Response 12/11/11.
In class we have been doing a second reading of Ceremony. Reading this book could not of come at a better time because of our recent school controversy about the logo. The logo debate and Ceremony has really opened to my eyes on a culture I previously neglected. To help myself understand this book and all points of view on the logo controversy I have spent a couple of hours researching native American culture, particularly the Laguna Pueblo. It has been an extremely fascinating research process for me.
Ceremony is an extremely complicated book, for me at least. The class discussion has certainly helped me wrap my mind around a small portion of the book; but beyond that I am still largely confused. That being said, it is still a very interesting book to read and I look forward to having more class discussions about Ceremony.
Response 11/20/11.
Recently in class we have been focusing on using Prezi to make a short presentation about specific eras in literature history. I am very glad that Ms. Holmes showed us Prezi because Power Points often get boring and mind numbing. While it can be hard to add excitement to text, Prezi accomplishes that by its fasinating capability to fly across the screen to the next bit of information that awaits. I will be definitely be using Prezi for my presentations.
It has been very interesting to learn about the history of literature. Last year we delved into the history, but did not connect the time periods and how the effected each other. It has been very interesting to do that this year.
Response #3: This has been my first time ever really delving into a book and breaking down what every single sentence could possibly mean. It is eye opening how much you can miss just by reading something through one time. Sure, you most likely understand the plot, the characters and their personality, but there is so much more in the story. For example, when Albee sets up the scene in the American Dream, I would have never thought that the two chairs seated far away from each other had any sort of significance. It may be because I am rather inexperienced in this field, but it is border line mind-blowing how much information is within the plot itself. One thing I do question, however, is how much the authors actually intended. Like one of my fellow classmates brought up during 2nd hour, did the author intend for his/her story to be picked apart line by line; are we as students possibly looking too far into a sentence or word choice; is the author so brilliant he/she did this subconsciously? Personally, I think it would be very interesting to have an author be in the room with us while we are doing a close read. That way we could consult him about whether he met for something to be taken that way.
We also did another Eros prompt. I was glad that Ms. Holmes gave us the same exact prompt and poems because it allowed me to learn from my mistakes last time and easily fix them, rather then trying to decipher yet another literary work and then trying to fix my mistakes.
Overall I have really enjoyed doing to close read in the class the past week or so because it has really opened my eyes to a lot of new things in texts that are hidden beneath the surface or words on the page.
Response #2: In the recent weeks we have been working an incredible amount with syntax and practicing open prompts. Focusing so much on these two areas has helped me an incredible amount (I hope), since these two areas are my weakest points. This is my first year really looking and dissecting the syntax of literature. It is fascinating how such simple things I used to take for granted such as punctuation can be inspected and actually have an effect on a essay. I am also still struggling a considerable amount with writing essays in this class. The essay style is very different compared to other AP classes I have taken. Learning how to write these essays perfectaly is going to be a year long processes.
We have also read the American Dream in class. This was my first introduction to the Theater of the Absurd. The American Dream was certainly absurd. I do not think I still understand the play even after practicing writing open prompts in our groups. Understanding this theater and play may be another year long task I have to tackle before the exam in May.
Since school has started, I have learned a lot of useful information in class to continue the growth of my writing and reading. I have never really been an avid reader, and when I did read I never did more than once and I did not dissect the text. In class I have learned how to do a close reading (using DIDLS) to get a deeper more meaningful feeling from the text. This new reading strategy has allowed me to understand more texts and even have a conversation with them instead of just reading the words. I have also learned in more detail about diction and imagery so far.
Prior to taking AP Lit, I always struggled writing opening and concluding paragraphs. However, we have learned a few techniques so far that has helped me write better introductions. TAP has also helped me be 100% positive that my thesis is answering the prompt and I am not swaying from the question.
Overall, AP Lit has helped me an extraordinary amount so far. I cannot even imagine what is to come...
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Open Prompts
1990. Choose a novel or play that depicts a conflict between a parent (or a parental figure) and a son or daughter. Write an essay in which you analyze the sources of the conflict and explain how the conflict contributes to the meaning of the work. Avoid plot summary
It is not uncommon for teenagers and their parents to get into arguments frequently. Teenagers often believe that they are always right and have a lot of strong knowledge that their parents do not. However, that role is reversed in Death of a Salesmen. Willy, the father of Biff, thinks that he has Biff's life planned out and knows what Biff wants in his life. The source of conflict in Death of a Salesmen is Willy's deteriorating life and health as well as his controlling personality.
Willy was a extremely successful businessman in his prime, but that is because of actions many would consider to be immoral. Willy would have affairs with the secretaries of businessmen and give them stockings for his business. However, when Willy begins to get older, his business goes down hill. As result, his already fragile relationship with his sons take a turn for the worse. There are a lot of similarities between Willy and Biff in Death of a Salesmen, and Willy recognizes that. He and Linda largely ignore their other son. Willy tries to "relive the glory days" through his son. He tries to get him to become a successful businessman and follow in his own footsteps. Biff, however, has already decided the path he wants to go down and it is quite different than what Willy imagined. The main source for the relationship problems with Willy and his son, Biff, are that Willy's life and business is degrading and he tries to live his younger life through Biff.
The struggle between Willy and Biff is the source for one of the main ideas and meanings of this book. Death of Salesmen is about the struggle to find who you are and going agaisnt the grain. During this time period, after World War II, was the age of conformity. Everyone was buying, driving, wearing, saying, doing etc... the same thing. In this book, Biff goes agaisnt the mold and walks down a different path than his father. Willy and Happy represent the American Dream and conformity, while Biff represents the free west and being an individual.
1995. Writers often highlight the values of a culture or a society by using characters who are alienated from that culture or society because of gender, race, class, or creed. Choose a novel or a play in which such a character plays a significant role and show how that character's alienation reveals the surrounding society's assumptions or moral values.
The idea of an “American dream” is often criticized by many people, including Americans themselves. Many argue that the American dream is fake because people get caught up in satisfaction and what they want. In the play “The American Dream” by Albee, Ablee highlights the flaws of the classic American dream by portraying a typical middle aged American couple while also showing another character, Grandma, as a sane human. This contrast and alienation of Grandma reveals Mommy and Daddy’s flaws and the overall flaws of the American Dream.
Mommy and Daddy represent the classic American family who is trying to achieve the typical American Dream. All they want is satisfaction from each other and other people. As a result they are blind to many things and lack quality traits. Daddy is succumbs to Mommy’s command and does not have a voice for himself. He often repeats what Mommy says just to reinforce it. Daddy also often forgets things told to him literally seconds before. This strange habit of Daddy shows the audience and reader that he only hears what he wants to hear and often ignores others and has a robotic like auto response.
Much like Daddy, Mommy is solely focused on herself and what others think of her. At the beginning of the play she returns and hat just to buy the same hat so people are satisfied. Mommy also controls Daddy a lot and is the dominate one in the relationship.
Grandma is the only voice of reason in this play. It is through Grandma that we fully understand how insecure and strange Mommy and Daddy are. This is clearly show at the end of the play when Grandma breaks the forth wall and tells the audience the play is over. Grandma ends the play because everyone has what they think they want. This is significant because Grandma is telling us that Mommy and Daddy think they are finally satisfied with the Young Man, when Grandma knows that the only reason they are satisfied is because he is empty on the inside but looks stunning on the outside. Because Mommy and Daddy represent the typical American couple, Grandma is indirectly saying that the American dream is peoples desire to look good and be accepted by the rest of the community.
1973. An effective literary work does not merely stop or cease; it concludes. In the view of some critics, a work that does not provide the pleasure of significant closure has terminated with an artistic fault. A satisfactory ending is not, however, always conclusive in every sense; significant closure may require the reader to abide with or adjust to ambiguity and uncertainty. In an essay, discuss the ending of a novel or play of acknowledged literary merit. Explain precisely how and why the ending appropriately or inappropriately concludes the work. Do not merely summarize the plot.
There are numerous plays, movies, novels, and poems on the idea of the "American dream," but none of made me question and maybe even understand more than Albee's play titled "The American Dream." The play uses theater of the absurd elements to make it harder to understand and it tests your comprehension. The theater of the absurd also makes it hard to distinguish between elements of that theater and other literary techniques authors use to enforce specific points.
"The American Dream" ends when Grandma speaks to the audience. She says that everyone in the play thinks they have what they want and it would be a good place to end the play. This is an appropriate ending because the whole entire play is about getting satisfaction. Mommny and Daddy make many not so subtle hits throughout the play that they are not satisfied with their lives, often relating it to the idea that you cannot do anything to change your satisfaction; its just the way things are. They are many hints that their sex life is extremely lacking. In fact, they adopted a kid who they ended up killing. Whether the literally killed the kid because it was not the perfect kid they wanted, or just figuratively dismantled the child by parent neglect and abuse is unknown.
Grandma ends the play when the Young Man comes to Mommy and Daddy's house. This was a perfect time to end the play because the Young Man has no feelings or anything on the inside of his body, but he looks gorgeous and on the outside appears to be the perfect child. Grandma chooses to stop the play now because she realizes that the Young Man is the child that Mommy and Daddy wanted from the beginning. They finally get the satisfaction they have wanted the whole entire play. Grandma even says something along the lines of everyone has what they wanted, or has what they think they wanted.
Grandma wraps up the play are the ideal time because everyone in the play thinks they are satisfied, something Mommy and Daddy have been looking for apparently for most of their lives. It is a little unusual for a character in play to tell the audience that the play is over, possibly a theater of the absurd element. What is extremely strange is that Grandma is able to break the fourth wall; that is be on stage without Mommy and Daddy seeing her. The significance of this could possibly mean that Grandma is acting as the director in this play. She controls who enters, the Young Man looking for work, and when the play finally ends.
2002. Morally ambiguous characters -- characters whose behavior discourages readers from identifying them as purely evil or purely good -- are at the heart of many works of literature. Choose a novel or play in which a morally ambiguous character plays a pivotal role. Then write an essay in which you explain how the character can be viewed as morally ambiguous and why his or her moral ambiguity is significant to the work as a whole. Avoid mere plot summary.
"The American Dream" ends when Grandma speaks to the audience. She says that everyone in the play thinks they have what they want and it would be a good place to end the play. This is an appropriate ending because the whole entire play is about getting satisfaction. Mommny and Daddy make many not so subtle hits throughout the play that they are not satisfied with their lives, often relating it to the idea that you cannot do anything to change your satisfaction; its just the way things are. They are many hints that their sex life is extremely lacking. In fact, they adopted a kid who they ended up killing. Whether the literally killed the kid because it was not the perfect kid they wanted, or just figuratively dismantled the child by parent neglect and abuse is unknown.
Grandma ends the play when the Young Man comes to Mommy and Daddy's house. This was a perfect time to end the play because the Young Man has no feelings or anything on the inside of his body, but he looks gorgeous and on the outside appears to be the perfect child. Grandma chooses to stop the play now because she realizes that the Young Man is the child that Mommy and Daddy wanted from the beginning. They finally get the satisfaction they have wanted the whole entire play. Grandma even says something along the lines of everyone has what they wanted, or has what they think they wanted.
Grandma wraps up the play are the ideal time because everyone in the play thinks they are satisfied, something Mommy and Daddy have been looking for apparently for most of their lives. It is a little unusual for a character in play to tell the audience that the play is over, possibly a theater of the absurd element. What is extremely strange is that Grandma is able to break the fourth wall; that is be on stage without Mommy and Daddy seeing her. The significance of this could possibly mean that Grandma is acting as the director in this play. She controls who enters, the Young Man looking for work, and when the play finally ends.
2002. Morally ambiguous characters -- characters whose behavior discourages readers from identifying them as purely evil or purely good -- are at the heart of many works of literature. Choose a novel or play in which a morally ambiguous character plays a pivotal role. Then write an essay in which you explain how the character can be viewed as morally ambiguous and why his or her moral ambiguity is significant to the work as a whole. Avoid mere plot summary.
When you are a young, peaceful hobbit blinding walking through the land of middle earth while trying to reach a destination rather quickly, I am sure a guide would be extremely helpful to you. In fact, that is exactly what Gollum is to Frodo Baggins and his best friend Sam. Despite Gollum’s intentions, he does actually guide the two hobbits to their destination quite well. Gollum is a morally ambiguous character because while he does guide the two protagonists to the land of Sauron, his ultimate goal is to still get the ring for himself.
Depending on how you look at it, Frodo and Sam stumbling upon Gollum can be considered a fortune or yet another creature that they must conqueror in the end. Gollum is certainly not purely evil. Hundreds of years ago he was himself a hobbit called Sméagol, and hobbits are the farthest creatures from being evil. Then are a genuinely nice people who enjoy their peaceful rural life. Hobbits also like to get together with large groups and celebrate big events. So, by nature Gollum is not purely evil. He also was tortured for days by the evil forces of Sauron in attempt to find out the current location of the ring. And finally Sméagol, despite his intentions, did lead Frodo to Sauron’s kingdom where he ended up destroying the one ring and destroying all evil forever. It is not unreasonable to come to the conclusion that Frodo would not of not achieved his ultimate goal without his and Sam’s guide.
That being said, Gollum is also extremely far from being purely good. His greed and desire for the ring led him to transform from a carefree hobbit to a hideous and almost pitied creature. In fact, after one of his friends found the ring while they were fishing on Sméagol’s birthday, Sméagol ending up strangulating his friend to death because of his desire for the ring. Sméagol also plots to turn Frodo on Sam. Numerous times throughout the story he attempts to frame Sam for various things that would upset Frodo; one example is Sméagol made it appear like Sam had eaten the rest of the already scarce food in the middle of the night. And finally, right before Frodo is going to destroy the right, Gollum jumps in and tries to murder Sam and Frodo and steal the ring for himself.
Gollum plays an extremely important role in the Lord of the Rings series because he adds yet another plot line to the already tangled plot. Without Gollum, Sam and Frodo would have never reached Sauron’s land. At the same time however, he is yet another task the two hobbits must overcome. He tries to manipulate Frodo into turning against Sam. Gollum represents how greed an unhealthy desire for power can lead to ultimate destruction. Gollum is also a prime example of how evil and powerful Sauron truly is. He can cause the kindest race of them all to turn into a greedy, power thirsty monster.
2007, Form B. Works of literature often depict acts of betrayal. Friends and even family may betray a protagonist; main characters may likewise be guilty of treachery or may betray their own values. Select a novel or play that includes such acts of betrayal. Then, in a well-written essay, analyze the nature of the betrayal and show how it contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole.
In desperate times of need, human beings often look to their closest friends and family for support. In Lord of the Rings, Frodo Baggins is being led to his destination by a creature named Gollum. Despite Sam, Frodo’s best friend, efforts to rid Frodo of this hobbit like being, Frodo continues to rely on Gollum for guidance. Because Frodo is naive and loses sight of who is his true best friend, he is corrupted and almost killed by the greedy and sly Gollum. This adds another dimension and plot to the Lord of the Rings novels and contributes to the meaning and morals of the story.
When Sam and Frodo first bump into Gollum, they are disgusted by his nature and appearance. However, when Frodo learns that Gollum knows the way to Mordor, Frodo immediately becomes interested in the once upon a time hobbit. During their long and deadly journey to Mordor, Sam becomes suspicious of Gollum. After many failed attempts of trying to warm Frodo about the dangerous creature, Sam basically gives up and accepts that Gollum will be accompanying them for the rest of the journey. Gollum was a hobbit hundreds of years ago, but greed and torture transformed him into a disgusting creature. Gollum and his attentions shed light on how cruel and evil the Lord of the Rings world is during this time period. Humans, elves, dwarfs, even hobbits, the fairest and kindest of all folk, are willing to go great lengths to posses the ring. Because Frodo’s judgment is skewed by the ring, we as a reader understand that this ring has the power to cause turmoil even between the best of friends.
Not only does Gollum separate Sam and Frodo from each other, he also tricks Frodo into trusting him. As the story progresses, Frodo becomes more and more dependent on Gollum’s knowledge of the land and navigational skills. On the outside, Gollum appears to be helping the two hobbits find their away. However, Gollum is actually planning how to kill them and tries to on several occasions. Because Frodo is corrupted and blinded to Gollum’s blatantly obvious attentions, it allows us as a reader to understand on a deeper level the meaning of the Lord of the Ring series. Prior to Gollum, we were not able to understand why all races gave into the power of this one, powerful ring. However, now that one of the nicest beings in the land is being corrupted and blinded right in front of our eyes, we get a deeper understanding of the power and evil this ring posses.
Typically when two best friends are separated by another, things are not right. When Gollum succeeds in splitting these two previously thought to be inseparable friends apart, it opens the eyes of the reader to a whole new understanding of the evil and corruption of Sauron and Saruman’s forces and the power they have to rip the good apart.
1994. In some works of literature, a character who appears briefly, or does not appear at all, is a significant presence. Choose a novel or play of literary merit and write an essay in which you show how such a character functions in the work. You may wish to discuss how the character affects action, theme, or the development of other characters. Avoid plot summary.
At the first Hogwart’s School of Witchcraft and Wizardry’s first feast in Harry Potter’s third year at the school, the choir is singing a song with the chorus being, “Double, double, toil and trouble fire burn and cauldron bubble.” These are very famous lines said by the three witches in Shakespeare’s Macbeth, who only make two appearances throughout the play. However, those two encounters with Macbeth lead him to act in an irrational way, even trying to kill his own sons.
The three witches don’t necessarily use sophisticated logic or reasoning to set in motion the downfall of Macbeth. Prior to their encounter, Macbeth is happy with his kingdom and his King. However, the three witches tell Macbeth that the throne is in his near future. When he tells his wife this, Lady Macbeth becomes power hungry and devises a plan to bring the down fall of King Duncan. What ensues is total mayhem for the country. Death is widespread and eventually a war breaks out between Macbeth and Macduff. Because the three witches tell Macbeth during their first encounter that he can rule the kingdom, Macbeth and his wife become irrational, power hungry beings who will do anything sit upon King Duncan’s throne.
One of the most common themes of Macbeth is the corrupting power of unchecked ambition. The three witches’ two appearances unleash the ambition of Lady Macbeth and Macbeth. Prior to Macbeth’s encounter with them, he has no desire and ambition to become king and neither does Lady Macbeth. Unfortunately, when Macbeth finds out what is in store for him, he and his wife’s ambition to be king and queen control their thoughts and actions and they end up destroying themselves. If it was not for the three witches, Macbeth and Lady Macbeth would have never had the ambition and desire to murder King Duncan and take the throne for themselves.
As a result of Macbeth’s new tyrannous rule, other characters have to step up and attempt to bring him and his wife to justice. Macduff is especially furious with Macbeth because Macbeth ordered the murder of Macduff’s family. It soon becomes clear during the witches seconded visit with Macbeth that Macduff should be Macbeth’s biggest concern. Macduff develops into the opposing force that eventually brings about the downfall of Macbeth’s extremely short regime. Macduff’s character develops into Macbeth’s rival in Macbeth because the witches told Macbeth to be weary of Macduff.
Although the three witches in Macbeth only appear in two scenes, they have a significant impact on the play. They corrupt Macbeth and his wife, Lady Macbeth, by unleashing their hidden ambitions, and end up developing Macduff into Macbeth’s rival. Their limited appearances do not affect their impact on the play.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Close Reading
Close Reading 12/11/11
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/world/africa/congo-police-abducting-opposition-supporters-reports-say.html?ref=world
Living in America, we take a lot of freedoms for granted. With the presidential election around the corner, the media is focusing heavily on the GOP debates. There is a lot of name calling and bickering, but shouldn't we step back for a minute and reflect on how lucky we truly are? In the Democratic Republic of Congo, a presidential election was recently held. However, reportedly, the polls were corrupt and the victor may not be the true president. With that information, should Americans be proud that we actually have a say in who runs our country, whether we agree with them or not?
The imagery in this article from the New York times is appalling; how on earth could officers being chasing down little boys and beating them? The first sentence of the story sets up the rest of the article to be extremely bone-chilling. "Police were going door to door on Saturday, taking youths out of houses in an opposition neighborhood and pushing them into unmarked vehicles, a day after the incumbent was declared the winner in a disputed presidential election." After reading that sentence, my mouth dropped. What can possibly be the rational for taking youth out of their own houses because they live in an "opposition neighborhood." This imagery really helps draw a connection with the people of Congo. It helps the audience understand what the people are currently fighting for and suffering through everyday while I sit at home typing on my computer in a warm house.
There are some staggering statistics in this article such as the amount of votes Mr. Kabila received in one area. ",,, official results in one district of Katanga Province had Mr. Kabila receiving 227,855 votes out of 227,858 cast, with a 90 percent turnout — a result the group called “highly suspect.”It is extremely hard to believe that all but three people voted for this man. Details like this throughout the piece help the audience, who is most likely naive to the situation, understand how corrupt this election potentially is.
The diction throughout this piece sets a really dark tone. "Unmarked" is used to describe the vehicles in which youth were forced into by the police force. Typically, police cars are marked so people who see them may get a sense of security and protection. However, when a car is unmarked it gives people quite the opposite feeling; secretive, scared, helpless. Other words such as beating, used to describe the police officers actions, are brutal words. "Beating" reinforces the the corruption of the government and police force. Finally, "round-up" is used to when the article is talking about the police gathering the young children and putting them into vehicles. Round-up almost has a casually tone; it makes it seem like this activity is not really that uncommon in this part of the country.
http://www.philly2philly.com/politics_community/politics_community_articles/2011/11/20/48097/jerry_sandusky_scandal_joe_paterno_f
If you follow the news at all, you are well aware of what has happened at Penn State University over the past decade. Allegedly, Jerry Sandusky, a former defensive coordinator for the football team, sexually abused multiple victims. Many people around the world are furious with two people besides Sandusky himself; Joe Paterno and Mike McQueary. McQueary testifies that he actually witnessed Sandusky sodomize a young child in the locker room facility of the Penn State football team. After witnessing this rape, McQueary went called his dad and notified Joe Paterno the next day; he did not go to the police. Alyssa Bonk uses techniques to show her displeasure with the way McQueary and Penn State handled the situation and what she thinks should happen.
There is some very strong diction throughout this article. Some words Bonk even took the time to bold. Three words are bold-faced, protect, police and proper. Bonk bolds proper because she is furious that McQueary notified Joe Paterno, not the police, who are the proper authorities. What is truly mind boggling about this whole case is that McQueary is still an employee of the university while "JoPa" is not when they both did the same exact thing. This frustration with the university can be seen in Bonk's article when she bolds protect. The university placed McQueary on leave with pay because he was receiving death threats due to the way he handled the whole situation.
At one point during the article Bonk writes, "you walk into a shower and you see a man molesting a young boy." This is an extremely graphic sentence. This imagery is extremely important to the overall piece because it helps evoke anger in the audience. The audience cannot possibly comprehend that McQueary was able to witness such a horrific event and simply walk away. A few sentences Bonk describes what she would of done if she was placed in this situation, "You grab the perp by the neck, you get the boy to safety, and then you drag that maniac to the nearest police station." It does not take an expert to sense the anger in this portion of the text. "Drag the maniac to the nearest police station," is extremely vivid and gives the image of Bonk marching across campus with Sandusky at gunpoint. This imagery helps evoke anger in the audience.
The detail in this article help the reader comprehend how many people this scandal actually effected. Beyond the obvious traumatic events that Sandusky put the alleged victims through, many people who are innocent of the actually sexual harassment are effected by this scandal. The details that Bonk uses about how much Joe Paterno gave back to the university help emphasis what this scandal has truly done in the football world of Penn State. Joe Paterno dedicated the vast majority of his life to the school and also donated millions of dollars to build buildings such as a library. The fact that he can go from being revered as one of the best coaches of all time to being fired overnight helps the outsider understand how anger people are that these events and Paterno allegedly knew about them.
The Penn State scandal has brought out mixed emotion from people across the world. This article by Bonk helps illustrate one point of view.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/10/03/111003fa_fact_gawande
In this article, Atul Gawande argues that surgeons themselves should also have coaches. He makes many references to professional athletes who have coaches throughout the duration of their careers. Atul is questioning if surgeons had coaches would they continue to get better and avoid the inevitable plateau.
Diction choices such as peak and plateau suggest that once doctors get to a certain point, or "peak," they have no where to go but the wrong way. Things can only get worse and their skills they have acquired over many years of training will slowly begin to deteriorate. Dr. Gawande also uses the word "beating" when describing his average percent of complications. This is another reference to the on-going sports analogy he uses throughout the essay. When you beat a team, you prove that you are better then them during that one game. Well, Dr. Gawande is exactly "beating" any team, he is just performing his operations more successfully than the majority of other doctors.
When describing a typical procedure, Gawdande uses some strong imagery to drive home the point that a lot goes into an operation, and if you don't have a coach constantly over your shoulder screaming there is a higher chance of you forgetting something or making a mistake. "Infection turns it into a fat, bloody, inflamed worm that sticks to everything around it" paints an incredible vivid image in my mind. This really drives home the point that if one mistake happens, something can go terribly wrong. In the last paragraph Atul describes playing tennis on a hot warm summer daily casually. At this point, he is obviously past his "peak" in tennis. This image helps relate to his peak in surgery because it gives the sense that after doctors hit their peak, they only perform operations casually and are not as intense about them as they need to be. Having a coach would certainly change that.
There is an incredible amount of detail in this piece that reinforces Atul's claim that doctors having coaches would possibly improve their performance. About half way through the article he lists a whole bunch of things that could go wrong on a simple procedure on how you would have to deal with it. It would be extremely hard to be able to process so much information in an extremely dire situation but you simply have to do it if you want the patient to be okay. Doctors coaches could help with this. Having a "coach" in the operation room would allow for someone very experienced to air to surgeon in all situations. Eventually, the surgeon could possibly become experienced enough to become "coach." Having coaches would help avoid the plateau that Atul is talking about. Other details such as surgeons peak at a very old age compared to athletes who peak before they are even 30 contribute to the fact that maybe that is the reason that doctors do not currently having a coach.
Overall Atul Gawande using diction, imagery and details to support his argument that doctors peak at a later age than other professions and maybe having a coach could eliminate the plateau he is talking about.
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2008/10/27/081027sh_shouts_sedaris?currentPage=all
In this article David Sedaris talks about the undecided voters in the 2008 election. He cannot comprehend how undecided voters have not made up their mind or agree with one candidate on one issue but not other issues.
The diction David Sedaris uses in this article makes it quite clear he has strong feelings about people who are undecided. A word such as "layman" suggest that David is referring to those who have not made up their minds as lazy, uneducated people. Mr Sedaris goes on to use the word "platter" and "shit" which shows us that Mr Sedaris thinks that although one candidate can look good on a nice, expensive platter, in the end it is still shit. Relating this back to the diction of layman, David is implying that only educated men and women with professions are capable of seeing through the platter to what a candidate truly is; in David's mind, shit. Later in the article, David uses the word "importance" when he is talking about how he likes democracy. When David uses this word he is currently voting during a president election at the young age of 11. Using "important" in a casual tone means that the elections that decide the president of the United States are actually important and something people should not be indifferent about, but rather should do their research and make up their minds.
The numerous details in David's essay help us visualize what he thinks about presidential elections. The details of him voting for a random candidate in an election at a young age enlightens us that David most likely gets the hatred for undecided voters from his family. His mom clearly had no option in the election and allowed her 11 year old son to randomly chose a president. Ironically, that president was later impeached. Another detail, the ensuing fight between his parents, sheds more light on David's strong dislike for undecided voters. His parents got in a fight because his mom had no care for the election.
This essay paints many vivid images in our mind that help us understand David's feelings and motives behind this essay. The paragraph about David sitting on a plane and the flight attendant comes up and asks David if he wants a platter of chicken or shit paints a very, very clear image in our mind. This "scene", if you will, makes the reader understand how clear and obvious David thinks the choice is between two candidates. The final couple of paragraphs in the play during which his mom and dad are fighting through their kids gives the reader a hint about why David feels so strongly about presidential elections. He thinks that randomly casting a vote is incredibly stupid in an extremely important situation. In fact, when he randomly chose his vote, that president went on to be impeached.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/09/11/911.commemoration/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
After a decade of grief and recovery, nation remembers 9/11, is an article on CNN.com about how Americans have responded and acted in the 10 years since the attacks on the United States.
David Ariosto and Laura Dolan paint a vivid picture in our mind when they are describing the scene in New York City 10 years after the attacks on the World Trade Centers. The opening sentence of the article, "Thousands gathered Sunday morning at New York's Ground Zero and stood still in silence, some crying as they listened to the names of the victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks read aloud," gives us a real sense of the feeling and mood of New York. The sentence paints a somber picture that is similar to a funeral. In a way, today is a funeral. People across the country are coming together to remember the 2,977 lives that terrorists stole from America.
Later in the article, the imagery switches from that of a funeral to that of a war zone, "Roads near Ground Zero were blocked and police checkpoints for both vehicles and pedestrians surrounded the memorial." In a war zone, typically roads are either blocked or are patrolled by the forces controlling the territory. The purpose of road blocks and checkpoints are to make sure that all vehicles and people going in and out of the area are documented and also to make sure that nothing dangerous is entering the territory. "...heavy security presence permeating the area in lower Manhattan..." is yet another quote the allows us to picture the scene in NYC today. Police and other authorities are swarming the city looking out for an indication of yet another attack on innocent lives. Dolan and Ariosto describe the scene to us flawlessly and really allow us to imagine what it looks and feels like inside the Big Apple.
There is an extreme contrast of feeling today, 10 years after the 9/11 attacks. Ariosto and Dolan use the word "solemn" numerous times throughout the article. It really drives home the mood. The lost of almost 3,000 innocent lives is extremely devastating. However, there is also the feeling of unity. Despite the difference in Americans, all have one thing in common:10 years ago today we were attacked. President Obama used some very strong words to show the world that America is still here and prouder than ever. "...we refuse to live in fear." "...we remain vigilant." "Refuse" is a very strong word. When the president tells the world that Americans, "refuse to live in fear," it drives home the point that no matter what you do to our country and people, we will stand back up stronger than before.
There are many details used by the authors that added to the article and really make you understand the devastation of 9/11. Throughout the article it has the times when certain events happened; "9:59 a.m., the time the South Tower collapsed." These details give us the sense of time and how quickly everything unfolded. Other details such as, "2,753 people died on two airplanes and on the ground when the planes slammed into the World Trade Center towers, causing their collapse," are necessary in the article to help us understand the destruction and devastation on September 11, 2001. Without these details, the article would feel bland and empty because people reading would not understand why today is such a big deal in American History.
Ariosto and Dolan use diction, imagery and details to really get the readers involved in the article and to be able to understand, visualize the atmosphere, and feel the mood of New York City today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/world/africa/congo-police-abducting-opposition-supporters-reports-say.html?ref=world
Living in America, we take a lot of freedoms for granted. With the presidential election around the corner, the media is focusing heavily on the GOP debates. There is a lot of name calling and bickering, but shouldn't we step back for a minute and reflect on how lucky we truly are? In the Democratic Republic of Congo, a presidential election was recently held. However, reportedly, the polls were corrupt and the victor may not be the true president. With that information, should Americans be proud that we actually have a say in who runs our country, whether we agree with them or not?
The imagery in this article from the New York times is appalling; how on earth could officers being chasing down little boys and beating them? The first sentence of the story sets up the rest of the article to be extremely bone-chilling. "Police were going door to door on Saturday, taking youths out of houses in an opposition neighborhood and pushing them into unmarked vehicles, a day after the incumbent was declared the winner in a disputed presidential election." After reading that sentence, my mouth dropped. What can possibly be the rational for taking youth out of their own houses because they live in an "opposition neighborhood." This imagery really helps draw a connection with the people of Congo. It helps the audience understand what the people are currently fighting for and suffering through everyday while I sit at home typing on my computer in a warm house.
There are some staggering statistics in this article such as the amount of votes Mr. Kabila received in one area. ",,, official results in one district of Katanga Province had Mr. Kabila receiving 227,855 votes out of 227,858 cast, with a 90 percent turnout — a result the group called “highly suspect.”It is extremely hard to believe that all but three people voted for this man. Details like this throughout the piece help the audience, who is most likely naive to the situation, understand how corrupt this election potentially is.
The diction throughout this piece sets a really dark tone. "Unmarked" is used to describe the vehicles in which youth were forced into by the police force. Typically, police cars are marked so people who see them may get a sense of security and protection. However, when a car is unmarked it gives people quite the opposite feeling; secretive, scared, helpless. Other words such as beating, used to describe the police officers actions, are brutal words. "Beating" reinforces the the corruption of the government and police force. Finally, "round-up" is used to when the article is talking about the police gathering the young children and putting them into vehicles. Round-up almost has a casually tone; it makes it seem like this activity is not really that uncommon in this part of the country.
http://www.philly2philly.com/politics_community/politics_community_articles/2011/11/20/48097/jerry_sandusky_scandal_joe_paterno_f
If you follow the news at all, you are well aware of what has happened at Penn State University over the past decade. Allegedly, Jerry Sandusky, a former defensive coordinator for the football team, sexually abused multiple victims. Many people around the world are furious with two people besides Sandusky himself; Joe Paterno and Mike McQueary. McQueary testifies that he actually witnessed Sandusky sodomize a young child in the locker room facility of the Penn State football team. After witnessing this rape, McQueary went called his dad and notified Joe Paterno the next day; he did not go to the police. Alyssa Bonk uses techniques to show her displeasure with the way McQueary and Penn State handled the situation and what she thinks should happen.
There is some very strong diction throughout this article. Some words Bonk even took the time to bold. Three words are bold-faced, protect, police and proper. Bonk bolds proper because she is furious that McQueary notified Joe Paterno, not the police, who are the proper authorities. What is truly mind boggling about this whole case is that McQueary is still an employee of the university while "JoPa" is not when they both did the same exact thing. This frustration with the university can be seen in Bonk's article when she bolds protect. The university placed McQueary on leave with pay because he was receiving death threats due to the way he handled the whole situation.
At one point during the article Bonk writes, "you walk into a shower and you see a man molesting a young boy." This is an extremely graphic sentence. This imagery is extremely important to the overall piece because it helps evoke anger in the audience. The audience cannot possibly comprehend that McQueary was able to witness such a horrific event and simply walk away. A few sentences Bonk describes what she would of done if she was placed in this situation, "You grab the perp by the neck, you get the boy to safety, and then you drag that maniac to the nearest police station." It does not take an expert to sense the anger in this portion of the text. "Drag the maniac to the nearest police station," is extremely vivid and gives the image of Bonk marching across campus with Sandusky at gunpoint. This imagery helps evoke anger in the audience.
The detail in this article help the reader comprehend how many people this scandal actually effected. Beyond the obvious traumatic events that Sandusky put the alleged victims through, many people who are innocent of the actually sexual harassment are effected by this scandal. The details that Bonk uses about how much Joe Paterno gave back to the university help emphasis what this scandal has truly done in the football world of Penn State. Joe Paterno dedicated the vast majority of his life to the school and also donated millions of dollars to build buildings such as a library. The fact that he can go from being revered as one of the best coaches of all time to being fired overnight helps the outsider understand how anger people are that these events and Paterno allegedly knew about them.
The Penn State scandal has brought out mixed emotion from people across the world. This article by Bonk helps illustrate one point of view.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/10/03/111003fa_fact_gawande
In this article, Atul Gawande argues that surgeons themselves should also have coaches. He makes many references to professional athletes who have coaches throughout the duration of their careers. Atul is questioning if surgeons had coaches would they continue to get better and avoid the inevitable plateau.
Diction choices such as peak and plateau suggest that once doctors get to a certain point, or "peak," they have no where to go but the wrong way. Things can only get worse and their skills they have acquired over many years of training will slowly begin to deteriorate. Dr. Gawande also uses the word "beating" when describing his average percent of complications. This is another reference to the on-going sports analogy he uses throughout the essay. When you beat a team, you prove that you are better then them during that one game. Well, Dr. Gawande is exactly "beating" any team, he is just performing his operations more successfully than the majority of other doctors.
When describing a typical procedure, Gawdande uses some strong imagery to drive home the point that a lot goes into an operation, and if you don't have a coach constantly over your shoulder screaming there is a higher chance of you forgetting something or making a mistake. "Infection turns it into a fat, bloody, inflamed worm that sticks to everything around it" paints an incredible vivid image in my mind. This really drives home the point that if one mistake happens, something can go terribly wrong. In the last paragraph Atul describes playing tennis on a hot warm summer daily casually. At this point, he is obviously past his "peak" in tennis. This image helps relate to his peak in surgery because it gives the sense that after doctors hit their peak, they only perform operations casually and are not as intense about them as they need to be. Having a coach would certainly change that.
There is an incredible amount of detail in this piece that reinforces Atul's claim that doctors having coaches would possibly improve their performance. About half way through the article he lists a whole bunch of things that could go wrong on a simple procedure on how you would have to deal with it. It would be extremely hard to be able to process so much information in an extremely dire situation but you simply have to do it if you want the patient to be okay. Doctors coaches could help with this. Having a "coach" in the operation room would allow for someone very experienced to air to surgeon in all situations. Eventually, the surgeon could possibly become experienced enough to become "coach." Having coaches would help avoid the plateau that Atul is talking about. Other details such as surgeons peak at a very old age compared to athletes who peak before they are even 30 contribute to the fact that maybe that is the reason that doctors do not currently having a coach.
Overall Atul Gawande using diction, imagery and details to support his argument that doctors peak at a later age than other professions and maybe having a coach could eliminate the plateau he is talking about.
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2008/10/27/081027sh_shouts_sedaris?currentPage=all
In this article David Sedaris talks about the undecided voters in the 2008 election. He cannot comprehend how undecided voters have not made up their mind or agree with one candidate on one issue but not other issues.
The diction David Sedaris uses in this article makes it quite clear he has strong feelings about people who are undecided. A word such as "layman" suggest that David is referring to those who have not made up their minds as lazy, uneducated people. Mr Sedaris goes on to use the word "platter" and "shit" which shows us that Mr Sedaris thinks that although one candidate can look good on a nice, expensive platter, in the end it is still shit. Relating this back to the diction of layman, David is implying that only educated men and women with professions are capable of seeing through the platter to what a candidate truly is; in David's mind, shit. Later in the article, David uses the word "importance" when he is talking about how he likes democracy. When David uses this word he is currently voting during a president election at the young age of 11. Using "important" in a casual tone means that the elections that decide the president of the United States are actually important and something people should not be indifferent about, but rather should do their research and make up their minds.
The numerous details in David's essay help us visualize what he thinks about presidential elections. The details of him voting for a random candidate in an election at a young age enlightens us that David most likely gets the hatred for undecided voters from his family. His mom clearly had no option in the election and allowed her 11 year old son to randomly chose a president. Ironically, that president was later impeached. Another detail, the ensuing fight between his parents, sheds more light on David's strong dislike for undecided voters. His parents got in a fight because his mom had no care for the election.
This essay paints many vivid images in our mind that help us understand David's feelings and motives behind this essay. The paragraph about David sitting on a plane and the flight attendant comes up and asks David if he wants a platter of chicken or shit paints a very, very clear image in our mind. This "scene", if you will, makes the reader understand how clear and obvious David thinks the choice is between two candidates. The final couple of paragraphs in the play during which his mom and dad are fighting through their kids gives the reader a hint about why David feels so strongly about presidential elections. He thinks that randomly casting a vote is incredibly stupid in an extremely important situation. In fact, when he randomly chose his vote, that president went on to be impeached.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/09/11/911.commemoration/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
After a decade of grief and recovery, nation remembers 9/11, is an article on CNN.com about how Americans have responded and acted in the 10 years since the attacks on the United States.
David Ariosto and Laura Dolan paint a vivid picture in our mind when they are describing the scene in New York City 10 years after the attacks on the World Trade Centers. The opening sentence of the article, "Thousands gathered Sunday morning at New York's Ground Zero and stood still in silence, some crying as they listened to the names of the victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks read aloud," gives us a real sense of the feeling and mood of New York. The sentence paints a somber picture that is similar to a funeral. In a way, today is a funeral. People across the country are coming together to remember the 2,977 lives that terrorists stole from America.
Later in the article, the imagery switches from that of a funeral to that of a war zone, "Roads near Ground Zero were blocked and police checkpoints for both vehicles and pedestrians surrounded the memorial." In a war zone, typically roads are either blocked or are patrolled by the forces controlling the territory. The purpose of road blocks and checkpoints are to make sure that all vehicles and people going in and out of the area are documented and also to make sure that nothing dangerous is entering the territory. "...heavy security presence permeating the area in lower Manhattan..." is yet another quote the allows us to picture the scene in NYC today. Police and other authorities are swarming the city looking out for an indication of yet another attack on innocent lives. Dolan and Ariosto describe the scene to us flawlessly and really allow us to imagine what it looks and feels like inside the Big Apple.
There is an extreme contrast of feeling today, 10 years after the 9/11 attacks. Ariosto and Dolan use the word "solemn" numerous times throughout the article. It really drives home the mood. The lost of almost 3,000 innocent lives is extremely devastating. However, there is also the feeling of unity. Despite the difference in Americans, all have one thing in common:10 years ago today we were attacked. President Obama used some very strong words to show the world that America is still here and prouder than ever. "...we refuse to live in fear." "...we remain vigilant." "Refuse" is a very strong word. When the president tells the world that Americans, "refuse to live in fear," it drives home the point that no matter what you do to our country and people, we will stand back up stronger than before.
There are many details used by the authors that added to the article and really make you understand the devastation of 9/11. Throughout the article it has the times when certain events happened; "9:59 a.m., the time the South Tower collapsed." These details give us the sense of time and how quickly everything unfolded. Other details such as, "2,753 people died on two airplanes and on the ground when the planes slammed into the World Trade Center towers, causing their collapse," are necessary in the article to help us understand the destruction and devastation on September 11, 2001. Without these details, the article would feel bland and empty because people reading would not understand why today is such a big deal in American History.
Ariosto and Dolan use diction, imagery and details to really get the readers involved in the article and to be able to understand, visualize the atmosphere, and feel the mood of New York City today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)