Whitman Makes Chocolate

In order to encourage more appreciation and interest in the arts, the Americans for the Arts Foundation created an interesting poster titled, “Why some people think Walt Whitman makes chocolate candy” to emphasize that more art should be integrated into the lives of young generations.  The article begins with a statement printed in bold that reads, “Kids don’t get enough art these days.”  The declarative nature of the statement forces readers to agree straight from the beginning.  The poster stands to persuade the American public to become more knowledgeable about the arts so that nobody in the future will mistake a famous poet for a candy maker.

The visual presentation of the poster resembles that of an old time article. The title resembles the Walt Whitman chocolate logo creating an appealing and attractive way to display information.  It captures the readers’ curiosity and gives them reason to read further.  Maybe someone reading the ad thought that Walt Whitman made chocolate too.  The overall argument in the ad is supported effectively in the brief description of Walt Whitman and the great impact he had on the world of poetry.  Here, readers are more likely to agree with the poster and might even choose to visit AmericansForTheArts.org because of the rhetorical strategies used to promote action.

The ad is short, sweet, and to the point without displaying tons of statistics or straight facts of any kind.  It instead describes a hero of the humanities and why people should care- making it hard to disagree.

BOOOAAATTT

Hardin uses the life boat metaphor in order to help him explain the moral and controversial questions and problems that we struggle to face in our world today.

By including the life boat scenario in his introduction, his readers are able to relate the moral struggles and consequences of certain methods of decision making to real world issues.  If 50 people are on a lifeboat and the max capacity is 60, then what would happen if we allowed the 100 people in the ocean to hop on board?  Hardin relates this dilemma to the “equal share” theory of natural recourses.  There are of course obvious problems with this idea.  “Each American would have to share the available resources with more than eight people.”  He also looks at the counter argument- that we cannot expect the current population trends to remain the same- and makes his argument even more persuasive.  Hardin says that in the end, “the boat swamps, everyone drowns. Complete justice, complete catastrophe.”

Hardin also talks about the “tragedy of the commons” to illustrate why our world cannot simply ask everyone to use their own digression when it comes to protecting the environment or using natural recourses.  Hardin stresses that “only the replacement of the system of the commons with a responsible system of control will save the land, air, water and oceanic fisheries.”  Hardin comments that The World Food Bank is our push for a new commons.  The idea sounds good-food for everyone!  However, he uses our experience with the “Food for Peace program” to illustrate the flaws that a great idea can posess.  It “required the creation of a vast Government bureaucracy, which then acquired its own vested interest in continuing the program regardless of its merits.”  Not so good anymore.

Hardin then turns to one of the most convincing parts of his argument, foreign aid.  He explains to his readers that if each country was responsible for its own well-being, then the ones that were poorly managed will be devastated.  However, the positive aspect of this idea is that countries would actually have to learn from their mistakes if they ever wanted to prosper.  The governments who were able to manage their affairs well would flourish in wealth.  The question is should the wealthy “nations that do manage to put something aside be forced to come to the rescue each time an emergency occurs among the poor nations?”

 Are you on the boat or off?

Not So Guilty Pleasure

            In Corby Kummar’s Not So Guilty Pleasure, he explores the world of cupcakes and the public opinion of what makes them “just-right.”  Through his use of descriptive and fun language, he appeals to his audience of dessert consumers convincing them that the best cupcakes have the simple icing that “for many people evokes childhood.”  Kummar also appeals to ethos by citing many different cupcake shop owners, building his own credibility.  His casual tone and descriptive language he uses to express his qualitative evidence works effectivey throughout the piece.  Kummar also uses a few statistics in his article to express the fact that most “cheap supermarket cupcakes” actually have less calories than most brand name sweets.  He argues that people still demand their “unsatisfying” Starbucks muffins, however, shunning the recipes that remind us of our childhood and persuades his audience to change their ways.

            Kummar begins his essay by describing with great detail what makes a perfect cupcake for him.  He appeals to his audience of dessert lovers by describing the “butter beaten” cupcakes of his childhood that deliver that “satisfying snap” in every bite.  He laments, however, that the only “just-right” cupcake he has found was a plain white “birthday” cupcake that had exactly the right crackle and a perfectly moist chocolate cake.  This special find was at “baked and Wired,”a small café in Gorgetown that is not very popular.  Kummar begs his audience to “get over the names…and the novelties” and to finally enjoy a satisfying cupcake made with with care: the ones with perfect icing that so many artisan bakers shun for being to generic.  Kummar goes on to persuade his audience further by incorporating a few facts into his argument.  The plain old cupcakes that taste so good are actually made with 180 calories compared to one from Starbucks that has 440 without the icing!

            Kummar concludes his article by offering a new idea to consumers.  He says, “The real culprit keeping cupcakes from fitting my definition of “health food” is less the icing than the plague of plenty that has invaded the entire food industry: portion size.”  Café owners feel more and more pressure to up their serving sizes in order to compete with their neighbors.  Joan Chang, a Boston pastry chief remarked, “We’re competing against what people see on TV,” she said with a sigh. People should look at their own muffin tins to remember what a single serving looks like.”  By the end, Kummar offers a very effective argument through his friendly language and simple facts.

“Petrified” The New Yorker

In his essay Petrified, John Lahr describes an “entertainer’s journey through fear” from stage fright and how it is both the “burden and blessing of performance” for all actors.  Lahr begins his essay with a captivating story about the trauma and stress that one young actor, Stephen Fry, suffered from as a result of his stage fright.  Fry was a successful inspiring actor who, after one “fatal” performance, felt such grief and anxiety that he contemplated suicide.  Although Lahr tells his audience that Fry ended up moving away instead, his story captures the attention of his readers straight from the beginning of his piece.  They want to know more about the life of real actors who appear to be perfectly confident at all times- about the “man behind the mask” if you will.  Lahr moves on to describe with great detail the attack of stage fright explaining how an actor might suffer from “…sweating, confusion, loss of language-a simulacrum of dying.”  Lahr sights many different reliable sources of well known actors and actresses to support his claims building his own credibility.

            He explains the helpless and horrid venerable feeling that some actors feel before they perform.  He compares acting to the relationship between a mother and a child: “All the traumas of childhood…are revived for an actor when he appears…before customers, who have the power to either starve him of affection or reward him with approval.”  Lahr’s comparison works effectively because of the way he describes it explaining how the actor lives off of the appreciation and approval of his “mother” audience.  Next he describes why anyone in their right mind would want to put themselves through this torture and why Fry was unable to fight through the pain and go on with the show.  After citing many examples from actors about their experiences with stage fright, Lahr actually defends it.  He makes it out to be the “necessary condition for success, an essential test of courage.”  Even though it may be petrifying at times, the reward is worth the pain.

           Lahr makes his conclusion by offering solutions to overcome this stage fright.  He gives many examples of the strange rituals many actors and actresses perform before a show.  In the end, the audience is left with a great appreciation for all the guts and determination of the performing world.

“Cocktails of the Past”

Wayne Curtis, an Atlantic correspondent, wrote his article, Cocktails of the Past, in order to reveal to his audience of cocktail enthusiasts how “history and fickle trade patterns have influenced what we drink,” in America.  In writing with a casual, reflective, and humorous tone at times; Curtis effectively showed his audience why “when it comes to drink, Americans rarely clamor for subtlety.”  By appealing to pathos in his detailed explanations of exotic drinks and in exploring the possible causes of his claim, Curtis creates a convincing article exposing “the demand for violet liqueur [which] suggests that the home bar may be following the trajectory of the kitchen pantry.”  He hoped to offer an explanation as to why the bartender at the “Tales of the Cocktail” convention in New Orleans began a presentation with a slide that read, “That Damn Eric Seed.” 

Curtis appeals ethos near the beginning of his article, building his credibility, when describing how Eric Seed has succeeded in creating a heartwarming drink for everyone.  He tells his audience that he actually had the opportunity to meet Seed himself and converse with him over a few drinks, allowing readers to trust him more easily.  He makes it clear that Mr. Seed has dedicated his career to importing liquor that is unattainable “unless you have a time machine”.  Curtis chooses to describe one drink in particular, the “Crème de Violette” with such descriptive word choice that readers are almost able to taste the cocktail in their own watering mouths.  “This is an ethereal lavender-hued liqueur, with the fleeting, elusive taste and aroma of spring violets, from which it’s made,” he says.  Curtis then explores the possible causes of his claim that might explain the popular American “demand” for a drink that reminds them of good old times.  He believes that a common curiosity about old celebrated recipes might have been one possible cause. 

Using the Aviation cocktail as an example, Curtis laments that since its original recipe called for a liqueur that was nearly impossible to make, “the Aviation became simply gin, lemon juice, and maraschino liqueur, with no hint of the azure sky that inspired it.”  Curtis’s rhetorical appeals to pathos here that describe the sky said to have inspired the recipe persuade the reader to further accept his claim.  Curtis goes on to describe an experience of his own at “Arnaud’s French 75 in New Orleans, a comfortably dusky bar of dark wood, quarter-size hexagonal floor tiles, and Edith Piaf in the background;” creating very effective support for his argument.  The impact that a certain atmosphere can have on a person was incredible.  Curtis concludes his article by tying it back to the beginning explaining with luscious detail why he found himself damning Eric Seed for complicating his life after his third sip of Crème de Violette as well.  Curtis, like most Americans enthusiasts, could not get enough of the “refreshing elixir that recalled a spring evening, lifting [him] gently out of the confines of place.”

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200904/cocktails

“Suppose time is a circle…”

In this chapter, Lightman asks his readers to consider what the world would be like if time were a circle and if “every handshake, every kiss, every birth, every word, [would] be repeated precisely.”  He explains that those who are aware of the nature of time and its repetition are the ones who lead miserable lives.  This is because they would already know that any action, experience, relationship, ANYTIHNG would be repeated in life and theres nothing that they could do to change it.  They would already know how their first day of high school would be or the outcome of a cross country race.  Nothing would be surprising in life.  Minds would already be made up so there would be nothing to ponder over or to question.  Once any decision has been made, it will certainly happen again exactly the same way. The people who realize this must lead unhappy lives because they cannot change anything.  So what is there to live for if they already know the complete outcome of their entire lives?

Knowing that they will live their lives over and over again also means that they will make the same mistakes.  It means that they will suffer from the same pains and deal with the same hardships over and over without any control.  Life would be exactly the same rotating in a perfect circle and leaving no space for alteration.  People they love will die and then die again…whats the point?  It’s such a depressing idea to dwell over.

Naww I Got Smaaaart in my HEAD :)

So Is google making us stupid?

Google has declared that its mission is to eventually “organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful…something that understands exactly what you mean and gives you back what you want.”  That means that we will be able to ask google anything and get answers in high speed greatness!!  And as great as this sounds I do have to agree with Carr on this one.  Worrying about loosing the want and even need to think for yourself and to understand new concepts is frightening.  Although I have to admit that I do depend on the internet almost completely to write research papers, for sources, for notifications on facebook, for cool festive recipes (I know Im lame), etc.  Now in 2009 our American culture seems to growing lazier and lazier.  Honest labor isnt really the desired thing anymore.  People want jobs that require minimal work for good pay.  And now I cant help but relate this to Walden.  When Thoreau talked about societies advancements, he didnt say that we should do away with them but he did persuade us to think more for ourselves and to read deliberately.  However today people definately dont read to have conversations with intellectually superior authors and they dont read Walden when they are trying to relax by the ocean in the summer time.  I personally feel like I have no time to read for pleasure while im in school.  Of course I could make the time instead of doing something more social…but that usually doesnt happen.  I dont think that people value reading “deliberately” anymore.  If I have a reading assignment for school that I forgot to do for homework, I will usually skim over it or read it thoroughly and end up not finishing due to time.  I know that this is only hurting myself in the end (and this isnt an every day thing) but its what happens.  I think that many people have developed the attitude that if you dont care about what youre reading then why bother?  But we should bother because you can learn from reading.  So the state of reading in 2009 isnt doomed yet…but unless something changes soon…refer to my title.  Just read Walden Thoreau does a better job of explaining it.

Visitors and Solitude

In Thoreau’s chapter on solitude, he described how much he loved being alone.  He loved having time to and for himself away from the hustle and bustle of society.  In solitude, Thoreau was able to think, he was able to read deliberately, he got to know himself as a being alone and did not feel lonely.  At the house that he built himself on Walden Pond, he lived life as he desired but he still had visitors.  Thoreau includes the chapter about visitors in Walden to give his audience the completed picture of his life.  Although he did spend the majority of his life alone, he did have company every now and then and as we read, he actually enjoyed it.  Thoreau valued conversation and relationships but not the kind that we know today.  He loved unrefined conversations that enabled him to connect with, to understand and learn from, other people without time limits.  He wanted to share his experiences and knowledge with other people and was able to do so through Walden.  Thoreau’s trouble was not with company in general but with company who didn’t value conversation and language in the same way he did.  He talked about the times when he had many visitors in his home and how there wasn’t enough time to really get to know each other- how everyone was trying to give their own two cents to a “superficial” conversation.  That wasn’t real to Thoreau.  Instead, he enjoyed the company of his friend the woodcutter much more because everything that was said between the two of them was genuine and even enlightening at times.  So in his search for a balance between solitude and company, Thoreau found Walden Pond and seemed to live a very happy and content life there.

Reading

So I guess I should tell you that I actually read the whole chapter because skimming over it apparently wasn’t an option this time J. 

In this chapter, Thoreau stresses the importance of reading in our world explaining why “books must be read as deliberately and reservedly as they were written.”  He writes about how many people in society like to skim over the classics that the world has to offer just to obtain some general knowledge about them.  But in Thoreau’s opinion, reading to obtain general knowledge is in no way equivalent to deliberately reading the work of an author in his/her own language word by word and understanding them intellectually on a higher level.  There is no comparison.  He does an excellent job stressing the value of reading deliberately and even says that it is worth spending the time to learn even just a few words of another language to read a classic in its original ancient language.  He writes that the classics which are spread throughout the world are the “noblest recorded thoughts of man…carved out of the breath of life” themselves.  He goes on to describe how much good reading slowly and purposefully does for the mind because it enables you to understand the thoughts of the author- get to know him/her a little better.  Thoreau also spoke of his own life and how the “prospect of such reading in the future” was what propelled him through the hard work he had to do during the day.  He expresses his deep hope for a future society that will incorporate reading and the desire to learn into its daily life.  Thoreau also pointed out that we are all still students in a sense no matter our age or level of knowledge because there is always more to learn and more truth to be observed.  Why stop once you get a job and have a family?

Solitude

I found Thoreau’s chapter on solitude to be very inspiring.  It made a lot of sence to me and I could actually relate to some of the feelings that he was describing (but not all of them of course).  The whole time I was reading the chapter I kept recalling summers spent at the lake on the water.  There is no doubt in my mind that some of my best thinking was done sitting on the dock there by myself there.  It was so peaceful and I never felt “alone”.  Or the times when I am so exhausted after a long day and I just want to be alone on my couch with a movie and no one to talk to.  It is a time to think and reflect on my day and to just be there with no oblligations.  But sooner or later I return to my family and friends.  So I can see why Thoreau loved living in complete solitude because of the little moments that we can experience alone.  They are certainly necessary because they give us peace of mind in our crazy stressful lives.  But I would not want to be without company for my entire life.  I couldnt be.  I like people too much and I value the relationships I make.  I love my family and friends.  For me they make life interesting and exciting.  Thoreau didnt think he was missing out on anything because “he loved being alone”…but I would have gone crazy if I was him.