Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Potential College Essay


Rare is a case where someone claims to become a better version of themselves in a moment.  For me, change occurred with the snip of a scissors.  In the summer going into my sophomore year of high school, I cut my extremely long and thick hair into a pixie cut.  It was a drastic change with no warning to any of my friends and family besides my mother and one of my friends.  Prior to cutting my hair, I would get frustrated because I wanted it to look unique but it was too heavy to do anything with it.  I felt insecure about my hair so I established myself as3 an extremely passive person who could never make up my mind.  My “friends” would walk all over me and exploit what I did for them without consideration for me as a person.  Cutting my hair short allowed me to be more assured in who I am, showing my friends and family that I strong individual.  I am able to be both unique and confident. 

When my hair was long, I would hide behind it, hiding also behind my more confident friends.  After I cut it, my peers and family respected me more since it was uncommon that someone my age would make the decision to cut their hair so short.  They saw that I had confidence in myself and was growing from a passive girl to a strong young lady.  My family saw that I was able to think for myself and trusted me to make the right choices.  Many of my friends were impressed that I was able to do something so drastic without asking for the opinions of others first.  Both my family and friends saw that I was finally finding myself.  I no longer hid behind my “friends”, but became my own distinctive person.

When my hair was long, no one took me seriously because I did not take myself seriously.  I would get good grades but I would not put in any extra effort to make my work stand out.  No one expected me to be anything special because I did not want to hold myself to any high standard.  In a way, it was as though my hair was nothing special and neither was I.  After I cut my hair, I saw that I could create a new and better version of myself.  I had my own sense of style and could create my own image.  I saw that standing out is not inherently bad.  My academic performance increased, I became more involved in my school community, and was not afraid to take on leadership roles.  My peers now see me as someone reliable since I try to be a leader as well as considerate of people who feel how I felt prior to cutting my hair.  In my life today, I continue to look for ways to help people find who they are.  Once I was timid and uncommitted, now I am focused and true to myself. 

                My life changed for the better in an instant.  I never believed that cutting my hair would affect the way the way I interact with those around me, nor that it would allow me to be given more responsibilities.  Since I know what it is like to be taken advantage of, I try to encourage others and be a true friend, rather than a friend of convenience.  When I cut my hair I saw that I had the confidence to shape my own life and to be a true and welcoming friend.  One haircut changed my entire outlook on life and friendship.  Now with short hair, I am a young woman who tries to be a positive influence by showing people the power of individuality.

Thursday, April 7, 2016

Not A Real Artist

     Creativity and originality go hand in hand when discussing art, but once someone takes inspiration or reinterprets another's work, the piece is viewed as invalid, uncreative, and unoriginal.  However, artists of every medium use inspiration from outside sources in order to create an effective and moving piece.  As time has gone on, it becomes harder and harder to an artist's work to be validated and seen as a masterpiece because some create their own piece by taking the works of others and making it into something new.  With the modern incorporation of technology into art, it is seen as easier to plagiarize or rip off someone else work, and many claim that creativity and originality are dead.
     New forms of art and technology are always doubted and dismissed at first, especially when used together.  In the TED Talk given by Lawrence Lessig, he provides three examples as to this being true thought society.  Lessig discusses the invention of the "Talking Machine," to which John Phillips Sousa had responded by saying that, "These talking machines are going to ruin artistic development of music in this country."  This shows that even the past, something new and modern was seen as corruptive of art because it takes away its authenticity.  The outlook on "talking machines" has greatly changed over time, and it seems that in todays society music and other art forms are solely distributed and shared through them.  People being scared of new developments and change in ways of life has become a growing trend throughout the history of a growing world.
     Another trend throughout history has been that phenomenal artists hate themselves and their work because it is looked down upon by other people.  Artists such as Vincent Van Gogh were only truly respected and recognized as masters of art years later.  Over time, the standards and interpretations of art change and develop with new discoveries and events.  These new progressions in the world can act as a stream of inspiration for the artist to create in an entirely new style.  In early America, artists and writers were rejected because their art did not follow the traditional European style and standard of art.  Throughout his TED Talk, Lessig was able to vocalize that creativity thrives with freedom but unnecessary laws and standards limit the acceptance of art.
     Technology and art have the ability to grow and work hand in hand, as shown in modern society.  Modern generations can be called remix generations, or animating generations; both of which are modern forms of art created through the medium of technology.  However, some people claim that remixing and remaking other peoples works make these new forms of art created through piracy.  This can be true if the context is not changed enough, but society thrives off of growing and expanding off of the ideas of others, so the same can be said for art and technology combinations.  Originality and creativity comes form interpreting the works of others; taking the work of someone else and combining it with something else or something new makes it one's one, making it original.  Everything in this world is based off of something else, especially in art.  Saying that interpreting or creating something based on someone else's work is piracy is almost the same as saying that artists who paint landscape are not real or original artists because the landscape was created by the earth, not by the artist; the same goes for the art of photography.
     Remixing and remaking works of art through the combination of both art and technology gives a reason for the standard definitions of creativity and originality to be reevaluated.  Thoughts, emotions, and other creations are original, even if one draws on outside sources in order to form them because more research and more outside sources can allow a person to create the something to the strongest capacity.

The Politician Piggy Bank

     It is not a surprise that the United States government has never had the most genuine and trustworthy reputation.  Even before they get into office, politicians begin their manipulation process while in the process of campaigning and raising funds.  They will spend hours a day calling their constitutes to ask for donations and invite them to fundraisers.  However, politicians find this process both torturous and humiliating.  The people who donate are hardly appreciated though, the politicians take their money and move on.  Those who do donate are approached every year for the same purpose, feeding the politician piggy bank.
     In one of his recent episodes, John Oliver addresses the truth of congressional fundraising.  He is able to bring light to a subject that many do not think about and will even try to ignore.  Not only is the fundraising process, with obnoxious phone calls and long fundraisers, stressful and bothersome to the people, but also to the candidates.  Oliver brought up the valid point that, "people in Congress are the ones constantly complaining about the time they waste on fundraising," but they are the ones with the power to change the entire fundraising process.  These Congressmen will complain so much about the fundraising process and speak freely as to how torturous it is, even if the fundraising centers locations are kept under-wraps with no one from outside the campaign going in.  However, one would think that if something was so bothersome to such a large amount of people, some attempt at change would be made.  Congress is meant to help and protect the people, but instead they are taking their money in a way that is not enjoyable for either party.      
     As politicians become more accustomed to the fundraising process with years of experience, they tend to open up as to how the process makes them feel and how it can have an affect on the people.  After announcing his retirement, Representative Steve Israel met with John Oliver to diascuss what really happens during congressional fundraising.  He admitted to pushing people to call for donations and forcing them to meet a certain quota.  However, Israel recognized that "the real victims of this torture have become American people."  They have to give their money to a fundraiser where the funds themselves are not even being used for the campaign process.
     Majority of the funds raised end up going to the Congress-persons political party to help other's campaigns. Even if the position is secure, a certain minimum of funds must be raised.  These funds that are to be given range from $125,000 to $800,000.  If this is the amount for a typical Congressional campaign, one can only imagine how much money is being raised in the presidential elections this year.  If politicians are willing to take such large sums of money for a cause that does not make a single group happy, then politicians should initiate change to the system.  This system of "paying dues" also can create a large debt, and if Congress is already okay with doing that on a personal level, then there is a likely chance to do the same thing while in office.  Our nation has a large sum of debt that we constantly struggle to keep under control.  Paying dues can quickly get out of hand and become a habit.  Habits such as these, on a national level, have a negative affect on the people most of all.  These funds are coming from the people, and yet they are not being used to their benefit.
     The politician piggy bank is always growing at the expense of the American people, even though it exists to benefit them.  Congressional funding is not bad if it is done in moderation and the funds are used for their intended purpose, rather than paying dues.

Friday, March 11, 2016

Credible Comics

     McCloud breaks the stereotype of comics begin completely childish and goofy be establishing ethos.  In comics, there is not much room to establish credibility, so it is incredible feat that he is able to do so.  McCloud is able to do this by not only using words, but by using pictures and events as key points to hint at ethos.  He is able to establish ethos in both words and text, even if these are not the main focus of the comic.
     He first establishes his ethos by depicting himself as an outside narrator.  A narrator is typically a well educated person on the subject who is waiting to inform others of their message.  He goes on to explain his point, but the presence of the narrator figure adds to the credibility of the words he is saying.  While addressing the reader, the narrator is depicted separating words from pictures.  The titles on the books are famous writings and the pictures are famous works of art.  This shows that he is credible since he is educated in other fields besides comics.  In addition to ethos established through pictures, McCloud establishes his credibility through words as well.  On words that he wishes to stick with the reader and to be emphasized, he uses bold and italicized words.  This shows that he has confidence in what he is saying and is ready to point out the key points in his arguments.  
     McCloud also subtly includes the definition of comics.  Ethos is established through this inclusion since it shows that he took time to research exact definitions, making him seem more intelligent.  In one of the pictures, he also depicts the constitution, and the word box above it includes a specific summary of the constitution along with the year that it was created.  Including the specifics of the constitutions allows McCloud to seem much more credible in other respects instead of just comics.  At the very end of the comic, the last frame includes a reference back to the very beginning.  It states that comics are a story of show and tell, just like the young boy from the start of the comic.  The boy is showing and telling the class how is toy can change into different things, must like a comic does. 

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

Dreaming of Stars

     Stars are beautiful and bright, yet unreachable and unstable.  They seem perfect and ideal, a source of inspiration and a far off goal.  However, upon further inspection, the star is burning so bright and powerful that it will burn itself out.  Also, if one were to look into the sun, which is a star, their eyes would burn.  Celebrities are called stars for a reason.  They are an what people look up to and stare at pictures of.  Celebrities seem perfect on the outside, but are dying within, and if one looks too closely into their lives, this damage begins to show.
     Celebrity bodies are a great source of controversy.  Their bodies are seen as the perfect specimen of humanity, but at the same time they are criticized and ridiculed for their body.  In the world of celebrities, there is no way to be the ideal weight.  If a celebrity gains a few pounds or does not present themselves runway ready at all times, their career is threatened and they are called countless horrible things.  However, if a person is too skinny, they are mocked for not having the right amount of curves or for caring too much about what they look like.  Society creates these impossible standards for celebrities, but at the same time, society is also the one to criticizes their need to be ideal.  Outwardly, celebrities may seem like the pinnacle of health, but many tear their bodies apart from the inside out by going on extreme diets or "cleanses," eventually developing into eating disorders.  These stars seem perfect but are destroying themselves, all the while being under the constant gaze and judgement of the common people.  The common people themselves would never be able to attain this goal weight or beauty standards, but because the lifestyles of celebrities are to out of reach, the dream life of the stars is pushed even further to the impossible. 
     Common people are also damaged by the "perfection" of celebrities.  By looking to closely into the lives of the stars, they too will try to alter their lifestyle to be the ideal person.  Not only will the celebrity develop an eating disorder, but now an every day person will too while attempting to live up to unrealistic beauty standards.  Sometimes, if the star is observed and idealized for too long, the damage is irreversible, and both the star and the observe will suffer.  In order to better society as a whole, including both the stars and the observers, unrealistic beauty standards must changed to promote a healthy and productive lifestyle that encourages eating right and exercising, rather than skipping meals and starving oneself.  Stars can be seen as beautiful, but they should not be mistaken as invincible.

Friday, March 4, 2016

Attacked By Perfectionism

     Zombies are constantly walking into and out of my life, dragging me down before I am able to push them off completely.  Often times, when one zombie leaves, another takes its place.  Zombies may not be present in this world in the manner that they are typically depicted, but they do walk this earth.  They are out distractions and our bad habits that prevent us from working to our full capacity.  We know how to "shoot" our zombies to get rid of them, but they always return.
     Being a perfectionist is the zombie that is constantly attacking me.  Perfectionism keeps me from ebbing efficient and effective in my work, even though I know that I can fix it.  If i truly applied myself to thing things that I am doing, then this zombie would disappear.  For majority of my school assignments, I will allow it to control me until the very last second.  This temporary elimination of my zombie is not enough to do my work to its full potential.  Lately, I have been watching crime shows in order to distract myself from actually applying myself to my work.  I can stop to just shouting off the TV, but instead I lie to myself saying that it is too interesting to shut off.
     I do not like doing things unless I am completely sure that it will be perfect when I hand it in.  Due to the fear of it not being perfect, along with the lack of effort that I have, I never truly apply myself to anything until the last second.  Often times, because I do things so last minute, it is never the quality that I want it to be.  The lazy perfectionist zombie prohibits me from applying myself, even with topics that I enjoy.  I find that the more I enjoy a topic, the harder it is to get rid of my zombie.  If I love the topic so much, then it should be easy for me to write, but instead I just want it to be even more perfect.  Even right now, I have waited until the last second to write this because I found it interesting, and it is not even close to as good as I want to be.  Instead of motivating me even more, perfectionism completely wipes away any motivation that I could have.
Despite all of the negative consequences for my perfectionism, I enjoy my procrastinating perfectionism since if I do it last second then I have an excuse for it being bad, where as if I use my time wisely and actually try, I do not have anything to blame but myself for it being bad.  This zombie is something this is always attacking, no matter how many times I push it away, it will return.



Thursday, March 3, 2016

Modern War Drums

     Throughout history, music has been a means of communication.  Even if there is a language barrier, music can be used to convey a feeling or emotion, so many forms of music are relatable throughout the world.  Different genres and types of music symbolize different things, allowing it to convey messages in a catchy and powerful way.  In modern times, most songs have more meaning than the speeches that political figures give to the crowd.  Music can be created and used in celebration, mourning, and even warning.
     McBride argues that hip hop music is a warning; a warning that addresses different social issues.  In many cultures throughout history, war drums were used as a warning of danger.  These drums would announce the threat so people would be aware that something was wrong.  Hip hop music is extremely similar to this since is announces the issues that younger generations experience.  Younger generations create this form of music to communicate with each other and with older members of society.  In this way, hip hop is used in order for people to communicate with each other as well as to inform other people of coming danger.
     I support McBride for the most part because many issues in society are first addressed in hip hop songs.  From the origins of hip hop until modern times, this form of music has been extremely revealing to the reality of peoples lives.  However, not every hip hop artists follows this method of songwriting.  There are some hip hop artists that sing solely for entertainment purposes in which theirs songs export different scandalous forms of lifestyle.  Despite this, true hip hop has its foundation in sharing a message of warning.  Many different social justice issues are addressed in these songs, along with expressing pride in specific characteristics that are rejected in society.  Hip hop artists warn that they will not tolerate injustice and are aware of things that are in need of change.  Each individual artists can draw from their own personal experience in order to create this music, so for different people the warnings are of different messages.  The song may be create to reveal the truth of being trapped by social standards, but another person who is not trapped in the same way can still find the song relatable in a different light, so the warnings can be adapted to each person.
     Just as McBride stated, this form of music is a means of communicating warning and it has been since its origins.  Hip hop is the equivalent of war drums in the 21st century since both emit a message of warning.







Wednesday, March 2, 2016

"I Know Lots of Words"... But Do They Have Meaning?

     Politicians use many means to set themselves above other candidates, the most notable is their speeches.  However, there are many descriptions and empty promises within these speeches, so sometimes the most unlikely sources, such as comedians like John Oliver, supply the most accurate information.  Often times, the truth is revealed through outside parties who are not seeking to perennially gain from the election of one candidate over another.  For example, John Oliver exposed Trump for his lies and ridiculous statements without telling the viewers who to vote for instead of Trump.  The most hard hitting information is gained through believe who analyze one person; Oliver never said who to vote for instead of Trump, just as long as it was not him.
     In this Presidential election, Donald Trump is either viewed as either a complete joke or an ideal president.  Trump's power comes from his confidence in himself and all the success he claims to have had.  However, the only proof for the true amount of his success comes from Trump himself.  Within his speeches, he constantly brags of his success in business, but never truly discusses how he plans to fix problems within the country.  His speeches consist partial truths, empty words, and outlandish proposals masked by one or two messages that many people can support.  Trump will begin by telling his supporters how wonderful they are and how stupid anyone else is.  He is able to form a connection with the crows since he makes them feel important and it makes Trump seem grateful and kind.  Trump uses repetition of short phrases that people wish to hear, such as "I will make America great again."  This is something that he says frequently, loudly, and with extreme confidence, but never does he truly say how he plans to do just that.  Building a wall will not solve all of the nations problems, but because he proposes such drastic means of change, Trump is able to appeal to a specific audience.  Repetition, drastic proposals, and the ego the precedes him make him an appealing candidate in his speeches.  He will give his family history and the story of his success in order to create a bond with the audience.  These stories make it seem as through he experiences the same things was everyone else, but is still better than them at the same time.  While Trump worked to get where he is in life, he also had many extreme advantages that everyday people do not have.  His rationale is that because he went to an Ivy League school, he "knows lots of words."  Lots of words will not solve the nations problems, but because the listeners were informed of his credentials, that is what they focus on.  Empty words lead to empty promises, which have no meaning in the end.  Similarly, Trump will propose something that everyone will support, such as better care for war veterans, then encourage the crowd to cheer.  After this, he repeats what he has already said or will randomly go off in a different direction that makes no sense.  But because the audience is still stimulated by a proposal they can stand behind, they are distracted enough to ignore the true rational within Trump's speech.  Trump's loud and boisterous personality appeals to some but repels others.

     The complete opposite of Trump, Bernie Sanders is a likable and calm man.  He get passionate about certain issues without bringing down others in the process or screaming at the top of his lungs.  This rational approach when addressing certain topics allows the listener to hear his ideas entirely, not just empty promises.  Sanders is appealing to some people since he is willing to look at different perspective than what are typical and roots for the every day citizen rather than the top one percent.  In his speeches, he discus what changes he would make and how he would enact them.  Sanders has captivated young voters since he also focuses on the needs of younger generations as well.  Because these voters hear something that directly applies to them, Sanders is able to reach out to all ages.  He discusses issues that many others shy away from and does not claim to know everything, but will bring in outside sources.  Sanders does not promote himself, the influence he has on others does that enough.  Despite this, he did call out Donald Trump and reprimanded what he was saying, but Bernie called out Trump in a way that was more rattail and logical.  Trump mocked others and only made a fool out of himself, especially since my of the things he made fun of had nothing to do with the Presidential election.  Sanders did the opposite and called out flaws in Trump's arguments and reasoning rather than his appearance or personality.  In his speeches, Sanders is more direct and prompt in what he is saying.  His clearly stated facts and ideas allow him to be more relatable and understandable than Trump.  Bernie also exposes the true root of the problems rather than blaming it on another race or religion, unlike Trump who blames all of the nations problems on immigrants.
     Trump used repetition, his "successes," and ideas that all people support in order to appeal to and gain support from different audiences.  On the other hand, Sanders utilized well thought out speech, straightforward answers, and hard hitting issues in order to attract supporters.  Both candidates are opposite from each other; Trump is loved and hated for the same reasons, as is Bernie Sanders.  

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

A Profound Profession

     Virginia Woolf uses her personal experiences to discuss the hardships that women face in different professions in Professions for Women.  Woolf herself is a novelist and writer who hesitated to completely dedicate herself to a male dominated work place.  When she first began writing, she would get in her own way by believing that men always had to have the upper hand.  Over time, she realized that that took away from the effectiveness of her writing and began to show true feminism in a time where it was frowned upon.
     Woolf uses many different rhetorical strategies to artistically convey a thought provoking message on her life.  She uses herself as an example for a larger picture; women holding themselves back for fear of the male reaction.  Woolf begins her account by thanking those female writers that came before her.  Fewer experiences for women are allowed in the writing field since women are only truly accepted writing for a hobby.  However, there is a path that is open to Woolf and her fellow writers that had been paved by the first brave women authors.  She describes the path she is taking as "smooth" and "regulating."  Both of these words invoke feelings of guidance and simplicity, which goes to prove that it is the image of men that gets in the way of women writers, since the path is already clear and the materials are not expensive.  The descriptive language that Woolf uses allows the reader to visualize what she is saying, and she is able to do this due to her talent as a novelist.  A novelist creates and tells stories, so her background permits her to tell a convincing and moving account.  Woolf creates another beautiful image when describing a young girl writing in her bedroom.  She describes the girl moving her pen across the paper, from left to right, as "from ten o'clock to one."  This can mean two things; the first being that it is physically the way the girl is writing, but it can also mean that she is writing for house between the times of ten o'clock all one.
     Description of simple things also create a vivd story in the reader's mind.  In my opinion, one of the most beautiful descriptions in this piece is the battle with the phantom.  This chunk of story begins by Woolf saying that a phantom would come to her while she was writing, which later became identified as an angel.  The word phantom itself brings along with it many different preconceptions.  This word is dark and scary, an unknown being, a threat, a warning, and an obstacle all combined into one.  To me, Wool's use of the phantom/ angel is the personification of the doubt that women put on themselves when going against men.  This is the angel of doubt.  All of this is taken from a single word, "phantom."  Only a truly talented novelist would be able to convey such a powerful feeling in a simple use of personification.  Woolf's word choice is able to convey such a deeper meaning.  Even the change from phantom to angel is decisive and meaningful.  An angel is meant to protect, and in a sense this angel as protecting her from the harsh opinions and reactions of men, but this protection was also inhibiting her from reaching her full potential.  The angel also casts a "shadow [with] her wings."  A shadow is something that is dark and blocks out something bright, such as the bright thoughts that young Woolf had.
     Virginia Woolf also takes a subtle dig at the fragile masculinity of men when she says that the angel tells her to "be sympathetic; be tender; flatter; deceive; use all the arts and wiles of our sex," when critiquing something from a man.  These words are all kind and delicate, as if to address something that can be easily broken or damaged.  In this case the masculinity is very fragile since they cannot handle the truth of a critique from a woman.  When Woolf finally realizes that the angel is an inhibitor, she kills it since it would eventually "pluck the heart of [her] writing."  Plucked is a quick and decisive word, and the heart can stand for truth and honesty, passion, and accuracy.  Only a true novels would be able to pack such a large amount of feeling into six words.
     Several of the things that Woolf says are still applicable today, such as, "[Women] must tell lies if they are to succeed."  This is true because men only wish to hear things that are good about themselves, not the honest answer, and since men dominate the leadership positions in man fields, women have to warp the truth in order to survive in specific professions.
     Woolf makes many decisive choices in regards to syntax and diction, revealing her skill as a novelist.  She is able to create relatable and understandable characters, such as the girl and the angel.  Virginia Woolf also sets a variety of scenes in great detail for each moment in her recollections and comparisons, such as the bedroom, the boat in the fisherman metaphor, and the house.  Many other forms of feminist writings are not as descriptive and deep, but because of her background as a novelists, she comes off as composed and collected.  In another essay we read in class, titled Bad Feminist, the author was hesitant to accept the title and all that it implied as well as the misconceptions of it.  However, without directly stating she is a feminist, she is unwavering in her belief that men and women should be on the same playing field without holding each other back.  Instead of bringing other women down, she encourages them to see their strength, ability, intelligence, and potential.  This is my favorite piece of feminist literature we have read this school year since it is both eloquent and meaningful.

Cannibalism is Always the Answer

     Never before did I ever think that someone could make child cannibalism seem like a good idea.  In his article A Modest Proposal, Jonathan Swift proposes that eating children would end extreme hunger and poverty, increase positive family relations, and diminish population during the time of the Irish Potato Famine.  When I first read the title, I believed it would be a bland essay on the economy or government.  This article was about the economy, but in a different way than initially perceived since it encouraged cannibalism.  However, Swift never intended for this article to be taken seriously and wrote it as satire.  Satire is the use of irony and sarcasm in order to discuss and critique society or a specific person.  By adding ethos, pathos, and logos into his argument, his satirical proposal can almost seem like a legitimate idea.
     Swift is able to appeal to ethos by using outside sources in order to make himself seem credible.  He pulls on information given to him from his American friend, making it seem as though even people outside of the country deem cannibalism a credible idea.  This American friend could potentially be a member of the Donner party, which were a group of cannibals who began to eat their own family when running out of food as they were moving west.  Since the American friend spoke from experience, stating that the food was nutritious,  Swift is established as a well informed and believable person.  He had a perennial account of the idea he was proposing, so people began to take him seriously.
      Continuously, Jonathan Swift pulls upon logos as well.  He gives specific counts, percentages, and weights.  His child cannibalism proposal seems the most logical when when displays information on the population count and how cannibalism would benefit all classes.  Swift also appeals to logic when he provides the specific numbers that reveal how the population would continue if babies were to be eaten.  20,000 children would be spared so they would become the next generation of breeders.  Because he conceders the consequences for child cannibalism, he seems logical since he does not claim that all children should be eaten.  
     Establishes a sense of community when he addresses the community as "our city of Dublin."  This provides a sense of camaraderie since the problem effects them all.  The use of "our" makes it seem as though they are in this together and the solution can only be found through cooperation among all of them, appealing to pathos.  Swift also appeals to pathos when he states that child cannibalism will also protect wives in abusive relationships.  Men will not hit their wives if there is promise of a child to eat.  Also, Jonathan Swift makes it seem as though cannibalism will end poverty and ensure that all people will live happily.  This is especially true when he claims that children between the ages of 12-14 should also be eaten.  Swift writes that these children would never have to endure the hardships of poverty, pulling on the heartstrings of the community.  The people wish to protect children from poverty, and if some children are eaten, there is some security that those who live are not impoverished.
     Because Swift appeals to ethos, logos, and pathos, his satirical writing seems plausible.  It makes it even more comedic once one is aware that he is being satirical, but if one does not know that then the argument seems crazed but logical at the same time.  I enjoyed this writing once I realized it was a false proposal, but prior to I was disturbed and confused.  

Thursday, January 28, 2016

Eloquent Writing May or May Not Contain Meaning

"We love eloquence for its own sake, and not for any truth which it may utter, or any heroism may inspire."

     This quote from Thoreau states that as a society, we love eloquent language itself, not necessarily for what it is saying.  Eloquent language may not always be in regards to the truth, but because it is beautiful people enjoy it more.  Thoreau's quote not only displays his point, but it proves it as well.  I do not agree with what Thoreau is saying, since it is possible to see through someones flowery diction.  Many times when someone is giving a speech or writing, it is easy to see through someones big words to the lack of meaning behind them.  Since people are able to see through the meaningless language, no one love eloquence for its own sake.  The only time that I see people love eloquence for its own sake is in poetry.  Sometimes, poetry is beautiful and has a beautiful meaning, but other times is sounds nice but lacks actual depth.  Many politicians also use this method when asked questions and proposing ideas that they do not actually have a solution to.  By using big words, they are able to get off topic and fill u time without providing a real answer.  In the 2016 presidential election, this is especially true.  There are many issues facing our country today, and it is difficult to find a true solution, so to defend themselves many politicians will not admit that they do not know and will use eloquent language to protect their reputations.  Many legislators do not wish to show people that there are negative aspects of their discussion, so the people are left to listen to unnecessarily wordy speeches and writings to find out what their government is doing.  In a way, the people never really find out the entire truth.

     Despite the typical lack of meaning in eloquent meaning, it can inspire people.  The beautiful words stand out to people, and once people latch on to specific words it is easy to persuade them.  This reveals that eloquent language can be loved for its inspirational effects, but it can also be identified as meaningless.  In my opinion, Thoreau is both right and wrong in his thinking.  I believe he is aware of this since in his writing, he himself uses pretentious language.  This invokes a feeling within the reader but it does not always have meaning.  Much of his writing is redundant to points he makes; Thoreau will make a point,  but then restate it in flowery language over and over again.  I believe that Thoreau says, "We love eloquence for its own sake, and not for any truth which it may utter, or any heroism may inspire," to invoke further thinking.  I do not think that he intended for the quote to be factual and that he is aware that the quote can be interpreted as incorrect.

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Everyone is Equal...Except for You

     The creation of the United States of America was the beginning of the promotion of power being distributed to white men.  However, these men were very hypocritical in saying that each citizen has unavailable rights, but then continuing to look down upon women and treat them as property.  The Declaration of Independence was a unanimous document stating that America wanted to be separated from Britain and why. This was written in 1776, but years later, in 1848, Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote the Declaration of Sentiments, following a similar format to the original document.
     The Declaration of Independence is a key document in the history of the United States and it was used as the bases for the Constitution in later years.  Thomas Jefferson begins the Declaration of Independence stating that if a people is unhappy, then they have the right to dissolve what oppresses them since all are united through the laws of nature as well as through God.  The most well known portion of this document is that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."  However, these rights were not given to women, despite stating that each person is created equal.  It takes many years for women to gather enough support to create the Seneca Falls Convention, the beginning of the feminist movement that is still in effect today.
     Jefferson continues to go on an list all of the grievances that Britain committed upon the United States, being very specific and straightforward in what is being accuse and uses "He" to personify Britain.  Staton does the same thing in her Declaration of Sentiments, except this time it is used to point to who specifically is opressing the rights of women.  Men are the cause so men will be accused with a powerful line stating "He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable rights to the elective franchise."  In a world full of hypocrites, Elizabeth Cady Stanton speaks out, showing them how wrong they are.  The Declaration of Independence was to state independence from the reliance on Britain, but the Declaration of Sentiments was to state independence from men since women were tired of being pushed into the background.
     Due to the difference in time period that these pieces were composed, the wording is very different.  In the Declaration of Independence the word choices are very overcomplicated and difficult to read.  The Declaration of Sentiments was much easier to read, since it was written to be spoken out loud.  It was originally read at the Seneca Falls Convention on July 19, 1848.  The Seneca Falls convention was the beginning of the women suffrage movement where many notable women gathered to discuss the need for women's rights.  However, the format for each document was almost the same.  With an introduction of beliefs, then accusations of grievances by the opposing group of people who are stripping them of their rights.  Both the Declaration of Independence and the Declaration of Sentiments were written because a group of people had been controlling them and taking away their rights, not listening to them in important matters that applied to them.  While the men who supported the Declaration of Independence went on to oppress the women who supported the Declaration of Sentiments, both groups suffered injustices that needed to be addressed.

Monday, January 25, 2016

A Timeless Message



"Whenever Vanity, and Gaiety, a Love of Pomp and Dress, Furniture,
Equipage, Buildings, great Company, expensive Diversions, and elegant Entertainments
get the better of the Principles and Judgments of Men or Women there is no
knowing where they will stop, nor into what Evils, natural, moral, or political, 
they will lead us."
~John Adams~
     
     John Adams wrote this very longwinded and complicated sentence in a letter to his wife Abigail Adams.  Language and writing styles were very different then than they are in current times, but their correspondences with each other have the same casual feeling as an email or a text in 2016.  Despite people nowadays not using words such as "pomp and dress," or "equipage," in casual writing, the issue that the Adams couple addresses has rings of truth in the modern setting.
     When I attempted to deconstruct this quote from John Adams, I took away several messages.  However, the most prominent was that a materialistic people and society will focus on the superficial things in life which will eventually be seen as superior in the eyes of the common people, leading them down the wrong path.  People are easily influenced by those around them, causing people to value physical things that are unnecissary to every day function. Those with a copious amount of goods tend to become vain and eccentric, always wanting to show off their affluence.  These people not only look down on those with less, but people with less material wealth begin to feel jealous and desire the same "success" as the others.  Materialistic people often become the elite and powerful in societal rank and politics throughout history, and in modern times it can also be incorporated into the workplace and schools.  People who place self-worth on the amount of goods they have typically are not deserving of or suitable for a leadership possition.  It is difficult to see how others see once materialistic values take root.  There is no knowing in which direction the common people will be lead if they are not treated equally and alongside those who hold power.
     Materialistic people do not genuinly care for the success of all.  Rather, they care for their own personal gain.  These people can be seen as standoffish due to feelings of superiority as well as jealousy from the other side; or, these people can be put on a pedestal and idolised due to their success.  This power trip giveseople the ability to manipulate and falsely lead the common people into something that is not as it seems.  Many politicians, in both the time of John Adams through the Presidential Election of 2016, can be seen as the elite, materialistic, and vain.  It is difficult to find a leader that will place their own personal opinions aside to think of the betterment of all people.  Materialistic and moral do not typically coincide with each other in the sense of politics throughout history.
     Materialistic leaders will lead people to believe that their way of life is superior few to having more things to boast about.  Tangible results are placed over spiritual and emotional results.  Many people can seem to be happy on the surface, but are lacking the true sustiance of life.  A person can put up the facade of a perfect life, when in reality something is missing.  For example, a couple can be in an unhappy relationship, but stay together since they already have material happiness.  People may look put together since they have such a copious amount of things to be happy about, but lack something that truly makes life worthwhile.
     John Adams may have made is message very overcomplicated, but with some critical thinking, his message can be seen as timeless.  Materialism and vanity never go away, especially with people who are seen at the top of the pillar of success.  However, Adams sparks thinking that will lead to the realization that no one is truly happy in a society that values tangible success over anything else.  While Adams may have been writing specifically about politics at the time, his message can apply to everyday life in both the past and the present.


Richard Cory
by Edwin Arlington Robinson

Whenever Richard Cory went down town, 
We people on the pavement looked at him: 
He was a gentleman from sole to crown, 
Clean favored, and imperially slim. 

And he was always quietly arrayed, 
And he was always human when he talked; 
But still he fluttered pulses when he said, 
"Good-morning," and he glittered when he walked. 

And he was richyes, richer than a king
And admirably schooled in every grace: 
In fine, we thought that he was everything 
To make us wish that we were in his place. 

So on we worked, and waited for the light, 
And went without the meat, and cursed the bread; 
And Richard Cory, one calm summer night, 
Went home and put a bullet through his head.