dave."
The first portion of The Lost Boy is told as a flashback to the day before Dave's rescue by his teachers. He describes how, after suffering numerous of his mother's cruelties (all observed by his father, but not stopped), he ran away. However, his freedom was short lived, as he was found by a policeman who located his home and returned him there. The flashback ends with Dave's final thought of, "I have no home." (Pelzer, 32). The entire flashback is told in the present tense and from Dave's point of view. The effect of his use of the present is to make his audience feel as if they are witnessing what he is at the moment it is happening. During the parts where he describes the abuses he undergoes, such as "as solid slap to my [his] face," his reader's can feel as if they are in the same room with him as silent observers. His readers are given a first hand look into a world they may have never realized existed before, and after they have seen it, it would not be easily forgotten.
The remaining portion of the first half of the book is Dave's description of his dealings with his social worker, first foster, and the trial that ultimately freed him. It is told from a first person point of view like the beginning of the book, but this time it is in the past tense. The diction he uses to describe this portion of his life is distinct in that it is simplistic and unsophisticated. Much like the language a child might use when recollecting a certain event. This is not due to any writing deficiencies on Pelzer's part, but rather on purpose. He wanted his book told from his point of view at that moment in time, and he was in his early teens during these events, and so his diction is that of a young boy. He even mentions the cause for this in his author's notes. He says that,"...the perspective of this book is based on life from ages 12-18." His use of his perspectives at the time of the events he is describing enables his readers to recognize his slow maturity throughout the book, with the diction at the end of the book being more advanced than in the beginning.
David Pelzer's entire trilogy is not meant to appeal solely to the pathos of his readers. He does not desire pity for himself specifically. His purpose in describing the trials and tribulations he went through, many of them disturbing to most people, is to inspire sympathy for ANY child undergoing anything like he went through, and outrage at the perpetrators of child abuse. To be sure, he wants to appeal to his readers' sense of emotions, but not for himself. His intent is for his audience, when reading his life's story, to be struck by the atrocities he suffered and want to take action to prevent anything of the sort happening again.
While most people have indeed heard about child abuse, on the news, in commercials, and murmuring of it in everyday conversation, it is likely that very few realized the true extent and truth of the crime before reading Pelzer's book. The trilogy would have opened thousands of eyes, bringing to the forefront an issue that was previously in the back of many people's minds, lurking but never fully manifesting. A person who previously sent $10 a month to an organization against child abuse advertised on the television, believing they had done all they could, would now see that so much more is required to battle child abuse, and subsequently donate more or join an organization committed to helping abused children directly. If Dave's books can affect even one person in such a way, or save a single child from a world of pain and degradation, then they would have been worth the effort.
I was fiercely affected by Dave's first book, A Child Called "It," and have been again by his second book. His descriptions of his life are simplistic yet deeply moving. It is impossible to believe that anyone who has ready any of the books in his trilogy could walk away without being affected in some way. For me personally, I realized that, no matter how hard my life is, it could never compare to that of an abused child, making me more grateful for every luxury I have that I take for granted, that another kid might only ever dream of having. Dave's books are extremely moving and inspirational, showing the true resilience of the human spirit when facing seemingly impossible odds.
Writing goal: clearly analyze/offer evidence for each device
This portion of David Pelzer's memoir, the first half of the second book in his trilogy, describes how he was rescued from his abusive home by concerned teachers, placed in his first foster home, and the trial/events leading up to the trial that ultimately freed him from his abusive mother. In this part of his book, Pelzer uses a distinctive dedication, a flashback in the present tense, and unsophisticated diction to describe his own personal journey, and to encourage awareness about cases of child abuse that often go unseen or unrecognized.
The Lost Boy features a dedication that is distinct in several ways, making the book itself stand out immediately. Instead of a simply, few-lines dedication like most books contain, Pelzer's book holds many names and titles. Most importantly, it features "the teachers and staff who rescued me [Pelzer]," "the angel of social services," and his own parents, among many other friends and mentors. The first two dedications, to his teachers and social worker, show immediately that Pelzer went through experiences that many others have not, and show also that he wishes to show those people the utmost gratitude for helping him. The dedication to his parents may be surprising to many readers, because in his first book, A Child Called "It," Pelzer's parents are described as neglectful, on his father's part, and physically/verbally abusive on his mother's part. The addition of their names in his book, shows Pelzer's willingness to forgive those who hurt him, and that he has not turned bitter toward them, as most people might have done. The full description of his journey toward forgiving his parents is described in his final book of the trilogy, A Man Named Dave."
The first portion of The Lost Boy is told as a flashback to the day before Dave's rescue by his teachers. He describes how, after suffering numerous of his mother's cruelties (all observed by his father, but not stopped), he ran away. However, his freedom was short lived, as he was found by a policeman who located his home and returned him there. The flashback ends with Dave's final thought of, "I have no home." (Pelzer, 32). The entire flashback is told in the present tense and from Dave's point of view. The effect of his use of the present is to make his audience feel as if they are witnessing what he is at the moment it is happening. During the parts where he describes the abuses he undergoes, such as "as solid slap to my [his] face," his reader's can feel as if they are in the same room with him as silent observers. His readers are given a first hand look into a world they may have never realized existed before, and after they have seen it, it would not be easily forgotten.
The remaining portion of the first half of the book is Dave's description of his dealings with his social worker, first foster, and the trial that ultimately freed him. It is told from a first person point of view like the beginning of the book, but this time it is in the past tense. The diction he uses to describe this portion of his life is distinct in that it is simplistic and unsophisticated. Much like the language a child might use when recollecting a certain event. This is not due to any writing deficiencies on Pelzer's part, but rather on purpose. He wanted his book told from his point of view at that moment in time, and he was in his early teens during these events, and so his diction is that of a young boy. He even mentions the cause for this in his author's notes. He says that,"...the perspective of this book is based on life from ages 12-18." His use of his perspectives at the time of the events he is describing enables his readers to recognize his slow maturity throughout the book, with the diction at the end of the book being more advanced than in the beginning.
David Pelzer's entire trilogy is not meant to appeal solely to the pathos of his readers. He does not desire pity for himself specifically. His purpose in describing the trials and tribulations he went through, many of them disturbing to most people, is to inspire sympathy for ANY child undergoing anything like he went through, and outrage at the perpetrators of child abuse. To be sure, he wants to appeal to his readers' sense of emotions, but not for himself. His intent is for his audience, when reading his life's story, to be struck by the atrocities he suffered and want to take action to prevent anything of the sort happening again.
While most people have indeed heard about child abuse, on the news, in commercials, and murmuring of it in everyday conversation, it is likely that very few realized the true extent and truth of the crime before reading Pelzer's book. The trilogy would have opened thousands of eyes, bringing to the forefront an issue that was previously in the back of many people's minds, lurking but never fully manifesting. A person who previously sent $10 a month to an organization against child abuse advertised on the television, believing they had done all they could, would now see that so much more is required to battle child abuse, and subsequently donate more or join an organization committed to helping abused children directly. If Dave's books can affect even one person in such a way, or save a single child from a world of pain and degradation, then they would have been worth the effort.
I was fiercely affected by Dave's first book, A Child Called "It," and have been again by his second book. His descriptions of his life are simplistic yet deeply moving. It is impossible to believe that anyone who has ready any of the books in his trilogy could walk away without being affected in some way. For me personally, I realized that, no matter how hard my life is, it could never compare to that of an abused child, making me more grateful for every luxury I have that I take for granted, that another kid might only ever dream of having. Dave's books are extremely moving and inspirational, showing the true resilience of the human spirit when facing seemingly impossible odds.
TOW #19-"paid-what-you're-worth"
Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/paid-what-youre-worth_b_4964290.html
The subject of workers and their wages has been a source of controversy for hundreds of years, pitching employers against employees, and highlighted by the never-ending demand of laborers for higher wages. This article by Robert Reich discusses the myth that people's salaries reflect their worth as workers. In it, Reich uses statistical data and successive counterarguments to refute and discredit this idea.
Throughout this article can be found statistics on different companies and the wages they pay or paid in the past, data which Reich uses to facilitate his argument. He begins by pointing out that today, American CEO's are paid almost 300 times the salary of the average worker. According to the "paid-what-you're-worth" principle, this can only mean that, "They must be worth it or they wouldn't be paid this much." Reich announces his stance, i.e. against this belief, when immediately after wards he catergorizes it as "dangerous myth." He then goes on to analyze Wall Street, citing that Wall Street paid it's workers around $26.7 billion in just bonuses in 2013. His question regarding this large figure: "Are Wall Street bankers really worth it?"
Reich mentions that 50 years ago, GM employees were paid an average of $35 an hour in today's money. Today, Walmart is the largest employer of workers, and their employees only get paid about $8.80 per hour. This begs the question whether, "... the typical GM employee a half-century ago was worth four times what today's typical Walmart employee is worth? " Reich's answer is no. The counter he gives to this assumption is that 50 years ago, GM employees had a strong union to bargain with their employers on their behalf. Today, Walmart employees dont have a strong union to gain them better wages. Later in his article, to explain that Wall Street bankers arent actually worth their billions of dollars of bonuses, he says that, "You don't have to be a rocket scientist or even a Wall Street banker to see that the hidden subsidy the Wall Street banks enjoy because they're too big to fail is about three times what Wall Street paid out in bonuses." Thus it is not merely the efforts of workers/bankers themselves that results in their high wages, it is the subsidies that the Wall Street banks they work at have.
I believe Reich did a good job of pointing out the flaw in the belief that workers are paid only what they're worth. He effectively renders it a true myth by discrediting it. His article is even mor effective due to the fact that it is published on Huffington Post, a well-established, well-known, widely-surveyed website known.
The subject of workers and their wages has been a source of controversy for hundreds of years, pitching employers against employees, and highlighted by the never-ending demand of laborers for higher wages. This article by Robert Reich discusses the myth that people's salaries reflect their worth as workers. In it, Reich uses statistical data and successive counterarguments to refute and discredit this idea.
Throughout this article can be found statistics on different companies and the wages they pay or paid in the past, data which Reich uses to facilitate his argument. He begins by pointing out that today, American CEO's are paid almost 300 times the salary of the average worker. According to the "paid-what-you're-worth" principle, this can only mean that, "They must be worth it or they wouldn't be paid this much." Reich announces his stance, i.e. against this belief, when immediately after wards he catergorizes it as "dangerous myth." He then goes on to analyze Wall Street, citing that Wall Street paid it's workers around $26.7 billion in just bonuses in 2013. His question regarding this large figure: "Are Wall Street bankers really worth it?"
Reich mentions that 50 years ago, GM employees were paid an average of $35 an hour in today's money. Today, Walmart is the largest employer of workers, and their employees only get paid about $8.80 per hour. This begs the question whether, "... the typical GM employee a half-century ago was worth four times what today's typical Walmart employee is worth? " Reich's answer is no. The counter he gives to this assumption is that 50 years ago, GM employees had a strong union to bargain with their employers on their behalf. Today, Walmart employees dont have a strong union to gain them better wages. Later in his article, to explain that Wall Street bankers arent actually worth their billions of dollars of bonuses, he says that, "You don't have to be a rocket scientist or even a Wall Street banker to see that the hidden subsidy the Wall Street banks enjoy because they're too big to fail is about three times what Wall Street paid out in bonuses." Thus it is not merely the efforts of workers/bankers themselves that results in their high wages, it is the subsidies that the Wall Street banks they work at have.
I believe Reich did a good job of pointing out the flaw in the belief that workers are paid only what they're worth. He effectively renders it a true myth by discrediting it. His article is even mor effective due to the fact that it is published on Huffington Post, a well-established, well-known, widely-surveyed website known.
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
TOW #18-Survive technology
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/13/technology/personaltech/how-to-survive-the-next-wave-of-technology-extinction.html?src=dayp&_r=0
Basically everyone today (in well-developed countries) rely on technology to fulfill some need or another. Sometimes it's merely for convenience. For example, this assignment could have been written using old-fashioned pen and paper. Other times, technology is more practical than alternative methods. As technology is constantly changing, so do our methods of using it. Every type of technology that is new one moment, will become extinct as soon as something better emerges. In his article, How to Survive the Next Wave of Technology Extinction, Manjoo first explains the meaning of technology extinction, and then offers numerous tips and tricks on how to survive it.
Manjoo uses the example of the Nook to explain the meaning of technical extinction. In 2011, the Nook was proclaimed "the best e-reader in the land" by Consumer Reports. Yet, only a year or two later, the Nook has fallen out of style with consumers. So it is with every type of technology. The thing that proposes a risk to all consumers, is how to avoid choosing technology from a company that will not prosper. Manjoo's recommended strategy is to play every tech giant against the others, sample every company's best features, and do not overcommit. He offers a step-by-step plan/tips and tricks for making the best decisions and surviving in a world of increasing technology extinction.
The first step, according to Manjoo, is to BUY APPLE’S HARDWARE because Apple’s phones, tablets and PCs are the best-designed and best-made on the market. This step also maximizes a consumer's ability to be promiscuous with software. The next step, is to USE GOOGLE’S SERVICES. He says that, "throwing your data at Google is a good idea for two reasons: First, the company is incredibly good at managing it; it lets you have access to stuff on pretty much any device, anywhere in the world, all the time. Its services almost never go down, its data is extremely accurate (see Maps), and...Google offers solid security...." Manjoo claims that giving Google all of your "stuff" is not a commitment because "Google allows you to download your personal data from most of its services so you can easily move to some other pusher." The third step is to BUY MEDIA FROM AMAZON because books, music and movies from Amazon are the most widely viewable. It's possible to watch and read Amazon’s media on Apple devices, Google devices, Amazon’s own Kindle line and lots of other places, letting you use a variety of products. The last step is to BET ON CONNECTORS which bridge the gap between otherwise foreign technologies.
With different pieces of technology constantly going in and out of style, being replaced, and being remade, it presents an uncertain floor for consumers trying to make a decision about which company/products they want to commit to. In times of uncertainty, people seek something steady to rely on: a plan. Manjoo offers a plan for surviving in this world of technological extinction, supporting each step with examples that verify his advice. With technology playing such a pivotal role in most people's lives, a set of guidelines can prove extremely helpful when trying to make technological-related decisions.
Basically everyone today (in well-developed countries) rely on technology to fulfill some need or another. Sometimes it's merely for convenience. For example, this assignment could have been written using old-fashioned pen and paper. Other times, technology is more practical than alternative methods. As technology is constantly changing, so do our methods of using it. Every type of technology that is new one moment, will become extinct as soon as something better emerges. In his article, How to Survive the Next Wave of Technology Extinction, Manjoo first explains the meaning of technology extinction, and then offers numerous tips and tricks on how to survive it.
Manjoo uses the example of the Nook to explain the meaning of technical extinction. In 2011, the Nook was proclaimed "the best e-reader in the land" by Consumer Reports. Yet, only a year or two later, the Nook has fallen out of style with consumers. So it is with every type of technology. The thing that proposes a risk to all consumers, is how to avoid choosing technology from a company that will not prosper. Manjoo's recommended strategy is to play every tech giant against the others, sample every company's best features, and do not overcommit. He offers a step-by-step plan/tips and tricks for making the best decisions and surviving in a world of increasing technology extinction.
The first step, according to Manjoo, is to BUY APPLE’S HARDWARE because Apple’s phones, tablets and PCs are the best-designed and best-made on the market. This step also maximizes a consumer's ability to be promiscuous with software. The next step, is to USE GOOGLE’S SERVICES. He says that, "throwing your data at Google is a good idea for two reasons: First, the company is incredibly good at managing it; it lets you have access to stuff on pretty much any device, anywhere in the world, all the time. Its services almost never go down, its data is extremely accurate (see Maps), and...Google offers solid security...." Manjoo claims that giving Google all of your "stuff" is not a commitment because "Google allows you to download your personal data from most of its services so you can easily move to some other pusher." The third step is to BUY MEDIA FROM AMAZON because books, music and movies from Amazon are the most widely viewable. It's possible to watch and read Amazon’s media on Apple devices, Google devices, Amazon’s own Kindle line and lots of other places, letting you use a variety of products. The last step is to BET ON CONNECTORS which bridge the gap between otherwise foreign technologies.
With different pieces of technology constantly going in and out of style, being replaced, and being remade, it presents an uncertain floor for consumers trying to make a decision about which company/products they want to commit to. In times of uncertainty, people seek something steady to rely on: a plan. Manjoo offers a plan for surviving in this world of technological extinction, supporting each step with examples that verify his advice. With technology playing such a pivotal role in most people's lives, a set of guidelines can prove extremely helpful when trying to make technological-related decisions.
IRB Intro Post #3
For my third IRB selection, I have chosen The Lost Boy by David Pelzer. It is the sequel to the bestseller A Child Called "It." The first book focused on Pelzer's life as a victim of child abuse; his struggles, resilience, and coping methods. The Lost Boy is a narrative about his life after being rescued from his home where he was abused, and his life as a teen as a member of numerous foster homes. Both books provide a shocking, inspiring account of one of the worst cases of child abuse in California, and show the inner strength of the human spirit. Today, Pelzer travels around the U.S. educating the public on how to prevent/cope with/seek help for child abuse. He also carried the Olympic Torch for one of the games, and has received commendations from Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Clinton for his work.
Monday, February 3, 2014
TOW #17-Visual-WMF blade
This is an advertisement by WMF, a well-known cooking-products producer, for one of its products: the Grand Gourmet knife. In this ad, the creators use a visual exaggeration, the company logo, and a product slogan to encourage consumers to purchase this item.
The visual exaggeration used in this ad is that of the cutting board being sliced, as well as the carrot. The implication is that, while regular knives cut only the vegetable, the WMF Grand Gourmet knife is so sharp that it can slice through wood as well. This addresses the advertising of the blade's quality. The point is made clearer by the addition of the slogan for the product: "Sharper than you think." The slogan clearly identifies what viewers should realize from the visual picture, that the knife is truly sharper than one would think, sharp enough to slice through food and wood alike.
The addition of the WMF logo in the lower right-hand corner of the advertisement lends the ad an immediate sense of ethos. Many consumers will recognize the logo of the company, and therefore associate the Grand Gourmet knife with a company known for its quality cooking products. The logo also gives the consumers the information as to where/from whom to seek purchasing the blade, if they so wish. If a consumer is pleased with a product they purchased from WMF, then no doubt they would be pleased with the Grand Gourmet knife as well. This also encourages consumers and regular customers to purchase the product.
I believe this ad was very well done, especially with regard to the visual aspect. The image of the carrot AND the cutting board both being sliced would have been sufficient to get the point across even without the slogan. However, the slogan clarifies any possible misconceptions about the intent of the ad, and the final addition of the company logo makes the advertisement extremely effective.
Sunday, January 26, 2014
TOW #16: Removal of Bibles
Source: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/01/24/bibles-removed-from-university-lodge/
In his article, Todd Starnes uses direct quotes and a sarcastic tone to satirize the fact that Bibles were removed from a lodge owned by the University of Wisconsin due to some people's aversion to the mere presence of them.
The quotes that Starnes chooses to include make the speakers sound either ignorant or simply ridiculous. Added to that, Starnes follows up many of the quotes with a comment of his won that further mocks what the speaker of the quote is saying, or the point the speaker is making. One quote he includes is about the fact that Bibles are claimed to alienate "non-Christian guests whose religious beliefs are inconsistent with the message being promoted by the Bibles.'" Starnes then follows up this quote with a rhetorical question that mocks the point the speaker of the quote is making. He says, "So does that mean the university’s diner should stop making cheeseburgers, lest they offend vegans?" The answer to that is obviously a no, and, when compared to the quote, mocks it. He also includes the quote, "As you may know, the mission of the Gideons is to ‘win the lost for Christ,’” the FFRF's attorney wrote in a letter to the university. “The Gideon’s [sic] efforts to proselytize have frequently brought about conflict with non-religious persons and persons from minority faiths.” This quote by itself could be considered a valid point, if not for the cutting remark that Starnes follows up with, as follows..."I checked Google, and to the best of their search engine, there have been no religious wars fought in the name of Gideons International." The sarcasm in his response is almost tangible; his tone obviously one of mockery.
The final sentence of Starnes' article is perhaps the most sarcastic of them all, and there are quite a few in his article. He says that, "...the books were hidden behind the hotel’s registration counter. The books are made available only upon request. Much like how a convenience store sells nudie magazines – behind the counter, wrapped in brown paper, lest someone be offended." By comparing the Bibles to "nudie," he is pointing out the ridiculousness of the entire situation. Obvously, Bibles could in no way be compared with adult magazines, and yet, people are treating the two as one in the same. This statement brings home Starnes' point that any of the people who requested the removal of the Bibles on the grounds mentioned, are ignorant and almost humorously ridiculous.
I believe that Starnes accomplished his goal of satirizing this situation very well. His tone is obviously sarcastic and mocking, and his cutting remarks do their job well.
In his article, Todd Starnes uses direct quotes and a sarcastic tone to satirize the fact that Bibles were removed from a lodge owned by the University of Wisconsin due to some people's aversion to the mere presence of them.
The quotes that Starnes chooses to include make the speakers sound either ignorant or simply ridiculous. Added to that, Starnes follows up many of the quotes with a comment of his won that further mocks what the speaker of the quote is saying, or the point the speaker is making. One quote he includes is about the fact that Bibles are claimed to alienate "non-Christian guests whose religious beliefs are inconsistent with the message being promoted by the Bibles.'" Starnes then follows up this quote with a rhetorical question that mocks the point the speaker of the quote is making. He says, "So does that mean the university’s diner should stop making cheeseburgers, lest they offend vegans?" The answer to that is obviously a no, and, when compared to the quote, mocks it. He also includes the quote, "As you may know, the mission of the Gideons is to ‘win the lost for Christ,’” the FFRF's attorney wrote in a letter to the university. “The Gideon’s [sic] efforts to proselytize have frequently brought about conflict with non-religious persons and persons from minority faiths.” This quote by itself could be considered a valid point, if not for the cutting remark that Starnes follows up with, as follows..."I checked Google, and to the best of their search engine, there have been no religious wars fought in the name of Gideons International." The sarcasm in his response is almost tangible; his tone obviously one of mockery.
The final sentence of Starnes' article is perhaps the most sarcastic of them all, and there are quite a few in his article. He says that, "...the books were hidden behind the hotel’s registration counter. The books are made available only upon request. Much like how a convenience store sells nudie magazines – behind the counter, wrapped in brown paper, lest someone be offended." By comparing the Bibles to "nudie," he is pointing out the ridiculousness of the entire situation. Obvously, Bibles could in no way be compared with adult magazines, and yet, people are treating the two as one in the same. This statement brings home Starnes' point that any of the people who requested the removal of the Bibles on the grounds mentioned, are ignorant and almost humorously ridiculous.
I believe that Starnes accomplished his goal of satirizing this situation very well. His tone is obviously sarcastic and mocking, and his cutting remarks do their job well.
Sunday, January 5, 2014
Tow #14: Best books
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/15/books/review/the-10-best-books-of-2013.html?8qa
This article, published by the editors of the New York Times Book review, is a list of the top 10 best books of 2013, divided into fiction and nonfiction. The editors use information about each book and a brief description of the book to give readers of the article some insight into what each book is about, and why it would be considered among the top 10 books of the year.
The editors include the publishers and price of each book in their article, along with the obvious inclusion of the title and author. This additional information allows readers to determine whether they would want to purchase the book, and it gives the book a sense of ethos. Most people recognize publishing names such as Doubleday and Harper, and a book published by a well-known company will receive more respect and attention than one published by a random publishing agency. Undoubtedly, any book considered in the top 10 for the year would be published by a nation-famous agency like Knopf, Doubleday, or Harper.
Although not required, the inclusion of a description of each book is a huge help to readers of the article. The description tells readers what the book will be about, and, when paired with the price, will help people to decide whether they would want to, a. read the book, or b. read and purchase the book. Merely giving the title of each book, without an accompanying summary, would cause readers to most likely forget the books in the article as soon as they read it (the article). However, a description sticks in the mind more permanently, creating a curiosity to find out what the book is about/what is not included in the brief summary.
I believe the editors of the New York Times Book Review did an excellent job in crafting this informational article. The addition of publishers, prices, and plot summaries made the article more interesting/official, and would prove a great help to anyone interested in any of the books on the list.
This article, published by the editors of the New York Times Book review, is a list of the top 10 best books of 2013, divided into fiction and nonfiction. The editors use information about each book and a brief description of the book to give readers of the article some insight into what each book is about, and why it would be considered among the top 10 books of the year.
The editors include the publishers and price of each book in their article, along with the obvious inclusion of the title and author. This additional information allows readers to determine whether they would want to purchase the book, and it gives the book a sense of ethos. Most people recognize publishing names such as Doubleday and Harper, and a book published by a well-known company will receive more respect and attention than one published by a random publishing agency. Undoubtedly, any book considered in the top 10 for the year would be published by a nation-famous agency like Knopf, Doubleday, or Harper.
Although not required, the inclusion of a description of each book is a huge help to readers of the article. The description tells readers what the book will be about, and, when paired with the price, will help people to decide whether they would want to, a. read the book, or b. read and purchase the book. Merely giving the title of each book, without an accompanying summary, would cause readers to most likely forget the books in the article as soon as they read it (the article). However, a description sticks in the mind more permanently, creating a curiosity to find out what the book is about/what is not included in the brief summary.
I believe the editors of the New York Times Book Review did an excellent job in crafting this informational article. The addition of publishers, prices, and plot summaries made the article more interesting/official, and would prove a great help to anyone interested in any of the books on the list.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)