Reasonable Arguments

The Painted Veil

2009-10-19T14:36:00.000-07:00

The Painted Veil

The music builds, the images fly by and a story unfolds in the viewers’ mind. “Sometimes the greatest journey is the distance between two people,” the one liner reads as boats float by in cool blue tones and just after the music dramatically comes to an end. The movie trailer for the film, The Painted Veil, uses appeals to logos through enthymemes, ethos through company logos and pathos through music and images to grab the attention of the audience, in this case the viewer, so that every person who watches this trailer feels like they want to watch the movie.
An enthymeme uses deductive reasoning to form a point. The rhetor moves from a generalization to one particular case. With The Painted Veil, the clips from the movie that were used start to create a story that is, however, not explicably stated. First, the viewer is presented with a woman in bed, beckoning someone to sit down on the bed next to her. It is her left hand, the ring signifying marriage clearly present, which is calling the other person. So already, the viewer thinks, “This woman is married and she is asking someone to come either lie or sit down next to her – clearly making sexual advances towards another person.” Second, footsteps are heard going up a flight of stairs and seen stopping at a door. Then flashes up the next image of two undressed people (a man and a woman, the same woman as seen beckoning before) with terrified expressions on their faces. “This is obviously an illicit affair, which her husband finds out. We know nothing about the man, but that doesn’t matter, the female is a more important character because she was seen before [and as the viewer finds out, will be seen later as well], “ the audience contemplates.
From that sequence of events and those two other reasonings, the viewer finally concludes, “She’s married, cheating on her husband and her husband knows. The person whom she was seen with is not her husband, but the footsteps on the stairs and stopping at the door are. Something bad is about to happen, some life altering experience, for the married couple.” This is a prime example of an enthymeme and a style that is used throughout the entire trailer. The rhetor presents clips that require deductive reasoning for the viewer to find out what the storyline is about. This is a very audience interactive method of rhetoric because it makes the audience think things through, put the pieces together, not just sit there and be told what’s going on.
About 20 seconds into the trailer, two film company logos appear. The first, Warner Independent Pictures presents the well-known white Warner “W”, but with a red streak suddenly shooting up the middle line of the letter and dotting it like an “I” contrasted with a black background. By doing this, the “W” provides credibility, or ethos, to those who may be skeptical about an independent film. At the same time, Warner is also presenting this film as an independent one, different than all the rest and perhaps a bit more dramatic than most. The next logo is from the Yari Film Group, words in the forefront, letters in the back; the “Y” being twice the size as the “F” stacked on the “G”. Clearly, the most important point to them was the “Yari” portion of the title. With hues of teal and blue as the background color, the viewer adjusts from the dramatic black, white and red of the last logo to a more serene scene – telling of the film as a dramatic, yet pleasant movie to watch. There is another catch to company logos: if people know them and love them, they may automatically assume it is a good movie without even watching the rest of the trailer. Conversely, when someone has had a bad experience with these companies, in order to dispel harsh feelings, a good trailer is necessary to grasp the viewer’s attention.
The last technique is pathos, an appeal to the viewers’ emotions. This method is heavily used in The Painted Veil trailer, as is usual with most movie trailers, movies and other artistic renditions of life. The first, and most notable use of pathos is the music. Heavy use of Asian drums as one scene transitions from another makes the scenes dramatic and emphatic. Along with drumbeats, the way a scene transitions to another makes all the difference. The more dramatic scenes, especially in the beginning, use a fade to black technique, making those scenes choppy and thus emphasized. To contrast these dramatic scenes and to show a change in the storyline, both the music and the scene transitions are altered. An Asian-type piano is used to make the music higher pitched and faster, yet more elegant while the scenes cross fade into each other. As the storyline progresses even further, violins are added to the drums and the piano to draw upon the viewer’s own heartstrings. Violins, if used properly, almost always instantaneously make the listener feel sympathetic to whatever scene is occurring.
Another use of ethos in this trailer is the images or clips of the movie portrayed. In the beginning, the trailer focuses on passions of a sexual nature and of hatred, or of one who has been spurned, seen with the two main characters who are married yet are not happily married. Then fear, as well as the need to grow and change, appears about mid-way through when they head to a cholera-infested city in China. Happiness and joy with life as sickness is evaded and sadness and misery when it is not. As love is rekindled between the husband and wife near the end, ecstasy occurs. But as soon as that emotion is felt, it is immediately replaced with sorrow when the wife’s eyes are seen crying. Such a wide range of emotions in one trailer! The audience is quickly sucked into the power of this rainbow-effect of emotions that most viewers then think, “If this is how the trailer makes me feel, imagine what the movie will be like!”
The overarching theme associated with this trailer is the contrast of emotions, colors and music that make the film seem like it has two very different sides to it, and thus more appealing to a wider range of viewers. When the drums suddenly stop, the name of the title appears in a pale yellow and thin serif font. The color of the letters matches the scene in the background, which is a calming scene of dark mountains and water with a setting orange-yellow sun. The contrast between black and pale yellow make the letters not only easier to see, but this contrast focuses the title, which is the most important part of the trailer. However, not only are the letters contrasted with the background, that scene is immediately contrasted with the next and last scene, which is the one-liner with the boats and the blue. To end on such a contrasting note harkens the viewer back to the theme of this trailer and ultimately the movie.
When all of these elements, logos, ethos, and pathos, are used well in conjunction to form a movie trailer, a very unique thing is created. Most importantly, the audience ends up doing what the rhetor set out to accomplish: persuade the audience to be moved enough emotionally by this trailer to make them want to go see it in theaters.

2009-10-14T12:24:00.000-07:00

President Bush Reassuring America
September 11, 2001, America woke up to realize we were the victims of terrorists’ attacks against our country. That evening President George W. Bush gave a speech to give courage, reassure, and gain support of the American citizens. President Bush tells us how America is strong and will continue to move forward to fixing the problem. The purpose behind giving this speech is to pull us as Americans together and to reassure America that the government is taking the necessary steps to amending the problem.
He starts out the speech by using the word “our” which brings all of us as American citizens together regardless of who we are, where we live, or our social status. This attack didn’t just affect the people in New York, Washington D.C., or the airplanes, all America was attacked together. This speech is given at a time when Americans are feeling confused and worried about the future, so he knows that it is crucial that we are drawn together, because he knows, a house divided cannot stand.
President Bush then lists the victims, “The victims were in airplanes, or in their offices: secretaries, businessmen and women, military and federal workers; moms and dads, friends and neighbors. Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror”, which reinforces the fact that the victims are people just like you and me. This provides us with the motivation and desire to do whatever it takes to remedy this problem and protect ourselves from further harm.
Then he talks about the images that have been playing over the television and internet all day, which he knows we have been watching and have had an effect on us. He knows these images have scared us and left us feeling unsure of what the future will hold. He tells us that the terrorist acts were meant to accomplish this very task, but reassures us that our country is strong and there is nothing to rely about. He makes use of several words that we associate with strength, power, and goodness.
The first word is foundation, he says, “Terrorist attacks can shake the foundation of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America.” The word foundation is definitely something that we associate with strength; a foundation is the thing that holds our house up and together. If we have a solid foundation, which President Bush says America has, then these attacks can’t shake us. This means we are going to be okay. He next uses the word steel which is something that everyone can relate to because America is made of steel. He says, “These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.” American history is full of examples of how American resolve has helped us win wars, gain our freedom, and overcome
He then gives an analogy using the word light, he says, “America was targeted for attack because we’re the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining.” In the American culture, as well as many other cultures, light things are thought of as good while darkness is thought of as bad or evil. This plays on the fact that Americans are extremely proud of being Americans and do think that they are the best. Later in the speech he reinforces this by saying, “Today, our nation saw evil, the very worst of human nature, and we responded with the best of America, with the daring of our rescue workers, with the caring for strangers and neighbors who came to give blood and help in any way they could.” He focuses on the positive things that have come out of this day, in a city like New York where people are sometimes thought as being busy and the people not caring about others, they saws a tragedy and came together for good.
President Bush obviously wants us to know that even though we have just undergone a horrible attack, we are still strong. He does this by mentioning things like how the financial institutions, federal agencies, and the American economy would all be open for business the next day. He is saying that the enemy can give us a black eye, but can't stop us. He talks about the rescue workers who rose to the occasion and risked their own lives to search for survivors.
Bush definitely needs the support of the American people before he goes off to war, so in this speech he clearly states that our military is strong. He states that congress and many leaders from different countries are behind us in our task of finding those who committed this act of terrorism. This is interesting because later on we find out that even if the leaders of these countries said they were behind us, not many were willing to join us in the endeavor.
President Bush said, “Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government’s emergency response plans.” He said this to let us know that the government is on top of things, and isn’t sitting back waiting to see what will happen. This is also the first time that he uses the pronoun I, this is to underscore the fact that he is in control of the country and its resources; this was in an attempt to gain the faith and confidence of the people in him. Shortly following September 11, President Bush’s approval ratings greatly improved showing the people were confident that President Bush was trying hard to protect the country and do what was in America’s best interests.
In the second to last paragraph of the speech, President Bush uses religion to help reassure us and request our prayers on behalf of the victims, the government’s leaders, and himself. The popular Bible scripture that he used is one that whether you go to church Sunday or never go to church, everyone would know. He asks us to pray for all those who have been affected. President Bush knows that America has a religious foundation, and that the majority of Americans have a religious history. We all saw on TV, following September 11, there were pictures and videos of people praying at ground zero and around the country. President Bush seems to realize that no matter how strong our country or our military is, we can’t succeed without the help of a higher power.
President Bush finishes off this speech powerfully, that day was one of the worst tragedies in American history and he tells us September 11 is a day that we will remember forever. President Bush wants us to always remember what has happened, but more importantly to move forward and continue living our lives; because if we stop then the terrorists have succeeded in their purpose. He also realizes that many citizens will be afraid as it dawns on them that we are embarking on a journey that can only lead to war, and so he reminds us, “America has stood down enemies before, and we will do so this time.” And so eight years later the closing statement, “we go forth to defend freedom and all that is good and just in our world,” is still an ongoing process that we have yet to complete.

gettysburg address

2009-10-14T12:23:00.001-07:00

Austin Pliler

October 14, 2009

English 150

Rhetorical Analysis

Gettysberg Address

The Gettysburg Address was given on November 19, 1863. It was on that Thursday afternoon that President Lincoln gave one of the most famous speeches of all time. Lincolns’ natural physical appearance, presentation, as well as the fact that the speech itself would have fit neatly on a post-it-note may have been reasons that it is so remembered or revered. Or perhaps it was the important timing of the speech in the nation’s history. Whatever the case may be to use the words of Senator Charles Sumner "The world noted at once what he said, and will never cease to remember it”.(showcase.net, pg 1)

In seeing the President Lincoln you may think him intimidating at first. Standing at 6’3½”, and having the added height from his famous top hat, this giant man made it easy to follow him by his physical appearance alone. I think that whenever he gave a speech or went anywhere his rhetorical value would automatically be higher than a less height-gifted man. In modern society a good presentation. Presentation can make or break a deal, get you a job, and even allow you to date someone’s daughter. The ability to speak fluently and motivationally while knowing , or atleast pretending to know, what you are talking about about is a huge part of your ethos and credibility in giving a speech. Lincoln I think did this stupendously. He was able to inspire and convince a nation of a cause in less words than you can find on a cereal box. I believe that this is accomplished by the pathos in which he spoke of the cause. Lincoln was president during the bloodiest time in the nation’s history, and I believe that he couldn’t help feel responsible for it. I am sure that his emotions were high standing before that great battleground and looking out across the field.

The shortness of the speech is considered by some that it was so important. It showed that there was not much he could say about what went down during that battle. The guy previous talked for two plus hours while Lincoln spent mere minutes on his speech. I do not think that it would have the same affect if his speech took hours as well. Whether or not it was done intentionally I don’t know, but it sure had a lasting affect on lots of people.

As said before, the civil war was one of the most violent and bloody of all time. It depleted the countries recourses, ended hundreds of thousands of lives, and left most of the country destitute and hopeless. I think that in his speech, Lincoln was able to inspire and lift up, making extremely moving and full of remembrance. To quote from the address, “ We can not dedicate - we can not consecrate - we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled, here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but can never forget what they did here.”

The Gettysburg address was an extremely moving and history changing speech. I think that through President Lincolns presentation, his physical height of persuasion, and the point at which the speech was given is the reason that it will be remembered for many years to come.

2009-10-14T12:23:00.000-07:00

Obama’s Announcement Speech For President

“Change We Can Believe In.” This was the slogan during the for Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential election. Obama was known for his great slogan and his great speeches. Barack Obama gives a speech on February 10, 2007 when declaring his announcement to run for President. Despite the widespread controversy of his politics, no one can deny the brilliance of President Obama’s rhetoric--or at least the rhetoric of his speech writers. Obama’s speech uses a great amount of anaphora, pathos, and logos to make his speech effective to his audience.

Obama uses anaphora in his speech abundantly to show his passion for the people of America. He says, “I want to win that next battle - for justice and opportunity. I want to win that next battle - for better schools, and better jobs, and health care for all. I want us to take up the unfinished business of perfecting our union, and building a better America.” By Obama repeating “I want...”he’s persuading his audience that he wants the same things that every American would or should want. Barack is stating what he wants to do when he’s the president, and what he wants to change. Obama continues to say, “It was here, in Springfield...” over and over. Obama shows the

emotions he feels when he talks about growing up in Springfield. In his hometown was where he learned that he wanted to become the President of the United States. He looked out in the audience and saw past friends and teachers and realized he wanted the best for them. He realized he loves them and wants them to be as successful as they can be. Obama uses Anaphora to make his points of how he knows that he can change America, and makes an effect on the audience.

As Barack gives his speech one can see the he focuses on convincing the audience of how he should be the next president by using the element of pathos. Obama gives us examples of how he is just an average American citizen wanting the same things as us. He gives a specific experience when he lived in Chicago. He says, “My work took me to some of Chicago's poorest neighborhoods. I joined with pastors and lay-people to deal with communities that had been ravaged by plant closings. I saw that the problems people faced weren't simply local in nature - that the decision to close a steel mill was made by distant executives; that the lack of textbooks and computers in schools could be traced to the skewed priorities of politicians a thousand miles away; and that when a child turns to violence, there's a hole in his heart no government alone can fill.” By using this example of pathos Obama is able to relate with the average American and gives us hope that even though he’s only human he still has hope to make these changes that America needs. Obama first was a community worker, then was a civil rights lawyer and at this point was a US senator. It was easy to see that Obama was trying to prove that he has experienced all kinds of life styles and that he could relate to how everyone was feeling. The audience is able to feel Obama’s

emotions towards those people who lived in the Chicago and that’s what makes these specific experiences so effective to the audience.

President Obama wanted everyone to support him because he knew the one thing everyone wanted was to change to save America from becoming a sinking ship. Obama refers back to Abraham LIncoln to show how he just wants the same things as him. Obama says, “"That is why, in the shadow of the Old State Capitol, where Lincoln once called on a divided house to stand together, where common hopes and common dreams still live, I stand before you today to announce my candidacy for president of the United States." President Obama uses logos because it’s common sense that we want America to become a better place, but still people were worried if he still had enough experience to run a country. Obama exclaimed, “I recognize there is a certain presumptuousness - a certain audacity - to this announcement. I know I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change.” The audience knows that he has hopes the same as us, and even though he didn’t have the same experience as some of the other candidates he still had enough passion to makes those changes.

Listening to Obama’s speech, one can see that Obama is trying to persuade his voters by making them realize that they need change and he is the only one who can make it happen accurately. Even though the voters feel that he may not have the same experience as most of the other candidates, he makes them believe that he has more ambition to makes the changes everyone wants to happen. Obama effectively

influences the audience by using many rhetorical devices, and overall persuaded voters that he was the best option to be the President of the United States.

Jason Whitlock Hits the Mark with his Judgment of Racial Apologies

2009-10-14T12:22:00.000-07:00

Regarding racial jokes, Jason Whitlock’s article entitled “I’ll be the judge on racial apologies” reveals just what a black man thinks about white people making mildly crude statements about minorities. His article appeals to reader’s ethics simply through the entire topic of the paper, which entails the issue of racism and racial sensitivity. The reader is given examples of instances in the sports world where a white man has said something about a black man, and what entailed, as well as vice versa. Whitlock also appeals to authority by stating examples of when athletes and sports newscasters have slipped up and why they deserve to be pardoned for their words spoken or their actions.

Whitlock begins his article by stating that he should be the vessel through which all public racial comments deemed inappropriate, should go through in order to be aired on television. Right off the bat, Whitlock reveals his stance on the subject, joking that following comments made by a MLB network newscaster, Matt Vasgersian, “provoked our lawmakers into creating a Racial Apology Czar” (Whitlock). The joking done by the rhetor ridicules the subject he is arguing about, and makes racial apologies for mild jokes seem utterly ridiculous. The reader gets the sense that the entire topic is simply a joke, and that it is not even worth getting worked up over.

Whitlock goes on to say that “Well, that brief moment of silence is all a few bloggers needed to justify turning Vasgersian's poorly-timed quip into a Vasgersian-believes-all-black-people-look-alike controversy” (Whitlock), juxtaposing his previous feelings that the topic is indeed a joke. The rhetor opens up his article with a bang, making an elaborate joke out of Vasgersian’s circumstance regarding his own racial joke on national television that no one lauged at. Since bloggers can make a lot out of a little, Whitlock argues, it is imperative that these apologies go through some higher authority that is able to make the decision on what to say following any seemingly inappropriate jokes or comments made about minorities.

A cynical view of the broadcasting and television world in general is then put forth. This sparks the readers’ interest further by making him or her think about just what they can about it. An example of another slip-up concerning inappropriate comments on television is then given. “Broadcasters and entertainers appear on television at their own risk, realizing they're an innocent slip of the tongue from having a publicity-seeking "citizen journalist" channel their inner Al Sharpton and frame a perfectly acceptable joke into an Al Campanis moment.” Whitlock uses words such as innocent and perfectly acceptable, heavily defending the wrongdoing broadcaster.

This cynicism is backed up by the rhetor’s own opinion on the controversy surrounding Vasgersian’s joke. He concludes that the person joked about as looking like star NFL quarterback Donovan McNabb did indeed look like him. Whitlock goes on to say “I know I'm not the only one who chuckled when Vasgersian pointed it out” (Whitlock). The rhetor states that since the evidence for punishment of the broadcaster, Vasgersian, if a public apology was not given, is simply not enough, that Vasgersian has the right to “scream Kiss My Ass during his next MLB Network appearance” (Whitlock).

The use of crude language further pushes the envelope that the entire topic is a big joke. Readers get the sense that the rhetor does not take seriously the power of the public in pushing controversial statements to the forefront and getting people fired on account of cancelled viewership or general complaints. Nevertheless, Whitlock does get serious and states that no racial joke is the same, that “there are no hard and fast rules” (Whitlock). He states that what may be a harmless joke to some may be very offensive to others. He then uses an example of famous basketball player and broadcaster Charles Barkley’s comments concerning Barkley’s “hatred” of white people. The statement was a joke, and Whitlock makes that clear by giving an example of what he used to say to people who “pretended to be upset by Barkley's quip, ‘Marry a black woman, have a kid and I won't get offended when you joke, 'I hate black people' ‘’ (Whitlock).

The rhetor, in conformity with the rest of his rant, does not do well here to reassure that he respects the opinions of the majority. He makes good points, in that people should indeed not be offended by a simple joke, but to say that those people he knew were pretending to be mad is a foolish statement to make in an article regarding the foolishness of the public getting angry after hearing mild racist jokes on TV. Whitlock should have instead simply stated that the racist jokes go both ways. Both black and white people experience them and both black and white people make them up on national television in front of millions of racially sensitive Americans.

In conclusion to his rant, the rhetor gives one last example where two white broadcasters made a bad judgment call concerning a statement about a black broadcaster texting a white woman late at night. Whitlock points out that the text was made during “booty-call hours” (Whitlock). This type of language suggests that the statement by the white broadcasters weren’t simply speaking out of context. The slang helps to accuse the black broadcaster of indeed committing some type of moral crime in attempting to hook up with a woman whom he may or may not have been in a relationship with. Nevertheless, Whitlock defends the black broadcaster, stating that his white accusers weren’t racist, but that they were simply “hating” (Whitlock).

Whitlock reveals a black man’s opinion on the very hot subject of racial comments and jokes in public, and what should be done to deal with such racism, whether one agrees it is negative or not. The use of slang and appeals to popular figures and emotions in his article really makes his audience think hard concerning the use of racially charged statements in public television, particularly in the sports world, where the most popular spectator sports are dominated by minority athletes. Whitlock concludes his article with an example of when two white people, in the rhetor’s own opinion, were simply “hating” on a black man and disregarding certain “man laws.” This slang also appeals to the common sports fan, helping him get his point across by allowing readers to relate to his thoughts concerning the issue of racism in the sports world.

Political Rhetoric: Very Rough Draft!

2009-10-14T12:21:00.000-07:00

Political Rhetoric
The early 1960’s was a time of much uncertainty, and many questions. Many of the inherent human freedoms were threatened. President John F. Kennedy greatly desired to relieve some of the stress and pressure that many Americans were feeling and confronting. Throughout his Inaugural Speech in 1961, John F. Kennedy appeals heavily to fundamental principles of human freedom and happiness, directly acknowledges many different groups of individuals and appeals to their needs, shows awareness of several situations and struggles around the world, and makes commitments to many different groups and individuals, expecting a commitment from each in return. President Kennedy is not only able to recognize many different situations and needs, but he also offers some thoughts on how to act, and how change can be implemented. Through these tools, he is able to unite his audience and to refresh both his audience’s hope that they can actually create the world which they have all longed to live in and their desire to act.
1) Fundamental principles of human freedom and happiness…
Very early in his address, Kennedy establishes the fact that Americans and all people around the world hold to many of the same basic values and principles. This is very effective for him because it lets his audience know that his entire speech will be established on broadly applicable principles and morals, creating a sense of unity, even among very different individuals. He states clearly that, “the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans… unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.” Although he directly addresses his American audience, who is present at the speech, the principle is applied to the world as a whole, and to his audience abroad. He specifically states that not only are we committed to these values here in the United States, but that everyone “around the world” is committed to them as well. Through a simple statement, he was able to not only unite his national audience, but an international one as well. This unity not only had an effect on principle, but was also very influential in uniting everyone in how to act as well.
2) Different groups that he shows an awareness of and of their needs…
In addition to being able to unite his audience through establishing common interests, Kennedy is able to continue to build unity by acknowledging very specific groups within his broad audience. He is able to show the personal meaning and significance of his message to each of the different groups. He begins each new statement with one of the groups in mind, “To those old allies… To those new States… To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery… To our sister republics south of our border… To that world assembly of sovereign states, the United Nations… Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary…” This specific acknowledgement had a very powerful affect on those who were part of the audience. Two main effects can be noted. First, the specific acknowledgement helped the audience to be more attentive during the speech. Second, the acknowledgement helped the audience to feel a sense of individual responsibility that would remain with them long after the speech was delivered.
3) Situations he acknowledges from around the world…
At the time of President Kennedy’s election, there were many threats around the world to the peace that we would enjoy as a global civilization. Nuclear warfare was one of the great threats. Kennedy not only acknowledged this serious problem and issue that the nations were facing, but he also offered some suggestions of action that we should take. He stated, “both sides overburdened by the cost of modern weapons, both rightly alarmed by the steady spread of the deadly atom, yet both racing to alter that uncertain balance of terror that stays the hand of mankind's final war.”
4) Commitments and promises…
Another effective tool that Kennedy employed in his inaugural speech was that of making commitments to his audience. It was made even more powerful as he made very specific and individual commitments to specific sub-groups within his audience. For example, he promised, “those old allies” that America would “pledge the loyalty of faithful friends.” Here he not only drew upon friendship, a fundamental human value, but he also made a commitment to his audience that both he and America would hold to that. President Kennedy also established some commitments with his global audience, expanding the reaches of his message: “To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special pledge—to convert our good words into good deeds—in a new alliance for progress—to assist free men and free governments in casting off the chains of poverty.” Another great promise the Kennedy makes embraces yet another strong value supported by many people. He commits to those “peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery” to give his “best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required.” Again, drawing upon a principle that his general audience would embrace, and also making a long-term commitment, shows his willingness to do whatever it takes to make things right. As he instills his willingness to do so, it enables him to ask the same of others later on in his address.
5) Why was his speech so powerful in leading people to act?...
6) Conclusion

Analysis of “Acupuncture for Low Back Pain in Pregnancy”

2009-10-14T12:20:00.002-07:00

Western doctors admittedly know little about acupuncture and with that lack of understanding comes apprehension and concern. In a British Medical Journal Acupuncture in Medicine, Mike Cummings’ article “Acupuncture for Low Back Pain in Pregnancy” critically discusses the benefits of practicing acupuncture on pregnant women, despite increasing litigations and various concerns voiced by prevalent doctors claiming that such a practice causes spontaneous early pregnancy loss. Through his own case study, the author uses deep paraspinal and periosteal acupuncture throughout a patient’s pregnancy at her insistence to help control her lower back pain, and documents his results to convince his audience of the safety of acupuncture during pregnancy. Through his use of questions, examples, organization, style, and graphics, Cummings effectively defends his belief that acupunctural treatment on pregnant women is both safe and reliable.

The author first poses questions to his audience to convey his personal feelings and to help his audience better identify with him. He establishes his firm ethical stance in this way by engaging the reader and illustrating his integrity as a medical professional. As an existing acupuncture patient, the woman in this study had been receiving acupuncture treatment for weeks before she revealed to Cummings that she was in fact pregnant. He then explained how he halted treatment due to the apprehension in his field about using acupuncture on a pregnant woman, but resumed treatment after exhausting every other option and after the request of the patient. Is “it ethically defensible” Cummings asks, “to withhold treatment on purely medicolegal grounds (i.e. the concern about being blamed for a coincidental adverse event in the pregnancy), when the patient, who was aware of the material risks, had made the decision to continue treatment?” (44). Other professionals in the medical field have asked this same question, and this issue about acquiescing patients' requests has been particularly tense in the UK. By posing this question, then, Cummings supports the choice to begin treatment on a consenting patient and presents a background where readers with prior biases will more easily agree with the author's treatment and accept his study. Coupled with the author’s earlier inhibitions about administering the treatment, questions such as these establish his ethos and helps persuade the reader to accept acupuncture as a safe and legitimate option for pregnant women.

Second, through describing his personal study as well as referencing other research presented on this topic, Cummings gives more legitimacy to his results. He logically attests that due to the nonoccurrence of any complications resulting from the administration of acupuncture to the pregnant woman in his study, acupuncture is therefore safe. To prove that his study is not an isolated incident, he further refers the reader to case reports and studies conducted by other doctors on pregnant women who also found this treatment to be a safe and effective treatment. These references include Wedenberg’s “A prospective randomized study comparing acupuncture with physiotherapy for low-back and pelvic pain in pregnancy” and Thomas’s “Use of acupuncture for managing chronic pelvic pain in pregnancy.” Because the acupuncture Cummings prescribed did not cause any adverse effects on his patient, he concludes that this study, coupled with others’ research, provides conclusive evidence to dismiss the earlier claims that acupuncture begets abortions in pregnant women. With the evidence cleverly stacked in his favor, Cummings' audience is logically led to agree.

Furthermore, the article’s organization is deliberately chosen to accommodate quicker and more enjoyable reading. Cummings organizes his article chronologically, separating different ideas and events into paragraphs. This organizational style makes it easier for the reader to follow the study more naturally and provides more insight to the author’s feelings. The events are mostly grouped together by visitation, the first visit from the patient coming at the beginning, the second following that and so on, with a summary at the beginning of the article and a conclusion at the end. In this way, we learn as the author learns, and are more inclined to treat the presented case in its own light rather than applying any previous biases. Also, a notable foundation of trust is built as Cummings leads us through his mind and shares with us his experiences in a story-like manner. Readers feel like they are there with Cummings through every step of his study, hence drawing the audience closer to the text emotionally. Organizational arrangement is further apparent when Cummings introduces new topics. When presenting new information that he assumes the reader does not already know, Cummings laboriously elaborates on every fact that is applicable to the situation. These facts are then used as evidence to support his insights on the given subject in the following paragraphs. This format of new topic to description to explanation to supporting conclusion remains constant throughout his article. Presenting the facts before he gives his opinion helps to establish the author’s logos, as does his well-placed introduction of himself as a Medical Director at the beginning of the piece.

Although he refers to many other examples conducted in other hospitals throughout his paper, Mike Cummings uses just one first-hand example to describe his position. By using only one example in a story-like manner, the author appeals to our emotions by emphasizing the humanness of the patient. This kind of pathos used by Cummings helps us feel attached to the patient rather than citing many examples where each patient seems insignificant. Since the patient said she was experiencing severe pain, the audience begins to feel sorry for her. In this way, the author subtly persuades us to agree with the author to do something to help curb this horrible agony. Cummings expertly creates a singular, thoughtful story which presents an emotional aspect to his work that a statistical study could not have captured.

Most of the graphics Cummings uses in his article help illustrate the pain sites his patient describes and visually portray the severe nature of his patient’s condition. These visuals add a human element to make the article seem more genuine, and they serve to explain and supplement the text. He inserts them on the sides of the page forecast the topics soon to be explained. If a graphic appears on the left side of the page, for example, the audience can assume that topic will be discussed later on in that particular page. In this way, Cummings emphasizes important information not only by creating “landmarks” which make it easier to find particular topics, but also by illustrating concepts or ideas that might otherwise be hard to understand. The figure showing the areas of discomfort on the patient, for example, helps the audience know exactly where and to what extent the patient was experiencing her pain, and to emphasize the necessity of Cummings treatment to provide relief. The author utilized these visuals to present his information in a clear and systematic way, introducing his topic first, explaining it in words, then referring to the graphic in the text parenthetically so his audience would be able to understand and more fully internalize the text.

In his article, Mike Cummings uses a story about a pregnant woman who needed acupuncture in order to persuade his audience to question the predisposing suspicion that acupuncture causes abortions in pregnant women. By chronologically organizing his paper, including pictures, and referring to just one patient, the audience feels more emotionally attached to this case. The author offers emotional and logical evidence to support his belief that refusing treatment to a patient merely on unproven, superstitious beliefs is both unethical and archaic. Through effective use of questions, examples, organization, style, and graphics, this case study actively persuades its readers to disregard primitive and unfounded biases and acknowledge the research presented in this report.

Works Cited

Cummings, Mike. “Acupuncture for Low Back Pain in Pregnancy.” Acupuncture in Medicine 2003: 21;42-46. Print.

From People to Cars

2009-10-14T12:20:00.001-07:00

From People to Cars

Advertising uses sneaky, manipulative techniques to attract everyone, from children to grandparents. Bright and bold colors catch the eye, and the viewer stops, snared. Catchy phrasing keeps them looking. Pictures suggesting something everyone wants ties the unwary magazine reader in emotionally. Before long, a person is marveling at the wonderfulness of the product, doomed from first sight. One such ad is for the Toyota Sequoia. It uses bold catchy phrases at the top, pictures to clarify, smooth calming colors, and the pull of something everyone wants to represent the value of simplified, enjoyable living.

The Toyota Sequoia looks a lot like other cars on the market. It has shiny silver paint, sparkling chrome wheels, and four doors. So, what makes it special? In the ad, it is placed in a secluded setting on a beach with mountains in the distance. People are standing on the shore fishing, playing with their children, talking, and sitting back watching the ripples in the glassy lake. They’re far away from the busy hubbub of the city and enjoying life together like everyone wants to. The ad uses the happy people to weave a picture of joy and bliss. The setting, with the crystalline waters and the painted mountains, creates a feeling of wanderlust with a touch of adventure. The ad uses its setting and props to suggest that the Toyota Sequoia will help a person have a good time with the people they enjoy being around.

At the top of the ad, bold white letters say, “You’ve earned enough points with your airline. Earn some with your family”. At the bottom of the ad, a short paragraph describes how the sequoia is for work and play because of its unique design and features. The last phrase says, “There’s no limit to how far your family can go, or how close you can get”. The words in this ad clearly say that this product will help a person get away from ordinary life to create something better and new. This ad is keenly directed to people who feel removed from their family and want to reestablish or even create new bonds to last a lifetime. The ad suggests that the Toyota Sequoia can help achieve these goals.

This ad is filled with blues and browns. Blue, a cool and refreshing color, renews the atmosphere and ensures that the picture never gets old. The browns add the bit of rustic serenity needed to create a familiarity in the picture, so it feels like someplace someone has been that it is possible to return to. The hint of purple in the mountains supply the air of mystique everyone needs to stay interested and alive. This ad uses color to bring out the wish to be carefree and loved that everyone wants to feel from time to time.

Running along the bottom of the page for the Toyota Sequoia, there is a long panorama of a grassy mountainous scene divided into four sections. The first section shows three adolescents running and skipping through some water. In capital words, it says, “GET THE FEELING”. The next part of the scene is empty of people but full of trees and grassy hillsides. After that, there is a picture of a child bending down to point at something interesting he’s found on the ground. The last part of the complete picture says TOYOTA next to the Toyota logo. This sequence takes the mind along a path that begins with excitement, leads to wonder, then to discovery, and at the end of it all like a beacon to the unfulfilled wanderer, there is Toyota. This sequence helps suggest that adventure takes on many forms, but all those wonders are made possible through the Toyota Sequoia.

The Toyota Sequoia uses color, background, diction, and atmosphere to advertise its product. There is no comparing with other brands or ideas, suggesting that it is above those sorts of advertising techniques. It uses the idea of comfort and fun with friends and family to entice new vehicle buyers into the Toyota location nearest to them. It links its product quite successfully to finding what has been lost and fixing what has been broken.

Cars and living an enjoyable life are two very different things. One uses gas, oil, and other dwindling natural resources to go, while the other is supposed to work depending on attitude and personality. They are truly their own entities of individual ideas and focus. People don’t need cars to be happy, but it can definitely be argued that they help. Cars can’t go anywhere without people. In this day and age, they both need each other. It is the idea that people are much happier when they are working or playing well with someone they like that this ad draws upon. The designer clearly understands the pull to have a relaxed life without stress or worry.

The ad uses simplicity to convey its meaning. The scene or picture isn’t clustered with crazy people running around being random. It focuses on real people and what they need. The true basics are all people really want and need, and they are what this ad exhibits. In conclusion, while the ad is for creation and fun, it is also for life. Just as putting the foot to the pedal makes the car go, so being able to be almost anywhere within a few days makes life go. The Toyota Sequoia ad uses a longing to be free, desire for truth, and want of something that works to sell its product.

Freedom Writers Diary

2009-10-14T12:20:00.000-07:00

Freedom Writer’s Diary in Irony

“Well, Jeremy was arrested” (Freedom Writers 183). How does someone who horribly raped and murdered a young girl fit into a book that preaches peace and change for the better? The juxtaposition of violence and peace resonate throughout this passage, giving rise to a paradigm in pathos that epitomizes the message of the book, The Freedom Writers Diary. Logos and ethos are also used in conjunction with irony, but not to the same extent. This passage is one, out of 150, student’s diary entry that takes a passage from their life and compares the world around them to the Freedom Writer’s goals.
“There were media vans in front of the school and the first thing I thought to myself was they were there to welcome the Freedom Writers back and to write an article about us. But they weren’t” (Freedom Writers 183). In order to understand this entry, we must first understand the context that it’s in. The Freedom Writers originally went to Washington D.C. to present their idea of their diary to the U.S. Secretary of Education, Richard Riley, to see if he could get it published for the whole world to read. The point of this diary is to let other people know that they can change, no matter what background they’re from and that peace and respect are always better for everyone rather than hatred and segregation.
While they were in Washington D.C., they not only did that, but they visited the Lincoln Memorial, the Holocaust Museum and held a candlelight vigil for peace. The same night as the vigil, a rape and murder were taking place in Vegas and being carried out by another student from their same school. “Apparently Jeremy had brutally raped and murdered a seven-year-old girl in a Nevada casino…While the father gambled, Jeremy and his friend hung out in the arcade…Jeremy began playing tag with the little girl, followed her into the women’s restroom, where he raped and murdered her in a bathroom stall. The friend…left and did nothing to stop this crime” (Freedom Writers 183).
This passage highlights two things: pathos and juxtaposition. The pathos used here is a paradigm which the writer highlighted, but warned the reader not to follow. The paradigm here is that there is a young man, with nothing to do and a corrupt mind (mentioned later in the passage) that led to a horrific act. This can be generalized to all young men who have nothing to do and have “child pornography on [their] computer” while “abusing drugs” that with these conditions, all young men will commit such crimes (Freedom Writers 183). However, the writer of this diary entry also mentioned that the media focuses on these types of things. “No wonder young people are so easily stereotyped” (Freedom Writers 184).
The other part, juxtaposition, has two distinct passages that also use pathos. “It’s ironic that while the Freedom Writers were taking a symbolic stand against violence in our candlelight vigil at the Washington Monument, a murder was being carried out” (Freedom Writers 184). This passage was mentioned earlier. The second one deals with the media in this diary entry. “It makes me sad that this horrible murder moved the Freedom Writers’ story to the back cover, while Jeremy’s got the front page” (Freedom Writers 184). The juxtaposition comes in with both of these passages in the overlying message: that tolerance and peace are the better way to go and that the Freedom Writers are trying to establish that fact through their writings and their works. Yet, the world keeps on focusing on the negative, the horrible, and the treacherous. Putting these two concepts side by side really force that issue out in this diary entry.
There are two other points to make about this diary entry that haven’t been touched upon yet: the ethos and logos. The ethos here is kind of subtle. “There were media vans in front of the school and the first thing I thought to myself was they were there to welcome the Freedom Writers back and to write an article about us” (Freedom Writers 183). This was already mentioned, yet this same passage is applicable to ethos. This sentence established the strong character of the Freedom Writers: they were well known by now. This entry was written in the spring of Junior Year 1997. After two and a half years of being together, the Freedom Writers had made a name for themselves and were well connected as the remedial English class that had risen to new heights and taking on the world’s problems. When a reader reads this passage, then, she expects to understand the point of their entry and what lessons she’ll learn from it.
Logos is also a brief interlude within this diary entry. “Jeremy had a dark side to his personality. He had child pornography on his computer, and he was abusing drugs. This is a lethal combination. Although not an excuse, such things can make a person with such a dark and disturbed side commit acts they may never have if not under their influence” (Freedom Writers 183). While the writer saw this as an enthymeme and put two and two together, the reader can also see this as a form of logos: obvious logic that spells out why Jeremy did these things and what one should do to avoid making similar mistakes in the future.
In conclusion, pathos, ethos and logos are used in conjunction within this diary entry in order to make the reader more aware of what the Freedom Writers are trying to accomplish. Their values of tolerance, justice, peace and love are sharply contrasted with the violence, hatred, intolerance, racism and segregation in their lives and the world around them. This diary entry epitomized that very feeling in juxtaposition.
Bibliography
Freedom Writers with Erin Gruwell. The Freedom Writers Diary: How a Teacher and 150 Teens Used Writing to Change Themselves and the World Around Them. New York: Broadway Books, 1999. Print.

The Efficacy of Jonathan Edwards’ “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”

2009-10-14T12:19:00.001-07:00

The famous sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” written by American reverend Jonathan Edwards in 1741, is a prime example of the potentially forceful convincing powers of rhetoric. The sermon, even when read silently, is effective in forcefully projecting a specific interpretation of the wrathful nature of God and the sinful nature of man. In crafting his highly effective sermon, Edwards utilizes his authority as a man of God and as an interpreter of the scriptures, a logical and direct organization of arguments, and violent imagery to convince his audience of the vengeance of God against man.

Jonathan Edwards begins his sermon by quoting Deuteronomy 32:35, which reads, "Their foot shall slide in due time." Edwards quotes the verse, and then immediately offers an interpretation of its meaning. He places the verse in context by mentioning the "unbelieving Israelites," then passes judgment on the doctrinal situation by saying that the scripture "seems to imply" the points to be illustrated in the rest of the document (Edwards 194). Edwards is very aware of his audience's loyalties to the Bible as the word of God. He is also aware of the influence his position as a preacher has on the congregation. Edwards makes use of his knowledge of his audience's allegiances in order to add the most impact to his argument. He uses two authorities to which he knows his audience claims allegiance; that is, he exercises both his own authority and the authority of the Bible to make his arguments about the nature of sinners more powerful. The scripture quoted at the beginning of the sermon then becomes irrefutable proof of the precarious nature of sinners in the sight of God. The strong argument in the introduction to Edwards' sermon, which is fortified by the scriptures and Edwards' ability to interpret the scriptures, immediately establishes Edwards as an authoritative figure, thus lending credibility to the rest of the sermon.

As the sermon goes on, Edwards continues to utilize his authority as a man of God, specifically by creating his own interpretation of the nature of God. This interpretation of God becomes the reference point for the rest of the sermon. All of the commands and accusations in the sermon rely on Edwards' portrait of God as an angry, all-powerful being that has no obligation to have mercy upon his creations. By convincing his congregation of God's wrathful character, Edwards is then able to convince the congregation that they are in danger of damnation and severe punishment at the hand of this wrathful God. Edwards characterizes God as a being that "abhors" mortal men and "looks upon [them] as worthy of nothing else but to be cast into the fire" (200). Edwards then uses scriptural references to support his claims about the nature of God. He says, "We often read of the fury of God" (Edwards 201), "How awful are those words, Isaiah 63:3, which are the words of the great God" (Edwards 202), and quotes other scriptures in order to illustrate his point. Once again, he justifies his arguments by relying upon the word of God (scripture) and his own authority to interpret those words.

Edwards' arguments are further strengthened by the overall organization of his sermon. The sermon follows a very logically formulated course. Edwards begins by explaining the situation of the Israelites, as outlined in the Bible. He dictates, in a numbered list, the assumptions that can be made about the Israelites' exposure to "punishment and destruction" (Edwards 194). After outlining the Israelites' situation, he makes a claim that stems from his preceding logical explanation. He claims that "'There is nothing that keeps wicked men at any one moment out of hell, but the mere pleasure of God'" (Edwards 195). He then supports this claim, once again, with a numbered list of fully articulated explanations. Finally, after creating a well-structured argument about the Israelites, Edwards shifts his attention toward the members of his congregation and applies his claims about the Israelites to their present-day situation. His language immediately reflects this directional shift. He says that the subject thus far addressed "may be for awakening unconverted persons in this congregation" (Edwards 198). Edwards addresses the audience very directly, saying "This that you have heard is the case of every one of you that are out of Christ" (198, emphasis added). Before this shift, Edwards uses generalized language that is not directed at any specific individuals. When speaking of the condemnation of men, he says "the devil is waiting for them, hell is gaping for them, the flames gather and flash about them," etc. (Edwards 198, emphasis added) By shifting his attention directly to the audience before him, Edwards makes a logical transfer of ideas from the Israelites to the Americans in his congregation. The punishments and dire consequences assigned to the Israelites in the first half of the speech, before the shift, are then applied to the congregation. This sudden shift wastes no time in directly condemning the so-called sinners in Edwards' congregation. The logical progression of Edwards' argument makes his claims directly impactful to his audience.

Edwards also makes direct and powerful arguments by addressing specific groups within his congregation. Near the end of the sermon, Edwards begins to identify groups within the audience, then speaks directly to them. He speaks to older individuals, saying, "Do you not see how generally persons of your years are passed over and left," then turns to the younger audience members, saying, "And you, young men, and young women, will you neglect this precious season which you now enjoy. . .?" Finally, he turns to the youngest members of the audience. He says, "And you, children, who are unconverted . . . Will you be content to be children of the devil . . . ?" Once again, Edwards' methodological presentation creates a strong and convincing argument that applies specifically to the audience. By systematically addressing all age groups of the congregation, Edwards argues that God's wrath will not spare any sinner, regardless of age or experience.

Edwards also appeals to his audience through the use of extreme imagery. After identifying his audience members as sinners, Edwards reemphasizes the gravity of their situation through frightening images of destruction. He directly pinpoints the sins of the congregation, telling them that "wickedness makes you as it were heavy as lead, and to tend downwards with great weight and pressure towards hell" (Edwards 199). Through the use of this image, Edwards creates a notion of hell that is very physical, not merely spiritual or mental. The physical reality of the torture of hell increases the negativity of the consequences of damnation. Edwards continues to use similar imagery in his explanation of the wrath of God. The wrath of God is compared to "black clouds," "fiery floods," a bent bow loaded with an arrow pointed at the heart of the sinner, etc. (Edwards 199) The images used in the second half of the sermon (after the shift towards the audience) parallel those used in the first half of the sermon. The audience members are thus in danger of the punishments directed at the Israelites. They can now picture themselves "held in the hand of God, over the pit of hell" (Edwards 198). Because Ewards has used a familiar image, a hand, the wrath of God becomes a physical, easily recognizable metaphor that can directly influence the audience. Edwards' imagery, as used throughout the sermon, paints an overall picture of man's vulnerability to the furious power of God. The violence of the imagery is incredibly sensational, and thus, incredibly frightening and effective in convincing the audience of God's ability to destroy his creations.

The convincing powers of Edwards' sermon are the result of careful construction. Edwards, in recognizing the influence of his own actions as a preacher, utilizes the audience members' loyalties to the Bible and religious authority in order to establish his argument as an authoritative interpretation of the nature of God. Furthermore, Edwards organizes his argument in such a way that the frightening punishments outlined in the Bible can apply directly to his audience members. The logical construction of the argument maximizes the impact of Biblical evidence of God' wrathful character. Finally, Edwards' use of vivid and violent imagery has the ability to create a strong emotional reaction in the audience, essentially inciting fear and dread so powerful that the audience has no choice but to trust Edwards. The sermon finds its power from the specificity with which it addresses its audience. Edwards draws power from the beliefs of his audience, and in doing so, creates a powerful argument about the relationship between God and man.

Works Cited
Edwards, Jonathan. “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” The Norton Anthology of American Literature. Ed. Nina Baym. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2008. 194-205. Print.

Sexist Sows

2009-10-14T12:19:00.000-07:00

Katie Macdonald

Dr. Paul

Rhetorical Analysis

Sexist Sows

It is taken as almost gospel truth that men discriminate against women. They are the ones who for generations remained atop the pedestal of superiority; they were the dominant half of our species. Therefore, it has come to fabricate such stereotypes as to completely shift the social atmosphere when something like feminism pops up. In the midst of the conflicting altercations between the many avid groups, Anne Richardson Roiphe wrote an essay in the New Yorker, entitled “Confessions of a Female Chauvinist Sow”. In her writings she aims to convince her readers that women must put faith in the idea that they are equal to men, not inferior, but neither superior. Despite the happenings of the past, the important thing—and the hard thing—is to wipe the slate clean, to start again without the meanness of the past. "Women who want equality must be prepared to give it and believe in it…” (Paragraph 9). Through exercising a careful manipulation of language in terms of connection to audience, contrast, and comparison, Roiphe effectively creates an equalizer in beliefs on both sides of the species-spectrum.

There is an old saying that plays something to the tune of, "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me." It is possible that such a phrase was popularized in order for people to equip themselves with a psychological defense against the reality that words can, in fact, have a tremendous amount of significance depending on their usage and context. The careful manipulation of language in essays, for example, is one way that words can be arranged and exploited. One way in which Roiphe orchestrates her scheme in the essay is through the use of specific pronouns, such as "us," "we," "they," and "you" to establish a rapport-like connection with female readers. The effect of this subtle device is that Roiphe is able to directly communicate with other women, enabling her to transmit her point of view.

This connection is vastly important, as what woman would enjoy hearing her opinion that “women as a group are indeed more masochistic than men”(Paragraph 11)? She goes on to explain that the practical result of this division is that women seem nicer and kinder, but when the world changes, women will have a fuller opportunity to be just as rotten as men and there will be fewer claims of female moral superiority, but it still entails an insult to women as a whole; however, by putting herself on the same level as her audience, and by always presenting a counteracting example, such as the fact that there are “1000 Jack the Rippers to every Lizzie Bordon” (11), she allows the claim to become more accepted.

In addition to capturing the reader's interest with the indisputable bonds, Roiphe begins using contrast. The numerous examples of contrast throughout the essay portray men and women as being drastically different, especially morally. Boys are thought to be incapable of engaging in “easy companionship” (Paragraph 4) as girls are able to do, and men are generally believed to be “less moral”(4) than women. “Everyone assumes a mother will not let her child starve, yet it is necessary to legislate that a father must not do so”(Paragraph 5). Roiphe uses contrast to illustrate the common anti-male attitudes women have, and in doing so, makes it obvious that women feel superior to men. This exactly, Roiphe points out, is the barrier to equality between men and women. It is clear to the reader that equality between the sexes will never exist as long as women continue to feel superior to men. The contrasts also function to support points Roiphe makes later concerning the similarities between men and women.

About midway through the essay, Roiphe transitions smoothly from contrast to comparison and begins focusing on the idea that women are actually very similar to men. She bluntly states in paragraph 11 that aggression is not a male-sex-linked characteristic, and despite her shared emotional conviction that women given power would not disrupt the peace, she admits that even “great queens have waged war before”(11). Comparisons such as these lead Roiphe into making her strongest comparison: “Us laughing at them, us feeling superior to them, us ridiculing them behind their backs…if they were doing it to us we'd call it male chauvinist pigness; if we do it to them, it is inescapably female chauvinist sowness”(paragraph 14). This particular technique forces the reader to reflect on previous ideas in the essay. Roiphe’s previous statement “what they have done to us [women], and, of course, they have and they did and they are…” (paragraph 2) momentarily makes the assumption that men are to blame for the inequality between the sexes. However, through effective comparison Roiphe leads her readers to logically infer that women must also be responsible for the inequality between men and women. Minorities, and in this case, women, automatically feel superior to the oppressor because, after all, they are not hurting anybody. In fact, they feel they are morally better. It then becomes clear to the reader that the secret sense of superiority women feel is what makes them equally as chauvinistic as men.

If a male chauvinist was a "sexist pig," then what is a female chauvinist? The term “sexist sows” seems to fit rather nicely. Roiphe worked through her techniques to come to this conclusion; had she gone straight to the point without careful administration of her language and without putting a contrast along with the comparison, a very different effect could have been contrived. Her audience, particularly the female members of it, would have undoubtedly been offended. Roiphe’s specialized techniques allowed her to create a specifically designed essay beneficial to leveling the adverse in points of view. It is true that the women's movement cannot remake consciousness, or reshape the future, without acknowledging and shedding all the unnecessary and ugly baggage of the past, but it is important that the movement not become so anti-male as to dismiss its own hidden prejudices and class assumptions. Men and women are who built this world; and in all aspects of intelligence and humanity neither can surmount the other. We are equal.

Lincoln's Young Men's Lyceum Speech

2009-10-14T12:18:00.000-07:00

Lee Deppermann

English 150

Rhetorical Analysis Draft

Lincoln’s Young Men’s Lyceum Speech: A Passionate Appeal Against Passions

In November of 1837 a proslavery mob burst in to Elijah P. Lovejoy’s house and printing office. They killed Lovejoy, destroyed his abolitionist printing press and shocked the nation. Two months later a young lawyer and sometime Whig politician, Abraham Lincoln, gave a stirring address extolling the rule of law and the legacy of the founding fathers. Lincoln declared that there were no circumstances that justified mob action, and that any measure that subverted the rule of law endangered the future existence of the United States. Abraham Lincoln’s Young Men’s Lyceum speech carefully illustrates the logic of self-control, while at the same time uses passionate appeals against the use of unrestrained passion.

Lincoln’s audience included both the people who attended the speech it’s self as well as a much broader readership. Significantly, he realized that his speech would be delivered in a time where tensions between the North and South were never lurking far away. Several times during the speech Lincoln carefully casts himself as a moderate, thus broadening his appeal. Early on in his address Lincoln clearly states that mob tendencies are not unique to any region or social class: “they have pervaded the country from New England to Louisiana; neither are they confined to the slaveholding or the non-slaveholding states. Whatever, then, their cause may be it is common to the whole country” (29).

Lincoln’s effort to include both North and South in his denunciations was intended to enhance not only the accuracy of his message, but his credibility as a speaker. Any effort to cast the slaveholding South as the primary perpetrators of tyrannical violence would have branded Lincoln a radical, thus alienating him from his more conservative audience. Further, by including the South in his characterization of mob violence Lincoln produces the same effect in relation to the North. These differences, although insignificant to the modern reader, were sensitive issues at the time. By casting himself as a sectional moderate and distancing himself from a moral debate on slavery, Lincoln made himself more credible.

Lincoln’s most famous speeches, especially his presidential letters and addresses, are characterized by persistent appeals to logic. Lincoln, perhaps calling on his frontier story-telling background, was always able to relate a complicated moral or political issue with a saying or image familiar to the common person. Although Lincoln’s Young Men’s Lyceum address primarily features appeals to passion, the speech contains several prominent arguments that appeal to logic. Lincoln uses logic to decry mob violence by both giving specific examples and broader assumptions.

Lincoln was careful not to mention the Lovejoy murder because it was still a national scandal, and thus by mentioning it Lincoln would have alienated part of his audience. He does, however, bring up several prominent examples designed to illustrate his point. Lincoln’s first example involved the hanging of several gamblers in Mississippi. Concerning the gamblers Lincoln stated: “a set of men, certainly not following for a livelihood a very useful or very honest occupation; but one which . . . was actually licensed by an act of the [state] Legislature” (29). Here Lincoln is acknowledging the gamblers base character while at the same time appealing to the authority of the state legislature. Lincoln next cited the illegal lynching of both whites and blacks accused of fermenting slave insurrection in St. Louis (29-30). Lincoln’s most poignant example was the “most highly tragic” story of a free black seized in his home and murdered in public (30).

Lincoln’s use of specific examples shows the violent results of disregarding law, while at the same time showing his audience that the crisis of mobocracy was not a distant problem. When Lincoln gave graphic descriptions of the lynchings he connected those individual murders to all other instances where the rule of law is replaced by passionate law breaking. Lincoln’s audience would have had no illusions about what mob action really entailed after hearing those examples. Also, by choosing examples that occurred on America’s frontier Lincoln showed his listeners and readers that disregard for law both pervaded their community and could be stopped in their communities.

Although Lincoln built up his ethos by appearing moderate and used specific examples as logical appeals, most of his argument was supported by passionate appeals to common morals, civic virtue and the legacy of the American Revolution. As he opened his speech Lincoln extols both the American landscape and government: “We find ourselves in the peaceful possession of the fairest portion of the earth . . . under the government of a system of political institutions conducing more essentially to the end of civil and religious liberty” than any other in history (28). Later in the address Lincoln appeals to the mores of gratitude, justice, duty and love (28-29). When Lincoln appealed to American exceptionalism and virtue he was connecting his argument with his audience’s beliefs. The desire Lincoln’s readers would have had to be moral and exceptional would have connected them emotionally to Lincoln’s argument.

The majority of emotional appeals in the Young Men’s Lyceum speech deal with preserving the legacy of the American Revolution and the Founding Fathers. Although fifty-two years had passed since the signing of the Declaration of Independence the American Revolution still figured strongly in America’s historical memory. Both Lincoln and his audience would have grown up hearing stories and experiences from Revolutionary War veterans themselves. Along with memories of sacrifice, honor and duty Lincoln’s contemporaries would also have remembered the violence and rebellion of the Revolution. In appealing to his audience’s passions Lincoln had to connect the Revolution with law and order.

After identifying the problem of mobocracy through logical examples and arguments, Lincoln talked at length of how to resist those tendencies. Lincoln’s answer was passionate: “Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution never to violate in the least particular the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their violation by others” (32). Again, Lincoln stirred his audience by appealing to the universal values of liberty and posterity. “As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Constitution and laws, let every American pledge his life, his property and his sacred honor . . . to his own and his children’s liberty” (32). Here, and throughout the speech, Lincoln equates the Revolution with law, order and morality. Lincoln’s audience would not have missed the symbolism.

Ironically, Lincoln’s main strategy to combat unrestrained passion was to passionately appeal to common values and America’s revolutionary heritage. In doing this Lincoln surely recognized that although logical appeals to reason would support his argument, only passion would evoke emotion and action in his audience. The Young Men’s Lyceum speech is a masterful example of using language symbols to achieve a specific effect. Lincoln’s moderate use of logical examples, combined with passionate appeals to the Revolution, combined to produce the effective argument that the rule of law must always be supreme over our passions.

Works Cited

Lincoln, Abraham. “Address to the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield Illinois”. Abraham Lincoln: Speeches and Writings 1832-1858. Speeches, Letters and Miscellaneous Writings. The Lincoln Douglas Debates. Ed. Don Fehrenbacher. New York: Literary Classics of the United States, 1989. Print.

Words from the Dust

2009-10-14T11:59:00.000-07:00

Crying from the Dust: Rhetorical Analysis of King Benjamin's Final Address

For many readers of the Book of Mormon, the final address given by a respected religious leader and king stands out as one of the richest passages of the entire book. King Benjamin, as this speech's author and deliverer, was not only a great leader, but also a skilled rhetorician who knew how to involve his audience. In his attempt not only to inform but persuade his people of the truth of certain abstract ideas, King Benjamin draws largely upon his ethos as a respected magistrate and prophet as well as emotions associated with man's relationship to God, while anticipating and addressing objections his listeners might have to his expressed advice.

Throughout his remarks, Benjamin relates his own experience as an example, then compares himself to his audience to further involve them in his message. “I am like unto yourselves,” he says, after emphasizing his frail mortal nature. Knowing that much of the message he was about to deliver came from things he had learned for himself, Benjamin implied that what was true for Benjamin as a king and ruler applied to them in equal measure. Only by recognizing their similarities to Benjamin would his listeners internalize the principles he sought to ingrain within them. Had the people thought that Benjamin was simply trying for one last stab at positive publicity, it would have been easy for them to brush off his exhortations. But King Benjamin left no room for doubt: “I do not desire to boast,” said he, after unfolding to them the service he had provided during his reign. This statement leads into a powerful rhetorical question that both utilizes his connection with his audience and causes them to interact mentally, due to its presentation as a question: “if I, whom ye call your king, do labor to serve you, then ought not ye to labor to serve one another?”

Not only does this question further the relationship between Benjamin and his people, but it is also an enthymeme. Two observations are stated: first, that he is their king; second, that he labors to serve them. His conclusion that they ought to serve one another is only true to his audience if they accept the implied notion that they ought to be more like Benjamin in their conduct one to another. Going back to his previous statements, this draws upon the connection he has established from the first – that he and they are essentially in the same boat and ought to live by the same principles. Taking all these into account, we see that Benjamin has masterfully combined the power of enthymeme, ethos, and even rhetorical question into a single, seemingly simple statement. Significantly, he uses the phase, “whom ye call your king,” rather than “who am your king.” Possibly, he is reminding them of the respect they have already given him as signified by their willingness for him to be their king, further magnifying the power of his ethos. In fact, he goes on to repeat this phrase, “whom ye call your king,” multiple times later on to similar effect.

In delivering his main message, Benjamin proceeds to elicit a wide variety of emotional responses from his audience in order to induce a specific change in behavior or understanding. This first occurs through a sort of collective self-deprecation in which he describes the supreme majesty and goodness of God, which he then juxtaposes with the pitifully low value of man's services to God, no matter how sincerely given. Again, he describes this both in terms of his audience and in terms of himself to unify himself with his audience. The overall effect is an expression of humility and deep gratitude, which are largely products of diction that reflects these emotions in himself. For example, King Benjamin builds tension as he approaches a climatic conclusion regarding the unprofitability of man by making several lengthy “if” statements so that his audience is on the verge of their seats but are nevertheless taken aback at the brevity and simplicity of his final deduction: “yet ye would be unprofitable servants.” Already trusting their leader with whom they now share a strong bond of identity, this sequence would cause their hearts yearn to be better servants and would lead them to marvel on the mercies of their Lord.

Benjamin also makes a direct appeal to emotions of fear and dismay to convince his audience of the awfulness of the condition of the sinner. He progresses through several degrees of intensity to make this argument, from simple implicit advice to final explicit warning. After enumerating the benefits of righteousness, he first moves in the other direction by suggesting that “there is a wo pronounced upon him who listeth to obey [the evil spirit]” (150). Shortly thereafter comes a reference to “everlasting punishment” as well as two metaphors to illustrate the concept of the punishment in contexts that his audience could easily comprehend – drinking and earning wages. Though he has now begun to articulate the nature of the punishment, he has mostly just tapped the logical or perceptual resources available as a rhetorician rather than reach emotional climaxes. He does so in a direct way – by referring to a set of emotions which he associates with the man who dies in his sins. “The demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his own guilt...and doth fill his soul with guilt, and pain, and anguish...” He then goes even further in relating this message to his audience by addressing them specifically as “old men,” “young men,” and “little children,” and exhorting them to experience a “remembrance of the awful situation of those that have fallen into transgression.” In other words, he actually tells his audience to ponder on the horrible feelings he had just described, to experience it for themselves in some small way, to persuade them of the undesirability of the path which ends in sin.

King Benjamin makes another particularly persuasive point near the end of his speech, regarding charitable treatment of beggars. After urging them to help beggars, he considers an objection one might pose to such a proposition – that the beggar brought it upon himself, and the his punishments are just. Even as Benjamin had earlier implied that his audience should try to be more like himself in serving each other, he now takes this same concept to a higher level, asking “are we not all beggars?” His point is that God is the provider of all our possessions, and that God does not turn us away when we plea to him for help. This is, in effect, another enthymeme. God gives liberally to us, therefore we should give to beggars also. The hidden assumption to complete this argument is that his audience wants to emulate God, which most of them (hopefully) do. Following the pattern he had established earlier in his speech, King Benjamin asks rhetorical questions, employs enthymemes to appeal to reasoning and logic, and even appeals to the ethos of God and our desire to emulate him to establish the intended effect – which is to implant in his people a greater desire to impart of their substance to the needy.

King Benjamin's address is one of the most-quoted portions of the Book of Mormon – with good reason. His speaking style and persuasive devices are unique among ancient records of similar date and have withstood the test of time. Speakers today who wish to improve upon their audience interaction skills, emotional appeals, and even logical progression of ideas will be hard-pressed to find a better example than the one contained therein.

Works Cited

The Book of Mormon. Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1989.

Print.

Note: I haven't put in all the page numbers for the scripture references since I've been doing this on a computer away from my hard copy of the scriptures.

College Football Needs a Playoff

2009-09-28T12:46:00.000-07:00

Last year, the University of Texas Longhorns football team, after having only lost a single game, was not given the chance to play for college football supremacy in the national championship. The University of Oklahoma Sooners, who had the same record as the Longhorns, and even lost to them head-to-head that year, were instead slated to play in the final game of the year against The University of Florida Gators. This occurred because, in the current system, a computer formula is used to determine who the best two teams are at the end of each collegiate season. A computer decides who has the chance to become champions. This current method, dubbed the Bowl Championship Series, is an extremely unfair system to determine who should be allowed to play in the national championship, as, more often than not, only teams from the BCS conferences are allowed the chance. The NCAA needs to make a revision and undo the monopoly the board of directors of the BCS conferences has on all of the big games, that payout the big money to their respective conferences and schools. A playoff system, like the ones implemented in every other collegiate sport in America, needs to be utilized in college football as well.

There are exceptions to the BCS system as well, as teams such as Boise State in 2007, and Utah last year, were given the opportunity to play in a BCS game, even though it was not the national championship game. Both teams had perfect records going into the BCS games. The Broncos and the Utes both made the most of their postseason trips, as they decisively won their respective games, even though their opponents were billed as “much better teams” that would simply outmatch the two “mid-major” teams: Boise State, and Utah. However, under all the scrutiny and pressure, the Broncos and the Utes won the games, further pushing the envelope in the argument for a playoff system. Both teams were thought to be subpar, because of the conference they are from, the Western Athletic Conference, and the Mountain West Conference, respectively. Regardless, both defeated teams that were considered better because of the their respective conferences, which were both BCS conferences.

That being said, there have been many other examples of teams that have been snubbed of a chance to compete for the national title because they were not picked by the computer system. These teams’ not being able to have a chance to play, however, is not the only issue in the debate. In addition to being able to play on the biggest stage in the world, at the end of the year, the 8 teams chosen to play in the 4 BCS games, including the national championship, are also awarded millions of dollars that go straight to their respective schools and conferences, regardless if they win or lose. In the end, the BCS schools have a stranglehold on all of this money, as teams from the same six conferences make the trip back to the same BCS bowl games year after year, garnishing all of the accolades and money, which leads to better recruiting for each of the schools, better training, and the ability to hire better coaches. With all of these components in place, it is almost inconceivable that a team from a “mid-major”, non-BCS can expect to compete with these schools when the BCS schools simply have more money, more talented recruits, and better coaches.

The boards of directors of each of these conferences have a stranglehold on all of the money and they know it. They continually vote against any thought or motion to implement a playoff system into collegiate American football because they know that it will be more difficult for their teams to receive automatic berths into the biggest and most lucrative of games. Out of the 119 Division 1 schools in college football, only 8 are allowed into these BCS games and given all of the glory each year. If even a 16 bracket playoff system were implemented, it would greatly improve the chances of some very good teams in mid-major conferences to make it to the championship games.

Critics of a playoff system have claimed that if student-athletes were to play 2 or 3 more games each season, their studies would suffer. This theory is flawed, as studies and evidence show that many of these Division 1 “student-athlete,” continually cut class, receive less than satisfactory grades within the current system. In turn, their comments are nullified because of this fact. In conclusion, all of the reasons for a playoff system are there: mid-major teams have continually shown, especially in this past decade, that they can play with “the big boys”, of the BCS conferences, there are no reasons to believe that a couple more games a season will deter any student-athlete from his studies, and most-importantly, the monopoly upon the big games and the big money needs to end. The time to push for a playoff system in college football and permanently do away with the BCS is now!

2009-09-23T12:56:00.000-07:00

I recently had a run in with our illustrious campus police for participating in the safe, enjoyable and healthy activity that is rollerblading. I was totally in control and going a moderate speed on one of campus’s well-paved roads. The two underpaid, overenthusiastic young, single men found this an opportunity not only to use their sparsely limited power but almost break my neck in the process. Standing on the sidewalk on which I skated, and holding his arms outstretched like unto Moses before the red sea, this wrecker of recreation force me onto the grass while traveling close to what must have been 40 miles per hour. After talking to me about the dangers of rollerblading on campus, this kind officer said I must leave immediately or else. I saw that he only had a flashlight and a pair of overly tight slacks, but I didn’t want to take my chances. I kindly asked the fine gentlemen if I could rollerblade home, and after a series of awkward looks, some cop grunts, and a couple of full body scans they agreed.
I tell you that tale not to rag on our esteemed campus police, but to bring to your knowledge a pressing concern for rollerbladers everywhere. I started this hobby a little more than a year ago. Although I started out shaky I quickly learned how to avoid people and weave in and out of traffic without so much as a scratch. I was excited to come to BYU and try them out on the neatly paved roads and stretches of sidewalks. Now I understand the concern when the campus is packed with stressed students sprinting off to their next class but when it is late and there is not so much as an ant on the pavement, I do not see the harm.
The other day I saw a guy on a bike almost cream an innocent young freshman female with his three ton mountain bike traveling at mock 5. I do not know about you, but I would rather see someone spin out of control and fall into a bush on rollerblades because of me than be flattened by Skippy on his tricycle. It just would be more comfortable not to be stuck in the spokes of a high speed vehicle.
Did you know that roughly 80% of America is now obese? Banning rollerblading on campus is adding to that frightening number everyday. Now granted that rollerblading represents roughly one fourth of one percent but I think that making rollerblading legal would get more people involved and lower the number, because lets face it everyone has an innate desire to rollerblade. Allowing rollerblading on campus would not only be safe, but it would be a fun and healthy way for people like me and you to get to class.

2009-09-23T12:21:00.000-07:00

The Ancient Sport
Imagine for a second that you are in the mountains of southern Idaho on a chilly fall morning. You can see your breath as you breathe, and hear everything from the wind to the crunching of the leaves and small stick as you are trying your best to sneak through a patch of trees to get to your special spot before the sun rises. All the sudden you hear the majestic, ear splitting bugle of a bull elk less than twenty yards from where you stand, your heartbeat quickens and you can feel the adrenaline pumping through your viens. This will become one of those amazing stories that you tell around the campfire to friends and family. As a young boy I always waited expectantly for the first week of October because it meant I was able to experience things like this as well as spend time my father in the mountains. I enjoy spending time in the wild, being able to see the changing of the leaves, feel the chill as winter sets in, and getting up extremely early to spend the day with my father. Every year we go hunting for elk and deer together, sometimes my little brother, grandpa, or one of my uncles will tag along. It has been something of a tradition in my family for many generations, but in recent years hunting is being attacked by gun control laws and anti-hunting groups seeking to put a stop to this sport.
I recently had an experience that gave me the motivation to write this paper. Several weeks ago I returned home for Labor Day for a fishing trip that I had planned for a few weeks with my cousin and girlfriend. I spent the day trying but very unsuccessfully to catch a fish, I guess I am just not a patient enough person. Despite our obvious lack of success on this trip we had a great time, which proves that people don’t just go hunting and fishing to kill. There’s more to it than that. But back to my story, the next day I returned back to school and ran into one of my friends on campus. We talked about what we did over the weekend, and when I told her that I went fishing, her reply was- “isn’t that a little redneck?” Now I realize that your perception of hunting is largely affected by the culture of where you live or were raised.
So what is it that possesses so many people each year to leave the comfort of their homes, take work off, and live in the wild during the cold fall months? I would like to believe that it isn’t just because they have a blood lust to kill anything they see. From personal experience I know that hunting isn’t just about killing, there is more to it. I recently read an article by a man named Russ Chastain, who tried to put into words why it is we hunt. He said, “What leaps to mind is a quote from my father. Someone had asked him why he loved to hunt so much; what was so great about being in the woods. His reply was, "If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand." This really sums up the feeling many of us have.” He goes on to give his own description, “There's just no way to adequately portray the majesty of a forest and the creatures within, when you feel like the only man who's ever stood where you stand. It doesn't matter that you're walking on a well-worn trail, and that you spy spent shotgun shells alongside it from time to time. You feel all alone, at peace, fully alert, ready for anything. I never feel closer to God than I do when I walk in the woods, his most wondrous creations all around me, with the challenge of outwitting them on their own terms in front of me.”
So now we sort of know why people hunt, but does hunting have any useful purposes? Or is it just the sport you see in movies of high powered telescopes mounted to fully automatic weapons used to slaughter animals. Actually there are many benefits to the animals themselves and to us as humans. Hunters do actually have a good impact on the animal herds which they hunt by helping maintain their populations so that they the herds do not over populate causing many to die from a winter with not enough food. Also hunters are involved in maintaining the environment because if they destroy the land then their sport is over. For example, in the year 2001 there was $70 billion dollars spent by hunters and fishers in America, a large portion of this money is then used to maintain the mountains, rivers, trails so that not only hunters, but ecologist, hikers, photographers can continue to enjoy their hobbies and passions. Also I think that $70 billion dollars must help out our countries currently weak economy.
The thing that bothers most people about hunting is that animals are being killed. These same people who so passionately oppose hunting had bacon for breakfast, a hamburger for lunch, and a steak for their dinner. Does any of this seem a little hypocritical to you? Where does this meat come from before you buy it in a little plastic wrapped package at your local grocery store? I personally grew up on a cattle ranch and know first-hand where all the popular American places such as McDonalds and Burgerking get their food from. The fact of the matter is that many hunters are not hunting for sport, they are hunting to put food on the table for their family at home. With the expensive price of beef these days many people find that even though wild game is not as tasty it is economically more suitable to their wallet. So you have to ask yourself if there really is a difference between going to the grocery store to get your meat or hiking five miles in the snow to shoot an elk to feed your family. I don’t think there Is a difference, just that people feel more humane because they do not know where the meat came from, nor do they want to know.
The title of this article is The Ancient Sport, and hunting is just that. Since the beginning of time mankind has been hunting, whether it be for food, protection, or survival, it is in our nature. Its about competition, which I know our country is very competitive. Do you know that on average a hunter, after spending possibly hours sneaking around, or waiting for a deer, will only have 7 seconds to try and get a shot off. So its not what you would call a walk in the park. So why not do a sport that everyone in the family can be involved in, imagine how much better off this country would be if more fathers were like mine and took time off from work to be with his family.
I have spent the last two years in a country that knows nothing about hunting, the citizens aren’t even allowed to own guns. I can tell you exactly where you will find me come October, I will be out there in the mountains with my dad and little brother enjoying every minute that I have away from the hustle and bustle of college life. I already know I will enjoy the peace of the mountains and challenge of

The Honor Code

2009-09-23T12:15:00.001-07:00

The Honor Code

Although many view Honor Code restrictions such as overnight camping trips with the opposite gender as wholesome activities, the Honor Code Office has deemed this and other seemingly innocent activities inappropriate for BYU students. I recently read an article from an author who viewed these new additions as “micromanagement” and wondered what happened to the famous quote by Joseph Smith: “I teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves.” So why, then, do we have all these rules? What does BYU possibly have to gain by imposing so many inconsequential rules onto its students? Contrary to popular belief, the point of the Honor Code is not to aggravate already stressed students, nor is it to further establish its dominating presence over all who are obliged to obey. Rather, the object of the Honor Code (and any rule and Commandment for that matter) is to protect, to teach, and to discipline, so that students can more wisely make good decisions for themselves in the years to come.

First, let’s take the recent addition of the rule “no overnight camping trips with the opposite sex” to the Honor Code as our example. There are many who feel that this new rule is particularly imperious and unnecessary, and is therefore not worth keeping. It is highly unlikely, however, that our BYU leaders sit around large tables in dark basements, devising newer and more superfluous rules they can impose on us while drinking pickle juice and arguing over whose family line is more directly linked to Hitler. Assuming our leaders do not hold such conferences, surely this new rule must serve some constructive purpose aimed at benefiting us in some small way? In fact, all of BYU’s rules serve at least one undeniable purpose—to teach us what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior of a BYU student. Whether it be who you can spend a night in the woods with or what not to ingest into your body, BYU students quickly learn what is expected of them and that knowledge is largely instilled by the Honor Code. There are some people who honestly don’t know that it’s dangerous to go camping in the woods overnight, or who don’t understand why they shouldn’t drink alcohol and do drugs. The Honor Code is tailored to those people so they can have structure in their lives and quickly learn the necessary things to help them succeed at BYU.

Also, the Honor Code helps protect innocent people from harm. A lot of students are relieved upon arriving in Provo, believing it to be a “bubble” filled only with good people who only do good things. This is a dangerous and potentially fatal assumption. Although it is true that Provo is saturated with good LDS culture and ideology, it is just as dangerous a place for young people as any other city in America. According to a recent FBI report, Provo’s forcible rape rate is actually higher than the national rate (Whittle, Heather. “Provo Crime Statistics Measure City Against National Average.” Daily Universe. Brigham Young University, Provo. Web. 23 September 2009). I’m not saying that every overnight camping trip invariably leads to rape, but it’s a big issue that many students are unaware of due to their faith in others here at BYU. Because of this false security that many are lulled into, it’s necessary for our leaders to sound a warning to those who might believe spending a night in the woods with a friend (or in a group) is a perfectly safe and innocent activity.

Lastly, BYU is a school known around America for its high standards. Those standards would quickly plummet if there was no Code for which to measure up to; it would be nearly impossible to tell which students were helping to keep the standards of BYU high and which ones weren’t. Concrete rules are necessary to ensure that the principles BYU was founded upon stay firm and don’t fluctuate with personal interpretation. This helps us students know how to keep BYU’s reputation true. Additionally, these firm rules must contractually be agreed to in order for a prospective student to enter BYU. This means that they know the rules, and have already agreed to the consequences in the case they are caught breaking those rules. Just like laws of a country, the Honor Code is a fair way to make sure everyone knows what is expected of them and what the consequences are if you’re found breaking those rules. In effect, the Honor Code is the means by which BYU can impartially and justly discipline its students.

Rules presented in our beloved Honor Code are the tools with which our leaders teach us correct principles so we can govern ourselves responsibly in our post-BYU years. Fortunately, we won’t continue to be subject to an Honor Code Office after graduation, at which point I plan on tossing my Mach 3® and watching to see how long my beard can get. Until then, however, I am proud to uphold the principles that have made BYU such a great university, no matter how silly or impractical they might seem.

The importance of Chivalry in a Modern World

2009-09-23T12:12:00.002-07:00

Kelsey Welte

Danette Paul

Engl 150 H

16 Sept 2009

The Importance of Chivalry in a Modern World

Have you ever been on a date and wondered why a man didn’t open your door or after dinner didn’t pay the bill? Is this wrong, or should women be independent? These days women want to be independent and feel free from any assistance from men. Woman feel that being independent means that men shouldn’t do anything for them, but we cannot let Chivalry die. Although the world calls for woman to be strong and independent, woman should encourage chivalrous behavior from the men around them;not only because it shows respect between genders but also because it brings out the best part of human nature with this gentility.

As women, we think chivalry is when men take us out to nice dinners and pull out our chairs, and simply things that makes us feel like royalty; however according to www.Dictionary.com it states that the definition for chivalry is, “the sum of the ideal qualifications of a knight, including courtesy, generosity, valor, and dexterity in arms.” This definition is what or how a man should be treating a woman. In the middle ages there was a specific code of Chivalry and it was called, “The Twelve Chief Roles in Love” they mention ways to respect women that you love. It makes you wonder why their isn’t some code or law that states that men should be respected and be chivalrous in modern times. And since then chivalry was normal amongst men and women. And then later in the mid 1900’s their was the feminist movement where woman felt the need to be independent and wanted to vote and get jobs to get paid just like men. But through this independence process women wanted to feel equal to men, but they still let men be chivalrous towards them.

How independent should woman feel like is a right amount? In my terms independence is being able to provide for oneself like financially and physically. I think it’s a little much when woman play the damsel and distress role when it come to chivalry, and and always needing attention from men, but it’s important for us to let men do the little things that let us appreciate me. I feel an independent woman with confidence is someone who has had a college degree and could support herself. But I’m sure their of plenty of successful women with college degrees who could have a balance of independence and chivalry. Just to name a few...Princess Diana, Oprah, and Jane Austin were all independent women. Do you think that with all of their relationships that they felt too independent to let men be chivalrous around them? The answer is no! It is healthy in relationships for women to let men be the gentlemen they’re supposed to be towards women.

In relationships it’s important for a man to know how to chivalrous to make it last. The divorce rate in America right now is about 50% according to divorcerate.org. Some say that when a marriage starts the chivalry ends, but this shouldn’t be the case if women would remind their husbands of what they should be doing. It wouldn’t hurt to remind your husbands to open your door or to take you on dates every once in a while. I would think if you’re truly in love your husband would care to get a reminder every once in a while, and you still wouldn’t be

loosing your independence. Woman helping to encouraging men to act like gentlemen forever will make their relationships stronger and them happier.

Chivalry is important in these modern times because it’s what makes relationships work, it let’s women feel confident, and continues the pattern of chivalry throughout time. If we continue to let Chivalry die then who knows what could happen to the future. Women may never feel appreciated, and maybe might loose their womanhood. It isn’t less acceptable for a woman to burp or flatuate then it is for a man to not open a door for a woman on a date. If chivalry dies then manners will die and so we as women need to save this chivalrous behavior while we can.

What is Beauty?

2009-09-23T12:11:00.000-07:00

What is Beauty?

Beauty can easily be found in nature, architecture, art, music, dance, the human body, and the like. However, for our purposes, beauty that manifests itself in the human body will be the only type acknowledged hereafter. Often we hear the phrase, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” Yet, so much time, effort, and money is devoted towards making ourselves appear more pleasing to the general public. Women are known to willingly spend an hour each day altering their natural appearance. Both sexes exercise to maintain a desirable body shape for their pleasure and to appear more pleasing to observers. Unimaginable amounts of money are spent to acquire the latest clothing trends or even change a person’s natural skin color through tanning. A relatively new fad has hit the United States: cosmetic surgery. Why does this all occur? Almost everyone wants to be considered beautiful. If this is so, what exactly is beauty? Popular magazines may try to define it, favorite movie stars might have it, and the general public strives to obtain it. There is no ultimate beauty everyone can look to and idolize, contrary to popular belief. Human beauty is a characteristic found in an individual that produces pleasure, meaning, or satisfaction through any of the observer’s senses. Therefore, beauty is dependent on the observer’s culture, society, personal preference, and time period.

When thinking of beauty, a person would most commonly turn his thoughts towards the physical. However, it could be argued that the most important or meaningful beauty is that found on the inside, or the inner beauty. This type of beauty is often associated with positive traits such as a kind disposition, intelligence, an optimistic personality, charm, a high self-esteem, or willingness to do good works. Unfortunately, this type of beauty is often forgotten and to make up for this loss, more time and effort may be spent on the physical aspect. This could result in a greater mental inferiority and/or obsession with the outside appearance. It seems that more and more motivational speakers address the issue of focusing on the inner beauty. As they point out, physical attributes wrinkle and wither, but talents never cease.

The United Sates seems to have an impossible standard of physical attractiveness. In order for men to be considered good-looking, they must have noticeable muscles (but not too much), broad shoulders, a v-shaped torso, pronounced facial features such as a strong jaw, a healthy (or natural) tan, and be taller than most women. For women to be considered beautiful in the U.S. culture, they must have facial symmetry, a youthful appearance (including full lips, clear/smooth skin, healthy hair, good muscle tone, etc), large breasts, a healthy tan, a good body mass index, larger hips and round buttocks, and a shorter height than most males. For the most part, the rest has to do with preference and what the average American might find pleasing to the senses.

Different cultures and societies have their own ideas on what is sought after or considered beautiful. In Asian cultures, it is considered beautiful to be pale and special creams are sometimes used to reach this goal. In fact, my Taiwanese sister-in-law refused to believe that there were such things as tanning booths until she came to the United States for the first time. A unique tribe found by the border of Thailand and Vietnam, known as the Padaung, believes in elongating the neck as a sign of feminine beauty. At age five or six, girls are fitted with special rings that fit around the neck, and with each passing year, a couple of rings are added. In many African cultures, it is desirable to be obese or large in order to attract a mate. Students in Ghana rated heavier bodies more favorably than the skinny. As unpleasant as it may seem to the average American, the French don’t feel the need to bathe on a regular basis. It just isn’t that high on their list of priorities, along with shaving in areas such as the armpits.

The idea of what is beautiful and what is not, is evolving constantly. What once was fashionable is now considered hideous. A corset, a garment worn to mold the torso into a desirable shape, was first introduced in the middle of the 16^th century. It continued to develop through the ages, correlating with the change of the desired shape. In the 16^th,century, the corset was used to emphasize the breasts. It then evolved, during the Victorian age, in order to create an hourglass shape. Later, the S-bend corset was used to push the breasts forward while the hips went back. This gave the illusion of a slimmer waste, but then the corset evolved into a different garment—the girdle. Foot binding was a custom that took place in China from the beginning of the 10^th century to the 20^th. At age six or even earlier, girls would have their feet tightly bandaged. The feet became highly deformed, but retained their small shape. Because of the abnormality of their feet, women were forced to walk with a certain sway which was deemed attractive to males.

Since there have been mates to be won, beauty was sought after in many different ways. During the Mesolithic period (10,000 BC), people would attempt to soften their skin with castor oil and grease. Dye collected from plants, were used to tattoo the skin. Egyptians, such as Cleopatra, used finely crushed carmine beetles to make a deep red pigment for lipstick. Assyrian men and women wore elaborate braids and were very meticulous in personal hygiene and bathing. Ancient Greeks often wore beards which symbolized power and strength, attributes desired by their counterparts. The Romans were the first to introduce shaving and daily washing which later lost popularity in Europe. They also initially believed that blonde hair was a sure sign of prostitution. But when slaves from Scandinavia were brought down, noblewomen began dying their hair lighter shades. Chalky complexions were often desirable, which some women used white lead to obtain. This resulted in skin care products. High foreheads and a lack of eyebrows (that had been shaved off) also became stylish.

The popularity of wigs, especially among males, increased dramatically during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, who was its great advocate. Wigs soon became an art form in France, only dying out after the French Revolution. After the revolution in France and during the Neoclassical period, the idea became fixed that men were meant to be rational and women emotional. Dress began to express this ideology turning male wear into plain, reasonable clothing. On the other hand, female wear became simplistic and light, decorated with frills and ruffles. Through time, brighter and more vibrant colors were sought after accompanied by more lace.

In today’s society, it seems as if men—but especially women—are plagued with their own ideas of what is the “ultimate beauty.” I, myself, skipped high school (more than once) because of insecurities pertaining to my physical appearance and have known others to done the same. Bratz and Barbie dolls are given to little girls who begin idolizing biologically impossible figures. Advertising and modeling is another blow to the mental mind set of the general public. More and more airbrushing and retouching occurs thanks to new-found technology. We are given false impressions that such people exist. Advertising companies don’t care about these false notions; their job is to sell products. What they try to do is sell beauty: “Buy this product if you want to look like this.” It is false advertising and keeps us reaching for the impossible. Do we give up? No.

One out of every one hundred female adolescents is anorexic. Anorexia is when a person has an intense fear of being fat. Therefore, they starve themselves, sometimes to death. Four out of one hundred college-aged women are bulimic. Bulimia is when the person has an episode of binge-eating followed by unhealthy ways of weight control (purging) including vomiting. Being thin for women is looked on favorably by the media and our society. Women go to extremes to reach these standards which are often portrayed in advertisements. Men are also known to go to extremes while becoming more muscular and don’t know when to quit. Most people never feel that they are up to par; it is not in human nature. We work diligently to be considered perfect, but what is that? These disorders exist because of the overwhelming concern for becoming what we believe is “beautiful.”

It is proven that the “ideal” beauty is dependent on people’s opinions that have been molded by their culture, society, preference, and time period. Beauty has evolved and will continue to do so because of the evolution of people’s thoughts or wants. Our posterity will look at our jeans with purposefully placed holes and our orange tan thinking, “Why?” just as we look at our mother’s prom picture and think the same thing. Some qualities will always be sought after, while others fade. However, two things are guaranteed. The first is that human beauty will constantly revolve around anything that gives pleasure or satisfaction to the human senses. The second is the fact that there will always be people that are considered more beautiful than you; it’s impossible to please everyone. The trick is to realize and move on. Beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder.

A Case for the Classics

2009-09-23T12:09:00.002-07:00

Lee Deppermann

Opinion Paper Draft

September 22, 2009

A Case for the Classics

Mark Twain purportedly said that a classic is a book that everyone wants to have read but no one wants to read. Throughout much of modern history a liberal education, which can be defined as an education that focuses on acquiring intellectual skills through strenuous study of history, philosophy, mathematics etc, (with heavy emphasis in the Greek and Roman classics) was considered the foundation for both a good education and a productive life. Not so anymore. Paradoxically, Americans enjoy an unprecedented amount of prosperity while becoming less and less educated with each generation. Formal education, in both the high school and colligate levels are responsible for this shift.

Despite recent media attention surrounding public education, with President Obama’s recent speech as the prime example, no one taking an easy look at America’s education would think that the current system was dangerously lacking. After all, a Lexus in every garage and a headphone in every ear would suggest that although we may be less fluent with the classics, we’re not worse for the wear. A closer look, however, may change our opinion. The complexities that modern societies bring create new social problems that demand creative, intellectual solutions that go beyond the kind of innovation that produces a sleeker iphone. If our modern political, legal, social and moral issues are to be resolved it will be because cultivated minds apply mental prowess to find ultimate solutions. Liberal educations, with strong roots in the classics, have long been recognized as essential to shaping intelligent minds.

A resurgence of classical education is definitely within reach. Many American high schools, primarily public, still operate under the anachronistic model of preparing students to enter the workforce. A litany of research shows conclusively that college enrollment is higher than ever before and still rising. High schools that remain committed to basing their curriculum in vocational classes are seemingly ignoring the fact that the purpose of high school, for most students, is to be prepared intellectually for higher education. A student I met recently remarked that all of his business and ‘career preparation’ classes in high school were little prep for university level business training. In nearly all cases, formulas and strategies are quickly forgotten.

In contrast, a high school education with strong emphasis in liberal education would be much better college preparation, without sacrificing job-training opportunity. Studying Classical literature exposes students to other cultures, problems and ideas. Consider the student who applies himself in a class that studies ancient (or modern for that matter) history. Although he will likely never be in the same position as those he studies, in learning how to weigh evidence and evaluate decision the student will have gained critical reasoning skills not to be gained otherwise. Further, the student that applies himself to mastering literature and languages learns how to discipline himself, fostering the mastering of future material, whether in the classroom or on the job.

A liberal education, in contrast with vocational education, gives every student skills he can take into both college and into the workforce. Is there really a job that does not require you to think analytically? Critical thinking and writing skills are essential today, even considering the high tech environment that dictates many jobs. Perhaps more importantly, these skills are essential for college performance. Whether it is a business, history, engineering or art class, university students will need to be able to reason, think critically and communicate effectively. On the other hand, students who had a vocation job base in high school will need to learn those skills at the same time he or she should be using them most.

Educational experts agree that the high school years are formative. Not only do these years prepare students for the work force and college, they should prepare the student for a lifetime of learning and cultural awareness. Studying classical literature and history exposes students to new ideas and cultures. Vocational classes and curriculum do little to promote lifetime learning.

This transition, or reintroduction, can be subtle. But it must happen. Today’s problems need minds trained to think, and that training best comes from a liberal education, hopefully started in the high school years.

Public Interest Pieces Not in Best Interest of The Daily Universe - by Jessica Croft

2009-09-23T12:06:00.001-07:00

The other day, I picked up a copy of our campus newspaper, The Daily Universe. The headline of the feature story, which sprawled across the page, sporting bright colors and bold text, read “The Art of the Independents: Indies find success in the mainstream.” Meanwhile, stories about President Monson's recent devotional address and the Provo city elections were shoved to the outer edges of the page, fighting to be seen in the shadow of the gigantic feature article. I was, to say the least, surprised at the condition of the front page. The article that demanded the most attention was the one that had the least relevance and importance to the majority of BYU students. The public interest piece on independent films was completely stealing the spotlight from political and religious articles. This is not an isolated incident. The Daily Universe often neglects to place priority on articles that have real relevance, and instead uses its front-page space to display public interest pieces. Our campus newspaper needs to rethink its layouts.

Layouts should be logically formulated. The front page should be reserved for information that is most informative and helpful to its readers. Public interest pieces are not what I consider to be informative. They can be entertaining, yes, but they do not tell students anything that they could not learn by simply living their lives as BYU students and residents of Provo. The student body is quite capable of recognizing and perpetuating its own cultural practices. Reading stories about BYU dating habits may be entertaining, since the topic is so familiar, but doing so does not result in much else beyond a chuckle and an understanding nod. Referencing our culture can be important, but it is not productive in the sense that we learn something new. Entertainment has its value, but so does news. Hopefully we all agree that the purpose of a newspaper is to present news.

Because newspapers are meant to present news, the overabundance of public interest pieces on the front page can have detrimental consequences. Think about it logically. If BYU students are occupied with public interest pieces, they are paying less attention to news pieces. We college students have a limited amount of time for reading the newspaper. The pieces that we see first when we pick up a newspaper should be the pieces that matter the most. The news is far too important to college students for it to be hidden underneath stories about cardigan sweaters and skinny jeans (see front page of The Daily Universe, September 22, 2009). We, as college students, are at an important stage of life. We need to be preparing to enter the real world, where the real issues are. We can't afford to stay trapped in the bubble of BYU cultural practices. BYU students will not learn to become aware of world and national issues by reading public interest pieces that are directed at a narrow audience. The Daily Universe cannot draw so much attention to its own campus and still expect students to become responsible consumers of news media. It must instead look outward, and by so doing, encourage its readers to look outward and recognize world issues.

This is not to say that looking inward is necessarily completely detrimental. It can be important to draw some attention to one's own culture. Public interest stories do occupy an important space in journalism, and the journalists that write them contribute to the newspaper just as much as the journalists who write world and national news pieces. However, public interest stories need to be printed where they belong; that is, they need to appear in a public interest or student life section of the newspaper, and not as the main headline on the front page. It is possible that public interest pieces could appear on the front page of a newspaper, but they should never distract from the newsworthy pieces with which it shares the page. The careful organization of a newspaper is essential to its efficacy. The Daily Universe is, in part, an opportunity for student writers to publish their work in a realistic setting. Major newspapers put newsworthy issues as the top priority when creating a newspaper layout because they understand that readers will look to the front page for the most important news. The Daily Universe should also prioritize their news stories so as to produce a noteworthy newspaper for its readers and staff.

While autumn outerwear and independent film festivals could be of interest to some readers of The Daily Universe, it remains a fact that news should come first in a newspaper. Entertainment is a secondary function of a newspaper. The primary function of a newspaper is to inform readers of the news issues occurring in the world, nation, state, and community. It's time for The Daily Universe to do the responsible thing and rethink the way it presents its articles and information.

Arguing in the USA

2009-09-23T12:06:00.000-07:00

It seems that arguments in the US are often more like screaming matching than reasoned debate. Arguments should make a claim, give evidence, consider opposing views, and work for understanding and consensus.

Melodic Malfunction

2009-09-23T12:04:00.001-07:00

Katie Macdonald

Opinion Essay

Melodic Malfunction

Music—it is indefinable by words alone. In the way that some are devoted to a religion or an ideal, I marvel at the mulish temple of melodies (and occasionally alliteration) and will do everything within my power to make others feel the same affection for them that I do. Music is a foundation for the prevalent world. It is a drug ingested via the ears; different kinds of music have different effects, and some kinds are enjoyed more than others. For instance, there are only so many times that listening to a Jonas Brothers’ song is tolerable, and when the play count reaches over seventeen in just two hours, a line must be drawn. But I suppose having floor-mates who relish in the noise that is modern day music makes that line difficult to draw. And with the overwhelming conglomeration of genres such as rap, pop, and techno breeching the top song lists everywhere, the line is nearly non-existent. Indeed, one of the problems with society today is this erosion of the general span of music as we know it, and while some consider this decay “progressive change”, I simply see it as a disservice to one of the bedrocks of our existence.

To be blunt, it is extremely unfortunate that people settle for superficial mediocrity while real artists are ignored. Never before in the history of Western music has popular culture dictated people’s conception, definition and taste of music to such a disproportionate extent. Although there has always been a distinction between music for the masses (“popular music”) and a more sophisticated music for an elite (“art music”), popular music has not been able to fully shove art music to the cultural margins the way it does nowadays, and now that “50 cent” is the new Bach, classical music is dying a slow and silent death in a didactic ghetto. But the demise doesn’t stop at classical music—other forms are suffering as well. For much of the population, however, these forms merely exist as a museum piece; seen only if they happen upon it and are exposed to it in some way outside their intent and control.

Popular music and art music, though, cannot be compared. The individual genres and subsets that span from them are uniquely their own kind of music. The pop view of music says that music is made for entertainment; it does not serve any higher purpose. A piece's worth is measured by how catchy the melody is, how danceable the beat is, how many scantily clad women there are in the music video; et cetera. In some cases, the value of the music might be provided simply by a good performance. The "art" view of music says that music exists for its own sake: it should be appreciated not as entertainment, but as a work of natural beauty. Art musicians seek out some higher aesthetic goal. Often, they are simply exploring the possibilities of what music can be. Writing with unusual amounts of dissonance, or complex time signatures, or unconventional playing techniques, are all examples of this type of exploration.

Most music falls between these two extremes, and while I prefer a great jazzy rendition of a classic hit as opposed to a synthesized rap song, I can’t quite argue that the commercial music of the age lacks some pretense of trying to create art. Also, the musical genres do fall more purposefully under their own stereotypical ambiences; after all, it would be rather difficult to start a mosh pit to Frank Sinatra crooning “Fly Me to the Moon”. It can be said as well that it isn’t necessarily pop, rap, or techno music that is driving other, non-appreciated forms of music into the ground, but more the programming situation in general. For example, jazz today is caught in a vicious cycle in which radio and recordings have programmed a simple-minded music to appeal to a mass market—the lowest common denominator. In so doing, they have cultivated an audience that is prejudiced against and largely incapable of comprehending anything more substantial than that which is regularly programmed for it. Commercial radio won't play jazz because the audience doesn't like it; the audience doesn't like it because it hasn't been exposed to it enough to begin to understand it. Now, replace “jazz” with anything from musicals to contemporary… excluding pop.

This tragedy can’t really be helped, and unfortunately it makes my dreams of the general population breaking into coordinated song and dance even less of a reality. The melodic and harmonic invention, musical variety, structural and formal richness, intricate counterpoint and intellectual and emotional profoundness that the underdogs of the musical world hold will essentially always fall short in the midst of a new itunes hit. Herein lays my frustration: most kids listen to these top hits for superficial features, such as “a nice beat”, a sing-able tune or a lifestyle feeling that is expressed in the music. Listening is perhaps the wrong term here, for most pop music isn’t even actively listened to, it is merely passively consumed. Since pop music is so omnipresent, many people nowadays regard music as nothing but auditory wallpaper: something nice one can relax to and which doesn’t require a lot of attention. This apathy is what causes even more cookie-cutter, dance-beat, electronically-enhanced songs to be written; people don’t want to have to think about the depth artists create in their lyrics, nor the convoluted diameter of a melody. Hence the under-appreciation of song writers whose names should appear in the top lists throughout the world but don’t quite make it.

However, just because I see it as a cataclysm and just because a song isn’t as complex contrapuntally, or doesn't contain as grandiose chord structures as the later romantics doesn't mean that it is base. Music is merely a vehicle for words, ideas to be transmitted. If the writer managed to transmit those words or ideas in the correct emotional context, then it's an art, regardless of whether or not I personally like it. Alas, I will forever have to consolidate pop music and others, because with the Jonas Brothers and Flo Rida coming out with new top singles every month, it’s not something I can really escape from.

Fairytales and Imagination: Pathway to Dreams

2009-09-23T12:04:00.000-07:00

Kirby 1

Courtney Kirby

Dr. Danette Paul

English 150

September 22, 2009

Fairytales and Imagination: Pathway to Dreams

Where would the world be today with Fairytales? They’re a part of every person’s childhood. Bedtime is only tolerable with a story and a glass of milk, right? Fairytales have been a rampant part of my ascent from childhood to adulthood. From the already known to the ones I came up with on my own, they’ve helped me get past my struggles and look onward to the happily ever after. I suppose in the end I’m a hopeless romanticist. I believe in happily ever after and the road it takes to get there. Some may fear that I’m lost in a world that will never be. In response to the babycenter Momformation blogspot “Stepping Off: You Can Live the Fairytale” I argue that it’s the one that really has always been there.

Fairytales correspond directly with life. Everything seems well in the beginning. There’s always the air of uncertainty, but it seems like everything is generally okay and always will be. Then an inarguably terrifying change occurs and suddenly happy life becomes miserable chaos. Whether this change is an evil stepmother who is secretly an evil witch, or a move to a new town, it’s all unfamiliar and scary. And then someone comes along to help. This someone could be a prince, but more often is a best friend, sibling, parent, leader, teacher, or pet. Regardless of the age, gender, or species, it’s some being we can rely on to be there when we need them. Our world may be sadly lacking in Fairy Godmothers, but there are plenty of caring people just waiting for someone to ask for their help. There are even some people who, like Fairy Godmothers, seem to randomly pop in just when we need them most and have begun to wonder how truly alone we are. Then the great and terrible foe, from dragons to dirty bedrooms, becomes quite defeat-able and life goes back to the good and content beginning of the cycle.

As a metaphor for life, Fairytales work just fine. But really, how useful are they? Even the ones with the greatest morals are just stories after all. What good are they? It could be argued that they’re detrimental to the mental health of our youth. They are after all complete works of fiction, and let’s be real- happily ever after doesn’t come with a prince charming and a castle. Happily ever after doesn’t even come, according to some. Life is a constant struggle to get by and come out on top. Fairytales detract from reality, causing people to dream uselessly and lose sight of what’s truly important.

But then, what is reality? The fourth edition of American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language defines reality as: “The totality of all things possessing actuality, existence, or essence”. Reality is most often viewed as the harshness of the world. When people talk about coming “back to reality” most often they’re mentioning how they came out of their happiness. There is more to reality than the hard and mundane. Triumphs and joy are also real- they’re just more overlooked. Fairytales are about people who surmount impossible odds and fulfill their dreams. In all “reality” fairytales help to remind us that life can be good. They are the better half of what makes life real.

It is argued that there are no real points in fairytales. Sure, they have noble characters and happy endings- but how does this help you? You have no Fairy Godmother, after all, and you never will. However, you always have someone who cares. Fairytales remind us that we never have to face things alone, and that help comes in every shape and size. Sleeping Beauty had a prince, snow white a handful of dwarves, and Pinocchio Jiminy Cricket. We have family, friends, and God. Fairytales don’t just provide metaphors for the friends we sometimes forget we have, they inspire us to believe in ourselves as well as those around us.

A wise quote by an unknown author goes, “Everything is okay in the end. If it’s not okay, it’s not the end”. It can be believed that Fairytales lead us to think that the end comes after a few trials and everything is good. It is a clever argument, but is misleading in and of itself. Fairytales end with “Happily Ever After” because the wise writers know that in the end, everything really will be okay. The characters have learned how to deal with problems, so while there will be more it will be “okay” because they will be able to get through it. They know how to be happy for forever, so they will be.

While there are arguments against the perseverance of Fairytales in modern advanced culture, I hope you have become discouraged towards the points these arguments are trying to make. Fairytales give birth to dreams which in turn bring about the beginnings of new ideas, progress, imagination, and more dreams. They are the necessary sparks in a child’s life that light the way into a better, happier future of ever afters.

Corruption on Capital Hill

2009-09-23T12:01:00.002-07:00

Jared Sybrowsky

September 15, 2009

ENG 150, 59

Corruption on Capital Hill

How much do we really know about the people who run our country? As university students we are here to study, and eventually become our county’s future, however; many of us don’t know about some of the most important political issues of our day. Most of us live in the dorms, and therefore don’t have easy access to a TV. When we can use a TV, CNN or FOX News is rarely the first station we tune into. Instead we try to see what has happened in our favorite Soap Opera or Sit-Com. It is important that awareness be raised about the corruption in our government, such as ACORN, or Anthony Van Jones and others in Obama’s inner circle. By exerting just a small amount of effort, it will be easy to figure out what side of the issue we stand on – then we can take action. Through studying the issues of our country, we can truly exemplify a motto of BYU by entering to learn, then going forth to serve – our country.

Do we really know where our tax dollars are going? The ACORN scandal has been all over the news for weeks. For those who don’t know, undercover reporters went into various ARCON offices across the country to ask for help to set up a brothel where illegal immigrants could live and work. Not only did the ACORN employs gladly offer to help, but they encouraged the two reporters with their “business”. What is worse than the shear morals of these people is the fact that up until recently, ACORN was being funded partially by the U.S. government. Reports have come in with numbers as high as $31 Million that the government has given to the ACORN organization in the past ten years. Our tax dollars are being used to keep terrible organizations afloat. The alleged voter fraud in the most recent election does nothing to calm the mind in regards to ACORN. We, the people, need to take a stand against the government funding corporations that has such corruption in it. If the government had done more regular check ups on what ACORN was doing with our money, millions of dollars could have been saved; in a time of such great national debt, that’s exactly what we need. As busy as we are, we need to know what our tax dollars go towards. It’s our responsibility to be proactive in the government - a government that is “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

A pattern is beginning to present its self concerning the people who influence our president. During the most recent election, Obama’s relationship with Reverend Wright was a major issue. Wright was Obama’s pastor for over 20 years. The attention of the media was brought to Wright because of his radical and anti-American speeches. With our president sitting in his congregation of over 20 years, there is no way he was not influenced by Wright. Now, I’m not saying Obama shares his view and political ideas; however it worries me that he remained in his congregation for so long. Anthony “Van” Jones was also recently on the news for resigning form his position as the green jobs czar. This man, who has been a friend of President Obama’s for years, has been proven and admitted that he is a communist. We need to be sure that we really look at each person appointed by the president. Just because we don’t elect them doesn’t mean they are out of our control. Seeing these that Obama associates himself with people with such ideals should send up red flags for all of us.

Can we really do anything to help put an end to corruption in the government? Not only can we, but it is our duty. The purpose of this editorial is not to smear President Obama in any way. It is to promote us, the university students, to take hold of our new responsibility as the citizens of our country. If we want our children to have the life we dream of for ourselves, we need to be proactive in finding out the facts and letting the government know we won’t stand idly by. Reverend Wright and Van Jones were both uncovered by the media. News stations saw a problem in our country, and they worked on it until it didn’t threaten us anymore. The ACORN scandal was uncovered by two regular citizens - students in fact - who didn’t have any support system; they decided to find the truth about a questionable organization. Students all over the country need to follow politics and take their role as the future of America, by helping shape it today.

Fine Arts

2009-09-23T12:00:00.001-07:00

Alexis Apostalon

Why Are We Pulling These Programs?

Dear Board of Education Members:

I have noticed some movement growing within the public school systems. It’s been festering for a while. It’s been spreading like a disease. Do you know what this plague is? It is the plague of cutting the funding of fine arts from public school systems.

Let me share a little story with you. It was my senior year of high school and I was busy! I was taking I.B. (International Baccalaureate) classes; I was extremely involved with my church and all of its activities; I was a nanny for a family with a daughter who has RETS syndrome; I did ballet and ninjitsu outside of school; and within school, I was a member of the elite choral group, Madrigals, as well as the competing group for our high school, Chamber; I was also the secretary and activities planner for the French Club (often doing more than I should have due to the other leaders’ lack of drive to get anything done); and finally, topping the year off with my involvement in the high school musical production, Oklahoma.

It was a lot; I’m not going to lie. I was quite overwhelmed at times, but the only thing that kept me sane were the two things that I loved to do: sing and dance. More than half of my involvement in those two areas came from participating in the fine arts programs at school. That same year, I also started to hear rumors (which were later confirmed true) that other schools were having their funding cut from their very own fine arts programs. What if my school had taken away these things? I am 100% positive my happiness level would have gone down. Unfortunately, when I am not happy, my productivity also goes down. I doubt I would have made the grades that I did in school or, perhaps, even participated in those other activities to help give me a well-rounded life.

I am not entirely positive why funding is being cut from the fine arts. My supposition is that people don’t want to pay taxes on schooling so much anymore. I mean why would a taxpayer, who is most likely completely done with all types of schooling, want to pay more for schooling after they’ve already paid enough (especially when it comes to college)? It would make a lot more sense if those taxpayers had kids that went to public schools, but a large majority of them don’t have children. And the percentage that does, about half of them send their children to private schools because they think (with good reasoning) that they’ll get a better education. So overall, we’re getting less money for public schools, as you as Board Members are well aware.

So now you are debating on where to cut your funding from, am I right? You can’t just take away from reading, writing, mathematics, or science. Those are the basics that everyone needs. So then it comes down to a vicious battle between the fine arts and sports, and unfortunately, the fine arts departments in many schools are losing. Is it because you think that more people play sports than participate in the fine arts? Is it because you think more people besides high school students can and do enjoy watching high school sports more than any field of the high school fine arts? Or is it because you believe that playing sports leads to greater teamwork and school spirit than the fine arts do?

Well, let me answer those questions from my perspective, a recent high school student who was very active in the fine arts and reaped the benefits of it. To answer the first question, from my experience, there are as many different facets of the fine arts as there are different types of sports, possibly even more. This gives a child more options to choose from, to find their niche and feel comfortable in a place that they can excel. This is important to self-esteem, which I believe to be crucial during that age.

When I was a freshman, I participated in dance team. It was absolutely wonderful! I enjoyed it thoroughly and gained a lot of great experience and knowledge from it. However, due to scheduling conflicts, I was unable to continue with the team. This was devastating, but because I had other outlets, such as choir, I was able to keep my head high and have opportunities for something other than straight schoolwork.

Second question. While it is true that school spirit is often incorporated within football and basketball games and many people enjoy watching them (I have many great memories myself), it is also true that there are people that enjoy watching theater and choral productions, viewing art galleries with paintings and sculptings of high school students, and seeing the handiwork of a multi-media art piece even more than watching a tennis match. Why should we be depriving those fans of their pleasantries?

And to answer the final question of teamwork and skills, I say to you: those skills can be learned just as easily within fine arts programs as sports teams. The fine arts teach a multiplicity of skills that can be used later on in life: creativity, handiwork, hard work, self-imposed goals, entrepreneurship, and yes, even teamwork. If you’ve ever sat in on a choir practice, this will become evident. For a choir to sound great, all the members need to harmonize, make the right vowel sounds and blend. If you are not working on these things outside of practice, they won’t come to you. And if you are not thinking with a creative mind, patterns of musical stanzas will not make sense. Furthermore, those skills will not only be handy for one’s own personal life, but many employers look for well-rounded and balanced people that can add more to their company or business. A background in fine arts can help with that.

To add one final word about the fine arts, which was recently touched upon, but not explicitly said: the fine arts are long lasting. A piece of art can stay with you for as long as you live, if you take good care of it, and can even be passed down to your children and your children’s children. Not only that, as mentioned before, those skills are used throughout your life continually. Sports, which provide similar learned skills, will last forever, but the actual skill of participating in a particular sport is hard-pressed to go passed one’s 20s. Many people are injured and can be taken out of a sport for as short as 6 months or as long as their entire lifetime.

Board members of Education, I am not trying in any way to belittle the sports, but I do feel like the fine arts have been belittled way too often. I believe that their skills have been overlooked. Personally, I believe that everyone needs both: a physical outlet and a creative one. But we do not have the money to fund all of these things. So, in all earnestness, I implore you to keep the fine arts within schools to promote intellectual growth, skill-set, self-esteem and much more.

Spoiling Children

2009-09-23T12:00:00.000-07:00

Brian Miskell
English 150
Dr. Paul
September 16, 2009
Spoiled
As I was walking one day, I noticed one of the most incredible sights I have ever seen just across the street. There was a young man, about the age of twelve, who was out walking with his father. As they walked along the other side of the street, he noticed that his shoe was untied. Not an uncommon occurrence! His response however, was something I never thought I would see in my life. Rather than reaching down and tying his own shoe, he positioned his foot up on a step, making it obvious, and called for his father to come and tie his shoe. He waited very impatiently as he posed on the step. His father immediately ran over and tied his son’s shoe. Not even a “thank you” was uttered in response to his father’s unnecessary help. To my dismay, this was not the end of the scene; A few moments later, the boy noticed his shirt was beginning to become un-tucked. It is only reasonable that any healthy 12 year-old would be able to handle such a simple task as tucking in his shirt! However, at this point, the boy raised his arms straight up from his sides, high into the air. He again waited, this time almost grudgingly and painfully, for his father to come and tuck his shirt in. Again, there was absolutely no expression of gratitude or of love and admiration. It was no less than difficult for me to watch this scene unfold. As painful as it was for me to watch however, many vital aspects of parenting can be seen from this example, for better or for worse. Most clearly, this example demonstrates the inescapable negative effects of spoiling a young child.
The demands of raising a child in today’s world are extremely challenging. Though it might not be possible to outline everything that a parent should do to effectively raise a child, we can at least identify one of the greatest harms a parent can inflict, thus avoiding the detrimental effects of gross mistakes. One such mistake is that of spoiling. Spoiling a child does not necessarily come from impure motives on behalf of parents, but most often it is actually quite the opposite. It generally stems from a parents sincere desire to simply be a good parent. With the desire to be a great parent, many questions arise as to how to fulfill this incredible responsibility. New parents have a lot to ponder about and consider as their first newborn comes into the world. How are we going to provide for all of this child’s needs? How are we going to teach morals and values? How are we going to discipline? These are all reasonable questions to ask- they will greatly influence the child’s development if they are properly considered and executed. Parents of older children also have many challenges. As children reach their teenage years, they start to care much more about what others think of them, and self-worth is determined not by who they really are inside, but only by how they compare to others their own age. This becomes an especially tempting time for parents to spoil their children. It can be a powerful reason to give your kids more and more, as they see those things as leading to their own self-worth, even if that is only the judgment passed by others. No matter the age of a child, spoiling has very detrimental effects that are often difficult to overcome later on. We want our children to be happy and successful do we not? The answer is not to spoil them!
One important thing to do, is define what it means to spoil a child, because often a parent can justify their spoiling of their children simply by altering the definition, and passing it off as something else that doesn’t leave such a bad taste in others’ mouths. In very general applications, to spoil something (or someone) means that it goes bad, it is no longer usable as desired. Another definition would tell us that spoiling is a mistake in the producing of something, leading to an unintended and undesired outcome. So how does this apply to spoiling a child? Well, to spoil a child means to damage their ability to take care of themselves, to affect their future potential to be self-sustaining, to damage or harm them so severely that it affects their excellence, virtue or value. What are some of the ways in which we see these things happen around us, to our children? There are many instances in which we see these things happen. If we go back to the story we opened with, we can see that the child was severely held back and damaged by his father’s willingness to do everything for him, and not allowing him to learn on his own. This child will have great difficulty in providing for himself as he grows older. What will happen to him as he moves away to college for the first time, and finds himself utterly helpless as he finds his shoe untied on the way to class? I personally would not want to be around when that happens! He will undoubtedly be made fun of and other students will hold it against him for a long time. I’m sure that will be more difficult to handle than it would have been if he had had to struggle at it a few years earlier, but was able to eventually get it. This brings us to one of the most deceiving principles of parenthood. By providing everything I can for my child, I feel that they will have the optimum chance for success. While this can be true, it can also be very misleading. More important than providing goods and services, as businesses do, a parent must focus more on facilitating experiences of opportunity for learning and growing, and developing life skills (for example: the ability to tie one’s own shoe, or to cook for oneself, or to bathe oneself) is much different than doing everything for your own child.
The greatest thing a parent can do for a child id help them learn how to do things for themselves, and this cannot be accomplished by doing everything or them! Imagine learning how to golf. If you sat back and watched someone else play golf, but you never swung the club for yourself, do you think you would actually learn how to play as effectively as you could? No! You must swing the club yourself. It will be difficult the first few times, but then you will begin to get it. The same holds true for children. A child will never learn as effectively, or as much, when you are doing everything for them, they must be allowed to try things and to do things on their own, even if this means they will fall a few times. Spoiling children goes against everything we know about how people learn the best. It is obviously not going to benefit the child, and will more than likely make things more difficult for the child now and in the future.
What then shall we do? We know that children are the future. Today, we have children that will grow up to do all the same things that we must do, and even more. There are 5 year-olds today that will grow up to be the Presidents of countries, the other political leaders with great responsibility, business executives, doctors, and lawyers. They will be entrusted with everything. Should the parents of today not give them the greatest foundation they can have? This foundation in life can only be given by allowing children to learn and develop as a result of their own experiences, which can only be accomplished by not spoiling them, and doing everything for them!

The Halo Effect

2009-09-23T11:59:00.000-07:00

The Halo Effect

There are few things so distracting when one is trying to fall asleep as to have a rowdy group of boys just down the hall playing a loud video game and making excited exclamations (“Wow! A triple kill!”) in the early hours of the morning. The effect of such game playing, may, however, have a much smaller effect on the newly-made insomniac than on the ones who are actually using the game excessively. But it’s not just video games that can affect a person for good or for worse. From cell phones to Facebook to Halo, none of us are denied the benefits and conveniences of modern technology, especially here at BYU where connectivity is essential and independence is fresh. Unfortunately, this means that none of us can escape the consequences of this system, especially when a certain facet of technology is allowed to play a disproportionately large role in our lives.

Our use (and overuse) of technology does affect our mental capacities and tendencies. We’ve all heard the old adage “you are what you eat.” This is not true in a literal sense, but it does convey the link between input and physical condition. Likewise, our brains are shaped by the thoughts and messages we “feed” it – or fail to feed it. Intensive study yields greater knowledge and understanding, while too much video-gaming can numb our concentration and even result in death, as was the case for an overzealous gamer from South Korea who played Starcraft for fifty hours straight and then died. Though such extreme results are rare, they should stand as a warning of the type of effect that losing touch with reality can have upon all of us, to a lesser degree.

Technology, even in its advanced and high-fidelity state, is virtually always inferior to traditional interaction. For example, a person may have over a thousand friends on Facebook, but how much do each of those relationships mean if every one of this individual’s interactions occur over cyberspace? One or two good relationships can be worth more than all the superficial Facebook friends in the world. If, as they say, a picture is worth a thousand words, how many words is a real, living human being worth? Certainly not a two or three line of “status” on a social networking site. The point is not that Facebook is bad, but that real relationships are better, and that when the former starts to hurt the latter, it is time to stop and reconsider. The same can be said of video and computer games, watching TV, surfing the net, and even texting friends. Too often students are on the phone when they could be conversing with the people all around them. Too often they let their priorities slide and their focus dim because they while away unnecessarily large portions of their time in front of a screen. “It’s harmless,” they say, but in reality they are giving up all the progress they could have made by using their time otherwise, only to accomplish nothing, except climb a few points higher on an online ranking of players, a meaningless measurement by spiritual or mental standards.

A friend I know is the perfect example of this problem. Shy and socially awkward as a young child, his parents home-schooled him in fourth grade. He locked himself in his room all day. They thought he was studying. Eventually, someone discovered that he was actually playing a computer game for hours each day – Age of Empires. It is a good game, involving strategy, and based on real history. Nevertheless, it is also an addictive game, and it was taking the place of his studies. His parents stopped him from playing the game, and afterwards placed strict limits on its use. They sent him back to public school, where he excelled and eventually graduated as one of two valedictorians in his graduating class of four hundred. He’s now on a mission. It’s scary to think of how much he could have lost, had he and his parents let video-gaming control his life, take over his studies.

Most of us may not have so much at stake, especially since we’ve all made the decision to come here to BYU and are likely moving ourselves in the general direction of progress. However, I’ve seen members of my campus ward who text their friends during fast and testimony meeting. I’ve had roommates who blare loud music and play video games on Sundays. The problem is not so much what they are doing, but what they have to give up so that they can do it.

Fortunately, there is an alternative. I’ve lived all of my life without having a cell phone, and I didn’t get a Facebook account until recently. I have never used Xbox, play station, Nintendo, game boy or any other gaming devices. I have only played one computer game. When I was growing up, we had a TV in the house but no stations – we watched a movie together about once a week. Computer use in our home was strictly monitored – only our parents knew the password. When I came to college and finally got a laptop of my own, it was tempting to splurge and spend lots of time on it. I tried this, but found to my surprise that it only left me further behind in my classes, less emotionally satisfied and more drained of energy. That’s why I encourage everyone to take a week off, to cut back on their computer use and TV-watching to bare essentials. You might just be surprised how much time you have left over for more worthwhile things.

-Jake Shumway

Reasonable Arguments

2009-09-23T10:52:00.001-07:00