IRB 3 #2: To Kill a Mocking Bird - By Harper Lee

IRB #3: post 1

Consider Burke’s Pentad and each of the following ‘aspects’ of Fiction:
-Character “Agent” and “Agency”

Here is a list of all of the main characters mentioned so far:

Jean Louise: She is the narrator who more literate and more intelligent than her age group – due to being taught by her father and Jem. She originally came off as very overbearing and all-knowing, because she did try to beat up a Cunningham, however, after taking quiet advice from Jem by watching him accept others, she started to become more accepting.

Jem: Jem is the narrator’s brother. He is shown as the neutralization factor of the story because he acts humble and kind in every situation where the narrator doesn’t.

Charles Harris AKA Dill: He is the friend that the narrator and her brother find one day by chance. He is shown as a wealth of knowledge on different movies/plays/books.

Calpurnia: She is the African-American aid that lives with Jem, Atticus and the narrator. She helps around the house with mostly everything, as mentioned by Atticus. She also is added to the story in order to show how change is happening – both racial and stereotype change – because she talks about how it “don’t matter who they are [because], anybody sets foot in this house’s yo’ comp’ny” (27). She also talks about how they shouldn’t act “so high and mighty” (27) because it makes them no better than anyone else who is seen as “lower class”.

Atticus: He is the father of Jem and Jean; he also raised them alone without a wife, which shows his immense independence. He is used in the story as a “moving forward” character as well, like Calpurnia. Since he is well educated, he does have elevated diction (as mentioned by Jean) and an elevated sense of direction, so he does raise his children alone on the thought that change is good [and that is just as good as “compromise” (34)]. He is also alike to Jem because he is accepting of all people, even if they are seen as “lower” or “inferior”.

Miss Caroline: She is the Maycomb-county-inexperienced teacher who is new to the town and had a rough first day teaching at a new school.

Cunninghams/Ewells: They are seen as the “lower class” families based on their ancestors and what they did – or even what they do now. They are underprivileged and must live on what they have.

Radleys: They are the family that everyone must avoid because of rumors and inflated truths of what happened in years passed.

-Setting “Scene”:

The “Scene” is the quiet, simple town of Maycomb County. This county is very sheltered from the rest of the world, as explained in the beginning. It brings to the story a different type of plot, based only on the things that occur in this small town with barely any inhabitants. With this sheltered life come people who don’t know what reality is outside of its walls. This adds depth to the story because it creates two types of people: a division of those who saw the change outside of the walls and crave it and those who trust the Maycomb County way as the way of the world.
-Plot/Conflict “Act”

The plot and conflicts currently are very simple conflicts. For example, Jean had a tough day at school because the teacher yelled at her for being literate, and for also apparently calling out in class on business that was not her own. Another boiling conflict that could eventually become major would be the Radley House that people keep gossiping about and avoiding. Because of the “inflated truths” on this house and its inhabitants, it could create a town-wide rumble if the people inside the house decide to face the outside county and what they are saying.
-POV:

The POV is in first person because the story is being told by Jean Louise. This point of view may be very sheltered, but it adds depth to each and every character because you can not only get inside Jean Louise’s head and see the change within her, but you can see how other people change based on her interpretations of it. This POV not only adds depth, it allows for a more emotional appeal to come from the story.
-Theme “Purpose”:

The purpose isn’t too evident so far. However, I believe that because there is an acceptance of change (from Calpurnia and Atticus) and a change in some of the characters (like how Jean has become less judgmental to others because of jem), the overall purpose would be change overall. I believe that later in the story, we will see that change (and not segregation) will be more accepted in society, even in the small town of Maycomb.

Claim: The author is trying to convince us that the world back then was changing; it was a pivotal time to “compromise”, as Atticus would put it.

TO PROVE THIS: I could use quotes from Atticus and Calpurnia to show that even small town people believe that change is crucial to living. I could even show ways that Jean is changing because she watched her brother Jem accept others around him (like the forbidden Cunningham children) without judgment.

AOW #17: Political Cartoon

http://andrewohene.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/cartoon.jpg
This piece is showing a girl, not properly dressed, at a voters stand obviously for the presidential election, taken by the ballot. However, unlike a regular voting ballot, it not only has votes for the president and congress, but it has a spot to vote for the “American Idol”. The satirical cartoonist decided to include this part because, as stated, this specific section is used to “increase voter turnout…”.

I am not sure of the author of this piece; however it is from Tribune Media. This is a company that produces many political cartoons that are shown in prestigious magazines/newspapers (ie NYT).

The context of this piece would be temporal. I believe that I would be temporal because although this article was created in 2007, at this time American Idol was (and it still is) an extremely popular show. So, in context, this cartoon was a direct and extremely current reaction to the time period. Although it is considered a reaction, to the public it seemed so current that it was more like a daily occurrence rather than a post-reaction to something.

The purpose for why this cartoon was created was, ironically, to attract more people to the decreasing “voter turnout” during election time. This is ironic because in the cartoon, American Idol is used to attract more voters and outside of the cartoon (in real life), the cartoonist used American Idol to attract more viewers. All in all, the purpose is a satirical twist on the real downfall of voting time: that voting for the next idol is much more important than voting for the next president.

The audience of this piece is the voting populace: people 18 and older. This is the audience because even though it may be appealing to a younger audience (due to the immediate attraction to the most popular shows at the time), it still would not have an impact on them because they can’t vote and are not aware of the current depletion of the number of voters.

Some rhetorical elements used in this peace were satire, contrast, and emphasis of text headings.  Contrast was used with the girl, and her unprofessional and risqué clothing, against the seriousness of voting for the president of the United States. This was a very useful rhetorical choice because it showed America’s love for leisure over governmental importance. In one picture, it expressed the downfall of America in its priorities by having the girl represent modernism by placing her against the importance of past developments (like democracy and voting) that we mustn’t forget, even though it looks like we already did.

Emphasis was shown within the bolded and large text on the ballot. In big, bolded letters were the three topics that were all the same size and apparently, of equal importance. This emphasis of the vote for the “President…Congress…[and]…American Idol” as equivalent sectors, again, expresses how America’s priorities have shifted for the worst…

Satire was used as a main focal point of the entire cartoon.

Everything that the cartoonist added had a satirical purpose: the big, bolded letters to show that all the topics (presidents, congress, American idol) were all of equal importance, the outfit of the girl against the seriousness of the voting…

All in all, satire was what drove the cartoon and drew in a larger audience in order to get across the importance of voting for our president.

Yes, the author accomplished their purpose. They did because with communal memory and satire, they were not only able to draw in a large audience from a great age range (18 +), but they were also able to show America’s priorities are today and where they need to shift: in the way of voting!

AOW #16: WSJ Why the World Needs America (this was my favorite so far)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203646004577213262856669448.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

This piece is talking about that if America continued on its full decline, would the world still look and act like it does today? He first talks about how intellectuals believe it would, since America has spent years upon years spreading democracy and creating nations to help us if we fall. However, he believes that even though we did set up democratic nations and other fundamentals worldwide, they may not come to our rescue due to conflicting sides between countries (even those that are democratic) and the other immense world powers across the world with opposing views (like communism which is strictly against democracy). However, he also talks about how even though strong communist nations (that are seen as the top nations next to America) may actually be one of the poorer nations due to its constant isolationism of economics and trade. It is seen as a very independent country but he questions if these types of isolationists, who put all of their trust in the state, none in the majority and none in other nations of the world, can rule as a top world power. So, he then ends with saying that the world needs America, for “the U.S. [is] essential to keeping the present world order together and that the alternative to American power … [is] chaos and catastrophe”.

The author of this article is Robert Kagan. He is credible because he not only graduated from Yale University, a very prestigious university, but he also earned his MPP at Harvard, PhD at American University and is a professor at Georgetown University. He even worked in the State Department Policy Planning Staff of the government.

The context of this piece would be spacial because he had to refer back to even the early Roman times, during the fall of the roman empire, to connect to past citations of today to show how much America is needed as a world power (and what its fall would do).

The main purpose of this piece was a basic qualification cause and effect essay. It talked about some causes of the possibility of America’s fall from world power (by referring to previous falls of strong, elite nations IE the Roman Empire) and the effects of said fall (judging from current events and states of other global powers IE China’s world stage).

The audience would be the general public. I believe this because even though it is on the WSJ website, and the Wall Street Journal is known for its advance diction, topics and contexts, the general public (which I consider myself to be) that may not know as much on some subjects can still understand what this author talking about.

Some rhetorical elements used were qualification, enthymeme, and rhetorical questioning. First of all, I believe that this article was a qualification-cause-and-effect article. It would be a qualification article because it considered both sides (if America’s drop down from the world’s largest power would have negative or positive effects on the world stage). It would also be a cause-and-effect article because it did speak of how America would fall and the effects (-/+) it would have on the world.

Enthymeme was also shown all throughout the piece to carry along the readers. One enthymeme would be:

Major: America is a very influential world power (like the Roman Empire)

Minor: World powers can fall sometimes which may lead to an overall world stage (either negative of positive, it is still a major change of living for all).

Claim: Therefore, the world needs America to avoid this negative and/or positive change that could alter the world immensely.

They also used rhetorical questioning to carry on the article and its qualifications. One such example would be “Would the end of the present American-dominated order have less dire consequences?” and “What about the economic order of free markets and free trade?” These questions absolutely led the reader from one topic into the next. This was a fabulous rhetorical decision because it helped readers follow the author’s logic and want to keep reading. This also improved the author’s ethos because he didn’t favor one side or the other – he allowed the reader to consider both and choose themselves.

Yes, this author accomplished their purpose. They did because they were able to get across the main point of their article which was that the world needs America as a world power, no matter if it led to positive or negative effects, because it’s still major change which the world may not be able to adjust to. They were able to do this with qualification examples that showed both negative and positive results of America’s downfall.

GOOD CITATIONS TO REMEMEBER:

President Bill Clinton left office believing that the key task for America was to "create the world we would like to live in when we are no longer the world's only superpower," to prepare for "a time when we would have to share the stage."

Americans certainly like to believe that our preferred order survives because it is right and just—not only for us but for everyone. We assume that the triumph of democracy is the triumph of a better idea, and the victory of market capitalism is the victory of a better system, and that both are irreversible.

IRB 3 #1: To Kill a Mockingbird

Title: To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
Sections:
1.) Chapters 1 - 10
2.) Chapters 11-20
3.) Chapters 21 - 31
Why?

I chose to read this book because I have heard so many amazing things about it. Not only has it gotten fantastic reviews ever since it was first written, but I also wanted to read this for a long time. I felt like reading this book would not only expand my literary knowledge on the classic readings, but it will also lead me into reading more books alike to this, many which are more of the classics. All in all, it is a great book to read but is especially good to analyze, since I've heard of many fantastic lit device usages in this story!

AOW #15: TSA spot-checks

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/28/travel/tsa-vipr-passenger-train-searches/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

This piece was about the new, and somewhat invading, regulations and practices of the TSA outside of the airport.  There were many cases where, when people were getting off and on trains in certain cities their bags were getting searched for explosives while the police dogs inspected them. People believed that this was and could potentially be a privacy issue and could go against their privacy rights as US citizens.

The author of this article is Thom Patterson. There isn’t an immense amount of background on Patterson, but by the look of his CNN page, I can see that his hundreds of articles and citations within these articles (of first persona accounts, politicians, etc…) prove his credibility.

The context of this piece would be causal. Simply, this article is a reaction to the constant complaints and first-hand accounts with the TSA’s actions outside of the airport. It could also be causal because it never has to refer to history and, obviously, these opinions were voice afterwards as afterthoughts of the happenings.

The purpose for this article was to inform the people about the TSA’s new actions. It was also a very objective article because it showed both sides of how the TSA is not just for the airport, as shown by its name (Transportation Security Admission), and how the people react to their new action on new grounds. Since it is objective, I believe the purpose was to explain what is happening rather than have a clear-cut opinionated piece.

The audience of this piece would be, in general, people who use public transportation. In a more broad sense, the audience can be people who know who the TSA are and where they usually reside. It would be that kind of audience because in that sense, they would know where the TSA usually are and why this time, it is immensely different.

There are numerous rhetorical elements in the piece, such as definition, objective or 3^rd person omniscient POV, and imagery. First, he begins the entire article with imagery, by describing a scene in which the TSA invades an innocent man’s privacy by allowing his dog to sniff him up and down. This imagery opens up the passage, making the reader want to continue reading with the hint of lit analysis interwoven in. He also wrote in an objective view, showing all sides of the case (somewhat like 3^rd person omniscient in lit) and situation – IE first he starts with how the people feel about the TSA, and how the TSA feels. In the end, he eventually uses definition to support/explain the TSA side of things – by saying that “TSA officials [would] like to point out that the acronym stands for Transportation Security Administration, not the Airport Security Administration”.

I believe that the author did not accomplish their purpose. Although I did learn a good amount about what the TSA were doing to people, I don’t think that the man they interviewed was a prime example of how it bothered people – because he was OK with their reactions. However, even though I do know it  was more of an objective piece, I believe that giving two paradox examples – of an angered citizen against the stubborn TSA – would allow the reader to indulge more into the passage and learn more.

AOW #14: Snickers Commercial

Snickers commercia: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sci-RiYuXXk 

This commercial is an advertisement for snickers. In the commercial, the two working men transform into two well known “whiney” celebrities. So, in order to change them back from being whiny – their co-workers give them a snickers to help them stop their hunger and whininess.

The source that this was created from was Mars Inc. which is the company that creates Mars candy bars, such as Snickers. They are credible because they have been around since 1932 when the first Mars factory was created. Because of the immense amount of years they have been around, they are credible because they have experience and a trustworthy team – especially if people keep buying their products (as shown by the over $30billion revenue every year).

The context of this piece would be causal or spatial. It would be causal because you have to have background knowledge on the two celebrities in the commercial to understand the satire. It would also be spatial because although it was “in the moment”, the commercial was overall, more of a reaction to hunger from the work they were previously doing. It would be temporal if they showed how their hunger was created and then had the characters acting hungry rather than just showing the post reaction to the pre occurrence.

The purpose for this commercial was to make people buy Snickers because according to what happened, it can satisfy you’re hunger and make you less whiney and more active.

The audience this was written for would be the hard-working people of America (most likely the “99%”) who normally get hungry in the middle of the day and are looking for a satisfy snack – IE Snickers.

The few rhetorical elements that really stood out to me were communal memory and satire. The communal memory was shown through the two well-know “whiney celebrities”, Rosanne and Richard Lewis. It was also shown when they alluded to the “mid-day hunger” that many Americans have during the middle of their work day. The satire was shown through the things that the celebrities were saying and whining about; IE how Rosanne’s back hurt, then she got hit by the log so her front hurt.

I believe that the author did accomplish their purpose. They did because I know that I was more convinced to buy a snickers now than I was before since I just thought of them originally as just candy bars, where as they now made them seem like something to cease the hunger. Although, I don’t usually eat candy bars as snacks, if I was a regular American consumer, I would most likely go out and buy snickers as snacks now.