Tow #30- Letter to a New APELC Student

Dear APELC Student,

Junior year IS hard. I know you've most likely heard this already, and I'm sorry, but don't give up. Don't relax too much either. The stress that accompanies junior year and AP classes is meant to challenge you and help prepare you for college, even if you don't feel ready yet. Also know that your writing will improve: be happy with what skills you have already mastered by the start of AP English and be optimistic about the future of your writing.

I hope I can give you some advice about APELC that  will make the class more worthwhile and beneficial. The following is what I wish I would've known before starting the class:

1. There is never such a thing as "just reading" or reading once while in APELC- Make notes and annotate (combined, this is also known as "close reading") very article and essay you read for the class. If you read something and don't understand it the first time, READ IT AGAIN even if you don't want to or you are up late with other homework. The information you will get from taking time to seriously read and understand a text will help you to understand and participate better in class and will improve your essays. Also, don't read a text specifically for rhetorical strategies; read it for its argument/claim and or purpose. Then, go back and figure out what strategies the author uses to accomplish that purpose or make that argument.

2. Be organized and serious about your AP English blog- The blog you were asked to create and post on during the summer will be with you long after you have taken the AP exam, and will be a constant source of homework once you start "TOWs". Don't neglect it or be lazy about maintaining it, because it can help you and can boost your grade. Another point: don't procrastinate on your TOWs and try to write them like small essays from the beginning. Slacking off on TOWs makes it easier to slack off on in-class essays and other shorter writing assignments.

3. Ask questions- If you don't think your writing is improving, ask questions about it, have it checked, and do more practice. As corny as it may seem, practice does make almost perfect. (Note: You can never ace an essay, only get a 98 by getting a 9.)  If you get stuck in a rut, and get the same score on essay after essay, looks for common mistakes. Don't be ashamed to show your work to others, and remember to peer edit other people's essays the way you would want to have you essay edited. Honest, but helpful and considerate editing is ideal. Don't be afraid of constructive criticism, and don't be nice to friends when it comes to their writing. If you want to help them, and their writing needs to improve, tell them and help them! :)

Overall, try to make the most of APELC. It's your chance to take a college course and still receive help from teachers on your writing and understanding of readings. Professors,  most of the time, are not as considerate as high school teachers.

Lastly, remember that as much as tired as you get and as emotional as you may become about the class ( on your worst, most stressful days), it is you who is turning in the assignments and preparing for class. Don't be mad at friends who have less homework, parents who go to bed hours before, or teachers who continue to pile on the homework. You will improve something and/or learn something. It will be worth it in the end!

Good luck throughout the year! With effort and optimism, you will do wonderfully!

Sarah

Tow #29- Documentary Rhetorical Analysis 2

Viewing Goal: Identify arguments made in The Queen of Versailles

Writing Goal: Use personal knowledge I've gained throughout the year's Tows and readings to take a position on one argument I've identified 

For much of America's history, the country has been known as a "melting pot" or "mixed salad"- people of every culture define themselves as one nationality, as "Americans", and blend their ideas and ways of life. But even though being called an "American" can be somewhat vague of a description, the title "American" also represents being a part of a powerful, capitalist society and, in many cases, part of a moral and loving family. People across the globe idolize the United States for its "American Dream"- to make it rich, be successful, and live a free, happy life with friends and family. The documentary The Queen of Versailles claim that the Siegel family is an "American family" is true to the extent that the family has achieved the "American Dream", but does not live up to American familial or social values.

Though the Siegel family is rich and famous, they do not live as an "American family" should. David and Jackie Siegel supposedly come from "humble backgrounds", but at the same time do not seem overall concerned about saving money at home, just saving money overall. Jackie worries about donating things and the employees they had to lay off, but continues to shop and drive around in a chauffeured limo.  David worries about their Las Vegas resort and his wife's credit cards, but is extremely hesitant to sell the 90,000 square foot, $75 million "home" that he is building, nicknamed Versailles. Neither one realizes that they aren't really struggling, and neither one is eager to cut out things that really are unnecessary luxuries in order to live a still comfortable life and save their business. They don't notice the ridiculousness of a house such as Versailles, but argue over things like the lights being on when David gets home from work. The Siegels also cannot agree and fight within their own family. David's son admits that he is the only one of David's sons (who are part of the family business, Westgate) who will still stand by his father's decisions. Their staff, including their nannies, who are from South Asia (the Philippines? Vietnam?) cannot be with their families because they are required to care for the Siegel children. Victoria Siegel, one of David and Jackie's daughters, admits that she believes her father married her mother so he would have a pretty trophy wife to show off. Jackie knows nothing about the family finances, and feels out of the loop and stupid for being unaware. The family is not living with good family relationships; even though many American families do not have good relationships, many do not deal with the same issues at the same scale and almost no one else can blow off such issues to continue to live in luxury. The Siegel family does not live up to ideal "American Dream" familial or social values, even though the documentary argues that they are true, "down-to-earth" people.

In The Queen of Versailles, the Siegel family is presented as an average American family, happy and living the American Dream and acting on "American" social and familial values. They do not fit the true picture of America, despite the fact that the United States has a diverse population economically, socially, and racially. Whether the majority of America lives up to these morals or not, the Siegels are so "over-the-top" that their behavior doesn't fit in with skewed American morals. In fact, in many ways, the Siegels cannot be considered stereotypically "American" and do not act in ways that agree with American morals.

Tow #28- Documentary Rhetorical Analysis 1

Viewing Goal: Identify the documentary's purpose 

Writing Goal: Analyze The Queen of Versailles as I would analyze an essay or other visual text

The french king who built the Palace of Versailles, Louis XIV, was known as the "Sun King" and passed on his love of luxury to his grandson, King Louis XVI. Louis XVI and his infamous wife, Marie Antoinette, were believed to only care for themselves and their futures, rather than their people, at the start of the French Revolution. The Queen of Versailles, a documentary by Lauren Greenfield that focuses on the life of billionaire businessman David Siegel, his wife Jackie and their family, is a not so subtle allegory of/allusion to the life and struggles of the French royalty at the time of the American Revolution. She argues that while the Siegel family can be considered "down-to-earth", they live in an excessive way. Greenfield, through an interview-like style and emphasis of the setting of the documentary, exaggerates the spoiled behavior of the characters and unnecessary luxury of their lifestyle to argue that no one is perfect. 

The Queen of Versailles is completely focused on the life of the Siegel family in every way. David Siegel is the CEO, owner and founder of Westgate, a timeshare company with resorts across the United States and the brightest sign on the Las Vegas strip. His wife Jackie is 30 years younger than him and a retired beauty pageant contestant, model, and engineer. Both David and Jackie came from "meager lifestyles" and "never imagined" living where they do now, in a sprawling mansion in Orlando, Florida. The 8 Siegel children are so exposed to their life of luxury, with nannies, exotic pets, and limousines, that the idea of college, flying commercial, and earning a living is foreign to them. Being forced to live "among their means" is a struggle when the 2008 recession hits. But while the Siegels physically appear to be living in an over the top manner, they, their employees, and many of their friends and associates insist that they are "normal" people who "make other peoples' lives better through knowing them". The documentary is humorous, but also very blunt and candid, because the Siegels often don't realize that their actions are ridiculous, or that laying off thousands of employees from their company means they HAVE to sell their 90,000 square foot, $75 million "Versailles". They may be nice people, but they have flaws and appear to be living in a fantasy world, not reality.

The documentary, for the most part, seems very personal. The Siegel family's actions are filmed for 2 years, they are interviewed, and all the while, Greenfield never comments on their lifestyle, actions, or words outside of asking a few questions. The documentary relies on the Siegels, and if it were not for the interesting camera angles used and the fact that the family members and staff look directly at the camera, The Queen of Versailles would be less documentary-like and more like real life. This focus on the Siegels causes viewers to focus nearly all their attention on the family and their lifestyle, despite its exaggerated comparisons to the real Versailles, Louis XVI, and the title's namesake, Marie Antoinette. The family is seen in all its glory and all its struggle, and while it seems luxurious and powerful in the beginning, by the end, viewers are left feeling sorry for the family and exposed to their imperfection.

Setting is also very important to the documentary. The majority of the documentary takes place at the Siegels' home, their partially built place (Versailles), or with David Siegel's son and vice president at the Las Vegas PH Towers resort. Their excessive lifestyle is put into focus and makes the family seem more spoiled than ever, if they can leave their house in such a state of clutter and have things go to waste. The setting also helps viewers to compare the Siegels to everyday American families in both positive and negative ways. Positively, it emphasizes that the Siegels are messy, busy people who also have to worry about money and love their home. Negatively, they seem over-indulged and materialistic, despite David and Jackie's humble backgrounds. The family image as a perfect, American success story is destroyed because of the setting and the things the family says in their interviews.

Much like the luxury of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, David and Jackie Siegel are a family who has achieved success and appear to have let it bring their lifestyle to excess. They are a "normal" American family in some ways, but also exemplify the reality that no one is perfect and excess is not always acceptable. They are rich and famous, but also flawed and struggling to maintain their daily, spoiled routines. The Queen of Versailles is a documentary that causes people to think about "perfection" and success, and assess themselves based on the lifestyle of one big, over-the-top(perhaps exaggerated) family. 

Tow #27- Tow Reflection

Reading Goal: Find similarities between Tows #3, 11, and 19 

Writing Goal: Respond to assignment questions thoroughly 

Overall, throughout the year, I have both extremely disliked and appreciated writing TOWs. They were annoying to write, especially under a deadline, but I found that my essay writing really improved over the year because of writing timed essays and TOWs. From TOW #3 to TOW #11, my writing improved mainly in its organization and planning. While #3 and #11 are both mostly summary and worse than #19, #11 has more analysis and is a better attempt at rhetorical analysis than #3. #19 is the best organization-wise of the three TOWs because it is structured like a mini timed essay, and was one of the first TOWs I wrote that was supposed to model actual analysis writing. It finally occurred to me during the end of the 2nd marking period that TOWs weren't really helping my writing, since I was stuck in a writing rut and my TOWs were not very well-thought out or unique from each other. #19 is also the best of the three because of what it is analyzing. The TOWs I wrote in the beginning of the year are for the most part based on interesting articles, but not rhetorical masterpieces. #3 and #19 are more appropriate for analytic writing than #11, but I still think it's good that I varied the topics I was reading about despite the fact that many times, I was not excited about the article I chose. I think that if I could change anything, I would pick articles, essays, and other writing that is both new and interesting right from the start. I think it is definitely easier to write s better essay about something you understand and can connect to. From the beginning of TOW writing to now, I think I've mastered how to form an essay. I've realized that an essay no longer has to be 5 paragraphs, should have its thesis at the end of the first paragraph, needs strong topic sentences, and doesn't need generalized or quoted hooks and closings. I used to format my essays all in the same general style, and it was decent writing, but it wasn't getting me closer to an 8 and away from a 5. On the other hand, I think that my analysis could always improve. I still have to keep in mind that I must connect my analysis and ideas back to my thesis throughout my paragraphs, and sometimes I don't have enough evidence or reference my thesis only at the beginning and end. My analysis has improved, and I see the flaws, but knowing about the mistakes hasn't made them all disappear; I think that when it comes to improvement, tying my analysis to my thesis is one of my biggest things to work on. The thing I appreciated most about the TOWs was that they taught me to write well no matter what I am writing. It could be a AP essay for points, for the exam, or just for timed practice or a TOW, but it still counts in the long run towards making me a better writer. #11 and #19 resemble essays much more than #3, which seems like a commentary or summary even though the article/essay discussed is of better rhetorical quality than the topic of #11. Writing TOWs helped my writing to become AP quality just as much as the timed essays and other assignments because it made me finally think about the quality of my writing and what I can do to improve it. I learned that I have room to grow as a writer, and that was a good lesson to learn after having theme readers freshman and sophomore years who always gave me strong A grades and no little room to improve. Writing a mini essay and maintaining a blog may have been painful and/or exhausting this year, but it is worth it now that I see how much my writing has grown. 

Tow #26- IRB/ "Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife"/ Mary Roach

Reading Goal: Find sub-purposes, within the overall purpose of the book, that Roach accomplishes 

Writing Goal: Analyze rhetorical strategies Roach uses for her overall purpose and sub-purposes

Death is a topic that makes many people uncomfortable, especially when the topic of religion comes up. Our society today is hesitant to believe in "life after death", or any sort of spiritual, supernatural explanation to what happens after we die. Providing evidence that proves and disproves the existence of an afterlife, author Mary Roach uses exemplification and personal diction to entertain and inform her readers. 

The beginning of Spook starts with an aspect of religion many people are familiar with: church, and more directly, the Pope. People all over the world understand the Pope's significance as a religious leader, and even more at least know of the Pope. By using the Pope as a reference and example, readers are able to understand in more detail the afterlife beliefs they already know about or have heard about. Roach then shifts focus to evidence for reincarnation, where a person experiences afterlife on earth, and reaches the best form of afterlife after living many lives and getting rid of bad karma. She delves into researching reincarnation by explaining a trip she took to India to speak with a reincarnation specialist and meet some of his study subjects/clients/patients. the same can be said for her other examples. Since much of Roach's writing is written in a personal, anecdotal way that relies on examples, the book feels very real and makes her evidence seem more credible and informative.

Spook's author also uses personal, very conversational diction to make her nonfiction writing more entertaining. The book reads as if she is explaining the experiences she had while researching afterlives of many cultures, and is not completely serious or stereotypically  boring. Each chapter explores a new topic within researching the afterlife, and though the scientific terms could get confusing, they are well explained and easy to follow. Roach's writing reads like something a real person would say while talking, and not some textbook that a student would study about afterlife theories before an exam. Her diction also builds a sort of pathos that makes readers think about the afterlife personally. Roach teaches, but it doesn't feel that way until after you realize you've learned a bunch of new things about, for example, reincarnation. She builds upon beliefs readers already have or consider, both proving and disproving the afterlife, and doesn't take a particularly religious side despite how awkward writing personally about a controversial topic like religion could become.

Mary Roach, the author of Spook, uses both personal, conversational diction and examples to inform and entertain readers with theories on the afterlife. It is refreshing, and doesn't focus on death, so the book is not uncomfortable. 

Tow #25- New York Times Article/ "Is It Now A Crime to Be Poor?"/ Barbara Ehrenreich

Reading Goal: Correctly identify the author's purpose 

Writing Goal: Use and cite direct quotes; don't just paraphrase

Societies all over the world experience conflicts related with poverty and the gap between rich and poor. The poor are notoriously associated with crime and danger, leading to societies that have no trust for those below the poverty line and no desire to help them. Author and journalist Barbara Ehrenreich, through the use of irony and exemplification, argues that this mindset about the poor is misguided and a result of stereotyping.

Ehrenreich's article relies heavily on examples to show that treatment of the poor and blame for illegal behavior is wrong in many of America's cities. She first starts with the results of a recent study that investigates the "criminalization of poverty" (Ehrenreich), where the impoverished are blamed for crimes or are put in poverty because of common stereotypes and guilty looking behavior. When, for example, someone on the brink of poverty is fined for littering or illegally crossing the street and can't pay, they could end up homeless or in prison for not paying their bills or their fine. This is often even more true for African American and Hispanic citizens, who have to deal with racial stereotypes as well, not just being blamed for suspicious actions. The author also uses the example of Al Szekely, an elderly man in a wheelchair from Washington D.C. Though he is an innocent, polite man and a minister, he was put in prison and forced to leave the homeless shelter he lives in "for not appearing in court to face a charge of 'criminal trespassing'" (Ehrenreich). He received this charge because he was found sleeping on a sidewalk of the city, which is illegal for all U.S. citizens, homeless or otherwise. Ehrenreich uses other examples as well to make the point that the treatment of people in poverty is unfair and that these people have a disadvantage when it comes to this treatment or the laws they must follow.

Irony is another tool Ehrenreich uses often to make her argument. By way of many of her examples, she examines cases where people in poverty where unfairly arrested, fined, or imprisoned and became impoverished as a result of this treatment/circumstance. The act of imprisoning criminals and upholding the law is supposed to prevent crime and help, much less get in the way of, poverty. Instead, there are many situations where "upholding the law" (Ehrenreich) has created poverty. Also, Ehrenreich comments on how law enforcers frequently find the impoverished or poor at fault and blame them for illegal behavior because they can almost always profile a person as a "potential suspect" if that person is just "strolling around in a dodgy neighborhood" (Ehrenreich). Through the use of irony and sarcasm in statements like the one above, the author is questioning how fining and imprisoning the poor is of any benefit. They cannot pay the fines, and they take up unnecessary space in prisons if they are there for simple reasons like loitering or laying on the street. The poor are stereotyped and blamed when, Ehrenreich argues, "we can't afford to help the poor", or "go on tormenting them" (Ehrenreich).

Author Barbara Ehrenreich uses examples and irony to make a point about America's treatment of the impoverished: that it is unfair and doesn't accomplish anything. She challenges the common stereotypes about the poor and those in poverty and claims that law enforcement is too quick to blame these people for illegal actions, crime and general suspicious activity. Overall, Ehrenreich questions whether people take the easy way out by blaming the impoverished and also questions why many seem to think it  now a "crime to be poor" (Ehrenreich).

Ehrenreich, Barbara. "Is It Now a Crime to Be Poor?" The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Aug. 2009. Web. 27 Apr. 2014.

IRB #4 Introduction Post

Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife

By Mary Roach 

Spook is all about the scientific evidence that both supports and debunks ideas on the "afterlife". It focuses on finding factual explanations for the beliefs of many cultures and religions, using the studies of certified scientists, historians, and other experts on the subject. The author, Mary Roach, wrote the book because she was curious about what happens after people die, and decided to collect information both for against the argument that some sort of afterlife exists. The book is supposed to be informative, cultural, and funny. 

I chose this book because science has never been one of my favorite topics, and I was trying to branch out from what I normal read/have read for my other IRBs, subject-wise. So far, I've read a book on Native American history, a memoir about food (cheese), and a psychological, somewhat "self-help" book by Malcolm Gladwell. Reading something comparing religion and science seemed a good choice and more challenging topic since, at least to me, it enters official "non-fiction territory". Also, religion is very important to me on a day-to-day basis. I'm an active member at my church, so I've considered a lot of the questions the author appears to think about and argue about. I'm hoping that this book rounds out the information I've learned from reading IRBs this year and is as good as its reviews. 

Tow #24- Slate Magazine Article/ "In the Name of Love"/ Miya Tokumitsu

Reading Goal: Identify the type of writing as well as strategies used.
Writing Goal: Write a well-developed TOW essay, but keep it more concise than recent TOWs.

The statement, "Do what you love, love what you do" is a common American saying, so common that it inspires many to go off and live their dreams, including college students with no idea of their future career. Some criticize this statement because it is based on personal preference, and not economic, political, or social benefit. Some say that this philosophy only really works out for the rich, educated, privileged American, and not the majority of the population. Whether  it works or not, Ph.D. and author Miya Tokumitsu argues through exemplification and counter-argument that people should consider the economic, political, and/or social consequences that could arise from working because of the passion they have for that job or art.

Tokumitsu is very thorough when refuting others' claims about "Doing what you love..." (DWYL) to make her own points about the hazards of DWYL. She starts her article with some history on the statement and the application it had in Steve Jobs' life. The example she makes of him, a successful man who did what he loved passionately and benefited from it by convincing others to work for him doing the same thing, seems to counter her own claims at first, but actually makes her argument stronger. Jobs' is a prime example that the DWYL philosophy is somewhat "self-centered" and works best for people who have the means to be successful if it doesn't work out, and using someone so widely known as a counter-argument creates both appeals to logos and pathos in a way that helps readers understand her interesting perspective. She also dives into the weaknesses of the DWYL philosophy in detail with more examples. Perhaps going from personal experience, she explains how many academic minds, such as Ph.D.s, and artists of different sorts are resigned to low incomes due to the idea that they are "doing what they love". DWYL can be used as an excuse for poor salary, poor recognition, and other consequences of certain jobs. Tokumitsu claims that the worst jobs are either jobs no one wants, or jobs with lots of passion, and provides quotes from many sources. Overall, she paints the DWYL philosophy in a bad light and backs up this claim with connectable examples readers will understand.

Author Miya Tokumitsu uses counter-arguments and examples to debate that "doing what you love" is not beneficial in today's society. She thinks that it can be used as an excuse and self-centered inspiration for a job. But though a job is important to others, is it really the work THEY will have to do for the rest of their careers?

Tokumitsu, Miya. "Stop Saying “Do What You Love, Love What You Do.” It Devalues Actual Work." Slate Magazine. Jacobin Magazine, n.d. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.

Tow #23 (Visual Text)- World Vision Advertisement/ "30 Hour Famine"/ World Vision 30 Hour Famine Pamphlet

Viewing Goal: Identify importance of images, not just text in image.
Writing Goal: Analyze advertisement in depth like a written text and understand audience's perspective.

Most American teenagers don't experience what it means to be really hungry- to go without food for more than a few hours, to not have food to eat for days. Unfortunately, around 8,000 kids die worldwide every day from malnutrition. World Vision, a Christian mission organization, works to support the families of these children and provide food to families below the poverty line, often in South America, Africa, and Southeastern Asia. Their ad uses appeals to pathos and rhyming to convince it's viewers to raise money as a part of 30 Hour Famine and experience hunger for 30 Hours.

Much of World Vision's ad appeals to it's viewers emotions and feelings on hunger. Everybody hates to be hungry, and most people would not wish that feeling on anybody. When they look at the children in the advertisement, they see skinny, starving children who are just happy to have a bowl of rice to eat. They also most likely notice that there is a single bowl for both of them, and because it looks like a meager amount, their hearts are opened to the problem of malnutrition. Most people feel empathy toward the children and want to gve them more- they would not want their children, siblings, friends or anyone else they know to rely on sharing one bowl if rice as their meal, maybe even meal for the whole day. The text at the bottom if the ad, which says "Release the feast", sticks in people's brains because it rhymes and  also signifies that, for these children, that bowl of rice is a feast. It plays into the emotions the audience felt earlier wen looking at the children, making them consider how important food is to the kids and to everyone worldwide.

When most people see a picture of a starving child, they feel sad, empathetic, and want to make a difference. World Vision uses appeals to pathos and rhyming in its ad to catch its viewers' attentions and make them think about being part of a 30 Hour Famine Event/ make them want to donate money. Nobody want to be hungry, and through World Vision, people can help feed hungry children like they would want to be fed- they help children to receive more than just one pitiful bowl of rice, and hopefully change their lives for the better.

Tow #22- IRB/ "Outliers: The Story of Success"/ Malcolm Gladwell

Everyone wants to be successful, but there may be more to it than we think. Malcolm Gladwell, the author of the New York Times Bestseller Outliers, argues that sometimes being successful is just a matter of luck and circumstance. Through the use of appeals to logos and exemplification, Gladwell gives detailed evidence to support his argument and make his audience reconsider what is really exceptional. 

The majority of Outliers relies on appeals to logos and inductive reasoning. Gladwell structures all of the point that support his argument around facts, statistics, quotes, and his own established, credible analysis of these appeals to logos. For example, when making the point that a person’s birthday is often important to their success, he collects statistics about birthdays across many years and professions, from professional Canadian hockey to the industrial captains of the 19^th century, like Rockefeller and Carnegie. When Gladwell analyzes the circumstances these people were in to make themselves successful, he uses facts as background knowledge to prove their success or explain how their success was “measured”. This background and these statistics work well with all the exemplification in Outliers as well, addressing counterarguments and making his own arguments at the same time.

The exemplification in Malcolm Gladwell’s argument is both interesting and vital as evidence. While they work well with statistics and other facts, they also provide real stories to Outliers that make the book seem like a collection of more than just theories on success. Since the book is psychological, the book would be very scientific and methodical, perhaps even boring, without these examples. But exemplification does more than just mix with logos to form the backbone of Gladwell’s book; Exemplification adds a bit of pathos too by adding a sense of reality and emotion to the book. The people in the examples were real/are real people, like us, and have experienced success, meaning that if we find ourselves in similar situations, or make the most of our lives, we too can be successful.

Malcolm Gladwell’s book Outliers is a psychological, subtle “self-help” kind of book that uses appeals to pathos and exemplification to argue that success may be more complicated and circumstantial than we think. It makes its readers think about the true meaning of success while still connecting to its readers through common information and entertaining stories. It is the kind of nonfiction book that doesn’t really seem like a nonfiction book, suggesting that certain things, for some reason, are just successful. 

Tow #21- The Republic/ "The Allegory of the Cave"/ Plato

Everyone asks questions and/or has questions they want answered. Philosophers were famous for asking them, most notably Socrates, and by extent, Plato, through his Socratic dialogues. Nearly as famous as his dialogues, however, was Plato's allegory "The Cave", comparing people living a primitive life in a cave to everyday people in the real world. Plato artfully uses Socrates' comparison and imagery, along with questions, to explain that people must question the world and try to "leave the cave".

Plato uses many different comparisons to convince Glaucon that the cave is worth leaving. First, he compares the people in the cave to prisoners. The word "prisoner" almost always has a negative connotation, and makes the cave seem harsh, dirty, and undesirable like a prison. Next, Plato (through Socrates) compares the positives and negatives of light and shadows. He claims that even though the light seems wonderful from inside the darkness of the cave, it is painful and hurts the prisoners' eyes after all their time in the cave. It takes a long time for them to finally adjust, get used to the light, and feel comfortable enough to completely walk away. These comparisons argue that people have trouble accepting new ideas or challenging their old ideas. Overall, though, leaving the cave and questioning life will be worth the pain and the positives.

Plato also uses imagery to argue that people must question life and stop believing only traditional ideas. First, he mixes his comparisons of the cave to a prison with imagery, then transitions to describe the world outside the cave. The images of the night sky, heaven, the sun, and nature all make leaving the cave appealing, and therefore the allegory of leaving old thoughts and beginning to question oneself.

Plato's allegory "The Cave" is made up of many comparisons interwoven with imagery that make Socrates' ideas of questioning and embracing new ways of thinking seem desirable and ideal. These comparisons and images help Socrates' friend Glaucon to make a decision concerning the allegory and learn about real life at the same time, questioning traditional ways and making "life worth living".

Plato. "Book VII of "The Republic"" Plato's Cave. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Mar. 2014.

Tow #20- The Guardian/ "Fail Better"/ Zadie Smith

Reading Goal: Identify Zadie Smith's argument 

Writing Goal: Be able to concisely explain how she makes her argument/what strategies she uses

The best writers in the world can definitely identify good books, and the best readers in the world can definitely identify good writing. However, "good writing" is subjective in many cases; its difficult for a reader to decide what is good writing, and even harder for a writer to decide if his/her own writing is good writing. In her essay "Fail Better", author Zadie Smith argues that great fiction writing is much more personal than we often make it out to be, and that readers today are not good at judging the success of a book, through detailed anecdotes and examples, fiction-like imagery, and rhetorical questions.

Zadie Smith uses both positive and negative anecdotes in her essay to prove that good writing must be personal, and that personal writing is hard to do. Her positive anecdote is used right in the beginning to set up her argument. She uses the story of a young novelist named Clive, who attempts to write a great novel and appears to have all the skills necessary, but is not as successful as he would like/as he thought he would be because he questions himself and how he wants to represent himself in his novel. Smith uses this anecdote as an example to readers of what many writers go through, and builds ethos by acknowledging that she has done similar things, trying to write with personality and sometimes failing. Her negative anecdote comes in later on, as a counterargument portrayed through the eyes of TS Eliot. Eliot believed that writing was "an escape from personality" and what writers should avoid when writing a good novel. These contrasting anecdotes help make Smith's argument seem more valid, proving that most writers do not think of personality as important to writing and, more specifically, to fiction/the novel.

Smith also uses wonderful imagery and rhetorical questions to make her argument. Imagery is a large part of the anecdotes in "Fail Better", as well as the base for her analogies and comparisons. Without this imagery, it would be difficult to connect with the reader, as many have probably not written novels themselves. The rhetorical questions in the essay provide appeals to ethos, logos and pathos, but also are great transitions. Smith tends to use rhetorical questions to make a point or share her own opinion, making her more credible, logical, and connectable to her audience before she continues her opinion or moves towards another point in proving her argument. The questions hook the reader for the next thought, but also tie up the loose ends of the point Smith is making.

Overall, Zadie Smith uses anecdotes, imagery, and rhetorical questions to argue that writing, particularly fiction writing, is dependent on personality/personal writing to be successful. Smith also argues that because many writers are not personal in their writing today, readers cannot be good judges of successful writing and failed writing. Writers should strive to write the best they can, and that requires being personal, not scientific. Until writers can do this, they should be ok with "honorable failure", knowing that great novels are rare and its hard to write one; they should expect to fail, but try to "fail better". 

Smith, Zadie. "Fail Better." Fail Better. The Guardian, n.d. Web. 02 Mar. 2014.

Tow #19- The New Yorker/ "The Naked Face"/ Malcolm Gladwell

Reading Goal: Identify Gladwell's purpose correctly and find more than 2 rhetorical strategies

Writing Goal: Thorough analysis and clear topic sentences; write TOW like an actual analysis essay

Some people seem exceptionally good at reading other peoples' emotions and/or figuring out what another person is thinking. Bestselling author Malcolm Gladwell, the person behind books such as Outliers, uses the stories of famous psychologist Paul Ekman and others gifted with the ability to "read people well" to argue that people can be naturally born with this ability, gradually develop it, or learn it purposefully later on. In his 2002 essay, "The Naked Face", Gladwell suggests that there could be more to this skill than what meets the eye through complex appeals to logos, pathos, ethos. 

All of Gladwell's argument, but specifically his appeal to logos, is fueled by well-structured inductive and deductive reasoning. To form this reasoning, he uses many personal accounts, primarily those of Paul Ekman and police officers John Yarbrough and Bob Harms. The research Ekman has done on the topic of emotions and facial expressions included in the essay makes Gladwell's argument logical and well-researched, and very arguable. It is difficult for readers to prove Gladwell wrong when he provides logical, well-defended point after logical, well-defended point. Statistics make Ekman's evidence hard to deny, and contribute to Gladwell's appeal to logos. For example, when explains how he learned to tell if someone was lying through studying facial muscles and emotions, and then describes how he predicted Clinton's bad behavior after first seeing him on TV, these testimonies give weight and proof to Gladwell's logic-based argument. His use of personal accounts also makes his argument seem personal to his audience, appealing to ethos as well as logos.

One of the more powerful elements of Gladwell's argument is how he appeals to ethos. Besides personal accounts, Gladwell masterfully acknowledges his audience by using friendly personal pronouns like "we", "you", "he", "I", and "us". Writing through these pronouns, especially "I", gives Gladwell credibility as a writer and adds credibility to his accounts because of his active involvement. Since he explains what he learned about facial expressions first hand, readers can understand his argument more thoroughly and become more personally involved themselves. His argument makes people think about their own lives also because of rhetorical questions. Gladwell end paragraphs and often transitions with rhetorical questions, which cause readers to think and sometimes are somewhat suspenseful and more interesting during the long essay. Appeals to ethos are important when considering the topic, emotions, as are appeals to pathos.

Many good arguments have appeals to logos and ethos, but Gladwell also accomplishes appeals to pathos through the use of imagery. As the introduction to very personal account and point in his argument, as well as introductions of his interviewees, Gladwell paints a picture of the "characters" and setting with physical descriptions and personal impressions. This is critical for an argument about facial expressions and emotions, because the reader gets to know the emotions and expressions of the people who are making the argument, and this helps to prove why emotions are so important and mean more than many people think.

Malcolm Gladwell's essay "The Naked Face" debates the relatively new idea that people can control and/or easily learn how to read other peoples' emotions through detailed appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos. Psychologist Paul Ekman and others help provide the reasoning and evidence Gladwell needs to support his essay. Gladwell's argument helps deny the idea that only some people are uniquely gifted with this ability, and explains how it could be potentially very important in society. 

Gladwell, Malcolm. "The Naked Face." Malcolm Gladwell. The New Yorker, 2002. Web. 22 Feb. 2014. 

Tow #18 (Visual Text)- Gum Advertisement/ "Orbit for Kids" Gum/ Food Network Magazine

Almost no one actually likes going to the dentist, particularly not kids. But many people enjoy gum, chewing it any time of day and almost anywhere. Bubble gum specifically is entertaining for kids to chew. So when Orbit created their "Orbit for Kids" gum, which is supposed to help protect teeth, they made sure to market it towards parents, not kids. With its creative diagrams of a hand holding the pack while showing the “helps protect teeth” label, and a hand with the thumb covering this label, the company acknowledges the benefits of keeping this information away from kids and also uses humor to appeal to pathos. These appeals to pathos also appeal to ethos, combining with the gum’s plainly visible American Dental Association (ADA) Acceptance in the bottom left corner of the advertisement. This credibility is enhanced by the ADA’s factual, informative description of the gum’s hygiene benefits. Their logical statement, “If kids knew orbit for Kids was accepted by the American Dental Association, they might not want to chew it” parallels their previous statement “Don’t let them know it’s good for them”, and clearly explains the company’s argument/purpose, to appeal to parents with a healthy gum that kids will love to chew. The ad also is made up of the fun, bright colors that accompany every pack of Orbit gum and also make a statement in the middle of a magazine filled with bright, “home-y”, but sometimes repetitive colors. The advertisement finishes with the gum’s website, which allows the advertisement to be both accessible and informative online/ in a variety of methods of entertainment. The ad will reach more people, and logically markets itself in a technology-centered atmosphere. When the gum is both beneficial to their kids for entertainment/enjoyment and health reasons, parents are more likely to purchase and allow their kids to chew gum. And maybe, after some time, their kids’ teeth will have improved in the process.  Maybe going to the dentist won’t be as bad. 

http://media.dentalcompare.com/m/25/Article/139494-400x300.jpg

IRB #3 Introduction Post

Outliers: The Story of Success

By Malcolm Gladwell

Outliers is a national best-seller that explores how people become successful. Instead of thinking about WHO is famous, Malcolm Gladwell considers looking at why people are famous- what they've done, where and how they grew up, their surroundings, and what the most famous people all have in common that contributes to their success. The book is divided into an introduction, two parts, and an epilogue, each section focused on a specific aspect of success. It's somewhat psychological, but also entertaining and somewhat science-based. 

I chose this book because it is completely different from any other book I've read for an IRB so far. I tend to lean towards history when I read non-fiction, and I don't really read a lot of non-fiction outside of school anyway. This book has also been recommended to me by many friends of mine, and I am generally willing to try a variety of genres as long as I know that the book is good. Also, the book resembles a series of stories at times, which is what I enjoyed about the "Best Essays" book I read this summer and the memoir I read last marking period. I'm also a fan of learning interesting trivia when reading, and Outliers seems like it will include this as an added "bonus". I'm excited to start reading this, and I think it will definitely be unique compared to the fiction I normally spend my time reading. 

Tow #17- Best Life Magazine Article/ "Plastic Ocean"/ Susan Casey

What happens to all the things we throw out? And more importantly, what happens to all the things we think we throw out? Not what most would think- large quantities of trash, particularly plastic, end up in the world's oceans. In her 2007 article, "Plastic Ocean", writer Susan Casey brings to attention environmental issues associated with recycling, trash, animal life, and the future of our planet as an attempt to inspire readers to make a change in what they throw out and "recycle". She does this through the use of exemplification, appeals to logos, and personal anecdotes.

In the beginning of her article, Casey introduces a sea captain named Charles Moore with a passion for saving the planet and cleaning up trash. Her anecdotes on his life and experiences around the world's oceans, in California, and in the North Pacific Subtropical gyre, or "Eastern Garbage Patch" introduce readers to the concerns of the article. This area of ocean is one of about 5 that contain unheard of amounts of trash, resembling seas of garbage. All in all, these areas make up 1/4 of our planet's surface. Moore's in this tragic area grab the readers' attention from the beginning and then mix with statistics to make a very thorough, almost inspiring article.

While the statistics mix with Moore's examples and anecdotes, they also provide information about why all the trash and plastic in the gyre are a problem- for our health, the earth' health, and animals' health. Casey gives a detailed overview of what many of the plastics in production today can do to our health, as carcinogens and resource-wasters. She urges readers to think about the amount of trash they throw out, and educates them on what really gets recycled from what they put in the recycling bin. By the end, Casey;s article turns from entertaining to educating and becomes, if possible, even more serious. Casey establishes her credibility as a writer and fellow human being on planet Earth while educating and inspiring people to care about what they put in the trash can at the same time, arguing, if "our oceans are turning to plastic, are we"?

Casey, Susan. "Plastic Ocean." Love for Life. Best Life Magazine, 20 Feb. 2007. Web. 02 Feb. 2014.

Tow #16- IRB/ "The Telling Room: A Tale of Love, Betrayal, and the World's Greatest Piece of Cheese"/ Paterniti

To some, the greatest nonfiction pieces are the ones that don't seem like nonfiction reports, but like other genres. Nonfiction's negative connotation makes it unappealing to some, and any time it can be made more fictional, the better. Michael Paterniti' memoir The Telling Room is one of these books that becomes more fictional, though in reality, it's nonfiction.

Paterniti does this throughout the book, but especially later on, through the use of footnotes. From the start, the footnotes offer historical background, the author's opinions, and any other information that doesn't need to be included in the actual text of the memoir. But as the story of Paterniti and the cheese unfolds further, the footnotes become the more nonfiction aspect of the book, and the official text more a retelling of the cheese-maker, Ambrosio's, story. Paterniti's writing also becomes very descriptive as he begins to share Ambrosio's tale. Previously in the book, the Paterniti uses descriptions to characterize himself and other people in the memoir; later, he uses it to explain his characterization and development of the setting, as if he left parts out and is making the story clearer. It has an interesting effect, and makes for a definite transition in the story between dialogue and Paterniti's thoughts.

Over all, the book has a somewhat dramatic, whimsical feel, as if the author simply wants to entertain his readers. However, there are also moments when he shares what he has learned, maybe with the hope he can convey this knowledge to others and make his writing mean something. It makes an otherwise fun and "non-serious" memoir become more professional and is a credit to Paterniti as a writer because of how it creates a tone of importance. Maybe the readers are meant to feel like they've done something both enjoyable and thought-provoking with their time by reading this book. Whatever the reason, The Telling Room is more than just a nonfiction book- it is the story of part of someone's life, and makes its readers feel connected to the story. While it talks about an experience, it is an experience in an of itself.

Tow #15- Discover Magazine Article/"The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race"/Jared Diamond

When most people think of the first humans, they think of cavemen who eat wild buffalo and shelter in caves during the ice age, barely surviving through the invention of fire. Today, we as a species are grateful not to be the first humans, to have everything essential to survival basically figured out for us, in many cases. Jared Diamond's historically-based essay, "The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race" shares these ideas, but proposes that the first humans really weren't worse off as hunter-gatherers- they became worse off when they switched to farming, trading "quality for quantity". Diamond does this through appeals to logos and exemplification, making for a very scientific essay on how farming has ruined the healthy societies of the cavemen.

Right from the beginning, the author uses both appeals to logos and exemplification, along with general history, to explain how important and long-lasting the time of the hunter-gatherers was. He also begins to introduce how problems started with the addition of farming into humans' lives, and the gradual removal of hunting and gathering. Diamond uses a variety of examples, from Chilean mummies to ancient Greeks and Turks to examine the differences in height, age, disease, and population over the years agriculture has become popular around the world. He makes the point that farming may be able to support more people, but at a lower standard of living. Other statistics, along with current examples of hunter-gatherer societies show how even today, hunting and gathering is still healthy and profitable. Diamond keeps the essay serious, but thought-provoking, so that a variety of audiences can understand it, but still maintain historical background. The essay almost takes on a bias, making farming seem very negative while praising hunting and gathering profusely as the method of survival that should of stayed around.

Diamond, Jared. "The Worst Mistake in the History Ofthe Human Race." The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race. Discover Magazine, n.d. Web. 12 Jan. 2014.

Tow #14- The Atlantic Article/ "How Headphones Changed the World"/ Derek Thompson

Almost everyone likes music, and there are many types of music from which to choose. But probably one of the most important things about music is that it can be personal, unique, and create the kind of loneliness people like. According to journalist Derek Thompson in his article "How Headphones Changed the World", music, and by association, headphones, do all these things and more. They make music and other entertainment something people can do privately without needing friends for dancing, and they help people to relax, focus, and think clearly. Thompson argues that there are pros and cons to headphones' ability to enclose a person in their own little world, but regardless, that headphones have influenced everyone and the global culture of the world.

Thompson works to prove his point right from the start by comparing the pros and cons to listening to music in various situations. He argues that while music can be distracting or take away from productivity, it is more beneficial in the long run. He also employs the opinions of other famous journalists and writers when making his points about headphones and music in world society. This appeal to logos provides an appeal to ethos and makes the article both more credible and factual, which contrasts and supports the appeal to pathos that the author can create just be mentioning and simply describing music. Overall, however, exemplification is the backbone to Thompson's argument. Whether he is making an appeal to logos, pathos, or ethos, using imagery, or juxtaposing pros and cons, an example almost always follows, most of the time taking the form of a quote from one of his contemporaries or as detailed background on the first headphones or cultural life after the invention of headphones in the 20th century, for the Navy. Since Thompson laces his argument with this information, readers can't help learning something or becoming interested in something while reading the article.

Thompson, Derek. "How Headphones Changed the World." The Atlantic. The Atlantic, n.d. Web. 05 Jan. 2014.