Staying on Topic in Your Essay

All,

A critical aspect of an essay assignment is to stay on topic. The overall theme for Essay Three is 'the justification of control,' and your essay must partake in that discussion.

Whether or not you have arrived at a specific essay subject, use the following to ensure that you are on topic and that you are beginning to develop profound analysis:

1) Given this spectrum:

Violence (V) - Threat of Violence (TOV) - Manipulation (M) - Reason (R)

Where does your subject land? Or, if you do not have a subject yet, what interesting example of one of the above comes to mind when you ponder this spectrum?

Ex: Violence manifest in the formation of the United States as a nation.
Ex: Threat of Violence/Violence implied in Foucault's analysis of quarantine during a plague.

2) Now that you have a precise starting point (subject), is/was the use of this form of conflict resolution [V, TOV, M, or R] justified or just?

3) Analyze the 5WH involved in your subject matter. (Who, What, When, Where, Why, How)

4) Analyze the power relationship. Who benefits? Who gets to make the decision? Who does not get to make the decision? How did the 'deciders' and 'non-deciders' arrive at their positions in the power relationship? Who gets to assign qualitative judgment of 'good' or 'bad?' (Remember dialectic?) Apply more 5WH.

5) Determine further incidents of justice/injustice present in this power relationship.

6) Outline your essay utilizing the QI, CLAIM, REASON, Em, Burden of Proof, Audience, Counter Argument, and Cited Sources tools.

Best of luck,

-Josh G.

Desperately Seeking Inspiration

Hey Josh,

I've been reading the next couple of assignments to find a topic that interests me for the next paper. Unfortunately the only one that slightly interests me is the negative side of prisons. However, I don't think I could actually write an interesting paper, that I care about, on that topic. I've thought about how violence in video games effects young people but can’t think of where control would come in. Any tips?

-Desperately Seeking Inspiration


Dear DSI,

You are under control.

Get the fuck out of your comfort zone.

Life here is so soft it can numb the thought right out of a person. Wait until the term is over before you go off walking shirtless to the Cascades or a one-way to a developing nation- for now use the Internet and your imagination.

Take a note pad, write down what you think are some possible questions at issue addressed by the readings you've done, then get on the Internet and browse news web sites, follow links out into the creepy fringes, and evaluate the ones that spark any interest.

BBC
Radio Free Europe
Al Jazeers
MSNBC
Fox
Voice of America

Take notes on why and what QI they may be addressing. Take special notice of any item that you think may particularly affect you as a young university student in Oregon, US. Take special notice of horrific items that appear to have no effect whatsoever on your life. Take note of the ones that are complete bullshit.

Take a break then brainstorm historical and contemporary, or even imagined/hypothesized situations that may be similar in some fashion.

Once you've sketched some possible threads turn on some music you can jam to or that you particularly enjoy. Songs with particularly poetic lyrics can be especially helpful.

Make connections: you - subject of interest - insight (cause+effect/claim+reason) - audience

If this doesn't get you somewhere, we'll try again in class tomorrow.

-Josh G.

Maya RR3

I think Americans always refer to the “Declaration of Independence” without really knowing its origins. It constantly quoted in all forms of writings and speeches of other great leaders. It truly is one of the monumental documents that our country is based on. Honestly this was the first time for me to have fully read this piece of writing. I was surprised by how much relevance it still had after so many years. I was very interested in how he used the mixture of logic and emotion to persuade the audience. I’m personally not very patriotic, but I was very moved by Jefferson’s conviction to have an independent country. Jefferson’s use of not only facts, but also passion easily made a very convincing argument. It is inspiring to think back to the generations that had the dream of having a country free of repression from their repressors. I believe that America will always hold that ideal value of a country of opportunity and freedom.

Sarah RR3

The Declaration of Independence is what the United States is based on. It’s goal was to have all people regardless of race and color be equal. The government was created to make enforce that everyone is created equal. “That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” This quote shows what the government is supposed to do, unfortunately the government is far from this. The leaders in government today are corrupt and take advantage of their power, and they don’t lead our country based on the Declaration of Independence. There is lots of inequality. There is a huge economic gap between rich and poor, white people still have more advantages in the work force and education compared to minorities. Protesting is not uncommon and the government usually doesn’t listen to protesters. Guantanamo Bay is an example on how the United States doesn’t treat people equally. In Guantanamo Americans torture people who we believe to be terrorists. This is not just and when American citizens confront the government about it, they deny that Guantanamo even exists. When George W. Bush was President, the Government kept things even more secretive, making Americans lose their trust in government. When Obama came into Presidency people wanted change. This change includes all the values and principles that the Declaration of Independence represents. 

RR3 Jasper Newton!

After reading this short piece by Thomas Jefferson, my idea of the Declaration of Independence and its background has changed. Having Jefferson explain the background and reasoning of the Declaration brings the audience a better look on it, and what rights we were meant to have. The document is one of the most important pieces of written work in the history of the United States. It is persuasive in the way it appeals to the public and their rights. I believe in the quote “…all men are created equal”, but I don’t believe it is true today. When observing current society in the U.S, discrimination plays a huge part of disintegrating that notion. Discrimination in gender, race, age, wealth and knowledge all play a role. Jefferson went on a rant of what the King of Britain had done wrong, pointing out all the good things that the U.S has created from the mistakes of Great Britain. He points out that all the King had done wrong, and had done nothing in the name of the people and their rights. That the King of Britain has distributed no rights to the public and has proven a great threat to the U.S by attacking. Thomas Jefferson is taking all the King’s wrong doings and trying to learn from those mistakes to help run his country effectively. The Declaration is no doubt the most important asset to the public of the United States and our right to live here.

RR3 Leigh Parker

The Declaration of Independence contains some very strong points and parts that are really inspiring. I would have to say my favorite part is near the end, “…and by authority of the good people of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be. Free and Independent States; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown…” this line is definitely powerful and helps to persuade the reader. Although there were parts that I don’t agree with or that I can tell were written a very long time ago. For example, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” I do agree that we all deserve the rights of life, liberty, and happiness, but I do not like that it is assumed that everyone believes in a “Creator”. I also find it interesting that the Declaration is claiming that every man is created equal, and deserves these rights, yet the presence of slavery and mistreatment of African-Americans completely contradicts this statement. I also think that along with pointing out everything the King of Britain did wrong, it also might have been more effective if the Declaration mentioned some of what the plans that the “United Colonies” had in the future with their independence. But overall in my opinion, this document is pretty impressive in the way that it argues for our independence and has so much influence on the way we live our lives today. 

Han Cao RR#3

Initially, the American Revolution was to protect the existing way of life than to create something new. However, things were not happened on the track planned by leaders. During the Second Continental Congress, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin drafted a declaration of independence. At that time, most societies around the world were ruled by kings that believed in God. Jefferson argued that government can be only established by the people to protect their rights. After his ideas appeared on the paper, the people in the world began to accept and try to set up a new society all the time. I agree that people's rights cannot be deprived by others, even legally. Therefore, the government should be ruled by the people and can be abolished by the people. People are born with liberty and the Declaration of Independence made it possible. Yet there were some things that never mentioned in the Declaration, such as women, free blacks, Native Americans and slaves. So the Declaration was just the first step of the evolution of the modern society. People have been seeking a more complete method to preserve people's liberty.

Mary Saunders

The Declaration of Independence is unquestionably one of the most powerful and persuasive documents in the history of the United States of America. Thomas Jefferson's arguments are so effective because he presents the declaration in a style that is so passionate that one cannot help but to feel inspired by this one man’s motivation and courage to stand up for his country’s independence. The Declaration has remained one of the country’s most well-known pieces of text for hundreds of years because Jefferson’s extremely effective arguments continue to hold power and relevance. Many people may know the Declaration solely by the famous line: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” This line is famous for good reason; it is able to unite all people under the belief that they were all created equal by the same creator, giving every single person a commonality. The Declaration is so effective because Jefferson lists concrete reasons of mistreatment of the United Colonies under the rule of the King of Great Britain. Jefferson states that: “He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt out towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.” Jefferson provides solid, concrete, undeniable evidence of the extreme mistreatment that the colonies have suffered under British Rule. His style of appealing to the reader's emotions plays a big factor in the effectiveness of this powerful document.

The Dialetic of Independence

By Carolyn Sheedy

I wish we’d done the rereading of the Declaration of Independence before submitting in our revisions to essay 2 because I think it is a good example of what we have been trying to accomplish in our papers! The Declaration is an excellent tool to justify the birth of a new nation because of its powerful persuasive voice and straightforward organization of the essay. The paper has a clear enthymeme (to paraphrase it “we are breaking our ties with you because the your actions infringe on our basic rights.”) and supports itself well with the list of injustices and crimes.

I would say the success of this document is due to Jefferson’s masterful use of the three appeals. He appeals to authority by speaking from experience, we should listen to these people because they have suffered and they know what they are talking about. He appeals to our emotions by his word choice, taking advantage of the dialectics he can. Words like ‘abuses’ and ‘usurpations’ have strong negative associations with them still today, two hundred years later, as do words like ‘Free and Independent’. And finally, he appeals to logic with his list, pointing out what happened to wrong the immigrants and why it was wrong before finally tying it back into what they plan to do because of it, making their reason for declaring independence easily understood and reasonable.

Frankly, I am impressed by how effective these tools are because I did not really have much faith in them until I tried dissecting the reasons why this document struck me so strongly and persuaded me easily. I believe there are still flaws with the work, such as the long winding sentences, long repetitive lists and the overly flowery language but I accept that these are simply stylistic tastes and probably stem from what was common during the period this was written. Kudos to Jefferson on creating a wonderful base for the birth of our country as well as a wonderful base for any persuasive paper.

RR3

The Declaration Of Independence may be the most important document in the history of the United States, without it we would probably not be there today. This document is persuasive without using any threatening tactics. This is all about the people and how important it is for this country to their independence. The way Thomas Jefferson explains how "all men are created equal" would really appeal to someone because it is the truth and people like to see the truth when someone is trying to persuade them. Everything in this Declaration is appealing because it makes complete sense. Another persuasive writing tactic, proves how badly America had been treated. Jefferson goes through a lot of the things that the King had not done for them and it makes people think. After all of the complaints about the King, It goes into what the country needs as a whole. This is what ties everything together and really attempts to make Great Britain understand what they want. 

Karly Lundy

John Taylor rr3

The Declaration of Independence is one of if not the most important document in our country's history. Thomas Jefferson's point was that of laying out the reasons for us to seperate ourselves from Great Britain. Each reason that was layed was important and meaningful. I believe the most meaningful reason for that of "refusing the assent to laws, the most wholesome and necesary or the public good." In almost all of the sentences the beginning always starts with "He" and "For". Jefferson obviously did this on purpose so he could make the point known that the United Colonies wanted independence. I can't think of a counter argument when the argument itself is extremly solid and needed to be done. The three words that our country was based on was "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Everyone is this country strives to gain those three words. For example, even on a recent Cadillac commerical they ending slogan was "life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." This shows how even in car commericials those three words are used in a way to get people to buy their cars. The Declaration is an inspirational document that allowed our country to be who we are today.

Declaration of Independence Response

The Declaration of Independence is one of the corner stones of our nation and a crucial part of our past. When reading this short piece of literature it is hard to imagine the importance of the document as well as the pressure on the author. Unlike some pointless high school essay, the Declaration of Independence had to justify the birth of a new nation. 233 years later it is obvious that Jefferson’s words did the trick, and as I read over this historic piece again I am struck by its effectiveness. Similar to the papers we have written in class, the Declaration of Independence has persuasive aspects to it. The first two paragraphs are eloquently written and appeal to the emotions of any reader. The second paragraph also has a counter argument in it, “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes…” This counter argument, like all effective persuasive pieces, is addressed and laid to rest. Jefferson then goes on to list the wrong doings of the King. This portion seems repetitive at first but as we look back in history we can see that these repetitive paragraphs are justifying independence. When Thomas Jefferson sat down to write this piece it is clear he was writing a declaration. But the effectiveness of the declaration makes it extremely persuasive. I can imagine the King of Britain reading this and saying, he’s got a point.

By Daniel Sapiro 

From: Courtney Puckett

The Declaration of Independence states that every person should be able to live in a Nation with “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. One of our founding fathers Thomas Jefferson was portrayed as believing that whites were superior to blacks. However, they fail to mention that Jefferson had an intimate relationship with one of his multiple slaves and had multiple children with her. Since racism is not being addressed properly in the constitution, problems of racism continue to be a problem currently because of the constant struggle for equal rights and equality for all races such as: Latinos, Chinese, African American, Korean, and Hawaiian etc. This shows that the Declaration of Independence is not being followed specifically by the United States of America and not even by one of our founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson that created the Declaration of Independence in 1776. However, we need to live up to the values our nation is based upon, like “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness” from the Declaration of Independence. This should be something that our Nation follows directly in our current society to help resolve problems like racism, inequality, discrimination and prejudices that were present in 1776 and have carried into 2009.

Declaration of Independence-- Kyle Lachmnd

In the Declaration of Independence we see a strong, meticulous argument justifying the use of violent force when citizens have been denied their natural rights. At the convening of the Second Continental Congress there were profound disagreements among the various representatives about whether Britain’s actions towards the colonies, however distasteful, justified complete political separation. To gain the unanimous support necessary to declare war on Britain, Jefferson needed to produce a document that would communicate to the world that the American War of Independence was strongly based on principles of liberty.
Jefferson powerfully lists the grievances of the colonists, specifically pointing out the violations of their inalienable rights. Many of the rights later listed in the bill of rights—prohibiting the forced quartering of soldiers, due process, trial by jury, and rights of local governance—appear in Jefferson’s grievances. Jefferson’s fear of tyranny and belief in limited government, ideas that would later strongly influence his Presidency, also show up in this manifesto on human liberty. His statement, “when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government,” foreshadows the later battles he would fight with the Federal Government of the United States.
Most importantly, the Declaration of Independence is a testimony to the influence of Enlightenment thinkers like Locke and Rousseau on the Founding Fathers. The individualist idea of a Creator endowing natural rights to each individual established the foundation of American political thought and history.
Kyle Lachmund

Declaration of Independence

The Declaration of Independence by Thomas Jefferson portrays a very positive message for the United States. I do not agree however, with the entire passage because I believe it inaccurately addresses some individuals. When Jefferson says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…” it makes me reflect upon what I see in society today. Currently in the United States, a man makes more money then a woman in any job and because of this I disagree with this quote. Whenever discrimination occurs, whether it is the color of your skin, or in this case gender, it shows that everyone is not equal. In a county where people preach, and write about equality, I wonder what these people see in their everyday lives. For me, going to the University of Oregon you see how much inequality there is because of the cost of school. If a family is not fortunate to make enough money, they are discriminated from attending the University. Going back to what Jefferson says, I believe there is a huge difference between believing something (that everyone is equal) and actually seeing the reality of it (like wages of a women versus a man).

-Chelsea Schoenberg

The Declaration of Indepenence

By Allison Sheedy

The Declaration of Independence was a great way of cutting off ties with Britain. It didn’t involve violence (at least not to my knowledge) and is a great example of ‘reason’ versus threat of violence, etc. You know, what we talked about in class on Tuesday. I found it to be successful in communicating the intended message but not intimidating. It was written well and obviously crafted through a lot of hard work because of how inclusive and specific it is. The way it defines all of the conditions, terms, and issues appear to have been carefully picked out and not just added as afterthoughts.

It was a little repetitive, I admit, but I liked the style. While it appeared overwhelming and wordy, it was kind of humorous. The listing of all the wrongs the King of Britain had committed against them almost sounded like a little brother pointing out his older sister’s faults. I don’t mean this in a bad way, just that the emphasis by using the same repetitive style was definitely interesting while important. It catches your eye and brings attention to what it says.

I think the Thomas Jefferson did an excellent job on the Declaration of Independence. While he did not provide examples in his listing of the wrongs that the King of Britain did (which would have made it a lot stronger but perhaps might have deviated from the message), it did effectively get us to be independent from Britain which was the intended goal.

Joe Najdek RR3

The Declaration of Independence is a powerful document that is one of the reasons why we live in a free country. The most important line in the entire passage is the one that bothers me the most. “…all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.” The word certain tells me that the government will always be able to render which rights will be given to the people of this country. Why aren’t all rights given to citizens? I also don’t believe that all men, and women, are created equal. Who is to say if a baby has abusive parents or is born with a defect? I could sit here and write about how this document declared our independence but we all already know that. Jefferson lists the many wrong-doings of the King of Britain to make a generalization and I think that simplistic writing could be effective in today’s society. If someone in 2003 had listed all the negative results of George W. Bush being elected, maybe he wouldn’t have won in 2004. Finally the thing that interests me the most is that delegates from South Carolina and Georgia got Jefferson’s anti-slavery comments taken off his own document. It is interesting to think about if slavery would’ve changed if it were mentioned in the declaration.

- Joe Najdek

Supreme Court evaluates a case involving race, testing and job promotions

Here's a link to a timely story on the social rules of race.

NPR News Story: Supreme Court Hears Firefighter Promotion Case

-Josh G.

Maya's RR

Marge Piercy’s “A Work of Artifice” is a beautiful piece of writing, but I think it’s relevancy in our society is fading away. Women still have struggles against stereotypes and receiving certain rights, as do men, but it is not nearly at the same magnitude for women as it was just a few decades ago. From Piercy’s perspective I can understand why she wrote this poem. She grew up in a time when women were greatly more restricted to a certain mold and she must have had many experiences of discrimination. Although, I feel like I don’t really see the potency of her poem. It is of course written very well and uses metaphors seamlessly, but because of the much more liberated time I live in, I feel almost not justified in relating to it. It is a rarity for me to feel truly “pruned” or confined to a “pot”. Truthfully, most of the time, I notice oppression against me as woman only when it’s pointed out. There are still many steps that have to be taken for women in society, but the strides that have been made for the gender since the time Marge Piercy grew up in, is vast.

Response to "A Work of Artifice."

In the poem, “A Work of Artifice” by Marge Piercy, metaphors are used beautifully to demonstrate how women are held back by society. In this piece a bonsai tree represents women. The poem begins by saying a bonsai tree has the potential to grow 80 feet high on a mountainside, but instead lives a simple life in a pot. The gardener prunes it regularly so it maintains its tiny form, and all the while it is celebrated for its “cozy” and “domestic” appearance. When the poem comes to a conclusion it is clear that Marge Piercy feels that society is stifling towards women. The pot in this poem is the protective shell around many women that pigeon hole them into certain behaviors and ways of life. The gardener in this piece is a perfect metaphor for the constraints society puts on women. Women are “pruned” and pushed in stereotypical directions with the final destination being a secretary when they are capable of doing so much more. This poem has made me realize how effective metaphors can be in writing. They provide a simple and entertaining way to get across an argument that would otherwise be dull.

By Daniel Sapiro

Leigh RR2

After considering the possible relationships that could have been interpreted in “A Work Of Artifice,” I noticed many connections and interesting details that touched on the patriarchal attitude about female identity. The most obvious comparison is of the woman to the bonsai tree. Piercy mentions the trees potential to grow freer and stronger, but acknowledges the limitations that are put on her growth by the “gardener,” which appears to be the male’s influence. When Piercy says the lines: “…domestic and weak; how lucky, little tree, to have a pot to grow in…” I sense a bit of sarcasm. I think Piercy is touching on the idea that women are supposed to feel grateful and fulfilled to be under the “safety” of a man. The pot, in this example, could be seen as a mold that many women feel they must fit into in order to carry out her role. At the same time, this pot represents the plants inability to expand past a certain point, despite her efforts to grow further. When Piercy says that living creatures must begin to “dwarth their growth” at a very young age, she seems to be hinting that females begin to feel pressure to start fitting gender expectations early in life; that the standards created by men are in stilled in a girl’s mindset before she is old enough to think for herself.

A Work of Artifice

A Work of Artifice really opens my eyes to the metaphors in poems. It is quite easy to see how in the poem the Bonsai tree and women are the same. I feel it is saying that women are supposed to grow, but men are holding them back by "whittling back the branches." He thinks it is lucky to be taken care of but in reality, it can take care of itself. The same as women, the Bonsai would be able to take care of itself. I believe it is also saying that from a very early age women are taught to be perfect to men. The last few lines state "one must begin very early to dwarf their growth:..." Clearly saying how from the beginning one must learn how to act like a lady, or acting and being beautiful like one is the only way a man will love you. I enjoyed this poem because the point is very clear and it is easy for anyone to understand. I believe women need to break out of the pot and start to grow on the side of the mountain. Break the mold and be able to take care of your self personally. All of the metaphors in this poem are almost hard to hear. How women have to be watered by other people aka men. The message here is clear, women need to grow, and not let men keep them down.
Karly Lundy

Han Cao RR2

In the poem "A Work of Artifice",Marge Piercy describes the growing procedure of a bonsai tree. After it is damaged by lightning, a gardener takes care of it and helps it grow up. I think this poem talks about all the human beings in the world, not just women. The bonsai tree could be children, the gardener represents parents. All the children are influenced a lot through parents. The very basic attitude about society comes from families. Therefore, parents help modify their children indirectly so that kids can grow in a nice environment. Moreover, the tree could be males, and their wives are gardeners. There always be a woman behind a successful man. A deluxe breakfast, a warm hug, gives more energy for husbands to succeed. Thus, husbands are the bonsai trees that hardly grow without wives' endorsement. Of course, the bonsai tree is an analogy for different groups of people. Living in this society, you can only succeed with others' ideas and indorsement. Being a healthy tree is a goal for everyone.

Bonsai Trees Aren't One Gender

~by Allison Sheedy

While reading “A Work of Artifice” it is easy to see the parallel between the bonsai and a woman. The obvious interpretation is of how sexism has oppressed women. While this is one reading of the poem, it is not the only possible one. It could also be read as an individual being pruned and shaped by the government as well. I would certainly not argue that this interpretation is more prominent but I think it is more interesting. I have to confess; reading it through a gender lens was kind of boring due to the topic having been done so many times. I suppose I have become desensitized to these kinds of things.

Anyways, I found the poem to be a little more interesting by expanding the identity to that of simply a human instead of just a woman, though I suppose it could be read through a pet’s view as well. Discrimination doesn’t occur just between the sexes, it happens to everyone. Marge Piercy wrote this poem to be about female oppression but it’s just not very provoking that way. Perhaps it’s because the information isn’t anything new or because the poem itself isn’t aggressive. “A Work of Artifice” is not a poorly written poem or lacking in literary devices, it’s just not very original. Please try looking at it through a different lens and tell me if you think it made the work a little more impressive or if it didn’t change anything for you.

RR2 Brian S.

I liked most of what Langston Hughes had to say in his piece titled “Theme for English B”. He starts off for the most part rambling, but he says straight up in the beginning that he is “colored”. It is clear that race is on his mind so right away I got the feeling that he was going to start talking about how discriminated against he is, but he does not say much about this. Instead Hughes talks about how he and his white instructor are one because they are both Americans. I like that he says this because that is what I believe America to be as well. America is not a country composed of millions of people all cast of the same mold, but of individuals of all shapes, sizes, and colors. He goes on to say that often times he does not want to be a part of his instructor, but he is anyways. Racism comes through diversity, but has diversity not enriched America? It has. Racism is an unavoidable side effect of diversity, but this does not make diversity a bad thing. America is a melting pot of culture and from this comes the essence and strength of our nation.

-Brian S.

A Work of Artifice

Marge Piercy’s “A Work of Artifice” is a beautiful poem that captures the frustration that women feel about their scripted role as a domestic figure rather than a free spirit on equal footing with their peers. However, I think the true strength behind this piece is the vagueness of it. Every minority has different barriers to overcome and rights to win but this short piece captures the same feeling of oppression that they all feel.

With that being said, I don’t think this poem is very effective on people that are not already fighting for or at least supporting women’s rights. It is artistic and lovely to those of us that agree with its message but if this had been an attempt to persuade a person over, it certainly would not have worked on me. It feels like this piece was written with a tone better suited for the people that suffer from sexism than for the people that support it, regardless of its attempts to provoke a response from the ‘gardeners’ it mentions.

The problem with this poem is the fact that it feels much easier to relate to, regardless of whichever minority group you belong to. It attempts to attack sexism in our society by pointing out examples of women conforming to meet male standards such as the feet binding in China and the hair curlers but still carries an overall tone of suffering and the injustice of it all rather than the logic behind why it’s wrong and how to stop it. “A Work of Artifice” is a work of art, worthy of the praise it gets, but not provocative enough to spark any real reaction.

Carolyn Sheedy

Courtney Puckett RR2

The poem Theme for English B written by Langston Hughes, states that we are all related as brothers and sisters, no matter the color of our skin. Unfortunately society has built up stereotypes of different ethnicity's, which have developed into racism. Although this poem was written in 1902, this problem is still occurring today. The poem reflects that being American is a privilege; we are part of the “land of the free”, regardless of your ethnicity. The traditional “white” minority of America must accept other ethnicity's, no matter their skin color. This is because when it comes down to our genetic DNA makeup, there is no evidence that a specific gene distinguishes you from another. I just watched a video in my Ethnic Studies 101 class, a group of students in a classroom went through many tests in their school science lab. They hoped to find what component in DNA “makes” up ethnicity. The results from the tests showed that the African American student originally thought that her genetic makeup would be closer to that of a male African American student. But her genetic makeup was closer to a Caucasian female student in her class. I believe that racism is still occurring, no matter the time period, this is because the dominate race feels threatened by the inferior race.

Mary Saunders Response 2

Mary Saunders
April 19, 2009

“A work of Artifice” by Marge Piercy uses the symbol of a bonsai tree to represent women’s rights. Throughout the poem, the tree is described as being small and helpless. The tree has the potential to grow to be eighty feet tall, but instead it is carefully pruned by a gardner that only lets the tree grow to nine inches high. This careful pruning of the tree is a representation of men holding women back and not allowing them to reach their full potential in their lives. The poem describes the gardener crooning to the tree, “It is your nature to be small and weak; how lucky, little tree, to have a pot to grow in.” Many men throughout history and even in the world today have this same attitude towards women that the gardener has towards the tree. They say that the women are lucky to be safe, protected and cared for by men when in fact all women really want is to be treated equally.

Alexander's RR2

Theme for English B, one of Mister Langston Hughes’ many contributions to the category of poems that I frequently refer to as “What the hell just happened?”, is less dense than most thing existing in that prior domain. I can understand the first layer of meaning easily. It discusses Hughes’ life as a colored student, and reflects on the differences between his views, and those of his peers. But I had a thought, as I read. I thought, that perhaps Mr. Hughes wasn’t actually talking about racism, and that he simply left some ambiguity in the poem as a subtle jibe for the folks who saw past it. I think, perhaps, Hughes is reflecting on perception and reality. His lines, 27 to 40, discuss the interactions of his words with the reader, and I’m forced to wonder if race is brought up only to set the stage for Hughes’ perceptions- his writing will mean something different for him than it will for his readers because he is black, and has lived a different life then those surrounding him. He and his teacher, through this paper, are a part of each other, ‘struth, because they each interact with the other’s perceptions through this poem. Yet, it ends with a claim the teacher is white, and more free. Is he white (a fact) and free (an unrelated fact), or free because of his whiteness? I think, if I am wrong, I would rather not know. But, I do think too much.

Jasper RR2

“Theme for English B” by Langston Hughes is a poem that overall summarizes the discrimination, differences and similarities between African-Americans and white Americans in a mostly white upper-class school. Hughes talks about him living in poverty within Harlem, while attending this upper class, wealthier school. His teacher tells him to go home and write a paper about himself. The instructor says “Go home and write a page tonight. And let that page come out of you- Then, it will be true”. Hughes went back to his living area, which is located above a Harlem YMCA, and writes his paper. He writes how “Sometimes perhaps you don’t want to be a part of me. Nor do I often want to be a part of you”. This is pointing out the differences between him and the professor. He gives us an idea of what his place is in society, being black in a primarily white area. Ending his poem with summing up that he is a human being and has most everything in common with, and is the same as, a white American.

John Taylor rr2

In “theme for English B", Hughes talks about how different his school is compared to where he is originally from, which is Harlem. The environment of his college is of a white upper-class culture which is dramatically different compared to his poverty-stricken neighborhood of Harlem. The assignment that he has to do is to go home and write a page tonight. And let the page come out of you- then it will be true.” He talks about what he likes to do and what he makes him happy, which includes eating, sleeping, and being in love. The point of the assignment was to show how if someone really took the time to sit down and think about what they like and what they are all about, it turns out that everyone is different in one way or another. For example, with me going to a catholic school my whole life, which included an all boy’s high school where I had to wear a uniform every day, to someone who didn’t go to any form of a private school. I believe Hughes is trying to say how hard it was for him to change from going back and forth from Columbia University to the hard streets of Harlem, and the difference of cultures.

Theme for English B by Langston Hughes

After reading Theme for English B by Langston Hughes, it made me personally reflect on my own life. The author says, “I guess being colored doesn’t make me not like the same things other folks like who are other races (372)” and I feel like throughout my life I have come across instances where I am judged because of who I am. In my middle school I was the minority race (white) in a predominately African American and Hispanic school. I tried out for the basketball team and made it, however everyone around me looked at me because I was white. I felt out of place because it was the first time I had been the minority, however I realized that skill and race did not correspond to one another at all- therefore nobody should judge me because of what I physically looked liked. This example directly relates to what Langston Hughes talked about in his poem, when he talks about being the only black student in his class, and being surrounded my whites. In society, people are quick to stereotype and make judgments on people because of their race. From this poem, I think that the message portrayed is everyone has their own story from their race, gender, etc. that identifies them as an individual, and therefore everyone must share their personal story for others to hear.

-Chelsea Schoenberg

GROUP FIRE

Hey group Fire it's Brian. I wasn't in class Thursday because i was out of town, but i was wondering if you guys knew what you wanted to do for the presentation on Tuesday yet. My number is 425-246-5519 and my e-mail is bstewart@uoregon.edu. Give me a call or e-mail me and let me know what you want me to do or if we're still figuring it out.

Thanks,
Brian

Sarah RR2

In the poem, "Theme for English B" by Langston Hughes, the poem is written as a black African American living in Harlem. He has a homework assignment to "go home and write a page tonight, and let that age come out of you-- then, it will be true." I think this is a good assignment to give someone who is 22 (like the narrator). When one is 22 they hopefully have figured out who they are and what their life goals are. Regardless, it's always a good idea to take a step back and assess what makes you, you and realize where you want to go in life, and what you want to become. One can figure out what people in their life matters and makes them happy, and what people in their life aren’t sincere and bring the individual down. When one reflects then they may also realize that they need to rebuild bridges between their family and friends. I think high schools in particular should have retreats. I went to a catholic school and we went on one every year. It is a good experience for everyone to open up to their classmates and reassess who you really are.

Joe Najdek RR2

“A Work of Artifice” by Marge Piercy is an interesting poem that discusses women’s rights as a bonsai tree (women) is being pruned by a gardener (men). It is well known that in the past men have both mentally and physically framed women as second rate. It seems to me that Piercy is saying that men should take all of the blame in limiting women’s freedoms. Men put women down because they grew up seeing it everywhere they went. Women, more specifically before the 70’s, let themselves be controlled for thousands of years. What Piercy fails to realize is that women conformed to be housewives or stay at home moms. Everyone is born the same but society put men higher than women in status. The bonsai tree in the poem could have grown at any pace it desired despite the gardener’s intentions. The author seems pessimistic at best. She delivers no solution or call to action on how to bring equality to females. Finally, a solution is hard to find when our culture reinforces weak self-images in women by painting the perfect woman as super skinny and blonde. Women may look, think, act and live differently than men but they deserve to be treated equally.

Justin Sander's RR2

In the “Theme for English B” by Langston Hughes, the instructor assigned a student to write a page about anything with the belief that whatever comes out will be true. The student wrote about being black in a predominately white school and area in America. It is a poem of insight into one’s personal identity in society. Furthermore, it is a poem of what we learn from each other in society. The instructor stated “Go home and write a page tonight. And left that page come of you—Then, it will be true.” Hughes responded on his first line of the poem saying, “I wonder if it’s that simple?” Is it that simple? It is. Hughes wrote without a clear direction of where his piece was headed. He resulted in a well-crafted poem of insight into himself as a black man in America. Huges said he will be “a part of you, instructor / … /yet a part of me, as I am a part of you. / That’s American.” The meaning of the line is that America is made up of so many different diversities that we all influence the definition of America. We are united as an identity of various unique people from many different places.

-Justin Sander

Social Rules with a Critical Eye

Now that you've cut your teeth on the key concepts and tools of critical reading and writing, do the class reading and also turn your analytic vision on whatever you see 'out there' - keeping SOCIAL RULES in mind as the direction of your approach.

The assigned readings made me think of the ways in which a dominant culture/society can shape a subordinate one...but also made me think of how what is popularly understood to be a subordinate view/position can deliver powerful critique of the dominant culture, or highlight interdependence.

And if that doesn't work for me, I always find that comedy news helps get me thinking.

The Daily Show

-Josh G.

Suggestions for My Em?

Josh,
I am just about to start writing my rough draft and was wondering if you had any suggestions for my enthymeme. Also, is there a certain amount of sources you like to see in a paper?

-Just About to Start

Dear JATS,

First, start with a minimum of one citation. If you use more, that is fine, but make sure that you are using MLA guidelines.

Secondly, what is your QI?

If we deconstruct your Em (phrase the CLAIM as a QI), it is not a good conversational trigger.

"Should the golden rule of expression be that if one does not want to be judged by their cover they should act in a modest fashion?"

You need to start with a 'trigger' QI that can operate at conversational speeds.

Like we did on the board at the end of class yesterday, cut it down until it easily triggers conversational reaction.

That QI will then morph into a functional CLAIM that will then link to a solid REASON with a SHARED TERM to form a viable Em.

After arriving at a successful QI, proceed by:
-determining your stance (do you agree or disagree)
-determining your audience
-reviewing your choices for a shared term
-choosing the one that will provide momentum in the trajectory that you want to explore with the essay
-providing your REASON
-completing the Em
-checking the UNSTATED ASSUMPTION
-sketching/outlining an essay based on the BURDEN OF PROOF (the REASON)
-following the rest of the steps in the writing packet

Best of luck,

-Josh G.

Struggling to Turn My QI into an Em

Hey Josh,

I am struggling to turn my question at issue into an enthymeme that makes sense. My question at issue is How are swear words considered profane and offensive? I am also considering the QI How do swear words set the norm for what is socially acceptable in society? I am not sure which one is better, or if I am phrasing it wrong altogether. Do you have any suggestions how it can be phrased into an enythymeme? Thanks!

-Struggling to Turn My Question

Dear STTMQ,

First, phrase your QI as a 'yes-no' question to make sure that your audience (and you) are able to respond to it in a meaningful way (make sure it is interesting and clear enough to trigger a response).

The second one works better in this respect:
Do swear words set the norm for what is socially acceptable in society?
(though socially acceptable and society create a distracting redundancy)

Also, you may want to see if you have something specific in mind when you write "set the norm."

After you've settled on an effective QI:
-determine your stance (do you agree or disagree)
-determine your audience
-review your choices for a shared term
-choose the one that will provide momentum in the trajectory that you want to explore with the essay
-provide your REASON
-complete the Em
-check the UNSTATED ASSUMPTION
-sketch/outline an essay based on the BURDEN OF PROOF (the REASON)
-follow the rest of the steps in the writing packet

Best of luck,

-Josh G.

Is this question/Em okay?

Josh-

Is this question/em work okay?
QI: Do women have the right to feel like they are oppressed because of their lack of education and ability to work in relation to men?
Em: Women are oppressed because they are not treated equal to that of men.

Thanks in advance,
Is This OK?

Dear ITOK,

First, remember to make it clear in your question that we are discussing something within the realm of "the rules of expression." On first review, your question and Em is not addressing our general discussion.

A way to reconnect would be to re-read "Marked Women" and see what connection you can make between choices of expression and judgment or unequal treatment.

A QI related to that essay may read:
[Ex: Do people judge women's level of education and professional abilities based on their choice of clothing more so than they do for men?]

Secondly, as your Em reads, it is circular. Follow the exercises below to arrive at a viable Em.
[An Em is circular if you can flip the key words in the CLAIM and REASON and the meaning of the sentence is unchanged: Women are not treated equal to [that of] men because they are oppressed.

In any case, to make this more effective in generating thought for you as an author, and for your audience, try phrasing the question at issue in more specific terms. It would me most helpful if you could relay the context of the discussion in your question.

Vague/Unclear: have the right to feel like they are oppressed
Specific/more clear: [example- justified in feeling discriminated against]

Vague/Unclear: lack of education and ability to work
Specific/more clear: [example- ?] Including this (phrased this way) in the question introduces an assumption that an individual is lacks or possesses an education and the ability to work based on their gender/sex. All but the most essentialist individuals would likely disagree that all women lack education and the ability to work. [In short- delete all indefensible assumptions.]

Vague/Unclear: in relation to men
Specific/more clear: [example- compared to men]

Once you have a specific 'yes-no' QI that addresses the 'rules of expression,' you can:

-determine your stance (do you agree or disagree)
-determine your audience
-review your choices for a shared term
-choose the one that will provide momentum in the trajectory that you want to explore with the essay
-provide your REASON
-complete the Em
-check the UNSTATED ASSUMPTION
-sketch/outline an essay based on the BURDEN OF PROOF (the REASON)
-follow the rest of the steps in the writing packet

Good luck,

-Josh G.

Way Too Late

Josh,
I know I am emailing you way too late but here are some ideas I have come up with-

Question at Issue: How do different discourse communities that oppose each other interact? Or In what means do opposing discourse communities interact with one another? Or How do controversial discourse community motto’s affect other similar discourse communities/ the public?

If you don't get back to me in time, which I expect, I am going to go ahead with one of these even though they are not well developed yet.
I am showing these to you just so maybe you have a better way to develop one of these ideas for a better question at issue. And which would help me complete the different aspects of brainstorming.

Thanks, Way Too Late


Dear WTL,

Of the three questions the one that I see as being the most workable starting point is the third:

How do controversial discourse community motto’s affect other similar discourse communities/ the public?

However, this question has gotten about two steps ahead of itself in complicating the terms and phrasing of discussion.

First:
Take a step back and use clear, precise terms in your question. Starting from an readily identifiable point will help the essay/discussion develop. If the question is broached but the terms and referents are unclear, there is no momentum. [As you develop the discussion/essay, more general terms can be used, as it will then be clear exactly what you're talking about.]
So, clarify the terms:

Vague: Controversial discourse community
Specific: [example- the National Socialist party (Nazi)]

Vague: mottos
Specific: [example- (logo/symbol) swastika]

Vague: similar discourse communities
Specific: [example- other political movements]

Vague: the public
Specific: [example- people who may be offended by the expression]

Second:
Try phrasing your initial question at issue as a 'yes/no' question.
This is like the continental divide, determining where you 'stand' as the author, and where your audience stands. This is essential in determining your relationship and approach to the issue and the audience. If nothing else, it is a quick way to find out if anyone even cares enough to have a response to it.

[example 1- Does the use of the swastika by the National Socialist party (Nazis) have any effect upon other political parties and how they utilize symbols?]
[example 2- Does the use of the swastika by the National Socialist party (Nazis) have any effect upon people who would otherwise take no notice of that political party.]

The second example is a stretch and may simply confuse an audience, however, the first may be thought-provoking.

After you have determined that it is viable, find out where you 'stand' and then proceed with the Em-production process.

-Josh G.

Was Wondering About the Topic

Dear Josh,
I was wondering about the topic that I have chosen to write on.
My topic is symbols and my QI statement is: How are discourse community symbols viewed in different contexts around the world.
I'm not sure about how to answer the other questions though because I'm not really taking a solid stance on an issue. I'm mainly talking about how symbols like the Nazi swastika is looked upon as bad in our society but in Buddhism it's a sign for peace.
Let me know what you think and any advice you can give me would be greatly appreciated.

-Was Wondering About the Topic


Dear WWATT,

First, you have a good starting point because it is something that people will want to talk about and it relates to the rules of expression.

However, to develop the idea into a written essay, follow the small steps carefully to avoid confusion, conflation, and ultimately, frustration.

It sounds like your QUESTION AT ISSUE (a question of interpretation) is something like:

Can the same symbol represent violence and hate in one context but represent peace in another context?

From your email, your answer is clearly 'yes.'

To continue developing the idea, phrase your QI as an analytical question (using 5WH):

How can the same symbol represent violence and hate in one context but represent peace in another context?

Answer this to get your REASON. In doing this, use a link (shared term) between this question (which is simply your assertion phrased as a question) and your answer. As phrased above, the strongest options for linking are:

(same) symbol
representation
context

Additional options:
violence and hate
peace

Once you have an answer, combine your CLAIM and REASON to form an Em.

-Josh G.

Very Confused on This Topic

Josh,
I am very confused on this topic. I wrote my QI & Em on the video from our blog. Is this okay? Or did I need to make up my own interest?
-Very Confused

Dear Very Confused,
It sounds like you are going in the right direction, because you are responding to something that is related to our discussion, though without knowing what video you're referring to, it's hard to tell where you may be taking it.

The key point here is that (within the context of 'rules of expression') you don't have to 'make up' your own interests, you just have to identify and articulate those interests that you already have.

-Josh G

Trying To Figure Out a Good Topic

Dear Josh,
I'm trying to figure out a good topic to write about and I need help figuring it out. Maybe you have a suggestion?

-Trying to Figure Out


Dear TTFO,
The general topic is 'rules of expression.' To find a starting point, do the assigned reading and make a note of something that sparks your interest.

Once you have that, I can coach you in methods to develop it into a viable idea fit for sharing with our discourse community.

However, nobody can just give you a 'good topic.' You have to start with what interests you about something in the assigned readings, then analyze it in the context of 'Who? What? When? Where? Why? How? (5WH).

-Josh G.

Still Drawing a Blank

Hey Josh,
I am still drawing a blank about what to write about. I am leaning towards talking about how media, leaders and governments manipulate public opinion at times of war to get people to support and further their cause.

Any help?

-Still Drawing a Blank

Dear SDAB,

You have actually already gotten past the blank, because you've articulated an interesting idea regarding the rules of control. Now you just have to recognize what you've accomplished, and how to develop it further. If you look at what you've written, you're asking a QI (a question of fact: 'Does it exist?") that would read something like:

"Do media, leaders, and governments manipulate public opinion during times of war?"
[Note that your / a QI is simply your / a CLAIM / ASSERTION phrased as a question.]

It is clear from your statement that you think 'yes,' they do.

Now look at the dependent clause in your email about your topic. Here you've already given a REASON ("to get people to support and further their cause").

To clarify this reason more, phrase your QI as an analytical question (using 5WH):

"Why do media, leaders, and governments manipulate public opinion during times of war?"

Phrase your answer using a link (shared term) from the question. Your choice of shared term will determine the trajectory of the essay. Your choices (as phrased above) are:

media, leaders, and governments
manipulation
public opinion
(times of) war

Once you have an answer, combine the CLAIM and REASON to form an Em.

This is what you will bring to class today, essay due Thursday.

-Josh G

Confused by the Syllabus

Dear Josh,

I was confused by the syllabus. Do we write the 3-4 page draft for Tuesday or is that due Thursday?

-CBTS

Dear CBTS,

The Question at Issue and Enthymeme is due Tuesday. The essay is due Thursday.

-Josh G.

Poison, Protest, and Prosecution

In our discussion, think about local, tangible examples that can help you express your ideas.

Here's an Oregon example that you may be familiar with:
Ian Van Ornum tasered by Eugene Police while protesting against poison spraying (May, 2008)
Police use Taser on protester
http://www.kval.com/news/local/19411459.html
Big issues lie behind stun gun court case
http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms/sites/web/news/cityregion/11095211-57/story.csp

-Josh G

john taylor

"Weasels words" shows how our society is constantly decieved and mislead by so many companies. Especially with words such as "never", "always", and "everytime". Each of those words can mislead someone into buying such products. The "weasel words" are often contagious when it comes to their use. For example if a comapany decides to use the words like "my face wash always helps to clear up acne" the other rival companies therefore will then use that same terminology for their future products. After reading the passage I realized that so many of my own products that I have now have weasel words laid out all over the place. Now I realize how much I was decieved into buying such products.

But in end I can't be mad at the fact that the certain companies used decieving words. Because in the end its their job to sell products. And that means by any means necessary. Obviously if the product does the complete oppostite of what they are advertising they fight against, I would be mad. But in the end alot of the products pretty much do the same thing as their competitors.

Scott RR1

Fortunately, Orwell got it wrong. Today, technology is the back-bone of our society. Most people find themselves unable to live without their laptops, cell phones, televisions, etc. The ability to communicate and investigate has undergone a makeover in the last twenty to thirty years. The internet has proven to be a catalyst to smaller businesses itching to grow. Many people are able to transmit valuable and important documents at the speed of light rather than waiting days and weeks for something to come in the mail. The power of information proves vital to the people of the free world and the people under totalitarian or communism rule. I strongly agree with Kinsley's point that Governments that strive to control the press are increasingly unable to do so. If the ruler or government wants to grow economically it has no choice but to allow full internet access. Full internet access.... This proves to be a major problem today for families that own computers. Children are able to obtain pornographic and sexually explicit material at the click of a button. This is a truly unfortunate situation. How can the government limit Internet access without taking away certain freedoms? This is a tough question that many are trying to figure out.

Kyle Lachmund Response: Orwell Got it Wrong

Though I fundamentally agree with Michael Kinsley’s article “Orwell Got it Wrong,” I also feel that it oversimplifies and mischaracterizes Orwell’s argument in 1984. I do not believe Orwell was contending that new electronic technology such as computers would provide the state with a unique totalitarian tool. Orwell was rather making a statement about how, in the scope of human history, autocratic governments utilize technology to influence and control their citizens. The printing press, radio, and, more recently, the Internet have all been used by various governments to perpetuate complacency and order. By setting his novel in a futuristic context, Orwell effectively illustrates how people who are in positions of power will utilize technology as a means to restrict individual liberty. This does not mean that Orwell believed that technological advancement inherently limited individual freedom, but rather that the State can and often does use technology as a means of control. If Orwell could have seen the development of the Internet, along with components such as Wikipedia and Google which epitomize the Democratization of information, I do not believe he would condemn them as agents of totalitarian oppression. Rather, he would recognize their significance in the advancement of individual liberty, while also pointing out that such technologies can (and have been) used as means to control the people.

Weasel Words

I found Lutz’s “Weasel Words” to be very thought provoking and interesting. It was interesting to see just how many ways our media tries to manipulate us into buying certain products. I had previously noticed claims in advertisements that seem to mislead consumers, yet I had no idea that there were so many different terms that contribute to deceiving the public. After reading “Weasel Words” I immediately began thinking about the immense amount of ads that contain these words and phrases. Then I thought about all of the times when I have fell victim to such illusions while purchasing products, it’s so easy to miss these common words that devalue many products. I’m sure that from now on I will notice when companies use weasel words to sell more, which will most likely result in saving a lot of money and time.
It almost sickens me to see how sneaky the media and companies can be. They give us the illusion that they want to help us by creating helpful products, yet their sole intention is to fool us so that they can make more money. Furthermore, what is the most upsetting is that millions of people buy into it. You would think that after purchasing “new and improved” merchandise and realizing it’s no better than the previous product, that we would stop believing phrases like this. Unfortunately this is not the case, companies continue to find other methods of manipulation, and the public continues to fall into their traps.

Accountability in Advertisement

William Lutz’s “Weasel Words” brought up points that I was not surprised to read, but regardless were very interesting and provoked further thoughts related to advertisement from me. I think a very relevant debate in our society today, is should the advertisers or consumers be held accountable for product purchases. It is true that all human beings have free will and hopefully common sense to not buy certain products, but should the average person be able to identify when a product is misleading them? Not only has advertisement sneakily integrated deceiving language to sell their items, but also created commercialism that often can have a subconsciously profound emotional effect on potential consumers. We can see enterprises like McDonalds’s playing into warm nostalgic childhood memories and Apple seemingly displaying a promised cool image with its product purchase. Is it too drastic to say that consumers cannot avoid spending millions of dollars on these companies because the appeal is just too strong? I think this statement is a little extreme, but I believe that a person that is not educated on the usage of deceptive language, images and ideas in advertising is very susceptible to buying products and having unfulfilled expectations. It would be unrealistic to say we can rectify the deception in the advertising world, but we can realistically implement more education on the subject so that people can be more informed on their purchases.

-Maya Barnes

Weasels..

Reading Weasel Words opened my mind quite a bit. I have always noticed in the past while reading, listening or watching advertisements that they can be very misleading and vague. After William Lutz well defined and presented many different ideas and examples of weasel words made me question the authenticity or value of all the items in my entire dorm room. I agree with Lutz when he enlightens on the area of false advertisement. When encounter an ad that is trying to overwhelmingly convince you, it always puts questions in my mind. I view most ads as false advertisement, although in fact they are very much telling the truth. They are lying to your face about the factual meaning of the utilities or subject matter, while telling the complete truth by using these weasel words. One example I found was in my closet. I took out a bottle of Motrin, it is a kind of pain reliever. There is the first weasel word. It says “Pain Reliever/Fever reducer”, there is no way the public could know how much pain it will “relieve” or how much of the fever it will “reduce”. Also right on the top of the bottle it says” Value Size!”. Which makes us question how much “Value” is added for your money. I find myself losing confidence in products everyday because of these vague descriptions. William Lutz helped me now have a more independent thought process when it comes to buying in to an ad.

Jasper Newton

Sooooo Misguided

Justin Goode

In the reading Orwell Got it Wrong Mr. Kinsley took a very biased one-sided view of the development of technology. He states that it has “expanded human freedom” by making world news and information readily available world wide. I say though that having this power has forever enslaved the human race. How many people do you know that check their facebook or myspace or everyday? How many people do you know that own and use cell phones either to call or text message everyday and when they don’t have it their lives are put on halt. The constant bombardment of advertising also doesn’t allow for freedom because the consumer is always persuaded to buy product or the other. The war on terror has proven that the use of technology makes it very easy for the government to track and find you. The terrorists have discontinued use of a lot of technology using letters and sending tapes to each other. Their lack of technology has made them disappear from the face of the planet and therefore more free than anyone in the modern world.

Karly RR1

Orwell got it wrong really helped open my eyes to the thoughts of others in the 80's. People of the government believed television would ultimately lead to the complete control of society. In turn, what they didn't expect happened. Kinsley makes very valid points after he claims modern communication has expanded human freedom. Every point made in this writing is a good one always backing himself up. I agree one hundred percent that Orwell really did get it wrong in that society would never get the technology we get today. Technology surrounds us daily, and I truly don't know where we would be without it, and I'm sure Orwell would be very surprised to see where we are today.
The style of writing really catches my eye because not only does Kinsley prove Orwell wrong, he does it with poise, each point almost makes Orwell look like an idiot. I also agree with the fact that the democracy of information can be a tough trade off. There is an extreme, over the top amount of inappropriate information on the web, and that really takes a toll on some people. But, the pros definitely cons, and explicit material is something that will never go away. All in all this was a very interesting reading that helped solidify my outlook on technology.

Sarah's RR1

William Lutz’s “Weasel Words” opened my eyes to how marketers play on words. Marketers never lie in their advertisements, they just use words with a broad meaning that people want to see such as “helps, low fat, new, eliminates, etc”. It makes me realize that everyone just wants to make money and the products people sell don’t always fulfill the wonders they claim. An example is Febreze. Their slogan is “Febreze is like a breath of fresh air any time because it actually sweeps away those stale and stifling odors and leaves a fresh scent.” When in reality it leaves a fresh scent that overpowers the polluted smell. The slogan doesn’t lie, it just doesn’t tell the full truth.
In my experience I have typically had a good result from my products. Nyquil is a lifesaver for me. Whenever I feel sick and need to get a good night’s sleep it does work and I do get rid of my illness after taking it for a few days. EmergenC on the other hand doesn’t work at all for me, and I find that I get sicker the day after I drink it. I belive that if more people read this article then people would give what they are buying a second thought.

Lee Prindle

Kinsley makes a few good points, but some of his arguments can be easily flipped against him.

First of all, technology has done an incredible job of connecting the world and making it possible to share information and ideas with virtually anyone, anywhere.
However, the idea that technology has made it difficult and perhaps impossible to have tolitarian control over their population is a bold claim. Take a look at North Korea - the government has complete control over all aspects of life, and they have used technology to strengthen their grasp, filling television stations with proganda against western culture and 'imperialism'.

My point is that technology can only be what a particular government allows it to be. For American's, the internet is a great tool to spread ideas and knowledge, because we are allowed to spread those ideas and knowledge. In countries where free speech is not a cornerstone of their foundation, information on the internet can be strictly monitored and even mandated.

Kinsley is right in the sense that we are not living in a totalitarian world dominated by all powerful and ever present technology. But, there are some important ideas that he conveniently overlooks.

Kinsley Got It Wrong

By Allison Sheedy

The first thing that caught my attention while reading ‘Orwell Got It Wrong’ was that the author works at a computer company. Of course a person who relies on technology to work every day would have the viewpoint that it’s helpful and wonderful. Putting this bias aside, I continued reading to see what more the author had to say about technology in our culture and was amused at the examples he chose to back up his argument. After stating how journalists have kept their right to free speech on the web it was less than inspiring. The problem in the novel was how technology affected everyone, not just the writers and politicians.

It’s interesting that Kinsley failed to mention the other technological devices in Orwell’s book, such as cameras and microphones. These devices are capable of monitoring humans more so than online magazines and fax machines. I guess I just don’t think that Kinsley focused on the more problematic machines to prove his point well. Also, the counter argument about pornography being the growing trouble with the internet was ridiculously silly. Identity theft and computer security is more dangerous to the public than smutty pictures on the web. I believe that technology has not followed the dark path Orwell described in 1984 but definitely not because of this article.

Mary Saunders
April 1, 2009
Writing 121

Michael Kinsley’s “Weasel Words,” examines a topic that every American is very familiar with, the false claims and gimmicks made by advertisers so prevalent in today’s consumer world. In the article, Kinsley analyzes the different strategies that advertisers use to try to market their product to the consumer as expertly as possible. Advertisers have mastered the art of false promises and gimmicks in order to lure in as many customers as they can. This article outlines the many ways that advertisers are able to persuade the consumer, such as “weasel words,” which are words that appear to be making a claim for a product when in fact they are making no claim at all.
I could identify with this article because I often notice the doublespeak and empty promises found in advertisements I see on TV, the internet, magazines, and billboards. I especially noticed the use of the word “help,” which advertisements use to try and convince the consumer that the product will somehow end or cure their problem, when in fact the word “help” simply means to aid or assist. Therefore, the advertisement seems to make some sort of claim that it will work when in fact it is simply an empty promise.

Subway- Eat Fresh

After reading Weasel Words by William Lutz, it really made me reflect and think about all the advertisements I have seen in my life that have misled me because of weasel words. I agree with what the author was saying about how weasel words cause confusion or false advertisement to an individual, and I believe that this confusion is intended for individuals to buy products. A perfect example that I think relates to how weasel words mislead individuals, is the advertisement that Subway had a few years ago, that talked about a diet that a man named Jared had. The diet said that Jared, “only ate subway sandwiches” and lost over 200 pounds. The weasel word, ‘only’ is misleading, because Jared also drank diet soda, ate chips, ate only certain sandwiches that were considered healthy (vegetarian, not tuna) and exercised. Consumers then went to Subway to buy sandwiches to follow the diet that Jared had, because they thought they too could loose a lot of weight. This is an example, like Lutz said in his article, about how advertisements use weasel words to mislead consumers into what they think a product sells. I think that in order for advertisers to continue to sell there products, they need to use these types of weasel words which is unfortunate because it creates false accusations surrounding the products.

-Chelsea Schoenberg

Response to Kinsley by Daniel Sapiro

I agree with Kinsley’s claim that technology has “expanded human freedom”, but this statement does not apply to every human being. The examples given by Kinsley in his short essay are all valid, and there is no doubt that technology has opened many doors while breaking down old walls. It has connected the entire globe, but if we step back from the global perspective and view technology through a smaller lens, we see that it can sometimes be oppressive rather than liberating. The smaller lens that I am talking about focuses in on the youth of the world. Kinsley gives a brief acknowledgment to the negative impacts of the Internet on children, but his argument is brief, and I believe there are much larger consequences for children who are over exposed to technology. It seems that the Internet, video games, and the other various screens that demand a child’s attention, have now become the main hobbies for many youths. Don’t get me wrong, it is important for kids to learn how to utilize technology, it is impossible to get through life without it. But when xbox and the Internet dominate a child’s development, it seems that technology can truly be oppressive. In my opinion, a child’s exposure to the surrounding world is just as important as learning how to use a computer. Both technology and the outdoors should be cornerstones to a child’s development, not one or the other. Technology has “expanded human freedom”, but the “trade-offs” for the youths of the world are larger than Kinsley alludes to. 

Weasel Words

"And, after all, what is a lie? 'Tis but the truth in masquerade." -Lord Byron

In just about every English class I’ve ever taken, the issue of advertising has always come up because of the amount of dishonesty behind it. ‘Weasel Words’ by William Lutz is another essay repeating this point to me, warning others about the tricks the industry uses to trick us into investing in their products. Whenever I run into one of these essays I always end up thinking the same thing. ‘Why is this such a big deal?’ To me, it doesn’t appear that the advertisers aren’t doing anything that I don’t do myself.

Every day, we all manipulate words in a similar manner to what these advertisers are doing. We shape sentences and choose certain words or details to convey a message to another person. I don’t think misinforming the public about products is justifiable or good advertising. However, if advertisers are out of line for exaggerating facts or twisting the truth, poets and lyricists must be as well. It seems childish to single out advertisers and politicians for knowing how to manipulate our language while ignoring the fact that almost every work of art or every conversation we have uses the same tactics.

With all this said, I believe purposefully misleading customers to buy a product is wrong. But I also think that dramatizing an idea or telling a story in a way to make it appeal is a part of our nature. It might be dishonest to lie but it might also be unintentional.

-Carolyn Sheedy

Han Cao RR1

The expansion of technology enriches our lives indeed. As what Michael Kinsley describes in "Orwell Got It Wrong",we cannot say that a world without technology will be more democracy. The promotion of Internet provides a broad stage for people to propagate all kinds of remarks,which means thanks to the Internet, individuals 'freedom no longer confined to surroundings, people in the world could share their ideas overnight. For instance, the establishment of Face book is a success. People can contact whoever they want, write about their each day life, post pictures and videos they like. From a political point of view, the Internet makes people enjoy the freedom of political liberty. Decades ago, when government made a decision, individuals never got a chance to discuss about it but accept it. With the Internet, things become easier. Citizens share their suggestions on line and discuss to each other freely, no matter which class they are from. I am a lucky girl living in 21st century, with various advanced technology. I search things I want on line even do not need to leave my apartment. Although I do not go out a lot, I still feel free. Therefore, I agree with Michael Kinsley's opinion.

Weasel Words

Weasel words are used all throughout advertisements; this technique is used to trick consumers into believing that the advertisement can solve something, such as cold medicine will “relieve all your cold like symptoms”. I agree with William Lutz that weasel words are greatly used in advertisements, but I don’t believe that it is a negative thing to do. When consumers see the commercial for the cold medicine, they “believe” that the medicine will really work, this is exactly what advertisers want to happen, they are selling a product. An example I thought of while reading is the Febreze commercial. The advertisement states that a “dual action mist” was added to the bottle of Febreze and now it can “find and eliminate odors”. In the advertisement it never says what odors it will eliminate or how this newly added “dual action mist” improves the quality of the odor elimination. Consumers recognize that Febreze is now killing more odors, so they go out and buy it. I don’t believe that there is a way for anyone to monitor weasel words in advertisements because it has become so popular in advertising agencies. These words pull in the consumer and force them to buy the product. This is not a pessimistic way to market a product but a rather smart tactic.

-Courtney Puckett

In response to "Weasel Words"

The last time I viewed the word ‘help’ with such distaste, it was in response to some ditzy airhead asking me to ‘help’ write her paper. But I got over that one quickly. I don’t have to see the essay in question every time I turn on the TV, or listen to it every time I turn on the radio. I am not bombarded with that particular lie every time I attempt to access some media or other.

Except, apparently, I am.

I suppose what irritates me about the entire thing is the specific manipulation of people and laws. Advertisements specifically designed to imply a message, rather than outright say it, still have a message they impart. In the literary world, it’s referred to as subtext, and people write essays about how it changes the meaning of plays. It seems that in the Advertising world, it’s referred to as fraudulent claims, and lawsuits are written over whether or not claims are explicitly stated. Now, I recognize that laws written around what a given piece of media made you ‘feel’ would be hard to enforce, but the current system seems geared towards encouraging the mentality that flat-out lying is a no-no, but truth from a certain view is perfectly fine. On consideration, if it worked for Obi-Wan Kenobi, I suppose I shouldn’t be too surprised it’s worked for everyone else.

Kinsley Counter Argument

I see where Michael Kinsley is coming from and agree with a large portion of what he says. Kinsley makes it clear from the start that he is biased (he works at Microsoft) and believes technology is a good thing because it has “expanded human freedom”. His main focus is the internet. Building on this it is Kinsley’s belief that censorship of the internet in unconstitutional. He attempts to address a counter argument but does a poor job of disqualifying it. The example that Michael gives for the counter-argument (pro-censorship) is children being exposed to pornography. I believe that it is easy to look at this and say “So what? A kid saw a naked woman and got a little freaked out”, but what about more serious issues? There is a much stronger counter argument that Kinsley is afraid to acknowledge.
The internet gives sexual predators’ easy access to children. Every day children are contacted by such people pretending to be kids themselves, wanting to meet up in person through instant messaging on the internet. Another example of how the internet can be harmful is the unlimited knowledge that it leaves at one’s fingertips. Knowledge of things such as how to construct a homemade bomb like ones that have been used in school shootings. The counter-argument that I present is that censorship is a good thing when used in moderation.

-Brian Stewart
(Not my true opinion, just a hole in Kinsley’s argument)

RR1 Justin Sander

In Michael Kinsley’s piece “Orwell Got it Wrong” he argues that George Orwell’s novel 1984 is an inaccurate analysis of the advancements in technology. Kinsley states that modern technology has expanded our personal freedom, not suppressed it as George Orwell argued. I agree with Michael Kinsley on most accounts, but Orwell is not completely wrong. The Internet and the computer has always been a vital tool for my success. The Internet is a large contributor to my present knowledge, and I take comfort in knowing that I can find out anything I need to know on the Internet. Computers and the World Wide Web have enabled global communication on a universal basis and have allowed ambitious individuals to launch successful careers. However, the very same technology that has granted so much personal freedom can also be used against the general public. For an example, the Patriot Act enabled the government to invade anyone’s personal life via email and cell phones, which resulted to wrongful accusations of terrorist acts against Steve Kurtz and Brandon Mayfield. Advances in technology present opportunities for governments to further invade personal privacy. For an example, BBC says that there are 2.5 million CCTV (closed-circuit television) cameras operating within the U.K. The fear is that these cameras will spread to all public places and not just streets. Cameras placed in all public areas will coincidentally be able to oversee homes and private places. Although these cameras help reduce the crime rate, the cameras make the “Big Brother” mentality a reality because it is a closed circuit not available to the public.

-Justin Sander

A "World View" of our WR121 Discourse Community

As we enter into this course on argumentation, we will respond to many arguments - verbal, written, and visual - to explore what they mean or don't mean, and why they matter, or not.

This is a visual representation of where our classroom discourse community is "from."
Does it mean anything? Does it matter? Why? How?

-Josh G.

Joe Najdek RR1

I overall agree with Michael Kinsley’s argument that modern technology has increased mankind’s personal freedom. I am so reliant on the internet, my computer and my television that I couldn’t even imagine a world without them.  The internet is one of the greatest inventions of all time because it allows us to explore and connect to the world every night. Without those freedoms, such as the right to choose, which allows us to be independent; we would have limited options for entertainment and work. In turn the government would have an increased chance to take away our freedoms for nothing in return. In a way, modern technology does show slight similarities to the example of George Orwell’s 1984. What we buy, how we act and sometimes even how we think is controlled by what we see online and in films.  Sometime in the future our freedom of speech could be in danger but that is not directly linked to technology. With the increased personal freedom comes increased personal responsibility. What is appropriate varies with different people in different areas. I think that anything in technology or the media is “potentially dangerous material”. Pornography is vulgar and everyone knows it exists; nobody is forced to watch it. The only cost of having too much personal freedom, in my opinion, is discovering something harmful.   In the end we, especially in America, have the free will to pretty much use, watch, and do whatever we want. 

The Enthymemes and Logic of Monty Python

Watch this and respond to/analyze the enthymematic claims and chain of logic in this scene from Monty Python.

How can we apply the structural forms of persuasion and 'evidence' to our argumentation and logic?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

Welcome to WR121

Why have a blog for the course?

The course philosophy is to 'train' in the same way that we actually engage with the world. A classroom separated from 'the world' or 'life' is a fallacy.

Even when we isolate ourselves within a windowless room to 'learn' at a university, we remain connected to the influences, relationships, and thoughts that compose our lives.

Keeping a blog helps recognize this connection and offers the opportunity to practice the art of critical thinking and ethical argumentation in relation to the actual methods and venues of interaction that we use. Additionally, it offers students both the challenge of writing to a 'live' audience and the comfort of expressing ideas that they already 'own' and are familiar with, rather than trying to think, argue, and compose in the isolation of a classroom.

The ultimate goal is not to 'teach' students compartmentalized information about writing, but rather to write and improve the logic, persuasiveness, and delivery of students' writing by having to ethically convince, or sway, a discourse community's views on a given issue.