TOW #29 - Letter to a New APELC Student

Dear New APELC Student,

Welcome! I know that when I was in your position, everyone I talked to about this class told me I would become a better writer. To be honest, I didn't think that was true. I thought of writing as something that couldn't really be taught; either you were good at it or you weren't. But looking back on my writing from before taking this class, I can tell that I didn't have a very good grasp of how to best construct my writing to convey my point effectively. My writing wasn't bad, but I didn't structure my arguments with the intent to appeal to a specific audience, and I definitely didn't consciously use rhetorical devices. (Sometimes I would accidentally stumble upon one, but they work much better when you employ them deliberately!) When we began analyzing texts, it became clearer and clearer how much thought authors put into how they phrase their message. If you work hard enough on your own writing and employ the techniques that you learn about and study in class, your writing can absolutely improve, and you'll be able to see that with each passing essay (of which you'll write many).

This class requires you to be focused and participatory with your learning. Analyzing a text may not feel fun or easy, but it'll get better with practice and it'll definitely help you with your writing. Something I struggled with in the beginning was identifying the author's purpose, but after a while you start to see patterns in the writing. If you see a certain rhetorical device, it may point to one purpose, but a different rhetorical device would change the message. It varies and isn't an exact science, but you'll figure it out soon enough. Don't be discouraged by any of your essay grades, either. You're not expected to be churning out 9's right away, or even 6's or 7's. Everything in this class comes with practice. Writing is a process, and this course is a process. Once you reach the end, everything will make sense and be worth it. You'll be a better writer who is better able to read and analyze texts, which will make you a better informed citizen. There really are no downsides to taking this course.

TOW #28 - Reflection

I think over this year, I've gotten better at synthesizing the way that different rhetorical devices work together in order to achieve the author's overall purpose. For instance, in TOW #9, I identified different devices that were used satirically in order to show how sensationalized news is. But in TOW #18, I discussed how an author used quotes to support her credibility, but also pointed out that she analyzed them in a way that made her argument into an ad hominem attack. One rhetorical device or strategy can do two totally different (though not necessarily contradictory) things for your argument, and I think I learned to recognize that later on.

I think I mastered identifying purpose. In the beginning of the year, that was definitely something that confused me, but now I have a better intuitive understanding of what the author is trying to say. I'm able to pick up on how the rhetorical devices they use can indicate their purpose. I could probably still improve my identification of the subtler rhetorical devices. I still tend to notice mainly diction, allusions, usage of quotes, and I know there are many others that I could dig deeper for that are probably affecting the presentation of the author's purpose.

I think these TOWs helped by keeping analysis fresh in our minds. I was grateful that we kept doing analysis on our own so that when the AP exam came, it wasn't completely unfamiliar to have to write an analysis essay. But I often felt like I didn't have the time to take them seriously enough for them to have as big an effect on my analysis skills as they could have, since I would forget about them until Sunday evening. (Just being honest.) I also felt like I didn't always need the extra practice from TOWs. I think they are most beneficial to students who really want to improve their skills and take them seriously, but I think they're useful for everyone regardless.

TOW #26 - "It's Sugar-Free" (Visual)

This ad uses a familiar scene with a twist in order to subvert the reader's expectations and force them to consider the message for longer. When a person usually sees ants, they typically are headed in a straight line towards any source of sugar. If you drop even a minuscule piece of candy on the floor, it will be swarmed within minutes. Which is why a viewer of this ad would take a second to pause. They see a piece of candy, which looks to be delicious and sugary and exactly something any self-respecting ant or kindergartner would make a beeline for. However, the ants are avoiding it as if it's poison, and this is explained by the phrase "It's sugar-free". This phrase is cleverly placed in the area towards which the ants are headed, so the reader's eye is naturally drawn to it. It provides a simple explanation to the dilemma that the reader is subconsciously trying to resolve as they look at the ad. On the other side of the ad, where the line of ants starts, is the logo of the company, which is notably brighter and more colorful than the rest of the ad. This makes it easily noticeable and ensures that the reader will remember which brand is distributing this ad. It also restates the main point of the ad, which is that their candy is sugar-free.

Sugar-free is an interesting selling point for this company to choose, instead of, for instance, the quality or taste of their candy, or interesting flavors that they have. However, it allows them to potentially appeal to both adults and kids. The candy looks delicious and sweet, which would make any kid clamor for a lollipop. However, it being sugar-free is not immediately obvious, but of course would be appreciated by adults trying to avoid giving their kids sugar rushes or not rot their teeth. The outdoors image of the ants also appeals to kids who love playing outside and insects, and would associate this brand with that setting.

TOW #24 - Water Changes Everything (Visual)

This advertisement is for a charity that provides water to those in third world countries who don't have any. It's a very minimalist design, with a white background that draws focus to the meal in the center of the ad. Beneath the picture are two lines of text, one say "Water changes everything", and the other with the name of the charity's website. This ad uses clever wordplay by asserting that water changes everything, and showing an example of a classic meal -- spaghetti -- without water. Obviously, water is integral to the production of this very basic meal, and even more integral to the daily lives of all human beings. This ad can help open people's eyes to seeing how even when we don't think about a meal containing water, it still has an effect on its outcome.

The use of sharp angles and lines in this ad help direct the viewer's eyes towards what its author wants them to look at. For instance, the two hands holding utensils first direct the reader to look at the plate of uncooked spaghetti. After the reader has noted the irregularity, the straight spaghetti points downward towards the tagline and the website. This arrangement leaves the viewers' eyes at the ideal ending point -- the website -- so that it sticks in their mind and they're more likely to visit it. It gives the ad maximum effectiveness. The colors also play an important role in the reader's interpretation of the ad. The whiteness of the background and plate invoke a sense of cleanliness and sanitation, which is probably one of the main goals of this water organization - to provide clean water. White is also a religious color, and religion ties into helping others and charity. The red and yellow of the spaghetti are striking and also help to draw the reader's eye there first. Finally, the black text on the white background set it apart and create a serious tone.

TOW #23 - The Battle to Keep French Pure is Doomed (Written)

This article is about the French language adopting more and more loanwords from English, and the author's worry that this may pollute the language. The interesting thing is that this article is written in English, by a French-speaking author. Because of this, her audience becomes unclear. If she is trying to reach francophones, she is using entirely the wrong language. However, there is really nothing that anglophones can do to alleviate the problem she writes about. In this case, I believe that her purpose is less about fixing the issue and more about offering her thoughts on it to those who speak a different language. English has always happily accepted words and structures from other languages, without worrying about "purity", so a new perspective on the idea is very much appreciated. She explains how "pure" French is very elegant and refined, and that modern French, with its Anglicisms and loanwords, sounds choppy and foreign.

Another interesting facet of this conversation is that France has the "Académie française" that supposedly keeps the purity of the language intact, but it can only determine which words are "technically" in the language. It cannot control which words the people decide to use. On the flip side, the French Canadians who use the French language as well on a daily basis don't have such a society, but socially, they reject very strongly the idea of English loanwords. While the French use "le parking", the Quebécois use "le stationnement". Despite being closer to America and having an arguably more American culture, they still manage to better preserve their language and guard against loanwords and foreign influences. However, many French francophones consider Canadian French an abomination of their language. It's obviously difficult to balance an appreciation for one's own language as it is and the desire for it to change and evolve with a changing world landscape.

TOW #21 - Yes, Please (IRB Post)

I'm about halfway through with Amy Poehler's autobiography Yes, Please, and I really enjoy it so far. I think her use of pictures is unique. Most other authors don't use quite as many pictures to get their point across -- maybe one in the whole book, or a few just to illustrate one large event. But Poehler has pictures at the beginning of every chapter, and interspersed within her stories as well. This overabundance of visual texts gives another layer to her writing, forcing the reader to analyze why she might have chosen to include that particular picture of her stand-up sketch comedy or why that picture of her and her parents might have some sort of emotional resonance. It also helps give the reader a better visualization of the events of her life. She understands that some of her readers may not be familiar with her work outside of the SNL, so she includes pictures so they can understand more easily the tone and character of her work.

Another interesting thing I notice that Poehler uses is that she occasionally breaks off from the narrative of her life into a comedic bit. For instance, after discussing her own pregnancy and the emotions she felt surrounding it, she ends the chapter with a fake letter she pretends to have written with her husband to the hospital staff. In it, she details all the ridiculous amenities they would like to be provided with in order to make the birth more comfortable. I believe she uses this humor as a way to poke fun at herself and keep the tone of the book lighthearted. She doesn't want to be accused of taking herself too seriously, which is always a possibility when one writes a book about themselves. Her humor regarding her divorce (in which she talks about a series of "real divorce help books" with silly titles and terrible advice) also prevent the tone from dipping into something too serious and dark. She assures the reader that she has long moved on from that painful event and invites them to laugh with her, taking the focus off of herself (ironically, since this is an autobiography) and putting the focus onto the happy side of the situation.

TOW #20 - Holy Writ (Written)

Holy Writ, an article in the New Yorker by Mary Norris, details the events in her life leading up to becoming a copy editor for the New Yorker, and ends with some reflection on the decisions she makes during her work and their impact. Her general message was somewhat similar to Lynne Truss' in Eats Shoots & Leaves -- punctuation is important and should be paid attention to. However, her approach was much more forgiving. She admits that the New Yorker's style guide is not something that works for all forms of writing, but she also argues that there is a definite reason for every single style choice she makes, and that that reason isn't superfluous or nitpicky.

She uses examples of sentences that fit and do not fit the New Yorker style to illustrate her points for the reader. This helps frame her argument in solid proof of how her commas function in their sentences. She uses the sentence "When I was in high school, at Horace Mann, in the Bronx, in the nineteen-seventies, everyone took pride in the brilliant eccentricity of our teachers" to show the reader how commas are placed to separate extraneous details from the rest of the sentence. She argues that her commas delineate information that is not essential to the meaning of the phrase, and by giving an example of this, she helps the reader shift their views about comma overuse.

She also provides a counterargument at the end of her article to show that "proper" comma usage isn't always necessary. She talks about a book by the author James Salter, and points out three or four sentences that have commas she disagrees with. She says that if they were in the New Yorker, they would have been taken out, so she was curious why they were left in the novel. She asks the author himself, and relays that information to the reader, giving them a positive viewpoint of the other side of the argument from a reliable, credible source. Salter argues that the commas give rhythm and focus to the sentences in which he placed them, and Norris concedes that although her usual dealings with commas are about whether they are used "properly", style-wise, they can be used in an artful way that bends a few rules.

TOW #19 - Non Smoking Area (Visual)

This image is an anti-smoking ad that draws mostly on the pathos of reminding the viewer of their own mortality to discourage smoking. It depicts a cemetery with a patch of gravestones missing with the words "non smoking area" written in that spot. This implies that all the other graves are from smokers. 

This poster uses a lattice of crosses which implies an infinite continuation -- a graveyard stretching on for miles of victims of smoking. The reader sees that there are no exceptions to the rule: if you aren't in the non smoking area, you're going to be affected in a very negative way by smoking. The large expanse of green, a calming and vibrant color, in the middle of the non smoking area shows that abstaining from smoking leads to a happier and fuller life unaffected by lung cancer and other complications from cancer. The white crosses lend a somber air to the poster and a finality to the deaths of those who smoke.

The use of the words "non smoking area" mirrors their real life use in restaurants or other public places where there is a physical separation between those who choose to smoke and those who do not. This poster shows that the difference isn't just a personal preference, smoking deeply affects the lives of those who do it. Next time the reader sees a sign designating somewhere "non smoking", they may decide to go there, remembering the poignancy of the image on this poster. The incentive of a healthy life is a strong one for many, and this poster can definitely discourage someone from starting smoking, or kickstart someone to try quitting. 

TOW #18 - The Politics of Measles (Written)

The author of this piece, Margaret Talbot, opens with a situation from twenty-five years ago that parallels present day. It's a story about a community in which there had been a measles outbreak, and it turned out that the population that was most affected by this outbreak was a religious group that had opted out of vaccines. This is very similar to the current day situation where many people are opting out of receiving vaccines for personal reasons that are completely unfounded in medicine, causing outbreaks of diseases that were once thought to be almost eradicated. The author hopes to display with this anecdote the terrible outcomes of lack of vaccination. The anecdote ends with Talbot telling the reader that once the children were taken away from their families, they were able to get the medical help they needed. That is the sort of motivation that some parents need to realize that their own personal beliefs may be getting in the way of their child's health.

Talbot also makes good use of quotations from those who are on the opposing side of the argument to help support her own side. She quotes three different Republicans who are against vaccination and points out the flaws in their arguments. Supporting her argument in this way is a slight ad hominem attack, but it deals mainly with the logic of her opposition, so it's still a sound tactic. Senator Rand Paul says "I've heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines", and Talbot rejoinds with "No doubt, he has heard such stories, but the evidence does not support them". She is discrediting the argument of the opposing side in order to strengthen her own. She also ridicules Chris Christie's statement that not all vaccines are created equal, by reminding the reader that his formal health policies include quarantining a nurse who did not end up having the deadly Ebola virus. By making her opponents seem less credible, her already logical argument becomes the much more desirable side to be on.

IRB #3 Intro Post - "Yes, Please"

I'll be reading Yes, Please by Amy Poehler this marking period. Amy Poehler is a comedian who has worked on SNL and her own show, Parks and Recreation. I think she's an amazing and funny person and I'm excited to read about her own personal experiences in life in her autobiography. I've read the autobiographies of Tina Fey and Mindy Kaling before, so I'm hoping they follow in the same pattern of being really funny while also very insightful into the lives of modern female comedians.

TOW #17 - Once More to the Lake (Written)

The imagery in E.B. White's essay Once More to the Lake is what drives the narrative and helps convey the author's intentions. This essay is about a father and son's nostalgic trip to their lake house. The father is the narrator, he guides the attention of the story and introduces old memories he has that help frame his relationship with his son.

The author describes the lake as a "wild lake", "fairly large and undisturbed...and there were places in it that, to a child at least, seemed infinitely remote and primeval" (180). This description helps set the scene for an adventurous discovery, or a deep, intimate connection between a man and his son. He later describes a thunderstorm as "a curious darkening of the sky, and a lull in everything that had made life tick" (184). These descriptions place the reader in the middle of the action of the piece, and allow them to see the world through the father's eyes, in the same way that the father sees the world through his son's eyes. This interpretation is confirmed by the ending line of the piece, in which the father puts a bathing suit on his son and feels a phantom chill on his own body. This poignant end to the piece suggests that the father and son have similar experiences and relationships to each other. It leaves the reader considering the repetition and cycle of life and how they themselves feel connected to others' lives as well.

White also uses positive diction to convey his enjoyment of spending time with his son. "Peace and goodness and jollity" are the words he uses to describe their trip (183). This positivity improves the tone of the piece, and gives the reader a sense of safety, such as they might feel on a trip with their own father. It also presents the state of mind of the father -- he is enjoying his trip, but he also feels a slight melancholy and disorientation at being on a trip with his son instead of his father. Overall, this piece uses devices that are mostly present in fiction (narrative mode and descriptions) and a more flowery than is usually found in nonfiction writing to help present a real account of how White felt on his trip with his son and the circle of life.

TOW #16 - Do Fingerprints Lie? (Written)

This article, titled Do Fingerprints Lie? and written by Michael Specter, tackles the subject of whether fingerprint evidence is as infallible as is generally accepted. For a very long time, the US court system would accept any sort of "expert testimony", regardless of whether they were legitimately experts. Opinions that were "generally accepted" in the field were allowed, even if they weren't factually proven. The case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals brought this into a more critical light and created stricter guidelines for what could be admissible.

This article begins with an anecdote about Shirley McKie, a police officer who was wrongly accused of a crime because her fingerprint had been found inside the house in which a murder occurred. However, she insisted that she hadn't even entered the house. It turned out, in the end, that the print that had been taken from the crime scene matched her left thumb very well, but it had actually been the print of the murderer's right forefinger. This anecdote serves to demonstrate the falsity of two different commonly accepted ideas about fingerprints: that everyone has unique fingerprints, and that they can be accurately matched to a single person by the police. It turns out, though everyone does have different fingerprints (they are created in the womb based on everyone's unique movements and friction), they are very very similar, and there is not necessarily enough training within the FBI to correctly and 100% accurately identify fingerprints all the time. The anecdote serves the purpose of disproving the things that the reader thinks they know to be true.

Specter also uses an abundance of quotes from experts to give the reader the best idea of what the general feeling in the fingerprinting community is towards the court case that was going on and the questioning of its validity. Specter himself is not an expert on this issue, so he realizes the need for expert testimony. He incorporates the opinions from different sides so that he can present an unbiased view of this very complicated issue.

TOW #15 - The Lives of a Cell (Written)

The essay The Lives of a Cell by Lewis Thomas is about how around the world, there are no tangible connections between organisms, yet they still work together as one cell. He uses the extended metaphor of a cell within our own body as an example of how he is beginning to conceptualize the entire planet working together symbiotically. In a scientific manner, he splits his essay up into three "items". The first is that we, as humans, are made up of strange parts that don't really belong to us. We are not ourselves, we are the sum of completely unrelated parts working together. The second item is that the most surprising thing about Earth is not its diversity, but its uniformity. We are all similar to each other -- except for viruses, which he looks at as an evolutionary accident, a piece of DNA that was "dropped". His third item is that the earth shouldn't be looked at as an organism. It's too unconnected. It should be looked at as a cell, whose own parts are very disconnected and foreign yet still cooperate.

I believe Thomas's main point in writing this essay is to ask the reader to look inside themselves, not at the world, as he does in the beginning. By considering the world, and comparing it to a cell, we can look at ourselves and see how we are made up of the people in our lives, the things we use, the films we watch, the strangers who bump into us on the street. He says in the beginning, "it is illusion to think that there is anything fragile about the life of the earth; surely this is the toughest membrane imaginable in the universe", and I believe he says this to encourage the reader to see themselves as something tough, something made up of many things yet resilient to many others. Just because you allow strange people or things you aren't familiar with into your life doesn't mean you are weak. Those things can build you up and make you even stronger. Stronger against the viruses of the world, which are accidents, things that were dropped, things that don't share the same goal as everyone else. Our world shares not one goal, but many abstract, unknowable goals, and we all work together in our vast yet small cell-like environment to protect ourselves, not just as humans but as organisms, the planet united.