LK
On Henry Rollins' Steubenville Rape Case Article (Daybook)
I agree with Rollins’ points when he states that this case demonstrates the inequality within genders, and I believe his suggestions for more school programs to prevent these types of crimes are valid proposals. I do not, however, agree that five years (or more) in jail would not change anything for the offenders. Perhaps they will think twice next time they consider hurting someone, and if not then at least the victim in this case can feel safe as long as possible and future victims may not become victims at all. Rollins is correct in his view that the entire Steubenville situation is a failure on many parts− parents, teachers, society as a whole, and especially the offenders themselves. And while implementing school programs is proactive to prevent sexual assaults, it is not retroactive to help the girl in this case.
Rollins' overall inquiry question is “what happened here, and how can we fix or prevent it?” His central argument of the piece is that many people let the victim down and that jail time should not be the solution everyone automatically turns to. He advocates teaching students about consent to prevent future problems. Rollins supports his argument with many rhetorical questions and showing how the entire Steubenville case relates to larger problems in society, like gender inequality. The conversation could be extended to talk about statistics, faces, and similar cases. It would be interesting to hear the victim’s opinion on the trial, the sentences for the offenders, and Rollins’ idea to create school problems.
This piece I took from my daybook. It is an analysis of an inquiry written by Henry Rollins on the Steubenville Rape Case. I chose this item because it is an example of me questioning something, and critically thinking about the points Rollins made about his own inquiry. I tried to extend his conversation,which was practice when I went to extend my own conversation in my inquiry project.
Fox News and The Muppets (Moodle post)
The Fox News video is a prime example of what rhetoric is, and how vital it is in an argument. The underlying goal of this video segment is to convince viewers that “liberal Hollywood” is an enemy, and that it is brainwashing children to reap the benefits. The video is filled with loaded and emotionally charged language, including words like “brainwashing,” “manipulating,” “class warfare,” and “indoctrinate,” just to name a few. One of the words that stuck out to me especially was the title of “Communist Muppets.” In fact, communism was not even mentioned once in this video, but liberals were. It is an attempt to spark a subliminal message in the viewers’ minds- that liberals are parallel with communists. It is extremely important to consider the rhetoric in the situation because being aware of this rhetoric is what keeps us from blindly following the ideas of others. Hitler rose to power because his rhetoric was able to turn smart human beings into sheep that blindly followed him. Recognizing rhetoric is important no matter what side you are for in any argument, because no side is completely innocent. Just as Fox News uses rhetoric, NBC News is guilty of it as well.
The pathos I noted included phrases such as “leave little kids alone,” “liberals don’t care,” “the American dream,” and “eleven people killed.” These statements elicit strong emotion from people, because playing on emotions is an easy way to win an argument. The main ethos in the video was used to build up the reputation of Andrea Tantanos (representative of the conservatives) and to undermine the reputation of Caroline Heldman (representative of the liberals). Bolling, who was supposed to remain objective, constantly showed more respect to Tantanos. He even mentioned Tantanos’ television show, but gave very little background for Heldman. He continued to call Tantanos “Doctor,” but only referred to Heldman (who also holds a doctorate degree) as “Doc.” Both Tantanos and Bolling interrupted Heldman time after time in what can only be referred to as “ganging up” on her, but Tantanos was not interrupted by either Bolling or Heldman. Bolling even called Dan Gainer “a media expert,” in what was an attempt to build not only Gainer’s credibility up, but Bolling’s as well. Most of the logos I saw came from Heldman, as she mentioned numbers and facts such as “eleven people killed,” and “McDonalds has seven ways to pressure children.” She also referred to the fact that gas is almost four dollars per gallon nowadays, saying people are having to choose between “four dollars at the pump or feeding their family,” combining both ethos and pathos.
The use of ethos, logos, and pathos by both parties is the critical tool for their respective arguments. These elements merge to form the central argument and message for each side- that liberals are poisoning children, or that they are educating them. Without ethos, logos, and pathos, there would be no evidence or support for either side. They define the positions taken in the video, and are the most important things in convincing the audience to think and feel one way or the other.
Out of all the writing we have done in class, this was one of my absolute favorites. In high school my AP English III & IV classes focused on rhetorical analysis, so I have had practice with them. I love to write on rhetoric, and I honestly wish I could have done my entire digital essay on this particular Fox News piece. I personally am very liberal, so I become very passionate about things like this segment and I love to write about them. I believe this to be a good example of my analysis on rhetoric through a digital medium.
Shitty First Drafts (Moodle post)
I wholeheartedly agree with Lamott's stance on first drafts. Often when I am writing I finish my first draft and leave it sitting there (especially if I think it is wonderful and does not need tweaking, because hubris can be a problem of mine in writing). I go do something else- watch TV, mess around on the Internet, go shopping- whatever takes my mind off writing. I come back to it, hours later if it is due soon or maybe even days if I have a faraway deadline. I reread it, and I am usually horrified. Like Lamott said, it is “long and incoherent and hideous.” I reread it multiple times, highlight the parts that just do not sound quite right, and think of better ways to say them- better ways to get my thoughts out. I do not change everything because sometimes I find some diamonds in the rubble. Lamott said the first draft is what your inner child wants to say, and I find that that child can be very insightful. She also mentioned that when her mind wanders, it has conversations with people who are not there. She says she finds herself pretending she is on a talk show, or even “explaining to imaginary cops exactly why” she ran a red light. I do exactly the same things, and I found her technique on how to deal with the imaginary voices interesting and worth a try for myself. I think I write a lot like she does, with intermittent periods of writer’s block and thoughts that I will not be able to do it no matter how hard I try. Even sitting here at this moment writing this I am feeling blocked every few sentences, but from now on I am going to take a page out of Lamott’s book and put the mice in the proverbial jar.
I chose this piece, because frankly I like it. It is one of the peices that I feel is most telling of who I am not only as a person, but also as a writer. Lamott's words described her process of writing as one almost identical to mine. This writing is not long, but I feel that it is a good example of me making connections from the reading to something else I know— myself. I also have actually used some of Lamott's tips for focusing and overcoming writer's block. In incorporating her ideas in "Shitty First Drafts" into my life and making connections outside of the reading, I feel this piece is indicative of how I am contemplating my own role as a writer.
"Body Ritual among the Nacirema" (Moodle post)
I loved Miner’s interpretation of American society. It makes me reconsider how I, as well as other Americans, view our culture compared to others. We tend to think of ourselves as higher beings, enlightened in the new world by the complexity of our culture and technology. This even shows in the categorization of “developed” countries, and “third-world” or “developing” countries. While the term “developing” aims to be less offensive and more politically correct, it is still a word fueled by hubris. We tend to look down on tribal cultures simply because we do not understand them. He even includes a quote by Bronislaw Malinowski that says "Looking from far and above, from our high places of safety in the developed civilization, it is easy to see all the crudity and irrelevance of magic. But without its power and guidance early man could not have mastered his practical difficulties as he has done, nor could man have advanced to the higher stages of civilization." This quote makes the reader consider how we judge other cultures, and how others may judge us. It tells us to not judge what we do not understand, because ultimately we are all the same- working for a better, more advanced cultural future. Miner’s piece utilizes diction to turn American society into a more tribal-sounding culture, and it is very effective for me personally. It tells me that we need to let go of our conceit and arrogance. I qualify this as good writing because it is surprising, intriguing, and leaves me thinking and reflecting even after I am done reading it. As with most good things however, there is a potential for this kind of writing to be dangerously persuasive and misleading. Examples of this kind of writing include political speeches and reports, and propaganda- whether it be governmental, cultural, material, or any other kind. Language is power because knowledge is power, and language can fuel this knowledge. A simple sentence can bring immense joy or reduce someone to tears. It can start and end wars. It can change minds. But to do this, you need good rhetoric. Rhetoric’s role is the persuader in language, and this piece is a clear example of that.
I took this writing from a post in the Moodle Forum. It is my analysis of the Nacirema piece we read in class. I chose it because I see it to be a good example of my critical thinking on something we read in class. I made notes in my daybook on the original piece, and I used those to create this analysis. This piece also includes what I consider to be "good writing," and my interpretation of some of the vocabulary we learned and used in class.
For this section, I have selected five writings that were either taken from my daybook or from Moodle forum posts. I picked five pieces I feel show who I am as a writer, or show an example of me critically thinking, analyzing, questioning, etc. Each has a short description explainig why I chose that particular piece.
Nacirema Modern Ritual Response – "Puekam" (Moodle post)
There exists a strange ritual among the people and cultures of this world, one that seems to be of great importance in the Nacirema society especially. In its most basic form, it is body decoration. The people have been observed trading the paper they use as a type of currency for paints and powders of all colors. They use these items, often referred to as Puekam to paint their faces. They use many different colors, all on the same face. Shades of powder and paint that match the skin tone of the user are even applied to places where it is hardly noticeable. Interestingly enough, it seems to be only the females of the society with this fascination (or perhaps duty?) of facial modification. From my observations, men are discouraged from the same type of behavior, however they judge the women on how much Puekam they are wearing or how well it is applied. Women can also be seen judging each other, and some even trade more currency just to have a professional Puekam woman decorate their face. This is common with the more wealthy of the society. The Puekam tradition may have started out innocent, but it seems that pressures from society have made some women view the Puekam and others’ judgments on it as inexplicably linked to their self-worth.
Body modifications and adornment go beyond that of the face painting, however. The women can also be observed using hot pieces of metal to change the shape of their hair as well. These are often referred to as Nori Gnilrucs or Nori Talfs. The women spend hours on this process, even though weather conditions can destroy all their work in minutes. Much like the Puekam, women are judged on their ability to use the Noris effectively. Noris are even more expensive than Puekam, with women willing to trade many papers for one. Also like the Peukam, men are discouraged from using Noris. Perhaps this is due to the face that the males typically have shorter hair than the females, rendering Noris for men useless. Both sexes are observed buying Yrlewej, for their partners, friends, families, and themselves. Yrlewej is typically crafted from the most expensive metals and gems in the land, and can be worth the currency some of the Naciremas make in a year of labor. Although women usually tend to wear more Yrlewej and Yrlewej that is pricier (due to a greater number precious stones), men do not shy away from the Yrlewej as they do the Noris and Puekam. Yrlewej frequently adorns the body on the ears, fingers, and around the wrists, ankles, and necks. There are “less conventional” places for it though, as it can even be found inside the mouth on the tongue, on the stomach, and in lips, eyebrows and noses. Even though most of the Naciremas gain an elevated status from Yrlewej, the people with it in the less conservative places are viewed as outcasts. Despite the fact that the same piece of Yrlewej can be inserted through the ear or the nose, one of these is viewed as normal and the other is viewed as social deviancy.
It is irrefutable that the Nacirema society is odd, but one thing is clear- they are obsessed with appearances, and put a great deal of effort into maintaining these façades.
I loved writing this piece! It was a chance for me to be really creative and write something kind of strange, which was fun to do. I think it showcases my writing for this semester because I was playing around with one of the key things about our class– style. Although this is an example of imitating someone else's style, it let me experiment with a different type of writing while analyzing some facets of American culture.
Informal Thinking