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.