The
Elocutionist
The
Elocutionist
Vol. 1
Published by Dapper Sloth Press | Rochester, NY georgegoga.com © 2020 George Goga Cover design: Sophia Turturro All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America.
Table of Contents Introduction
xi P I : T A A
Advertisement of the Gods
17
Find the “Joy” in Advertising
21
K R S C
L R A F
Scientology on The Big Screen
Money, Happiness, and Instant Gratification
C F
29
Puppy Monkey Crazy
33
Razor’s Edge
37
Diversity and Inspiration
41
L K A P
25
B C J R
What Defines “Crazy”?
45
Every Kiss Begins with Kay
and Ends with Money M R
49
The Cruel World of Advertising:
Pepsi Versus Coke Throwdown
53
M B
Flip’N Style or Flip’N Offensive?
57
S T
GilletteVenus Deserves Credence
61 vii
P I I: O J S ’ “A M P ”
What’s For Dinner Baby? Credibility Games
T C
in Swift’s “Modest Proposal”
67
A Swift Essay on Satire
C F
73
A F
A Modest Analysis
77
S C
A “Not So Modest” Proposal
81
Modest, Immodest, or Both?
B C
Should We Eat People or Ridicule Them?
A P
85 89
P I I I: T S
Marginalization in Modern Society
M B
Diving Into New Perspectives: Eighner,
T C
Franklin, and Newman on Judgement A F
95 101
Alienation in the Public Setting:
Strangers at Home
107
C F
Bermuda Triangle
A P
Practical Brilliance in The Works of
Franklin, Eighner, and Rose
121
Intimate Modifications: Eighner, Morrison,
L R
and Staples K R
115
129 Deciding the Rest of Your Life at 18
141
The Reconstruction of Social Perceptions of
S T
Stereotyped People
147 P IV: E S
Under Quarantine
157
LOVE: The Most Powerful Word of Them All
161
K R, A F B C
viii
T C, J R
What Is Your Worst
Nightmare? The Etymology of The Sleep Deprived
165
S C, M R, A P
No Cap: History of “Cap”
169
The Etymological Journey of The Word “Tadpole”
M B
C F, A P
173
“Awful”: The Fantastic
History of A Horrible Word
177
M G, K M, T C
The Rise and Fall of The “Vibe”
181
D F, M A, C M
Nincompoop: The Strange Case of A Conflicted Word
185
Gremlins: Mischief, Mayhem, and Meaning
L K
189
The Etymology of “Ostracize” and Ancient
L R
Greek Discources
193
A P, C R, L R
Your Ideal Society: Utopia S T
199
The Misleading Moniker of America’s
Favorite Patty
203 P V: M
K R
On The Overrated Nature of Alone Time
C F
209
On The Overrated Nature of Superhero Films
V
Responses to Tim Kreider’s “The ‘Busy’ Trap
V
Responses to David Foster Wallace’s
211 213
“Consider the Lobster”
219
About the Authors
225 ix
Introduction
T
he reader holds a collection of non-fiction produced by Geneva High School students during the 2019-2020 academic year. It bears noting that the process of publication signifies a rite of passage in any individual’s life—propelling them beyond the comfortable microcosm of singular experience and into a world of global rhetoric and composition; this is especially true (and rare) of high school students. While the primary scope of this publication is to celebrate student creativity and critical thinking, its secondary aim is to disrupt a series of problematic assumptions about student writers in today’s world. The need for an anthology of this sort is urgent. In a world that’s frightfully expanding its access to publication, whether online or through traditional avenues, one exemption strikes me as most problematic—that of authentic student voices. This is not to say that such voices do not exist; rather, that they have not been adequately celebrated. Year after year, this continues to hold true. We hear of New York Times bestsellers, celebrity authors, and “million-dollar book deals” as though the meritocratic rhetoric of American democracy were not designed to keep particular populations out through not old enough, not wise enough... but maybe next year arguments. The following anthology responds to such a reality, leveraging the included voices to make the reunited case that celebrating student writing is fundamental to crafting an equitable, informed American populace xi
T E
who can think and write for themselves. And that the process of composition, revision, and publication shouldn’t be reserved for a particular age or station in life—by then, many allegiances have already been decided and it becomes woefully inadequate to speak of could have and would have at some point back then. The talented student writer’s dilemma often goes like this: though writing is by no means a chore, it becomes increasingly artificial as the student moves through their secondary and post-secondary education. Whether it be in high school or college, student writing whose logical end is the instructor’s desk, brain, and by extension gradebook becomes stifling, facile, and at times painful. Eventually, writing becomes a chore to complete with frightening regularity rather than a skill to cultivate. This is not to discount the need for writing for one’s self—but to make the reunited case for expanding access to talented, well-spoken student voices as the first step toward supporting a healthy tradition of composition and publication. The anthology begins with an essay often assigned in introductory writing classes—the advertisement analysis. Here, students select a memorable television ad and assess its effectiveness through common rhetorical appeals. Beyond the obvious notion that writing about images is a prerequisite for writing about prose, ambitious students often select ineffective ads, explicating in detail how the ad’s rhetoric fails rather than fulfills its rhetorical purpose. Following this, the second essay is a rhetorical analysis of Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”. Here, students evaluate the effectiveness of Swift’s rhetoric through his use of the same appeals analyzed in the previous assignment; the striking difference here is that students have graduated from writing about images to writing about words which continue to carry weight on the twenty-first century reader who is often caught off guard, even defenseless against Swift’s satirical proposal in favor of cannibalism. The third type of essay in this collection is a rhetorical analysis of three separate essays, which students read, evaluate, and asxii
Introduction
sess, articulating an argument about how each author’s rhetoric supports their purpose, while also identifying commonalities in theme. The essential difference here is that students are writing about the how and the why of one unifying theme. The final essay included in this collection involves researching the etymology of one word in the English language. Among other sources, students rely on the Oxford English Dictionary to explicate the nuances and shades of meaning that have affected the word since its inception. Beyond requiring students to participate in the research process, the essay also asks students to speculate, and to tell the story of the future of the word’s etymology—a move that would make any linguist proud. I’ve allowed myself to monopolize one part of this publication, its introduction, to point out a painful realization: that although I would love to take sole responsibility for these essays, in all reality, it is students’ immense dedication to the task at hand that has crafted the following collection. Throughout the composition and revision process, students have taken the lead to produce the book you now hold. Along with teaching them about the publication process, this experience has placed them at the center of creative expression, crafting their own narrative about who they are as learners and who they will become. George Goga 2020
xiii
Part I:
The Advertisement Analysis
Advertisement of The Gods
K R
I
magine the first bite of your favorite candy or food. That heavenly taste that has been long awaited has finally found you. This heartwarming feeling is simply unmatched. The Ferrero Rocher “Food of the Gods” commercial capitalizes on this marvelous moment by appealing to pathos. This commercial describes the Ferrero Rocher candy as being the Gods of Olympus’ “divine secret” that accidentally fell from the heavens to us. Explicitly, the ad emphasizes the candy’s “divine” taste that is worthy of the Gods of Olympus; implicitly, the ad sells power and prosperity by implying that if this candy were to be eaten, the viewer too could have the power of a God or Goddess. Ferrero Rocher is famous for its golden wrapped candies and commercials filled with golden structures and costumery. The God and Goddesses in this commercial are dressed from head to toe in golden decoration. The ad begins with a celebration between the Gods and Goddesses where it is raining Ferrero Rocher candies from the sky when suddenly candy slips through the grasp of a God and lands on the table of a family gathering down below. The Gods and Goddesses have accidentally lost their secret delectable candy and shared it with the mortal humans below them.
T E
As an expensive candy, Ferrero Rocher’s marketing is targeted towards wealthier individuals as this candy may be considered a luxury. This can be seen in the advertisement because the Ferrero Rocher candy starts out as the dessert of choice between the Gods and Goddesses of Olympus, which then falls upon us who are seemingly unworthy of this divine snack. The famous golden packaging of each individually wrapped candy and the golden decoration throughout the commercial introduce an association between purchasing this candy and living a luxurious, elegant lifestyle. Ferrero Rocher is implying that by purchasing this product, consumers will be one step closer to achieving this somewhat unattainable lifestyle that is rare, yet so enviable. Americans in particular associate affluence with happiness, which is what makes this commercial so effective and popular. Because of the general wealth of America as a whole, this leaves its citizens wanting more. Ferrero Rocher acknowledges this association and markets its whole brand accordingly. Through color association and implicitly encouraging viewers to be ambitious and motivated, this Ferrero Rocher advertisement has a strong appeal to pathos. Gold is strategically placed all throughout this ad and all other ads by Ferrero Rocher. All of the Gods and Goddesses are dressed in gold, all of the structures are golden, and even the sky of Mt. Olympus has a golden tint. The color gold usually correlates to a sophisticated, refined way of life which is sought after by many. The ad implies that if one were to simply purchase this dessert, one might be that much closer to a dignified lifestyle. This ad gives viewers a sense of motivation; the belief that they might be able to surpass their current setbacks and achieve what they really want in life. This kind of motivation subconsciously encourages viewers to better themselves and purchase this candy. Ferrero Rocher’s company tagline is “The Golden Experience,” alluding to the possible lifestyle of spectacular opulence that could be yours. The “Food of the Gods” commercial clearly alludes to the Gods and Goddesses of Mt. Olympus in Greek mythology.
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
There is a very powerful image in this commercial of the person who is assumed to be Zeus holding and examining a candy. Zeus is known to be the king of the Gods and is said to be the most powerful of them all. This suggests that this candy is superior to any of its competitors and is worthy of the utmost praise and respect as it is the dessert of choice of the most powerful God of them all. Viewers may also find the connection between this candy and the Gods humorous, which is another powerful appeal to pathos. You don’t have to be knowledgeable in Greek mythology to believe that Ferrero Rocher candies raining on top of Mt. Olympus is entertaining; this is what makes this ad’s appeal more universal. The outlandish idea of the Gods of Olympus creating this candy is so abstract and unique that it becomes funny. Most of all, this ad is entertaining, which has the largest appeal to the greatest number of people, therefore selling this product on all levels. There is a brief moment at the end of the commercial that flashes to a family gathering where people are enjoying Ferrero Rocher candies. Transitioning from the Gods of Olympus to this real-life situation brings the viewers back to thinking about how this candy could be a part of their day to day lives, and brings a sense of camaraderie to the advertisement. Through a variety of different rhetorical strategies, this commercial’s appeal to pathos is very effective. Viewers are most distinctly affected by pathos which is what makes this ad particularly strong compared to others. This commercial gives a sense of ambition, luxury, and elegance, which specifically appeals to American culture. Americans are known for wanting to be the wealthiest and wanting to get ahead of others. Americans can be very cut-throat and competitive when it comes to their monetary success and are often known to value this success over family values and traditions. This ad mainly focuses on prosperity and secondly on family. The commercial caters to this stereotype and furthers this distinctly American mentality while simultaneously inspiring viewers to have the power and influence they desire.
Find the “Joy” in Advertising
S C
T
he Joy “Change the World” commercial revolves around selling shaving products that are only available at Walmart. Walmart and Gillette teamed up to create a women’s shaving line that acknowledges how much of a hassle it is to shave. The razor comes in two flattering colors, pink and teal; these colors are very feminine and appeal to women. The company knows that if this product were meant for women, they wouldn’t want to purchase a green razor, and would rather choose the color teal. The Joy company doesn’t just sell razors; they also sell shaving cream and refill blades. They make these products more affordable to create more appeal. The “Change the World” Joy advertisement explicitly sells razors for women. This advertisement uses the idea that a razor can’t change the world, but consumers can build up confidence to make an impact by using this product, and they can have less body hair while doing so. This short, sixteen second ad features a new razor exclusively for women. The ad takes place in a feminine looking bathroom, given that the bathroom is all pink, including the razor. The bathroom has pink tile walls, a pink hamper, and a colorful toothpaste holder. This was done to attract women to this product and to be more appealing. The point is to demonstrate to
T E
women that if they want to change the world, they can do it with no body hair and smooth skin. This presents the idea that a breath of fresh air for a woman’s legs can change her confidence and attitude. The narrator and actress in the commercial are both women, and this is done to add feminine support for the ad. The reason Gillette made these new feminine shaving products was most likely because they usually make more masculine products; here, they were trying to change things up. This product is meant for women; this is helpful by making women want this product, since it is explicitly for them. This advertisement targets women of any age, race, and class. Gillette teamed up with Walmart to open up to a larger population. Walmart is one of the powerhouses of American capitalism because of their affordable prices and baffling variety of products. But is there an ulterior motive to this decision made between Gillette and Walmart? Gillette may have teamed up with Walmart to reach a certain audience that can’t afford outrageously priced razors. Gillette and Walmart knew that if women see this feminine razor made by a well-known company, a razor that they can actually afford, it may encourage them to engage in the stereotypes of American beauty. Making these products as feminine looking as possible attracts women to buy them more often than men. Since the ad features a woman shaving, it proves to the audience that it is a female product. This specific ad was most likely made to convince women that they can do whatever they want in the world. The company did this because more women need to take charge and embrace their bodies. Using this in the ad allows women to build up the confidence to change the world. The packaging is even made simplistic and feminine. Joy did this because they knew people would be attracted to a simpler, more colorful package. The more basic the packaging, the simpler the razor is, right? The Joy razor commercial features the package for the razor at the very end. The package has no unnecessary features. There are no boring and tedious details other than the three most im
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
portant ones. The package tells people that each razor has five blades, that each package contains one razor, and that each razor comes with two cartridges. It even communicates the color in an appealing way. In this case, it’s “Joy: the pink one”. This makes people completely informed about the product within seconds of looking at it. By making the packaging simple, Gillette draws buyers into believing that in addition to all of its benefits, the product is also simple. It creates a logical appeal by appropriately using the product’s statistics. The whole advertisement itself is straightforward. The Joy commercial featuring the razor’s package appeals to people with the use of easy logic. This Joy, “Change the World” commercial uses a strong amount of pathos. The whole feminine aspect of changing the world is an emotional appeal for a woman’s confidence. The ad demonstrates that if you have smooth, shaved skin, you can do anything. The appeal of making everything in the ad stereotypically “feminine” draws women in. Since both the narrator and the actress are women, consumers are attracted to the product because they can relate to what the women in the ad are saying. At the end of the commercial, the actress who was shaving her legs walks out of the bathroom with a piece of toilet paper stuck to her shoe. This is an appeal to pathos because everyone watching can relate to this, and it adds humor to the commercial. Humor is a big part of pathos and it makes an appeal to a broader audience because it causes people to smile or laugh; these things make people happy. The use of pathos in this ad draws consumers in by making it relatable. Unlike pathos, appeals to ethos are minimal in the commercial. The most credible part of this advertisement is the fact that it depicts women successfully using the product. This tells the audience that this product is reliable and worth it. This ad also communicates extensively about the values of American culture. With the main idea of the ad being supporting women in power, it demonstrates how the stereotype of women has changed in American culture. It exemplifies the belief that women can do
T E
anything as well as men can. The Joy, “Change the World” commercial gives women a whole new attitude which increases their confidence to make themselves unstoppable. This commercial tells women that it’s their time to shine.
Scientology on The Big Screen
L R
C
ommunication between people isn’t something that was just introduced to the public, but its developments and renovations come very quickly. From the radio, to television, and now phones, staying in contact has always been a priority. Communication can be used to relay important information, to ensure that all is safe with others, and to reach out to many people all at once. Commercials and advertisements allow companies, or those who can afford a publication to get people interested in some sort of product or topic they’re passionate about. During the 2019 Superbowl, NBC began to air its famous advertisement, “Curiosity”. Viewers were shocked to see a Scientology commercial, promoting the belief and urging viewers to investigate it play before them. The clip is packed with different scenarios of people being portrayed as fearless and brave as they endure tasks. Some are depicted making their way through a blizzard, others coming out of what seem like flames, and some even scuba diving. In addition to the visuals presented, background music accompanies the narration which works to create appeals to ethos and pathos meant to grasp the audience’s attention and spark its interest in this topic. The Scientology commercial is intended to make becoming a part of this belief appear to be a life changing
T E
and enhancing experience. It’s implied that the individuals in the beginning of the advertisement were influenced by Scientology to achieve such things. And so, it also works to create the impression that Scientology has revolutionized the modern world, and is integral to a highly developed society. Today, there are a lot of mixed opinions and ideologies going around when it comes to social issues that it’s very easy to clash with one another. The creators, executive directors, and others involved in creating the advertisement acknowledge that there may be people out there who are worried or anxious about all the hostility around them, and they used it to their advantage. The diction in the advertisement creates an appeal to pathos where Scientology is seen as a path to a more fulfilling or harmonious life. The narration states that Scientology is so powerful that it can “vanquish [...] ignorance and intolerance”. Other than making the viewers conscious of current issues and making itself a sort of salvation, it also presents Scientology as a tool that will improve society and make us understand each other better. The pathos appeal appears throughout the entire advertisement, with the intention of drawing in those who feel hopeless or lost in the world, or may be worried of what’s to come. The narration starts off by making Scientology appear as a sort of force that’s capable of diminishing “fear, bigotry, and hate”, and will also “bind us all” and “bring us closer”. Throughout the entirety of the advertisement, in the background, the music serves to be sort of uplifting, or that it may be climaxing towards something. It helps to mirror that the presence of Scientology will eventually lead to something monumental and resolve all of society’s complications and issues. The advertisement isn’t encouraging viewers to look into the belief, or contradicting other beliefs either. Rather, the advertisement is promoting its credibility and achievements to prove its effectiveness. Throughout the clip, this “force” is constantly being described as powerful, or having the potential to do impressive things, and resolve issues in a manner that benefits us all. The ad explicitly states that “the biggest minds in history” have been
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
influenced by this belief, and paints Scientology as largely influential and monumental. On the screen, images of historical figures such as Abraham Lincoln, Frank Lloyd Wright, Nikola Tesla, Shakespeare, and even Amelia Earhart appear. It’s stated that these individuals have been driven to solve mysteries in all sorts of disciplines, all thanks to Scientology and its influence on them. Adding such world-renowned figures and claiming that their life achievements have “solv[ed] the mysteries of science and culture,’’ enforces the power and life changing impact Scientology has. The purpose of the commercial is very clear, being that its creators wanted to display the effects Scientology has, and how much it has already achieved. After further analysis and research, the commercial fails to prove its credibility, and the statements can be disproved with a simple Google search. In the beginning, the accelerating visuals and mysterious narration all worked to try and grab the audience’s attention. The very bold statements in the second half of the advertisement were very generalizing, and completely threw out any ounce of credibility. Individuals shown on the screen, such as Shakespeare, were said to be guided by Scientology to achieve all they did, yet all of them, other than Frank Lloyd Wright, had already passed away before the creation of Scientology in 1953. So much time must’ve been invested in perfecting the commercial, where pathos created a reassuring appeal to the audience, and ethos evoked an appeal that Scientology would lead to great things. Yet, the creators and executive directors behind the scene utterly messed up by creating such a lie. Not only did they misinform the viewers, but they also created a gap for many to question the veracity of Scientology itself. Calling out the inaccuracy of who was influenced by the belief, will then lead to questioning the credibility of Scientology as a whole, and anyone involved. It’s important to note that the advertisement was also degrading the legacy that all these historic people left behind, by boiling it all down, and claiming that it’s all due to Scientology, nothing else.
T E
At first glance the advertisement is filled with accelerating visuals and demanding narration, and implies that Scientology has revolutionized (and will continue revolutionizing) the world as we know it. However, the advertisement fails to establish its credibility by presenting historic individuals on the screen and claiming that they had been influenced by Scientology, when in actuality that was a lie manufactured by the creators. The advertisement, “Curious”, did not prove itself to be an effective Scientology promotion, and also went as far to undermine the intelligence of the viewers and anyone who happened to come across it. In today’s day and age, questioning the reliability of anything presented to us is crucial, so when observing an advertisement such as the Scientology one, it doesn’t harm oneself to investigate its credibility.
Money, Happiness, and Instant Gratification A F
T
he Japanese commercial “Dog to Lion” is a powerful advertisement intended to persuade the viewer to buy Amazon Prime. Amazon is a company that intrigued the world with its accessibility, reliability, and usefulness. The website contains everything you can imagine, all available with the push of a few buttons. Amazon Prime allows you to have free one day shipping on every order and discounts on certain items, while only having to pay a small fee every month. The “Dog to Lion” advertisement is explicitly selling you its membership benefits, but is implicitly selling you much more. Along with Amazon Prime, you are being sold the concept of instant gratification. Instead of waiting weeks, you can marvel at what your money has bought you the next day. Additionally, the idea that money can buy happiness is indirectly expressed throughout the commercial. Through the use of various appeals to ethos and pathos, this ad attempts to convince the viewer that life with Amazon Prime is easier—that you will be happier, less stressed, and more successful. The commercial begins with a golden retriever laying down sadly, then picks its head up in excitement as the owners return
T E
with a newborn baby. The dog notices the family playing together and walks over to the baby. The baby immediately starts crying and the dog returns to its former place, and watches from the distance. The baby begins to play with a lion stuffed animal, and the father recognizes the dog’s jealousy and sadness. He uses Amazon Prime to order a lion mane costume and the dog makes a second attempt to meet the baby, and this time, is not rejected. The commercial continues by displaying the dog looking in the mirror with the lion mane on, and the father takes it off and puts it on himself. The ad implies that the family is upper middle class since they are well dressed and live in a nice home with warm, inviting colors. The advertisement is targeting the average family by displaying one on the screen: a husband, wife, child, and pet. But by creating a setting of above average wealth, the advertisement is implicitly putting the idea in the mind of the viewer that their situation will look like the on-screen family if they purchase Amazon Prime. The commercial is airing on television, as opposed to YouTube or a different streaming service. This is because the audience of television is mainly adults; the younger generations have moved on to Netflix and Hulu. The advertisement is taking advantage of the uniformity of society by placing their product into a situation that is parallel to the audience watching it. It is obvious that the commercial is appealing heavily to pathos. The difference in the relationship between the baby and the dog before and after using Amazon Prime is what makes the ad effective. Who wouldn’t want the dog and the baby to get along? Before the father uses Amazon Prime, the dog is portrayed as lonely and appears to be longing for the baby’s acceptance. Afterwards, the family seems to be more united, and the baby reaching for the dog just pulls on your heartstrings. The simple fact that a dog and baby are being used is an appeal to pathos itself. Would a Gerber commercial be as effective without a cute baby in it? The short answer is no, so Amazon is appealing to that soft spot in their audience. Perhaps they are using the baby as a way to
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
appeal to their middle-aged audience members who may miss the days when their child was that young. Amazon is appealing to the viewer’s youth, and effectively establishing a relationship between their service, money, and happiness. Furthermore, the scene where the dog is looking into the mirror with the lion mane on, and the father takes it off and puts it on himself is crucial to the advertisement’s message. Not only is this appealing to pathos through humor, but it also creates an underlying statement. The father saw how money correlated to the lion mane and how it made the baby love the dog. He puts it on because he might feel inferior or is upset that the child might be more attached to the mother. By paralleling the dog and father in the mirror, Amazon is inferring that money can put people on equal footing and is implying that spending it is a way to empower yourself. Amazon is also appealing to ethos by trying to establish credibility with the audience. The use of the normalized family and how Amazon’s service has a positive impact on their lives is an attempt to convince you to believe their product is worth buying. Seeing an advertisement that is similar to your own life makes the product seem more applicable, and overall more useful. Amazon is aiming for their viewers to think it worked for them so it will work for me, too. The commercial illustrates how Amazon Prime is beneficial and attempts to build credibility through their service being put to use by a typical family. Amazon’s “Dog to Lion” advertisement effectively pieces together convincing appeals to sell you its premium service. The setting and characters create an aura of relatability and comfort allowing for the viewer to be comfortable and trust the advertisement. However, when you purchase Amazon Prime, you are also buying into the cycle of instant gratification. The advertisement connotes money and happiness, so we, the audience must ask ourselves, do we want everything to be “prime”? Should we be more patient with our money or buy into fast and impulsive spending? And finally, how will this have an impact on our lives?
Puppy Monkey Crazy
C F
A
dvertisements have been around for a long time and as they have evolved from signs to radio to television, they have become inescapable and essential to the contemporary business model. The Super Bowl has become famous for its commercials and viewers often watch this event solely for these sponsored ads. Many different companies compete to have the most memorable ad that will hopefully boost sales. One company known for their advertisements is PepsiCo, which owns brands such as Doritos and Mountain Dew that are often known for their outrageous and silly advertising. Mountain Dew’s “Puppy Monkey Baby” commercial aired during the Super Bowl in 2016 to promote their new Kickstarter energy drink, and it took the world by storm. This ad mainly focuses on an appeal to pathos as the hybrid between a puppy, monkey, and baby strives to be just weird enough to get your attention and remember the product. The ad opens with three friends sitting on a couch watching television while looking tired and bored. The Puppy Monkey Baby then emerges from the wall and hands each person a Kickstart. After drinking this, the friends get up and dance with the puppy monkey baby down the hallway and the commercial closes with a shot of the can. This is used in combination with parallel struc
T E
ture to create a very engaging ad that keeps the consumer thinking about the product for days. While the ad is clearly trying to get the consumer to buy Kickstart, it implicitly sells youth and energy to modern day consumers. The best ads often feature something that is very memorable that consumers associate with the product. In the Mountain Dew Kickstart ad, this feature comes in the form of an animal that is a hybrid with a baby as the lower section, a monkey as the mid-section, and a puppy as the head. This immediately grabs the audience’s attention since no one has ever seen anything like it before. This shock factor really gets people talking about the ad which allows it to spread past the bounds of television and into our everyday lives. An effective ad is often not the one that tries to sell the product to the consumer during the thirty second ad spot because this is unrealistic. Most people are able to see through the messaging in the ad and won’t buy the product. However, Puppy Monkey Baby turns into a conversation starter. The more people talk about it, the more people that are talking about Mountain Dew Kickstarter, which helps sell the product. Maybe the Monday after the Super Bowl everyone at work is talking about that crazy Mountain Dew commercial, and people who never even watched the commercial may now know about the new product. This use of pathos to specifically target humor with an outrageous ad idea is what Puppy Monkey Baby excels at. The emotional appeal of this commercial may even be so strong that it prompts viewers to watch it again on other mediums such as YouTube. Puppy Monkey Baby makes a very strong appeal to pathos that makes it an unforgettable ad. The Mountain Dew Kickstart Puppy Monkey Baby commercial also utilizes parallel structure to make the energy drink more appealing to audiences. At the end of the commercial text appears on the screen saying “three awesome things combined” which the viewer may initially think is only referring to the weird animal hybrid dancing on the screen. Then it cuts to a picture of the energy drink and there is text that reads “dew juice caffeine com
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
bined.” This helps to place in parallel the Puppy Monkey Baby with the three main attributes of the energy drink. Additionally, this highlights that Kickstart is not your normal Mountain Dew, as they highlight the juice and caffeine aspects. Specifically marketing that this energy drink contains juice helps to appeal to logos as people often think of fruit juice as a healthy thing to drink for all ages which contrasts the aggressive marketing of many other energy drinks. A drink that contains juice seems like the logical option to choose, and it is very hard to see the five percent juice writing on the can. The combination of parallel structure and logos at the end of the ad drives the message home of how great this new product from Mountain Dew is. Some may say that this Puppy Monkey Baby creature does not make any sense and isn’t relatable, making the ad ineffective. While unrelatable, the comic nature of the commercial is what makes it so memorable. People love to laugh, and this ad excels at that, which helps to sell the happiness and energy that will come with Kickstart if you buy it. Others may point out the ambiguity fallacy which overemphasizes the juice content to make the drink more appealing. Even though this is misleading, this type of fallacy is commonplace in many ads, and doesn’t change the effectiveness of the ad. In this case, it may be viewed as morally wrong by some. “Puppy Monkey Baby” is a very strong ad that appeals to the viewers primarily through pathos. Mountain Dew’s “Puppy Monkey Baby” commercial strategically appeals to pathos by creating a funny and outrageous animal that viewers can’t help but watch. This is especially savvy given that advertising is always evolving alongside the fast-paced lives many people enjoy. As a result, ads have become fantastical to draw consumers’ attention. Social media has also affected advertising as people’s attention spans shrink and advertising spots become shorter; a lengthy informative ad has become outdated. PepsiCo is thriving in this market as its subsidiaries such as Doritos and Mountain Dew create wild and eye-catching advertisements with a strong appeal to pathos. Technology has definitely
T E
changed advertising and will continue to push the boundaries of what we think is possible in marketing, but it bears repeating that regardless of future change, we must maintian a critical attitude when evaluating what we’re being sold and how.
Razor’s Edge
L K
A
recent commercial for Gillette brand razors, called “We Believe: The Best Men Can Be” attracted massive attention across the internet for aligning itself against sexual harassment. “We Believe” derives its power mostly from appeals to hope, compassion, and progress. Gillette’s position as a corporation isn’t leveraged as a source of authority; instead, it creates an appeal to ethos with its filmmaking and style, and also appeals to the values of its audience as it progresses. It tackles a sensitive subject intending to provoke its audience into action, whether that be buying their products or drawing attention to the company itself. The ad begins with men staring pensively into the mirror. Are they preparing to shave, or is this self-reflection? Shaving, especially shaving with a Gillette razor, is an opportunity for self-reflection, it suggests. A pack of boys burst through an older Gillette commercial which proclaims the product “the best a man can get,” rushing past scenes of misogyny and aggression, and the excuses made for them. The disembodied voice of our narrator implores the hypothetical man watching to teach the next generation of men fewer toxic habits. “We Believe” mimics a cinematic aspect ratio. The layout of the ad has the little black bars on the top and bottom of the im
T E
age that mimic the dimensions of a movie screen; you see them on anything intended for release in theaters. The implication is that this advertisement is Important Cinema, with an important message for its audience, which, in a sense, it does. Several additional surreal details, including a chorus line of grilling dads, evoke the style of art-house filmmaking. The official video on YouTube even labels it a “Short Film.” “We Believe” mimics the aesthetics of filmmaking (which advertising is usually excluded from) in an attempt to associate itself with serious, more genuine art. It advocates for the kind of self-reflection and systemic change that can be found in this genuine art, but all its depth and sincerity intend to sell you razors. Any emotional appeal the ad makes relies heavily on its style; without the trappings of Serious Cinema, the swelling score and heartfelt narration come across as overwrought. It implores men to curb toxic habits and to set a better example for their children. The viewer is encouraged to feel hopeful. For example, the bright-eyed boys are shown as the next generation of men who will be better than their elders, but only if we all support the great, benevolent company. “We Believe” makes few appeals to logic. Misogyny and razors are only tenuously connected, and logically, the quality of razors has nothing to do with gender. The notion that women are obligated to remove body hair while men aren’t does bring together gender and razors, but the ad isn’t concerned with this—it doesn’t really seem to care what women think. The connection is obviously logically inconsistent, but that doesn’t matter, as long as Gillette’s brand is associated with progress and hope in the minds of consumers. At the risk of engaging in conspiracy theories, I suspect this ad has two intended audiences: feminists who will appreciate a razor company is telling men not to be total ogres, and men who are total ogres who will be outraged that a razor company is telling them what to do. The feminists might consider supporting this brave company taking a stand against sexual harassment in order to sell their products. The ogres as a target audience is, in
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
my opinion, the more interesting decision; advertising that appeals to progressive social values isn’t exactly new. I can’t say if the backlash itself was engineered, but it had to have been expected. There is a small, if vocal portion of the internet who will lose their minds at any vague gesture towards feminism. Their online temper-tantrums can’t do much to Gillette itself- hurt feelings are for puny humans, but they can and will draw attention to the very thing they are angry about. Gillette is encroaching on real life; by prompting discourse, it extends its ability to advertise from the advertising-saturated internet into the conversations that real people have. Gillette isn’t wrong to associate progress with optimism and joy and hope; a future world that is safer for women is something to strive for, but it is wrong to associate itself with that progress. It is, ultimately, a company driven by profit. It may be interested in social change, but not social change that might wound its precious bottom line. Advertising that harnesses any kind of social movement is inherently exploitative; as much as a company may profess to care deeply for the timely social movement, it is trying to appeal to you. Any political stance is carefully considered for potential risk and social benefits; there is no personal connection, no conviction, no desire for freedom or justice or good because it is a corporation; it cannot feel. Anthropomorphizing itself, convincing you that it is principled, self-aware, and conscientious is just more advertising. You should never care for a company the way you care for a person—loving other people makes you human, and loving a company makes you a customer.
Diversity and Inspiration
A P
T
he 2014 Apple ad, “Inclusion Inspires Innovation” conveys a strong message of diversity by displaying that the people who work for Apple are all different. Apple chose the theme of diversity to encourage people of all races and genders to buy its products. During the majority of Apple’s existence, it has been the most sought-after technology brand and this advertisement gives consumers more reasons to use Apple products. Throughout this ad, Apple appeals to pathos to convince people to be lifelong Apple users, not just to buy one product. A crucial message displayed throughout this ad is “diversity inspires innovation and creativity.” In a diverse environment, everyone is treated equally and there is a surplus of opportunities for anyone. When everyone is treated with the same potential, they’re likely to be more confident in sharing their ideas because they feel safe. In this type of environment, creativity will flourish because everyone is being treated equally. People in this environment are empowered to do their best, which helps Apple products become even better. Apple strategically uses clips of people smiling to suggest that Apple employees are happy and friendly. By exhibiting this, Apple makes people aware that they run a diverse and pleasant
T E
place to work. If people know that the company they’re getting their technology from is a diverse, happy place, they will be more likely to buy their products, such as cell phones or laptops. The clips also show a lot of the people wearing their own outfits, in colorful rooms, which attracts more customers than just plain pictures. Each Apple commercial is aimed at a specific group of people. The diversity ad is aimed towards middle aged people who have money to buy new technology. If you look up Apple ads, you’ll find that most of them feature all different people, not just the product they’re selling. By doing so, Apple demonstrates that its brand is user friendly and loved by many people. Some of Apple’s advertisements are aimed towards the younger group of people, teens and mid-twenties. They do this because people in this demographic always seem to want the new best product. When they see ads for the newest iPhone or MacBook, they will want to go out and buy it. In this diversity ad, Apple portrays its employees as happy and creative while depicting them in their different work environments. Each person is wearing something different, in a different setting. Some people have colorful hair and clothes. Some are in an office setting, while some are in a big open building. Showing each person in a different setting contributes to the advertisement’s main theme of celebrating corporate diversity. This ad utilizes pathos to persuade the audience to choose Apple products. They use clips of people smiling or laughing to suggest that Apple is a happy place to work, which will make more people want to buy their products. When people see that others are happy, they automatically become happy as well. Another method that Apple employs is the use of pathos by matching up the video clips with the beat of the music. I think this draws the viewers in because, in a way, it is satisfying seeing the music and the video clips match up on each beat. During the shopping experience, if you are greeted by friendly workers, you are more willing to buy something from them.
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
Being friendly to other people helps both the producer (Apple) and the consumer because it becomes a better-rounded transaction for everyone involved. The purpose of the ad is to encourage and invite people to shop with Apple. The sense of diversity portrayed in the ad makes people feel more comfortable shopping and purchasing things with Apple. Anyone watching this would feel more comfortable and understand the meaning behind this ad that Apple has produced. This is a very strategic ad that Apple has produced because the result is Apple selling more products to a more diverse group of people. This leads to a broader distribution, and benefits the company by having a more diverse population using their products, ultimately growing the company. Some people may ask “Why does Apple display diversity in this ad if its products are ultimately aimed at one specific group of people?”. I believe that by creating this ad, Apple is trying to convey that its products are available to all people regardless of race, age, or ability. Apple is trying to make people aware that anyone could buy their products and by exhibiting that their staff is diverse, it helps attract a more diverse group of consumers to buy Apple products. Apple is one of the most sought-after companies in the world. Their advertisements are inspiring and creative. These are quality products that are available to anyone, all over the world. So, if you’re looking to be inspired and creative, buy Apple products!
What Defines “Crazy”?
B C
I
n today’s day and age, advertisements in any shape or form are basically required to propel your business into the limelight. Advertisements can be simple enough that a three-year-old child could understand and complex enough so that they require critical thinking to fully understand the concept of what’s being sold. Businesses promote their products or ideas by appealing to ethos, pathos, and/or logos. Ads that receive the most recognition are the ones that are emotional or just simply dramatic: a form of pathos, because as humans, we base the majority of our decisions solely on emotion. The multibillion-dollar company Nike is known all over the world, generally for its shoes and the promotion of athletes. Its slogan “Just Do It” is legitimately the foundation for its many promotions and sales. Nike released an ad “Dream Crazier” in February 2019, which reviews the stereotypes placed on women in sports and society. An appeal to pathos is depicted throughout the entire commercial and some appeals to logos also appear. Those qualities are what help many ads including this one in particular become effective. Since Nike is a huge company known all around the world, the company takes on many issues and debates and uses them as a platform for its advertisements. In this instance, it takes on
T E
the debate surrounding women’s equality in sports and society. This is a sensitive, aggressive topic that seems to be a worldwide debate. Nike titles this ad as “Dream Crazier”, which raises the question, are women who go above and beyond in sports and in their careers crazy? Or, is this the new normal? It’s the twenty-first century; we are no longer in the eighteenth or nineteenth century where the role of women was to take care of the children by being a housewife. I personally connected with this because as a female who is very athletic, it is important to me that more young girls become involved with sports. Also, that they feel comfortable enough to escape their comfort zone in any aspect of life. Nike makes this ad especially effective because the company is not forcing you to buy its products; it doesn’t even mention the products at all. The narrator is having a conversation with the audience about a real issue. The ad appeals to everyone, but its target audience is young female athletes because the ad serves as inspiration to contradict societal norms and pressures. The use of appeals to logos help Nike make this ad more convincing and reliable. The company also uses many famous female athletes to help support this point. If Nike just used random female athletes, then people wouldn’t pay attention, and the ad wouldn’t be as influential. Having celebrities endorse a product or promote an issue generally engages a larger audience because we feel that if a celebrity approves a product, then the product must be worth pursuing and then purchasing. Nike uses the most well-known female soccer, tennis, track, and basketball players (just to name a few sports) to convey its message. In addition, using female athletes shows that they are allowed to have a voice and that someone actually values their opinions. Throughout the entire ad, the narrator lists many stereotypes that are placed on women in sports. The most powerful ones that stood out to me were that “If we show emotion, we’re called dramatic” and “And if we get angry we’re hysterical, irrational, or just being crazy”. If we show any sentiment, it’s presumed as not lady-like which is collectively unfair. This raises the question, why are men allowed
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
to lash out in any way, but women are supposed to be composed at all times? The use of the female athletes demonstrates that it is okay to have a reaction to anything that you’re passionate about. This advertisement is effective because of its dominant appeals to pathos. The opening scene sets the tone for the entire commercial: Paralympic runner, Sarah Reinersten, is very emotional after winning a race and at a press conference. This is one of the stereotypes that women are not allowed to show happy or sad emotions. We are held to a double standard if we show even the slightest amount of emotion. In the next couple of scenes, there’s WNBA players, coaches and tennis players verbally attacking the refs after a bad call. To say the least, this is a good thing; we’ve always been forced to bottle our emotions in, and now we’re at a major turning point in women’s sports. Also, the tone of voice of the narrator makes the ad seem serious. She’s not in a cheerful mood nor is she angry; she has a neutral voice that isn’t draining, but keeps you engaged in the conversation. Not to mention, the narrator of the ad is Serena Williams, the hardworking and successful African American world champion tennis player. At the end of the ad, she goes on to say, “So if they want to call you crazy fine, show them what crazy can do” and that just left a mark on me personally, and probably many other people as well. After watching this commercial, it actually made me want to go out and work harder to prove all the people who place stereotypes wrong. The women in this ad and women all over the world are being celebrated for breaking down the barriers for sports and in the real world.
Every Kiss Begins with Kay and Ends with Money
J R
U
sually during the holiday season, television advertisements synchronize with the spirit of the holidays. So, if it’s Halloween time, the ads will be Halloween themed. If it’s Christmas time, the ads will be Christmas themed, and so on. No matter what type of ad it is, it usually has a select audience that it’s targeting. There’s something about certain ads in particular that make them stick in our minds so that we can’t ignore them or the products they market. The “Every Kiss Begins with Kay” 2018 holiday ad is a perfect demonstration of this. This ad is memorable because of its little jingle at the end. Every time you hear of Kay Jewelers, the name of the company, you hear their little jingle and either smile about it because it makes you remember someone in particular, or it’s stuck in your head and you can’t get it out. So, when someone doesn’t know what to buy for one of their family members or their significant other and they’re watching television and this ad just happens to come on, they’ll think of that jingle which increases their likelihood of going there. Every Kiss Begins with Kay ad seems effective on the surface, but when you dig a little deeper, you will find out that that’s not entirely true.
T E
Every Kiss Begins with Kay is an appeal to pathos because of the family that appears in the ad. The ad is explicitly trying to sell you their company’s jewelry, while implicitly trying to sell you that Kay Jewelers makes you happy by showing how happy the woman in the commercial is after she receives the Kay Jewelers necklace. In their commercial “Memorable Christmas,” you can see it’s a very chaotic family environment, which everyone can relate to. You see a dog playing with wrapping paper, a child on a bicycle, a teenage girl who thinks dinner looks unappetizing, among other different things. In particular, though, you see the main couple in the middle of it all. At the end of the ad, the man takes the woman outside and gives her a Kay Jewelers necklace, which in return makes her give him a kiss. You can assume either two things about this ad. It’s either really sweet and reminds you of Christmas and makes you happy. It can also make you think that the woman is materialistic. She can be considered materialistic because she shows her signs of affection only after he gives her the shiny, expensive, necklace. These commercials are, in themselves, extremely materialistic, demonstrating in their ads that jewelry is the key to happiness in a relationship. The “Every Kiss Begins With Kay” commercials are aimed at men and women in their twenties who would like to get engaged and buy a nice, yet very expensive ring. In its commercials, Kay Jewelers makes it seem like its storefront is a lovely, inviting space; the company achieves this by including shots of families and couples enjoying their products. However, it is not a lovely place to work. Some people who have worked there in the past have come forward with rather interesting claims of sexual harassment and sexism. According to an article published in the New York Times, “The Company That Sells Love to America Had a Dark Secret,” Dawn Souto-Coons was one individual who came forward with claims of both. Souto-Coons said that she had been working at the company for many years and had never once received an interview for a manager’s position. Every time a spot would open, she said they
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
would replace the manager with a man and never even once considered her, even though her immediate manager claimed that she would. Souto-Coons also claims that even though they didn’t think she was manager material, she was placed in charge of training people to be the new manager, who in this case were all men. She also said one of the men who replaced the manager would make snide remarks about the women who came into the shop. Souto-Coons has also come forward about the men at Kay Jewelers getting paid more than the women. She said she stumbled upon this by accident when she pulled up the payroll forms. Kay Jewelers is a prime example of the fact that everything is not what it seems. Kay Jewelers is one of the most famous jewelry shops and has very expensive items. While the jewelry there may seem like it’s high quality, many people have made claims that the diamonds in their rings they’ve bought were fake. Many people have said that when they take their jewelry to Kay Jewelers, the diamonds are replaced with fake ones. So according to these people, like Chrissy Clarius who have had their diamonds switched out for fakes, Kay Jewelers isn’t a store they would recommend. Kay Jewelers was even facing a lawsuit because of how many people have purchased their rare stones, only to find them replaced with counterfeits. People have also said the jewelry they’ve bought has spent more time being fixed than it has been worn. Kay Jewelers is one of the most famous jewelry stores in the world. It’s expensive, and according to most people, has low quality jewelry. If I needed to buy one of my family members a last-minute gift and Kay Jewelers was an option, I would go there to shop. In my opinion, Kay Jewelers should try to make their jewelry better quality and try to be more helpful to their customers. If you’re just watching the commercial, depending on the person, it’s effective. If you move beyond a surface level interpretation, some realize that they wouldn’t really want to shop there. The commercials are supposed to make you feel warm while also encouraging you to purchase this jewelry.
The Cruel World of Advertising: Pepsi Versus Coke Throwdown M R
I
n the world of advertisement, rival companies tend to go after their competitors’ product. In the world of consuming, top name brands fight to get an edge on competitors. This usually happens through the world of Advertisement. Pepsi and Coca-Cola are two of the main soda companies in the world. They’re in a constant fight to get the upper hand on the world. Pepsi is known for its funny ads mocking Coca-Cola but this one shines against the rest. In this advertisement, Pepsi is trying to show their dominance over Coke and prove that they are the better company. They are trying to demonstrate using logos that their product is worth two of Coca-Cola’s and also appeals to pathos to make the viewer laugh. These uses of rhetorical devices help Pepsi as a company, but they also help the company gain an upper hand on Coca-Cola. A young boy walks down the street to a vending machine drenched in sweat. He puts his quarters in; he’s out of breath; and buys a Coke. He sets the Coke on the ground and puts more quarters in the machine. After buying two Cokes and setting them both on the ground, the viewer begins to think about
T E
what this kid is doing. Then, while reaching for more quarters, he stands on the bright red Coca-Cola cans and reaches for the Pepsi button. At this moment, you begin to see what is going on. This young boy grabs the Pepsi from the vending machine and walks away leaving the two unopened Coke’s in the sun. This ad is amusing yet cruel. The Pepsi company is singling out the competitor and literally putting Pepsi on top of a pedestal. By using the Cokes in this way, it is stating that buying two Cokes just to drink only one Pepsi is worth the extra money spent on the Cokes. By using the little kid in this scenario, the ad targets the children and it gives the adults a good laugh and they will remember this regardless of their preferred choice. In this advertisement, there is one big appeal to logos that stands out. In everyday life, individuals are not going to buy two extra sodas just to be able to reach the button for Pepsi. Most people will either ask someone to reach it for them if they are too short. The fact that people wouldn’t spend the money to buy two extra sodas to get the Pepsi demonstrates some logos. The use of the two Cokes also displays logos because two is greater than one, and the ad is saying that the Pepsi is worth buying the two additional sodas to truly feel the satisfaction of the Pepsi. Even the button for Pepsi is located at the top of the machine. This demonstrates how Pepsi thinks Coke is towards the bottom of the soda totem pole and Pepsi is up at the very top. Overwhelmingly, this ad relies on pathos as an appeal. The boy in the ad is willing to spend his quarters on two additional Cokes and use those as a step stool than to ask for help. This is a humorous way Pepsi thought of to demote the opposition’s product and promote theirs. This commercial would make people laugh and remember it for quite a while. I imagine for some time whenever someone saw a Pepsi sign or drink, they would think of this ad and have a little laugh to themselves. While using humor to convey its main idea when the young boy is walking to the vending machine, there is litter on the streets and graffiti on the walls of buildings. Using this imagery, it allows the viewer to
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
realize that this young child is most likely from a poor town or country which is proving that Pepsi is worth the cost. This use of pathos is effective because it hints at the boy being from a poor family. This side of it is difficult to see directly, but if a poor boy uses all of his money to buy three drinks just to only drink one, it demonstrates how Pepsi is worth the money. The ethos in the ad is clear to see. Pepsi is saying that their product is at the top of the vending machine and when we compare items that are considered the best, they are placed at the top of the list. The use of ethos here is perfect for this advertisement because the little kid would need a boost to reach the button for the Pepsi. Pepsi’s method of advertisement involves attacking the other competitor’s product and getting their hands dirty in the process. The use of ethos, pathos, and logos in this ad provides humor for people to remember when they are shopping and see a Pepsi.While bringing people back to the commercial, it shoots down the competitor’s product and places their own on the top of the list, or in this case, the top of the vending machine for the whole world to see.
Flip’N Style or Flip’N Offensive? M B
T
he Flip’N Style hair dryer made by Panasonic resembles any beauty product that has been made for women. Its sole purpose is to enhance the beauty of its user and make women feel good about themselves, but was its advertisement campaign taken too far? The Panasonic ad tries to depict that it is an all-around useful object great for anything: whether it be for drying your nails or hair, but it ends up being utterly offensive. The ad explicitly sells a hair dryer by having it be easy access and come in three different colors. Implicitly, it sells beauty and tries to express a way of connecting people who have been through the same trauma by portraying a bald model enjoying the product. Panasonic is a strong and common brand, most commonly known in Japan for its electronic products like the Flip’N Style. By creating this ad they were trying to find a way for everyone to use their product, even if that meant making the ad all around offensive. Panasonic deserves to be commended for trying to sell the idea that something as simple as a blow dryer can be used for multiple purposes by appealing to pathos and logos, but how did the company fail to recognize how society might find the ad offensive?
T E
Panasonic introduces an appeal to emotions numerous times in the ad by depicting a woman with no hair and implying that even if you cannot use a blow dryer for its main purpose, it can still come in handy, and is overall a fun apparatus to own. Panasonic incorporates pathos in a unique way in the advertisement because they were trying to find a way for everyone to enjoy their product so they used a women with no hair to reveal that just because it’s a hair dryer doesn’t mean that’s what it has to be used for, but they might have fallen short with the ad and ended up making it offensive. Hair dryers are made for hair, so if someone who has/had cancer saw the ad, how would they react? Furthermore, this ad was subtly trying to reach out to people with cancer, or anyone who has gone through chemotherapy, because they want to get the product out to more people. Ads that try too hard to be humorous or understanding actually end up being offensive and either the creators/editors don’t think about whom it could offend, or they simply don’t care. Panasonic delineates a bald woman holding a hair dryer in one of their advertisements like it fulfills all of her needs, but out of all the models they could have used they portrayed a bald woman. It’s evident that they did this to reach out to other women with no hair, because people tend to unite with others who have been through the same experiences frankly because it’s easier to talk about their trauma and how they feel. Panasonic thought in this circumstance that it would be ideal to use someone who’s bald because as viewers interact with ads, they can’t help but stop and think about how dexterous the product would be because if someone who doesn’t have hair can use it, imagine the things they could use it for. The ad explicitly says “when your through drying (your fingernails if your hair hasn’t grown in)” implying that it actually serves more than one purpose, it’s not like other products are made for specifically drying nails, but Panasonic tried to make it work and tried to make their product all inclusive, even if it didn’t transpire the way they wanted it to. Another place where pathos is used in the advertisement is by
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
playing into childhood memories. It dives deep into someone’s memory and “it’s also a nice replacement for your teddy bear”. As children, everyone is aware of how important their favorite stuffed animal or their favorite blanket was. By saying that the Flip’N Style can replace your teddy bear, it establishes this sense of trust between childhood memories and the company’s product. Not many people would let a hairdryer replace their favorite things as a child, but it’s such an amazing product that it will displace childhood memories and enhance appearance in order for Panasonic to get their point across that their product is irreplaceable and convenient for all events and problems. Although the ad attempts to incorporate logos, it doesn’t work out and did not convince consumers to buy the product. The catch phrase, “Even if you can’t use it, it’s fun to have” tried to be persuasive and logical but it doesn’t seem logical. It begs the question, why buy something that you can’t use? A blow dryer isn’t a toy, so ultimately the blow dryer serves no purpose. This slogan was trying to be funny and sarcastic because people tend to gravitate towards humor and Panasonic made the slogan so random and odd that it didn’t make any logical sense. The ad also serves no purpose because one of its main goals was to reach a broader audience to sell more products but this didn’t end up happening because the ad is unethical. Using bald women to try and sell a hair dryer makes the Flip’N Style and the advertisement useless and doesn’t achieve much when appealing to people and their needs. Logos is a strong writing technique, so it’s understandable why Panasonic tried to incorporate a catchy slogan and try to appeal to a larger audience by introducing a bald model, but Panasonic’s course of action to include logos is what ultimately made the ad ineffective and offensive. Panasonic had good intentions when creating its Flip’N Style ad, and it was looking for ways to reach a broader group of people. Yet I believe this could have been done in a less offensive way, because its ad was ultimately counterproductive. The way the ad was laid out made people intrigued but also disgusted because
T E
it’s like Panasonic took advantage of illnesses and tried to benefit from diseases like cancer, which is wrong. The advertisement tried to reach the goal of being inclusive of everyone and the company attempted to make a product that anyone has access to but the use of sarcastic captioning and a bald model escalate the ad from something useful to disrespectful and almost obnoxious.
GilletteVenus Deserves Credence
S T
A
n emotional appeal, supported by a preexisting brand presence, is debatably more effective than an infomercial-esque onslaught of facts and benefits. Of course, the genre of the product has a measurable sway on the efficacy of specific appeals, and with this, the GilletteVenus Razor seems to be specifically tailored to consumers’ affinity for pathos. This is in part due to the current obsession with the superficial; amplified by the addictive quality of social media and the increasing opportunity for ad placement and association with media-driven social movements. Gillette has been a renowned friend of the feminist movement ever since its SuperBowl airing of the “Toxic Masculinity” commercial, respectfully accessorized by the #MeToo movement, a moment when Gillette’s female-empowerment status was embedded into the minds of the audience. The ad in question pictures a two-toned girl, an evident symptom of the skin condition vitiligo, which has been recently brought into the pool of public awareness by Winnie Harlow, a model embracing the skin condition upon the shoulders of the feminist #BodyPositivity movement. Conjoined with the emboldened and white outlined “MY SKIN, MY WAY” caption, this ad implicitly sells confidence, empowerment, and courage to women (and explicitly sells
T E
a Gillette Razor). This ad is multi-faceted, yet it’s most notable feature by far is the feminist self-empowerment so adroitly displayed. Beyond its purpose of selling a razor, the ad brings awareness to an issue prevalent enough in the American culture to be used as fodder for an esteemed marketing company. This ad features a biracial woman with curly hair and an obvious case of vitiligo. She is looking directly at the camera, stationed so her eyes are the main focal points, with a raised palm-forward hand relaxing on her forehead. On the palm, there are blotches of blue paint, the same shade as the surrounding vibrant blue, encompassing the entire background and the inner lettering of the “MY WAY” half of the slogan (located on the lower left corner of the ad, taking up about 15% of the ad space). The girl has a slight smirk, evoking a sense of daring rebelliousness. Her eyes are accentuated with a thick eyeliner, and a white patch of skin is centered on her face, drawing even more attention to her eyes, and generally making her more appealing. The ad is quite obviously targeting women, based on its explicit sale of a GilletteVenus Razor. Of the stratified layers within the vague term “women”, the ad further targets young women, and more specifically young liberal women. Young women are stereotypically the type to maintain hairlessness, and the allusions to the #Bodypos movement captures a rather leftist crowd, as they tend to be more predisposed to progress. The majority of young women in today’s age lean farther to the left, making this liberal approach the most lucrative. On the flipside of this ads liberal appeal, its very existence is a weighty cog in the archaic and intricate machine of capitalism; specifically capitalizing on the oppressive nature of female beauty standards. Women are socially required to shave visible body hair, and those who do not find themselves subject to degradation and humiliation, and in some cases literal ostracization. Men proposed this societal mandate, enforced it, normalized it, and it is now perpetuated as a staple to femininity. The selling of razors targeted to women, under the guise of feminism, is almost ironic. Yet, one cannot
Part I: The Advertisement Analysis
help but commend Gillette for brilliantly taking this oppressive item (the female targeted razor) and reforming it into a socially aware and fiscally advantageous symbol of empowerment. There are many appeals to ethos available in this ad, yet their efficacy lies within the submerged pathos, covertly influential through this ad’s reliance on ethical social movements. The explicit ethos exists within the brand; Gillette is a household name, and is accompanied by a near century old amalgamation of trust. This excuses it from the use of logos, as all logic and rational benefits of the razor are implied within the Gillette brand. The function of a girl with vitiligo, coupled with the “MY SKIN, MY WAY” slogan, is to build a connection between Gillette and the #BodyPos movement, which is inherently a feminist movement. This artistic weaving of the ethos appeal undoubtedly attracts liberal young women, yet anyone (probably mainly women) looking to support such a popular cause could be convinced to buy this, even those not shopping for a razor. Beneath the surface of these ethos examples resides an Atlantis of the pathos appeal, complemented by the overarching visual aspects of the ad. The epicenter of the ethos appeal exists in its relation to feminism, and the courageous “MY SKIN, MY WAY” remark of unapologetic self-empowerment. This is so compelling because of its pathos appeal; the feminist movement, and by proxy the #bodypos movement tend to elicit a passionate response, especially to those who feel directly affected by the injustices addressed in these movements. This ad’s color scheme is a complementary arrangement of blues and an accent of light tan, making it visually appealing at the most fundamental level. The blue is commonly associated with strength and dependability, a dual connotation applicable to both the durability of the razor and the strength and self-empowerment the pathos of the ad implies. The girl’s smirk, along with the patch of blue on her hand, imbues a certain self-assuredness in relation to her vitiligo. Being that her blue-patched hand is on her forehead, right above her facial discoloration, the im
T E
plicit strength of the blue is juxtaposed to her patchy skin condition, and neatly tied into the composition of the ad, subliminally attributing her self-confidence—despite and in spite of the vitiligo—to the GilletteVenus razor. Rhetorically, this only tightens the grasp the ad has on its target audience, young women, and will subconsciously guarantee a purchase of this feminist razor. Most would consider this ads’ intent successful; Gillette effectively markets this product through a culmination of varying degrees of ethos, pathos, and logos. It even acts as an ad for awareness, successfully normalizing the existence of vitiligo and by extension any uncommon skin condition or physical irregularity, marketing it wonderfully. However, this specific skin condition, vitiligo, is exceedingly rare, and in this case, may be being taken advantage of. Is this condition, simply because it presents itself on the face of Winnie Harlow, and other unanimously attractive people, being used as a corporate crutch to manipulate consumers into buying Gillette products? Vitiligo is a very obscure illness, so is Gillette exploiting it and passing it off as an act of social justice? And if so, is this such a bad thing? Despite the greed-driven means, the resulting awareness is arguably a justified end. Capitalism is almost synonymous with American identity, and using such a money based system as a catalyst for progressive change is a refreshing contrast to the negatively connotative economic system.
Part II:
On Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”
What’s for Dinner, Baby? Credibility Games in Swift’s “Modest Proposal” T C
P
roblems often arise when a large number of people in a country are underrepresented or taken advantage of. In 1700s Ireland, a large divide between the rich and the poor began to develop. Many lower class citizens were unemployed and could do little to provide for themselves and their children. Jonathan Swift attempts to bring light to this situation through his essay “A Modest Proposal”, which poses an unreasonable solution about the children of Ireland, claiming that they’re a “burden to their parents” and useless to society. Swift writes his essay satirically, not actually trying to solve the issue, but rather to convey that action needs to be taken in the near future. The success of Swift’s essay is due to the fact that at this time, the surrounding context of Swift’s Ireland met Hodgart’s four criteria: freedom of speech, democratic ideas could be spread, Swift believed he could make an impact, and there was a wide audience of people able to comprehend his argument. Many essays get overlooked and ignored throughout history and their points are never heard.
T E
Swift expertly uses satire, ethos, pathos, logos, and metaphor to make his essay one that is both persuasive and credible. Swift plays credibility games throughout the essay that aid in the reader feeling rewarded for having been able to read it, and guilty if they don’t read it or stop reading part of the way through. His essay depicts the social separation in Ireland and how the government needs to put policies in place to help the poor support themselves and their families rather than have to resort to begging on the streets to survive. In his essay, Swift explains how in order to “prevent the children of poor people in Ireland from being a burden to their parents” and make them “beneficial to the public” they should be a source of food. Swift points out that “infant’s flesh will be in season throughout the year” and that the mother will be able to make “eight shillings net prophet” (13-14). He also explains how this plan will lead to men becoming fonder of their wives during pregnancy, not “beat[ing] or kick[ing] them” for “fear of miscarriage” (27). Swift writes this satirically, with no intent of actually instituting cannibalism in society; rather, he wants people to see the injustices of society and realize that they need to make changes soon. If Hodgart’s criteria for political satire were not met, Swift’s essay would have never been a success. It would have been swiftly discarded then and would have never been read now because nobody would have heard about it. The political situation of Ireland when this was written played a huge role in its success. During this time in Ireland, there were many political debates going on; Free speech was used in political papers all of the time and the people of Ireland were very open to the ideas of democracy. The willingness of the Irish upper class to partake in political debate encouraged authors to write more freely about the issues of society. This freedom led Swift to believe that by writing “A Modest Proposal” he could encourage the government and people to help the poor escape “oppression of landlords,” to pay their rent, and to find “clothes to cover them from the inclemities of weather”
Part II: On Swift ’s “A Modest P roposal ”
(32). The people in Ireland who would read Swift’s essay were in the upper class, meaning they were well educated and were able to see the point Swift was making though his satirical style. Swift wrote the essay as an educated man, which allows him to be respected and deemed credible by the upper-class citizens because they know he has similar values as them and has been well educated. If the essay was written in a way that everyone could understand the upper-class citizens, the ones who could actually make a change, may not have acknowledged the work as worthy of their time and discard it. These political and social conditions allowed Swift’s essay to be deemed credible and persuasive by his audience and spread throughout Ireland by its readers, rather than getting discarded and forgotten about in the heaps of history. Swift was able to make his essay persuasive through his use of satire, pathos, and metaphor. The goal of Swift’s essay is to persuade the upper class of Ireland that they need to help the lower class out of poverty by creating new systems within their government. He satirically explains how children would make good food for landlords because the landlords have “already devoured most of the parents” (12). He uses this as a metaphor, not really meaning that children should be eaten by landlords. The landlords “devouring” the parents represents how, in Ireland, the landlords exploit the lower class leaving them with nothing to support their family or themselves with. The satire of this draws people’s attention to the cause due to its outlandishness and ultimately encourages people to read it more deeply and understand Swift’s point, while also being persuaded to join his side. The word “devour” is typically associated with food that has been eaten quickly or destroyed; by using this word, Swift is able to convey how the lower class is treated in an inhumane manner where they can easily be exploited, rather than be treated with respect. Swift wants to make the problems in Ireland known by the elites and he is able to persuade them that there is a problem by creating a solution they find ridiculous, he asks them to
T E
consider “how they will be able to find food and raiment for [a] hundred thousand” (32). He utilizes pathos to persuade his audience by explaining how if something is not done, women will continue to “murd[er] their bastard children” just to survive (5). The thought of having to murder your own child just to continue to live makes people realize how dire the situation in Ireland is and that they should do something soon before it gets worse. Without this appeal to pathos, the readers would not have been convinced that they should do something to make a change because they would have seen the poverty as a small issue rather than the large one that it was. Swift uses ethos and logos to make his argument credible. If you read an essay and the author does not make themselves seem credible, it will be hard to believe and can easily be written off as nonsense. Throughout his argument, Swift includes ethos to establish his credibility. When Swift first presents his proposal, he explains how he was “assured by a very knowing American” (9). The American serves as an outside person who shares Swift’s views and can qualify them as reasonable and worth trying out. Without this, people would see the essay as something that is completely made up and not take any part of it seriously. Within his essay, Swift explains how there are “one million and a half ” “souls in this kingdom” and that there are “an hundred and twenty thousand children of poor parents annually born” (6). The fact that Swift knows so much about the population and birth rates in Ireland adds to his credibility because it conveys his knowledge of the country and what is going on inside it. The people reading this essay will be able to tell that Swift put a lot of time and research into his essay, this boosts his credibility because it is known that he didn’t just dream this up and write it in one day, he put time and effort into it. Swift’s essay is able to shed light on a situation in Ireland that otherwise would have been ignored because of his ability to make the reader feel like they need to read the essay or else they are doing a disservice to themselves and their country. His cred
Part II: On Swift ’s “A Modest P roposal ”
ibility is boosted through this because readers acknowledge him as an intellectual man who is simply explaining that something needs to be done to help the lower class of Ireland soon. Swift gives the people reading his essay no reason not to believe him or acknowledge his points aiding in his overall credibility and the success of the essay. Swift is able to make his argument known to the people of Ireland because it is both credible and persuasive. His use of satire as well as ethos, pathos, logos, and metaphor create an unforgettable and impactful impression on the reader, along with raising awareness for the poverty that plagued Ireland at this time. This essay allows one to see what poverty can lead to, and that the government should step in sooner rather than later to make changes that will benefit all of the people in its country.
A Swift Essay on Satire
C F
P
eople have argued over politics since the beginning of government. Today it is easy to see how divided the political atmosphere of the U.S. is. Both sides are extremely polarized and seem to hate each other more with every passing day. This can be attributed in part to the rise of social media where people often argue with each other and in turn get even more convinced their opinion is correct. Much of this criticism can stem from political satire as politicians and their supporters love to make fun of the opposition. Satire has been around since the Greeks but was not always as popular as it is today. Jonathan Swift who is regarded as one of the pioneers of satire also used it in a confrontational way. His essay “A Modest Proposal” immediately sparked controversy and outrage upon its release. He wants to bring attention to the issues in Ireland as people were starving in the streets while English aristocrats lived lavish lives. Swift’s use of satire was perfectly timed as it fell in line with Richard Hodgart’s four criteria for effective political satire. Swift’s decision to use logos and complex diction helps boost his credibility as well as appeal to the upper class and his use of satire along with the prevalence of Hodgart’s four criteria during the time period contribute to his persuasiveness.
T E
Swift’s logical approach to the problems in Ireland—although outrageous—greatly contributes to his credibility. Throughout the essay, Swift argues that the upper class in Ireland should start eating the children of the lower class in order to solve the issue of children starving on the street. He uses examples such as “the nation’s stock will be thereby increased fifty thousand pounds per annum”, which is very specific as he has calculated the exact amount of money each child is worth and how much it will benefit the economy (25). It is easy to tell that Swift has thought this out as he points out he has been thinking about this issue for “many years” (4). Although Swift’s proposal is completely satirical, his use of logos helps to shock the reader as his proposal is so well developed. Swift is also able to build his credibility through complex diction which helps to make Swift sound very educated on the topic. Some of the diction Swift uses is “collateral,” “carcass,” and “submission” to describe his proposition (13, 29). These words help to create a cold tone as these words are much grimmer than their counterparts. Swift could have used body instead of carcass, but the specific choice of “carcass” helps to bring perspective to Swift’s argument. Although the wealthy aren’t eating children, what they are doing to the poor is just as bad. This helps to appeal to Swift’s target audience which is the upper class who have created this situation as they only care about the lower class for monetary gain. Logos and complex diction both contribute to Swift’s credibility with his audience. Swift’s calculated use of political satire is aided by outside factors that line up with Hodgart’s four criteria and help to create an extremely persuasive argument. The idea of eating children to help the lower class out of poverty is an extremely outlandish idea that is clearly satirical. Obviously, children’s flesh would not “make admirable gloves for ladies; and summer boots for fine gentlemen” as Swift just uses this to mock the upper class (15). Swift is able to use this satire in two ways to create an effective argument, as the upper class who can actually understand the satire may see how corrupt they have become and the lower class
Part II: On Swift ’s “A Modest P roposal ”
that may not understand that this proposal isn’t serious will get angry at the upper class. Swift is able to set a trap for the reader by being extremely inhumane by proposing someone could “gain eight shillings sterling per annum by the sale of their children” as the reader will end up despising the speaker by the end of the essay (24). Since Swift is writing from the perspective of someone of the upper class, the reader will in turn despise the upper class; Swift sets this trap because he wants to bring attention to the upper class. They have gotten away with destroying the lower class by taking everything for themselves, which is why so many people in Ireland are living on the streets. Swift sacrifices his own reputation (many people were calling for his execution after the publication of this essay) in hopes of some change in the living conditions of the poor in Ireland. This argument was also well timed according to Hodgart’s four criteria for political satire to be effective. According to Hodgart’s first point, there has to either be free speech or a lack thereof, and since Ireland was under English control which offered little freedom of speech. Secondly, the educated class has to care about politics and since Ireland was having so many problems people were definitely looking for solutions. Third, the writer has to believe their writing can actually influence people and Swift definitely wrote this essay hoping it would impact Ireland’s situation. Lastly, the audience has to enjoy wit or imagination and Swift definitely uses both is his crazy proposal. Both the use and timing of Swift’s use of political satire contribute to the persuasiveness of his argument. Many of the factors that contributed to the success of “A Modest Proposal” can be seen in issues of social media today. The political satire that is so prevalent in “A Modest Proposal” has become extremely popular in today’s political culture. Satire by definition is humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity and vices, and this is exactly what can be seen going on in social media today. Whether it be making jokes that ridicule President Trump or someone trolling on the internet, satire has become extremely popular in our everyday
T E
lives and we often don’t even notice. Social media platforms, such as Twitter, have a character limit which lends itself to personal attacks much more than a well thought out argument. Satire can easily be used to create a one liner to try and end an argument than develop your point. I would argue satire has become abused which has contributed to the toxicity of social media. These satirical arguments about politics are also played out on TV, with shows such as SNL which rely heavily on satire becoming more and more politicized. More recently the rise of “OK Boomer” in meme culture is another example of political satire. The phrase is used to disregard people’s opinions by ridiculing their age. Swift initially used satire to make a statement about the difficulties people faced in Ireland, but as time has progressed it is now abused and often used differently than Swift intended. The use of satire in Swift’s essay is elegant and so well-crafted that it almost seems as if he is being serious. But the satire that can be observed in social media today is a far cry from that format, which has devalued the effectiveness of political satire. Satire today is used in many ways; some are very similar to Swift to make a political statement while others just use it to insult people on social media. Whether you think Swift went too far or not far enough, his calculated use of satire has popularized it, resulting in the constant use of satire in pop culture today. Social media is in part responsible for the spread of satire into pop culture, as much of our culture is posted everywhere on social media, which seems to be the breeding ground for satire. Social media has contributed to the rise of meme culture which is often quite satirical and is most definitely pop culture. Satire has had a larger impact on our culture than many people recognize, and its prevalence today can be attributed to social media.
A Modest Analysis
A F
L
ife for the common people of Ireland was not in any way desirable. The streets were filled end to end with beggars trying to scrounge up enough change to feed their families, while the upper class were sitting high and mighty in their castles. The poverty ridden country was running itself into the ground as the margin between the everyday people and the nobility was growing at a steady rate. With little hope in sight, Jonathan Swift’s satirical piece “A Modest Proposal” effortlessly harps on the aristocracy of Ireland with intentions that the Irish people would begin to address and put forth a solution that doesn’t involve marinating the carcasses of babies. Swift creates an engaging, persuasive essay through deceiving appeals to ethos, allusions, metaphors, specific diction, and symbolism alongside his combination of humor and political commentary all hidden under a blanket of satire. At the same time, he gives his two cents about American slavery. This rhetorical decision strengthens his own argument, while exposing how outrageous it is to claim that enslaving people can be justified. Additionally, according to Richard Hodgart, Swift’s essay had fulfilled the four criteria to be truly effective from a political standpoint. Firstly, he states that there has to be a degree of free speech, whether it is granted
T E
by the government or exists through ineffectiveness. Next, that there is a general readiness of the educated class to take part in political affairs, as well as confidence from the writer that they can actually create an impact; and lastly, an audience that enjoys the “graces of literature.” All these criteria are filled throughout the essay, which contributes to its effectiveness. First and foremost, the simple fact that he makes the rhetorical decision to devise a plan consisting of eating children to serve as his medium for conveying his true proposal blatantly lays out his confidence in his writing. While this demonstrates Hodgart’s third criteria, it also leaves the reader at a loss for words. Immediately, you realize that this is not a normal essay. The pure confidence shown through his style builds his credibility as a satirical author, and his syntax and diction throughout the essay serve to construct his fake ethos as a rich Irishman. His underlying arrogant tone exists to demonstrate how the rich treat the poor: That they all pretend to display some sort of urgency to aid them, but in reality, are only benefiting themselves and putting in the most minimal and useless effort in actually helping. The barbaric proposal stirred controversy for many reasons- the elites that saw through the metaphor were provoked by his witty criticisms, some people were fueled by the emerging enlightenment ideas and were inspired to create change by his essay, and some people thought Johnathan Swift actually wanted to commit mass genocide on babies and eat them. He predicted this, and initially published the pamphlet anonymously, further displaying his confidence in the strength of his writing. Moreover, in numerous parts of the essay Hodgart’s second criteria is fulfilled by the creation of the idea that his proposal is not the first and that the “wise men” have been tirelessly trying to devise a strategy of this caliber. Swift explains that he has been “wearied out for many years with offering vain, idle” and “visionary thoughts,” which is humorous to the reader that recognizes this is from head to toe a concoction of bologna (761). The Einstein discovering the theory of relativity-esque image he creates with
Part II: On Swift ’s “A Modest P roposal ”
this statement is pointing out how the educated class has such a stronghold over political affairs that they can pull the strings behind the curtain. So, Swift is claiming that the aristocracy certainly have the “general readiness to take part in political affairs,” they are just abusing it. Furthermore, while exploring a logos tangent consisting of the numerous benefits of eating babies, Swift rhetorically implies that the rich degrade the poor to less than pigs. He explains that turning the poor babies into a new dish at the dining table will slow down their “great destruction of pigs” (760). This small sentence has a tremendous impact on his argument because it subtly implies the magnitude of the disrespect the common people receive from the elites. After building up his ethos as a rich Irishman, throwing in that poor children and swine that eat garbage and live in filth destroys any argument that sympathy genuinely exists for the lower class. Additionally, Swift purposely creates a hole in his plan to extend his elaboration on the false assurance the upper class provides. He states at the beginning of the essay that his proposal is to help the common people by relieving their responsibility of having to provide for many children, which in turn will allow them to get off their backs. He makes sure to point out that any plan he devises will benefit everyone at the expense of no one. Then, he goes on to mention that there is no reason to have a “great concern about that vast number of poor people who are aged, diseased, or maimed” because they are “dying and rotting by cold and famine, and filth and vermin, as fast as reasonably expected” (759). This contradiction symbolizes the conflict in the minds of the elites concerning the balance they have of providing fake effort towards helping poor people and exposing their true feelings towards the subject. On one hand, they want to provide a persona for the public that displays them hard at work to create a better society while on the other hand, their true selfishness shines through. They truly feel no remorse for the poor suffering through inhumane conditions, and this whole in the proposal directly represents this.
T E
Moreover, Swift alludes to American slavery. By rhetorically juxtaposing eating babies with slavery, Swift is implying that the elite abuse their power to such an extent that it is plausible that they would start eating their babies. He brings up that the Americans justify themselves by exclaiming that they adopted the concept from another country, which demonstrates how the upper class continually pass on the blame to relieve societal pressure from themselves. He carefully picks apart the aristocracy of Ireland by exposing their phony attitude towards helping the poor. Swift mentions that cruelty “hath always been with me the strongest objection against any project,” meaning that his outrageous baby devouring economic plan encompasses fair treatment to the poor (759). This is exactly his point- the rich pretend that they truly possess a genuine care for the lower class and that they intend to help them. But instead, they end up producing a bogus solution comparable to that of baby stew being served at a tavern. His compilation of rhetorical moves is what makes his message well rounded and clear to the reader, and is the basis of his intention for the essay’s impact. By building up the double ethos as a satirical writer and an arrogant aristocrat, and following that with his underlying claims, the persuasiveness is further broadened.
A “Not So Modest” Proposal
S C
J
onathan Swift’s “Modest Proposal” was written in the eighteenth century during an economic decline in Ireland. Swift discusses, in thorough detail, how superior his idea is and the many ways eating children would help the poor Irish to sustain themselves. This idea seems very odd at first until you realize the underlying meaning of Swift’s words. Swift is actually attempting to call attention to the problems going on in Ireland by directing his essay towards the English who caused this, the wealthier people. He wants the English to do something for the Irish that will fix what they did to cause them such economic despair. He uses a lot of rhetorical style to persuade his audience of his ideas. Along with using rhetorical style, Swift incorporates the four criteria from Richard Hodgart to help increase his amount of credibility. The four criteria include a degree of free speech either through design as in Greece or England, a general readiness of the educated classes to take part in political affairs, confidence on the part of writers that they can actually influence the conduct of affairs, and a wide audience that enjoys wit, imagination, and the graces of literature. Swift uses all four of these in his writing to overall persuade his intended audience of his goal, and to add credibility to his argument, given that he needs
T E
it when leveraging the serious subject of cannibalism to pressure his readers toward change. Jonathan Swift uses the four conditions of political satire to improve his account for credibility and persuade his audience of his ideas. Swift utilizes the first criteria of free speech through design as in Greece or England by establishing his thoughts even though he did not have the full right to. He speaks on his proposal and that he feels no one will object to it unless they would be lessened by the Kingdom, “This I freely own, and it was indeed one principal design in offering it to the world” (29). Swift uses his idea of free speech towards the English to criticize their acts in government, although he wasn’t allowed to. Back in the eighteenth century, people did not have the right to criticize England’s government, so the fact that he did it anyways detects his passion towards the argument and strengthens his credibility. Swift uses the second criteria by writing towards a more educated and wealthier group, the English. He purposefully writes in a very educated manner, so that the poor Irish wouldn’t be able to understand his language, but the upper class and educated could. He uses specific diction such as fricassee and ragout to establish who he was writing to and why he was writing this, such as, “I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout” (9). When using these specific food terms, Swift expresses who his true audience is and why he is writing to them. He wants the English to know that they need to fix their political affairs with the Irish after ambushing them. Swift wants their mistakes to be seen and known, and he did this by using words or terms he knew only the most educated people would know, such as elevated terms for different types of food. By using these rhetorical techniques towards his audience, he is persuading them by bringing knowledge to their attention. Swift continues to use the criteria by demonstrating
Part II: On Swift ’s “A Modest P roposal ”
a high level of confidence that his proposal is without a doubt, disagreeable. He is persistent in which he knows his ideas will be heard and changes will be made, “I think the advantages by the proposal which I have made are obvious and many, as well as of the highest importance” (20). Swift acknowledges the importance of his ideas and makes them very clear to the reader, and confidence advances his chance at persuasion. He knows that if he makes a strong argument and knows its strength, that it will impact the audience’s view and they will be more assured that his proposal is justified. Lastly, the fourth criteria is revealed by using wit and imagination in his writing to allow for a larger audience to enjoy it. Towards the end of his proposal, Swift makes his point very clear to the audience, “For this kind of commodity will not bear exportation, the flesh being of too tender a consistence to admit a long continuous in salt, although perhaps I could name a country which would be glad to eat up our whole nation without it” (31). Swift incorporates humor into his argument by subtly roasting England and their actions. He uses the metaphor of cannibalism and the need for survival to bash on England for how selfish they were. When saying “a country”, he is referring to England and how they would react if this was happening to them and not the Irish. This can open up the audience to kids who will study this piece of literature in the future so they can enjoy its subtle humor and understand his language. Swift gracefully covers all four criteria in this proposal and furthered his credibility and persuasiveness. Jonathan Swift supports his argument in creative and intelligent ways by making strategic rhetorical decisions and demonstrating the four criteria in his proposal. Swift uses specific diction and multiple metaphors to express his true belief on this situation. He makes himself sound profoundly educated, and he showed a real passion towards the lives of the Irish. He dealt with great concern over this subject and made himself express it in a way so that a majority of the literate public could understand. This proposal teaches the reader a lot about communicat
T E
ing the importance of something to someone and how to do it correctly. Swift’s bravery and commitment to this event in time will forever be acknowledged and will always ensure him a great deal of credibility in his argument and ability to persuade any audience of his side. His style of writing and choice in phrasing makes people wonder, is his “Modest Proposal” actually modest, or is it simply ironic?
Modest, Immodest, or Both?
B C
T
he main goal of satire is to use humor and constructive criticism to indirectly or directly attack a targeted person or group. Jonathan Swift is very well known for his satirical arguments in the English language. In his essay, “A Modest Proposal” he uses the Juvenalian form of satire which is contemptuous and abrasive so that it is a direct attack on the target and in this case the wealthy upper class of Ireland. Richard Hodgart also writes an essay titled Satire which breaks down the effectiveness and the way satire is and was used. In his essay, he points out four major criteria that satire is required to include in order to strengthen an argument. These four points are related to “A Modest Proposal”, and also help develop the argument. Swift is very good at establishing his credibility and persuading the reader through his use of rhetoric. Throughout the entire essay, he uses ethos, pathos, and many forms of irony to build and make his argument stronger. This essay is not exactly what one would expect when reading the title. How can eating your child to save the economy be defined as a “modest proposal”? Swift later on in the essay explains why he feels the need that this should happen. But later on explains how he doesn’t want it to happen, this is the major form of irony that he uses. Also, the organization and style
T E
that he presents help the overall purpose of his proposal. Like many other authors, Swift uses rhetorical strategies to help build and strengthen his argument. In “A Modest Proposal” ethos, pathos, logos, and other rhetorical strategies are used to develop his argument for raising awareness about the economic crisis in Ireland and the oppression of the people. In his essay, Swift addresses how children should be used to solve the economic problems that have arisen. He argues that children should be given to the rich so that they can be consumed as food, giving poor families some much needed income. The title of the essay is not exactly in agreement with the argument, the proposal he makes isn’t very modest at all. The rest of the title of this text reads “For Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and Making them Beneficial to the Public”. The speaker proposes to turn the problem in Ireland into a solution by making the undernourished children plumper so that they can be sold to the wealthy. Initially, the reader assumes that they would put their children to work, not something extreme as preparing children to be “stewed, roasted, baked or broiled” (757). Swift uses many strategies to help build up his credibility. For example, he states that he has “...already computed the charge of nursing a beggars child… to be about two shillings per annum… (758). The fact he has already assigned a price for a child manifests that he has been thinking about this for a while. Also, explaining in depth about how much a child would cost and how they’d be prepared furthers his credibility because he seems to know what he’s talking about. Anytime you put a price next to something it’s kind of hard to argue whether or not it’s right, and in this case, there’s no way to argue the other side because something like this shouldn’t be a thought in anyone’s mind. This also is a use of logos by putting “statistical data” to make his argument seem logical. The fact that Swift chose to use children to solve problems going on brings up an emotional appeal, known as pathos. He explains how “... a young healthy child well nurses at a year old a most de
Part II: On Swift ’s “A Modest P roposal ”
licious, nourishing, and wholesome food…” (757). The thought of eating any human is very disturbing but the thought of eating a small child is even more disturbing and just morally wrong. The use of these three rhetorical appeals allows for Swift’s argument to become more effective than ever imagined, considering that his proposal is ethically wrong but the message behind it is compelling. The essay “Satire” written by Richard Hodgart establishes four certain criteria for a satirist presentation to become effective. These points align with the way Swift proposes his ideas, more specifically the last two points Hodgart addresses. In the third point, he talks about how the writer has to have confidence that they can persuade the reader. With a suggestion as extreme as Swift’s, he had to have an enormous amount of confidence. Although the essay was originally published anonymously. Also, the way that he presents the argument supports this portion of the criteria. His use of statistical data and him making it known that he has witnessed the troubles in Ireland ultimately boosts his confidence. In other words, Hodgart’s third point is all about the use of ethos and logos helps a satirical argument become stronger and Swift does a great job using those to his advantage. The final point that’s brought up is that the audience whom the argument is being presented to has to understand the message behind the humor. Towards the end of the essay, Swift discusses how he doesn’t want people to sell their children as food but adds fuel to the fire. He wants people to come together and solve the poverty issue in Ireland. After “A Modest Proposal” was published, he received major backlash because people simply did not understand his point of view. Many people even called for his execution. Now that times have advanced, we can understand why he presented his ideas in the way that he did. By using such a sensitive topic such as eating kids, it widens Swift’s audience and helps them become interested in what he argues. This “shock value” contributes to his rhetoric and advances his global cause. Today, this essay can also be used to discuss twenty first century
T E
controversies such as overpopulation, the abortion debate, poverty, and many more. The fact that this essay can still be used in present day proves that Jonathan Swift was and still is an influential satirical writer.
Should We Eat People or Ridicule Them?
A P
I
n 1729, Ireland was an almost dystopian oligarchy. The corrupt Protestant government did not have their majority impoverished Catholic subject’s interests at heart. However, there were some educated people that acknowledged how malignant the government was and how they were essentially killing off the lower-class population. Jonathan Swift wanted to write to the government to criticize their ruling methods and lack of regard for the commoners. Satire and constructive criticism of the government thrive in a society that propagates Hodgart’s criteria. This means that people have the freedom to be able to voice their opinions no matter how contrarian. They also need to have a literate audience that could understand the criticism and could appreciate and understand the sarcastic satirical elements. Without these crucial elements, writers such as Swift could write brilliant, biting critiques but would either be silenced or go misunderstood by their audience. To create good satire, writers need to tactically deploy rhetorical and literary devices, not just write dryly and informatively. Without the use of rhetorical devices Swift would not be able to as ably convince his readers, or even inspire them
T E
to read to the end. Jonathan Swift employs satire and other literary devices such as invectives and understatements to totally expose the corruption and greed of the Irish rich and the starvation of the proletariat. These literary devices emphasize how pressing the poverty problem is and how the affluent protestants demand taxes while not giving anything back to the public, starving and destroying the middle and lower class. Without a government that emphasized the value of free speech, Swift wouldn’t have been able to use his trademark Juvenalian satire to brutally shame the elites of Ireland into helping to subsidize the lower class. He opines that the landlords “seem to have the best title to the children” “as they have already devoured most of the parents” (12). He uses the rhetorical device inversion, with an appeal to logos to expose the brutality of the Irish rich. He says that because these landlords have worked the parents to near death, they deserve to take the kids. This logic makes sense and makes his plan seem somewhat sensible until you realize that Swift means for these landowners to eat the children not to take care of them. He reverses the logical relationship of what should happen to make his plan appear even more shocking. This increases the effectiveness of his argument because he is writing from the perspective of a rich, landowning, Protestant, Irishman, he is making the reader feel disgust and total contempt for actual Irish politicians that have turned a blind eye to the excessive problems plaguing Ireland. Swift also purposely understates many of the points of his plan. The greatest understatement of the piece is the title, “A Modest Proposal”, which is followed by an essay which is so outlandish and perturbing that people called for his death. This adds to the rhetorical trap he leaves for the reader, baiting them into disparaging the moneyed, and feeling pity and sympathy for the starving, desperate street urchins. His critique is so biting because he completely strips his targets of their humanity and of any likable qualities. He portrays them through his narration as apathetic, cold, humans who can only focus on themselves. These rhetorical devices also
Part II: On Swift ’s “A Modest P roposal ”
create the three main rhetorical appeals ethos, pathos, and logos. The whole plan utilizes logos, it is extremely thorough and well thought out which increases its efficacy. Readers see how strong his plan is and wonder if the upper class really has thought about eating their children to make the impecunious beggars a smaller problem. If the people believe this, they will try to take action against the elites and maybe even revolt if they don’t receive better wages or some sort of subsidization. By being so passionless, Swift is actually using pathos making the reader feel extreme anger toward the writer and the Bourgeois. It seems counterintuitive to aggravate and terrify an audience, but it actually works masterfully considering that Swift is penning a caricature. When people get angry at the character that Swift is playing, the upper class is threatened while Swift, who does not actually affiliate himself with any of the ideas he writes about, emerges unscathed with a horde of protestors. Swift is in his finest form while he demeans the Catholic majority, claiming his proposal will “have one other collateral advantage, [l]essening the number of papists among us” (13). He becomes the imperious ruler so easily, shows the subjects how they are held in utter contempt, and starts a movement with a few words. By taking this character and committing to it so fully he convinces all of his readers that he is one of the upper class rather than an opinionated writer. This makes the essay even more effective forcing the unknowing plebeians to turn against their rulers and bring them to action. Swift also alludes to the satirical memoir of Psalmanazar who pretended to be from a cannibalistic society in Taiwan. This reference is an incredible layering of satire upon satire, referencing a sarcastic work as a serious suggestion or idea is genius. Rather than making the imaginary people from Formosa seem savage and wild he makes their practices seem wise and informed giving his proposal more clout and credibility. It appeals to two different audiences, two different ways. To the educated and powerful, they understand the reference and that their situation is being compared to that of a cannibalistic society. For the poor and un
T E
educated, they might actually think that this work establishes a precedent for cannibalism of the poor. This shames the rich into making changes in the government, and scares the lower class into pushing even harder for complete change. He utilizes this fake memoir as a scare tactic to drive people to action, he makes them fear that they as a society will devolve into those people that are complete savages. Even though those people don’t exist, this use of exceptionalism to inspire shame is insanely effective. Satire is seldom written only for fun; in times of turmoil, it can change the political landscape or inspire revolution. The reason that “A Modest Proposal” is so effective is that all of its intricate details form a cohesive, effective plan that actually would work in practice. Swift establishes an amoral, ethically utilitarian approach to saving Ireland, and asks the government if they can do any better. The purpose of satire is to inspire social change which an author cannot do without a dose of realism which adds a morbid afterthought that maybe the author actually means some of what they wrote.
Part III:
Thematic Synthesis
Marginalization in Modern Society
M B
M
arginalization, the pushing of some groups of people to the outskirts of society, is so common that it is typically ignored or disregarded. The three authors Lars Eignher, Sallie Tisdale, and Brent Staples write as a means to reveal how they are treated differently whether because of their economic status, gender, or race. In the essays “On Dumpster Diving,” “Black Men And Public Space,” and “We Do Abortions Here: A Nurse’s Story” the authors and their essays introduce similar rhetoric styles by using pathos to sufficiently display the problems they face on a daily basis because of their place in society and how society views them. By each author writing about a different form of disempowerment, and how they cope with their own problems, it allows each essay to connect and work together with the others to depict how they are all discriminated against differently but are still conflicted about how they are feeling and their attitudes towards society. The authors write to accomplish a sense of trust between the reader and what they wrote to give readers reassurance that they have also dealt with marginalization and trauma and know the pain that comes with discrimination. The authors
T E
of these essays all use the appeal to pathos by including personal experiences and stories to become one with the reader and by using their experience of ostracization, to lend credibility to the authors’ involvement. In the essay “Black Men And Public Space” Brent Staples shares a personal experience of marginalization and incorporates his ideas into his essay to depict what it’s like to deal with disempowerment on a daily basis for years on end. Staples reveals that his race has affected how he interacts with people and how people interact with him. Beginning with the title, many people while reading will mistake the title for “Black Men In Public Spaces” when it is actually “Black Men And Public Space”. The title automatically sets a boundary between Staples and his surroundings. This suggests that Black Men and Public Space are two separate and polar opposite things, creating the idea that they don’t belong together thus showing marginalization. Staples begins his essay with the line “My first victim was a woman- white, well dressed, probably in her early twenties” (267) and by doing this readers almost fall into his trap, as he wants them to. Staples wants readers to believe that he would be capable of harm because of his race. Staples has been so defined by his race that he takes precautions in order for people to perceive him as safe. He will do things like “whistle melodies from Beethoven” and “move about with care, particularly in the evening” (269). Regardless of someone’s race they should not have to go out of their way to make sure that people don’t become suspicious of them, or think less of them, but this is a constant reminder for someone if they are marginalized that they will always be looked at differently and will always have to take precautions depending on where they are. In Tisdale’s essay about abortion and what it’s like working in an abortion clinic during the 1980s, she and her patients face a different type of marginalization, based on gender and the hard choice women have to make concerning abortion. Abortion is a sensitive and explosive topic, people go to extensive lengths to
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
support or pummel abortion and the morals behind it. In Tisdale’s essay she discusses what it’s like working at an abortion clinic and the upside and downsides of what she does. Tisdale states that “some seek forgiveness, offer excuses, occasionally a woman will flinch and say ‘please don’t use that word’” (711). Women have always been seen as less than men, making women marginalized and facing hate regarding abortions and choices they sometimes have no control over. People are quick to judge women, and blame issues on them, without knowing the whole situation. By doing this it takes confidence and empowerment from women because they will eventually become susceptible to what others say about their decisions. Society has accepted women much more than past decades, but people still believe that they are incapable of making life changing decisions like abortions. Lars Eighner writes about his life being homeless. While others might find it discomforting, and judge Eighner for choosing to live like this, he finds it useful and sees it as a new normal. He states, “I know many people will find the idea of scavenger ethics too funny for words” (61). Today’s society typically looks at the homeless as if they did this to themselves and it is some sort of punishment. Sometimes people can’t control what happens to them, or in Lars Eighner’s case, it is just the type of living that best suits them. Lars Eighner has chances to be successful but being homeless has taught him how to thrive while others look to it as a punishment. When Lars Eighner shares his experience of dumpster diving and how “many times in [their] travels [he has] lost everything but the clothes [he] was wearing and Lizbeth” (63). Most people marginalize homeless people by saying that they are dirty or needy but in reality, they have to do so much more than beg to stay alive. Homeless people have a more difficult life than most that discriminate against them. Society doesn’t realize that there is more to homelessness than just laying on a street corner all day, people like Eighner have to dig through dumpsters multiple times a day to stay alive and eat, while the only thing they have keeping them company is
T E
inanimate objects they find along the way or a dog if they are lucky. People are so quick to judge and put people like African Americans, women, and the homeless into groups based on disadvantages that should not even exist. With being marginalized in society comes trauma and conflict with emotions. Staples writes this essay to bring awareness that many people of color face but fail to speak up about because they already feel insignificant in situations. By writing his essay, he reveals that he is constantly treated like a criminal that he is starting to feed into what others believe. He writes that “after dark, on the warrenlike streets of Brooklyn where I live, I often see women who fear the most from me” (268). People automatically assume based on Staples’ race that he is going to attack them, when he is just trying to live like anyone else, Staples should not have to accommodate his life and go out of his way so people know that he is harmless, people should not automatically assume that someone is dangerous because of where they come from, their skin tone or what the look like. Tisdale writing about abortion has a different conflict, and while she feels marginalized along with her patients “[she] find[s] it difficult to explain how much [she] enjoys it most of the time” (710). Tisdale is conflicted with abortions, like many people because she can feel sad at times when performing abortions, but she also enjoys what she does because she realizes that abortions are a way out for people who have dealt with trauma. She knows that she is helping women (a marginalized group) but at the same time “[her] own belly flops with sorrow” when she has to watch women go through abortions and see all the unpleasant aftermath of an abortion (710). Lars Eighner writes this essay so readers and himself can understand the reasoning behind Eighner becoming homeless because in his essay he doesn’t state any examples of trauma except the trauma that could come with him being marginalized for living on the streets. Eighner uses his sense of reality and a minimalist lifestyle to cope with his emotions and daily life of being homeless.
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
Throughout all of their essays, they use the appeal to pathos to connect to the reader and establish trust between their situations and what happens in society. Staples has learned to “smother the rage [he] felt at so often being taken for a criminal” because he knows that nothing can really be done (269). Some people will forever be threatened by others for reasons unknown and Staples offers a way out for people of color who are also facing marginalization or need a way to cope with their emotions. By his essay coming from someone who has experienced this kind of discrimination it makes the reader more likely to trust what they are reading and coping methods because the first person point of view reveals that they dealt with issues and got through them, and this point of view is also seen in Tisdale and Eignher’s essays. Tisdale introduces very gruesome stories of patients not to disgust readers but show the reality of what an abortion is like and that women face marginalization and the horror of abortions. Tisdale recounts an abortion where “she look[ed] in the basin, among the curd like blood clots, [she] see[s] an elfin thorax, attenuated, it’s pencil line ribs all in parallel rows with tiny knobs of spine rounding upwards. A translucent arm and hand swing beside” (712). And while this is disturbing to many people, it’s something that needs to be talked about because abortion has been seen as wrong for so long and will be frowned upon for much longer, but women do not have fun having abortions, they don’t have sex just to have abortions, sometimes women have to have them but men just see women as incapable of handling themselves. Eighner lets readers into his life when talking about his dog Lizbeth and how when she dies, “she too will go into a dumpster [...] and after all it’s fitting, since for most of her life her livelihood has come from the dumpster” (61). Eighner has plans for the future and he wishes he could fulfill them before his only companion dies, but he knows how unrealistic this is. People in society think homelessness is a choice, that they did something wrong and this is their punishment, but what most of them want, like Eighner, is a stable environment to live in but
T E
it is so unrealistic because people are unwilling to give homeless people a chance and instead discourage and alienate them from the rest of society making them and other marginalized groups seem unworthy of fair treatment. Society has supposedly caught up with standards regarding race, economic status and gender when in reality these groups and many others are still being treated inequitably. All three authors use personal experience or others experiences to demonstrate how differently they are treated but most of the time these situations go unnoticed. It is authors like Lars Eighner, Sallie Tisdale, and Brent Staples that successfully reveal the constant struggle of marginalized groups and how they continue to live their day to day schedule with conflicting emotions and wondering if they will have to worry about someone being afraid of them because of their skin tone, or being considered incompetent because of their gender, or lazy because of the way they live.
Diving Into New Perspectives: Eighner, Franklin, and Newman on Judgement T C
A
s humans we often judge things and each other before we have time to really understand them regardless of how hard we try to remain impartial. If someone ate out of a dumpster what would you think? Would you immediately make conclusions about them being unhappy, uneducated and a failure? Or, would you keep an open mind and listen from their perspective? What about someone who works at a fast food restaurant or has conversations with their phone’s virtual assistant? People say you shouldn’t judge others based on appearances, because what is inside is what really matters, but they somehow forget to carry this principle with them in their day to day lives. It is not easy to change someone’s point of view once they have made up their minds, but it is possible through a strong persuasive rhetorical argument. Authors Lars Eighner, Joey Franklin, and Judith Newman were able to do this in their essays “On Dumpster Diving,” “Working at Wendy’s,” and “To Siri With Love” respectively. Eighner uses his past as a dumpster diver to convey
T E
that just because someone is a dumpster diver does not mean they cannot be a good person; Franklin proves that working at a fast food restaurant does not mean someone is an unsuccessful failure who never got their life together, and Newman portrays Siri as a friend rather than a virtual assistant that never actually understands what you say to it. All of these authors use a combination of personal anecdotes, ethos, and a first-person writing perspective to support their arguments that not everything is what it seems to be at first glance. “On Dumpster Diving” is an essay written by Lars Eighner in which he recounts a time when he was a dumpster diver. The essay explains that he ran out of money and this was the only way for him to survive. He writes about what types of food he would eat and how he determined what was good versus what was rotten or spoiled. Eighner continues by explaining the various stages of dumpster diving people go through beginning with “disgust and self-loathing” and continuing until the diver gets comfortable or even collects too much (59). As a dumpster diver, Eighner maintains his honor and never steals what has not already been thrown out. “Working at Wendy’s” is an essay about when Joey Franklin, the author, worked at Wendy’s on the night shift. He writes about how people would ask him if he had “thought about college” or assumed he was a “wasted life” and felt “sorry” for his kids (83). In reality he and his wife had a kid and he was working nights so he could watch his son during the day while his wife finished college. Franklin also goes to college and plans on finishing his degree and getting a better job. He does not see this job as a dead end; he sees it as a way to raise his son and eventually finish his own schooling. “To Siri With Love” is an essay about the author Judith Newman’s son, Gus, who has autism. Gus is “communication impaired” due to his autism and Siri helps him develop the skills necessary to communicate with people without the judgement that other people would give (628). Siri is patient and can answer any question Gus has. Newman wants readers to think of Siri as
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
more than just the voice on our phone that can make a phone call; she wants us to realize that Siri can be a “BFF” and be loved like a person (628). Personal anecdotes are a great way for an author to create a connection with their readers and convey their points if they are used correctly. All of these authors based their essays on their own experiences. Adding a personal touch makes them more persuasive and more credible in their readers minds. If Donald Trump, a millionaire heir, wrote an essay about working at a fast food restaurant, his argument wouldn’t seem credible because he has never been in a situation where he would need to work at one. Eighner writes about his dog Lizbeth who protects him by “recog[nizing] a fire ant infestation” when there are “more fire ants than she cares to eat” (62). This anecdote makes it so more people can connect and identify with Eighner, because they have something in common, a dog. Eighner has now made his reader admit that someone who dumpster dives is not much different than they are. Being able to identify with the author makes the argument more persuasive because it creates a better connection between the reader and the author. He also writes about a time when “one apartment resident object[ed] to [Eighner] going through the dumpster,” (63). This makes his argument that you can be a good person and dumpster dive more valid because it conveys Eighner’s respect for other people’s wishes more credible and persuasive and makes him, along with all other dumpster divers, seem like genuinely good people. Franklin writes about interactions with customers who asked him if he planned on going to college, not realizing that he was on his way to “grad school to get a PhD” and took the job instead of “get[ting] more student loans” (83-84). He also writes about conversations he had with each of the people he works with and how they ended up working at Wendy’s, one to “pay for a cell phone bill,” and one whose dad died and “lives in his car” until he is old enough to enlist in the military (82-83). Through his personal experiences as a Wendy’s worker, Franklin challenges the stereotype that those
T E
who work at fast food restaurants are uneducated and “another wasted life, another victim” (83). His experiences allow readers to see that they need to keep open minds because everything is not what it seems to be, and there is always some hidden story. Eighner’s was that he ran out of money and needed to eat from dumpsters to live; Newman’s was that her son was finally able to interact and have conversations with something without his disability hindering him. Newman uses anecdotes about her son using Siri to have conversations and get information on whatever he is interested in at the time. She discusses Gus’ companionship with Siri and how he asks her, “will you marry me,” and often had long conversations with her (632). Siri “doesn’t let [communications impaired Gus] get away with anything” which Newman conveys in an anecdote about Gus snapping at Siri because he “[didn’t] like that kind of music” and Siri’s response made Gus think to say “thank you for the music though” (Newman 630). Through this, she portrays Siri as a teacher and friend, changing the opinions of most people who see Siri as a voice that can send a text or call someone or totally misinterpret what you said. Each of these authors use experiences from their own lives to make people change their opinions on certain topics and keep an open mind. Eighner, Franklin, and Newman all use ethos throughout their essays to leverage a more persuasive argument. They manage to build up this ethos by writing their essays from a first-person perspective. Writing in the first person gives the reader and the writer the most direct connection because there is a sense that the story must be true because the author is writing directly from their real-world experience, not some made up character. Eighner begins his essay by using the word “I” in almost every sentence. He says, “I began dumpster diving,” “I live from the refuse of others,” and “I am a scavenger” (55). This made it extremely prominent that the essay was a real story about Eighner written by Eighner, which increases his credibility. The ethos in this is that it is nobody’s story but his own. Eighner does not
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
veer from his own experiences much which allows the reader to assume that all other dumpster divers are like Eighner without Eighner having to actually write it and risk being proven wrong. Franklin uses first person a little differently because he alternates between stories about his life and conversations he had with other employees at the Wendy’s where he worked. Telling the stories of himself and others prevents there from needing to be another person in the middle who could have altered the story. Franklin uses the ethos of him being the one who worked at Wendy’s to support his argument that just because someone works at a fast food restaurant does not mean they are worthless and have no hope of success in life. Franklin writes the stories of each of his coworkers in a way that makes the reader feel as if they are watching a firsthand recording of the conversation. He recounts his training session where the trainer, Chelsea, said “after the baby is born I’ll be back on nights” (81). Franklin proceeds to tell her “I want to work nights so I can take care of my son” (81). The first person account adds to the credibility of the argument because it is so direct, Franklin also manages to mix in stories from other people so the reader can see that he is not an outlier, he is just another person who works at Wendy’s and has future plans, not a low life or a waste to society. Finally, Newman writes in a first person perspective that conveys the success her son has had with Siri and how he made friends with Siri. She recalls listening in on conversations her son had with Siri where he is corrected by Siri saying, “I’ll pretend I didn’t hear that” after “spew[ing] out a few choice expletives” (633). there was another time when Gus asked Siri “will you marry me” her response made it so Gus “didn’t sound too disappointed” but it told him not all the same (633). Newman got to experience first-hand Siri helping Gus become a better communicator, writing, “yesterday I had the longest conversation with him that I’ve ever had” and that was thanks to Siri (631). This being written in the first-person perspective of someone who experienced the benefits of Siri first hand adds to the credibility because the reader can see ex
T E
actly how it works and judge for themselves if Siri really can be considered a friend or even be loved. If the essay was written by Adam Cheyer (one of the men who developed Siri) trying to sell or promote his product it may say similar things as Newman’s essay but of course it would, he made it and is trying to sell the technology. A real-life first-person account in this case is more credible because it is not a sales pitch about what Siri could do. Rather, it is a real-life example of something that actually happened. Making an essay about a personal experience adds credibility to an argument and makes it more persuasive because of how the reader is able to connect to the author through experiences they have shared. Eighner, Franklin, and Newman all write incredibly persuasive essays by using a combination of personal anecdotes, a first-person writing style, and appeals to ethos. All of these essays argue against what is popularly believed about each of their topics, so if they did not make strong choices about which types of rhetoric to use, all of these essays would have likely been tossed aside and seen as too crazy to be true. Each of these authors takes a slightly different approach but they use the same rhetorical strategies to convey their points that we should look deeper into the things around us because they may be more or different than we initially assume. Keeping these essays so personal creates more connections between the reader and the author, which increases both the credibility and persuasiveness of all the essays and letting people know that they should take another, deeper, look into what is around them, maybe through someone else’s eyes and see if their perspective changes.
Alienation in The Public Setting: Strangers at Home A F
N
o two people live the same life, but everyone encounters some sort of schism between the world around them and themselves. Our ignorance wields the power to damage our understanding of the world around us, and our selfishness can make us believe that what we combat is of greater significance than the people around us. The essays “Shooting an Elephant”, “Black Men and Public Spaces”, and “Writing Like a White Guy” share the common theme of alienation and mingle with different perspectives according to their context. They all pursue an outsider dynamic but end up with very different content. George Orwell recites a personal account of working as a police officer in Burma, where he feels out of place and portrays himself as a victim at the hands of the country he is colonizing. He explains that his personal struggle stems from the expectation that, as a white colonizer, he must fulfill what the natives expect of him. His personal bias and privilege shines through this writing, as he fails to realize that the native people can barely afford clothes and live in mud homes. Nevertheless, he feels ostracized because he is surrounded by people who don’t have the same privilege
T E
and can’t relate to him. Moreover, “Writing Like a White Guy” tackles the role race plays in success as a writer. Jaswinder’s father suggests he writes under a pseudonym in order to be published for his writing. Authors of color are often categorized separately, so he poses the question “Am I a writer or a minority writer?” (500). He elaborates that he deals with alienation because he is automatically placed into a separate category as white writers and is expected to address race in his writing just because he’s not white. This type of discrimination that flies under the radar exists everywhere in America. For instance, Brent Staples, author of “Black Men and Public Spaces” cannot escape a world where he is judged by his race and appearance. He uses a number of anecdotes to give the reader insight as to how his everyday life goes down; whether it be people crossing the street to avoid him, locking their car doors as he walks past, or mistaking him for a robber. As a result, he directly feels alienated in a public space where he should be valued as equal, which he has learned to ignore. Jaswinder and Staples both use “passing” extensively for society to be more accepting of them. Orwell appeals to pathos as he begins the essay by listing off the “harassment” he persists through at his job; things such as him being an “obvious target” of mockery and bearing the weight of the “insults hooted” at him, which all was “perplexing and upsetting” (750). By building up this rhetorical division between him and the people around him, he is illustrating the alienation that he feels. Working for the Empire makes him feel microscopic; as if he is just one of their toys. He resents doing their dirty work and having to see it, again appealing to pathos and attempting to sympathize with the reader. Having to witness the “wretched prisoners huddling in cages” and the men who have been whipped left him with an “intolerable sense of guilt” (750). Being constantly hated is what makes him feel as if he doesn’t belong (which of course he doesn’t, since he is working for the British, oppressing the people of Burma for natural resources) so appealing to the reader’s sentiments, perhaps trying to evoking
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
memories of being teased is his means to help the reader understand the personal battle that he is fighting by working in Burma. In addition, he also admits that this is “the only time in my life that I have been important enough for this to happen” alluding that being hated empowers him and gives him a sense of importance (750). Being something close to famous in the small Burman village, even if it’s for the wrong reasons, gifts him a selfish fulfillment that subconsciously competes with his feeling of alienation. Perhaps growing up in a developed, populated country caused him to reside in a mental power deficit, and being purposely isolated by the Burman people is filling this void. Building on this, when the elephant catastrophe breaks out, the people come to him to solve it. As he hunts down the elephant, the Burmans are following him in a crowd. Orwell then uses the word “us” when referring to the elephant’s position in relation to himself and the Burmans, which is rhetorically important (752). He now refers to them as being together, and for this brief instance, he feels as if he’s not alone, and that the people need him. By the Burmans depending on him, it distracts him from his alienation, and allows him to reconcile briefly. Orwell states that “they did not like me, but with the magical rifle in my hands I was momentarily worth watching” and that he “could feel their two thousand wills pressing me forward” (753). He did not want to shoot the elephant, but had a moment of realization that the power that two thousand people could really do, and if he didn’t do the one thing that they wanted him to do, he could push away the feeling of being an outsider. In front of all those people, he didn’t want to seem like a failure. The white man’s role in countries they are colonizing is perceived by him as “he wears a mask, and his face grows to fit it” (753); and even if he hates his job, he feels that it is his obligation not to show weakness to the Burmans. This feeling arises for a number of reasons, from defending his masculinity to believing that he is culturally and racially superior. Although contributing to the exploitation of underdeveloped countries is morally wrong, it seems as if he is
T E
more opposed to having to do it himself, rather than disputing that it is taking place. He ignores the fact that the Burmese are humans too, rather than merely existing as the bystanders of his internal hatred for his job. His alienation from the Burman people and inability to accurately relate could be impairing his ability to distinguish this, as all people are innately self centered. The alienation Orwell deals with is very different from that of Staples or Bolina; he is being isolated from a world of minorities, even though his skin color and job position him to be the enduring majority. His outsider dynamic is birthed from his own doing, instead of being born into a world where your skin color is the catalyst for your oppression. Bolina heads a different direction, as his essay deals not only with the ways he has been segregated as a result of his race personally but widens the scope of the argument. By imposing this parallelism, Bolina is giving the reader perspective of the issue if they are not a minority. He does this by showing how the prejudices we are aware of apply to him personally, creating the image that the alienation he faces is applied to a larger context. Firstly, he begins by explaining the difference between life for his father and for him, and that “racial difference need be mitigated whenever possible, if only to lubricate the cogs of class mobility: nearer to whiteness, nearer to wealth” (496). Bolina makes it clear that race, class and opportunity are perfectly correlated, and his parents have realized that firsthand. In order to conform to the standards society has set for success, he must conceal his cultural identities; and this is exactly why Jaswinder’s father suggests he writes under a pseudonym. But, Bolina has something different in mind. He is adopting this language of whiteness and success he refers to, and is proving to the world that he is more than capable. In other words, he is facing the alienation society has automatically bestowed upon him, and conquering it. However, being consumed by a focus on becoming Americanized leaves him with an unavoidable guilt; a guilt that he is betraying his true identity, and that this sacrifice is not worth it. He knows
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
that his parents worked hard to give him all these opportunities, but a part of him feels as if it’s wrong. As the essay progresses, this idea becomes more clear. Towards the conclusion of the essay, Bolina mentions that when he speaks at poetry readings and people are confused about his nationality, it doesn’t offend him. “I understand where it comes from” he says, as his underlying regret continues to bleed through his words. A very perplexing mental battle arises, because he hates that he feels like he should write about race, but at the same time believes it would be underscoring the value of his identity, and that writing about race shouldn’t be required of him just because he is a person of color. Finally, he decides that “even one’s evasions are born of one’s fixations,” meaning discrimination is a very important and personal topic, and one does not find satisfaction in attempting to purposely avoid the topic of race. Jaswinder concludes that language is a powerful thing, and everyone uses it differently; so moving forward instead of “writing like a white guy” he will continue to use the language he has learned to love, to write as a brown man about the self and of language itself. Finally, his message towards the topic of alienation, is to first accept it instead of trying to ignore it, face it, and overcome it. No matter what situation you are placed in, continue to adapt and stay true to yourself to surmount your problems. Staples approaches the same topic as Bolina but with a different style; a more laid back and anecdotal approach, but within still lies a brutal criticism of the realities of society. The essay displays a tranquil tone towards such a serious topic, which creates an argument in itself. People being judgmental because of someone’s race should in no context be acceptable, there is a very distinct difference between keeping yourself safe and blatant, arbitrary racism. He begins the essay with the words “my first victim was…” to make a statement (267). This very specific diction serves to make a statement of how he is perceived publicly based on his race; and the writing that follows- calm, and reflective of his personality is truly the kind of person he is.
T E
Staples bears the weight of alienation wherever he goes because public settings directly make him feel as if he doesn’t belong. The word “and” in the title extends upon this, as he doesn’t label the writing “Black Men In/On Public Spaces” because society is not necessarily restricting black men from public spaces, but making them feel as if they aren’t wanted there. It is similar to the feeling Orwell deals with, but fundamentally completely different. They are polar opposite contexts- a white man out of place among a country of minorities, and a black man being ostracized among a country led by white men. It is unexplainably sad that Brent was forced to come to terms with these realities of public interaction, no person should have to live through that. To avoid being interpreted as a “suspect”, Brent uses a variety of methods to “pass” (269). He will give people walking a wide berth, as to not scare them into thinking he is following them; whistle classical music to ease tensions when he is walking, and exchange jeans for more business-oriented clothes. He must be constantly thinking of how the public setting is changing because of him instead of just focusing on what or where he’s going, Staples is thinking of the random people before himself even though the only thought they give towards him is whether he is “safe” or not. I truly hope that one day that everyone, regardless of race or appearance, can walk down the sidewalk without having to battle this alienation everyday, and be as comfortable as the person behind them or in front of them. All three of these essays give the reader insight into the author’s personal struggles, and even though everyone’s situations are different, it allows us to realize that we are not alone. Staples, Orwell and Bolina deal with different mental beasts but nonetheless all struggle with an overarching feeling of alienation. Orwell feels out of place, surrounded by no one like him. It’s nothing like his home, where he is a stranger to being oppressed. He appeals to the reader through pathos in order to guide the reader through his physical and mental battles in Burma. Staples and Bolina are both born into a world where the odds are against
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
them, but both pursue a career in writing. Bolina recounts how he has dealt with this alienation through adopting American culture and “Writing Like a White Guy”, followed by an enlargement of this feeling, criticizing American treatment of immigrants and his lingering regret of accepting his identity. Staples writes a short essay that displays how he feels like an outsider in his own home. He has struggled endlessly with the alienation that is produced from this, and is forced to do whatever he can to put people at ease. The authors put forth a diverse perspective of discrimination, and how it differs according to context and race.
Bermuda Triangle
C F
A
s decades pass, many sayings have gone out of style and words have become taboo. New stereotypes are created as time goes on and as new groups of people emerge (think of snowboarders, who many believe only cause trouble on ski slopes). Although there are many examples of people breaking stereotypes and trying to avoid them, stereotypes often remain in the collective subconscious. Cities are populated by scores of homeless and handicapped people, especially in places such as sidewalks, supermarkets, and fast food locations. These people are often viewed as unfortunate or less successful members of society. However, most people know nothing about their lives or circumstances which led them to where they are. People often rely on stereotypes to make their opinions on people they have never even met before. In Lars Eighner’s “On Dumpster Diving,” Nancy Mairs’ “On Being a Cripple,” and Joey Franklin’s “Working At Wendy’s” each author employs rhetorical strategies to make their arguments more persuasive and relatable to the reader. An author’s rhetorical approach often determines the effectiveness of their argument. Eighner, Mairs, and Franklin all employ the use of personal anecdotes, specific diction, and appeals to ethos to develop their arguments. Although each writes
T E
about a different premise they all have the same overarching idea of how we often judge and degrade people without even knowing them or their story. Eighner’s commentary on dumpster diving offers a revealing insight into what it is like to be homeless. He clarifies that he doesn’t like the term dumpster diving and instead “prefer[s] the word scavenging” as he feels this is much more fitting (55). This specific use of diction helps to demonstrate how dumpster diving is actually a lot of work. Scavenging by definition is to collect something from waste and has the connotation of hard and grimy work. A vulture is a prime example of a scavenger and this word choice definitely helps Eighner’s argument of how homeless people are not all beggars, but some actually work very hard to earn their subsistence. If anything, Dumpster diving is helping society as “a lot of perfectly good food can be found in Dumpsters” and would otherwise go to the dump if not scavenged by Dumpster divers (56). This act of cleaning up society is the opposite of what we have come to think of Dumpster divers as the task itself is seemingly disgusting. Eighner’s use of this long personal anecdote helps us to see into the life of a Dumpster diver and how it is really hard work. In fact, Eighner once accidentally drank alcohol when Dumpster diving and was “suddenly intoxicated” although he didn’t want to be drunk (58). This helps to dismiss opinions that people usually become homeless due to the abuse of alcohol or drugs as Eighner had nothing to do with either. When Dumpster diving he also found discarded college papers and was “horrified to discover the kind of paper that now merits an A in an undergraduate course,” as those who were more privileged than him weren’t necessarily better writers (62). The cumulation of Eighner’s experiences of being homeless throughout the essay help to boost his credibility on the topic. His essay itself makes the statement that a homeless person can write a very intellectual piece that is regarded as a great essay. The combination of specific diction to describe the act of Dumpster diving along with Eighner’s personal anecdotes contribute
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
to a very persuasive and credible argument. Mairs also uses similar rhetoric of specific diction and personal anecdotes to talk about the hardships of living with MS. She specifically calls herself “a cripple” as it is the best way to describe her condition (65). Many may feel this word is harsh or taboo nowadays but it helps her differentiate herself from “‘handicapped’ and “‘disabled’” as those can mean a wide variety of things while cripple is an apt description as she is slowly losing her ability to walk and needs a cane. This word choice initially in the essay helps to set the tone of how honest Mairs is about her condition throughout the essay. Despite her condition, Mairs is still able to “continue many of the activities” that she enjoys (66). She is still able to lead a relatively “ordinary life” which may often not be seen as possible by outsiders (67). Disabled people are often pitied since they are able to do what everyone else is, but Mairs demonstrates how she can do much more than many able-bodied people. Mairs reveals the real struggle with being a cripple is the mental toll. She thinks sometimes that maybe people are only nice to her “because [she’s] a cripple” (69). This really helps to demonstrate how the real difficulty with being a cripple isn’t the ability to walk or move around, it’s the idea that people might not be genuine. This is the opposite of what most would think the greatest struggle about being a cripple would be. When you see someone who is physically impaired it is hard to see past the physical and the greater mental challenges that come along with it. She is also able to appeal to ethos by talking about “teach[ing] writing courses” which helps to build her credibility as a writer. The use of personal anecdotes helps to explain how although her life was altered because of MS, she is still able to lead a fulfilling life. In the end, she still has a much better life than many and wouldn’t trade it for a cure. Franklin brings a new perspective to working at a fast-food restaurant that often goes unnoticed, which he reveals through his personal story. He takes a job at Wendy’s because it is the one that lets him “work at night so [he] can watch his son dur
T E
ing the day” which is all while his wife is finishing college (82). Although many people assume that because he is working at Wendy’s he hadn’t gone to college but in reality, he is in the “top 5 percent” and is close to graduating, but just had to take off some time until his wife finished (83). This exposes the common misconception that fast-food workers are working there because they aren’t smart enough or didn’t go to school to get another job. While breaking down this stereotype Franklin also talks about many of the people he works with such as Chelsea who “is pregnant” and Oren who is working to “pay for a cell-phone bill and to get out of the house” (81-83). These people may often be looked down upon because they don’t make much money and are unskilled labor, but they still have dreams and aspirations. He uses specific diction such as “victim” when describing how he thinks a consumer views the workers. This word choice helps to describe how it feels to be a fast-food worker as customers can think as though the workers have fallen into some kind of trap (83). In reality, the job at Wendy’s is something they chose and they work hard like everyone else. Franklin’s use of anecdotes helps the reader understand the wide gamut of people that work in fast food. He also talks about how people think he “got [his] girlfriend pregnant” but he is actually married (83). This is yet another example of how just due to his job, people made assumptions about him without even getting the chance to know him. Also, the fact that he brought his “resume to apply” builds credibility (80). Usually, people don’t bring resumes to apply to Wendy’s but Franklin does as if it was any other professional setting. His personal experience in fast food along with his education appeals to ethos which builds credibility. These stories of working at Wendy’s help to bolster Franklin’s argument as well as his credibility. All three authors employ very similar stylistic choices such as anecdotes, specific diction, appeals to ethos to create persuasive arguments. Anecdotes can be very powerful especially when tackling issues in society and they are used masterfully in each
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
essay. All of the essays have similar overarching content as they all talk about groups of people that are commonly misunderstood. This is why the anecdotes are so powerful as they help to put the reader in the author’s shoes to see what it is really like to be homeless and have to Dumpster dive to survive, or have MS, or work at Wendy’s. They all also employ very specific diction to describe their situation that may not be understood. Word choice becomes very important when talking about something the reader is unfamiliar with because it helps to relay that experience and all three authors are able to relate to the reader by using this diction. It is easy to tell that they were all defined by words that they saw as unsuitable and therefore go as far as to clarify diction to stress its importance in their arguments. Additionally, each author has a very similar approach to appealing to ethos which helps to build their credibility. They all talk about how English was a very big factor in their everyday lives. Eighner practiced his writing while being homeless and seeing the poor quality of college writing. Mairs teaches writing as well as works as a freelance editor. Franklin studied English and is earning his Ph.D. These are all very strong appeals to ethos as each author clearly has a lot of experience writing. This results in very persuasive essays as each uses a very similar rhetorical approach with the aim of disputing common misconceptions. In the fast-paced world we now live in, people are constantly making assumptions and generalizations. Eighner, Mairs, and Franklin all create compelling arguments on things that are often stereotyped. They use very similar styles which are easy to relate to due to their many anecdotes, strong diction and appeals to ethos. These essays challenge the reader to actually learn about being homeless or crippled or working in fast-food rather than generalize. In today’s society, we often try to convince everyone that they are unique and special, but it is more important to realize that we are more similar than we may expect. These stories also serve as inspiration as they each had to overcome great obstacles to reach their goals. Eighner was homeless because all he
T E
really cared about was his writing which didn’t require a home or traditional job to perfect. Mairs overcomes physical and mental struggles every day to live a normal life. Then there’s Franklin who worked at Wendy’s, so he could reach his goals and raise his son. All three are very similar in that each had a hard path to accomplish their goals, which resulted in a very similar style of writing to create successful arguments. The ability to tell a story from their own perspectives is what really helps to set these authors apart from the rest and create impactful works of literature.
Practical Brilliance in The Works of Franklin, Eighner, and Rose
A P
W
riting without rhetoric is unconscionably boring and ineffective and can’t convey nearly enough information as it could or should. All good writers agree about the use of rhetoric, but taste and style are what decide which devices are deployed and where in a piece of writing. These questions, of where to use rhetorical devices and when, are complicated and may not have singular answers, lead to debate among authors. These complex uses of rhetoric distinguish between excellent writers and writing and more merely adequate writers and writing. Three writers, Joey Franklin, Lars Eighner, and Mike Rose, utilize their strong writing to shine a spotlight on gritty practical brilliance that is more immediately serviceable to society by combining great curiosity and intelligence with physical skills and routines. They enlighten the reader by exposing stereotypes of disenfranchised and mistreated people and professions. Poor people and those in unfortunate situations are oft written about, usually using the same tropes and become tired literary and rhetorical devices themselves. In the essays “Working at Wendy’s”, “On Dumpster Diving”, and “Blue Collar Brilliance” the authors take a fresh
T E
look on what it is like to be in the place of those people. These authors are the most effective because of the shock value they bring with their uncommon and unusually empathetic rather than sympathetic perspective of the oppressed. These writers use rhetorical devices such as irony, stereotypes, characterization, pathos, and logos to bolster their insightful and well-crafted claims about the equality and individuality of people regardless of class. All three authors make separate points about their subjects but combine when read together to synthesize a strong identity of the independence and power of the lower class regardless of their lack of tools to succeed from the very beginning. Irony and stereotypes combine for a strong, almost comic effect in all three essays. People such as Joey Franklin, Lars Eighner, and Rosie Rose are chronically underestimated despite their prodigious talents and capabilities. When looking retrospectively at the way people assume incompetence or ineptitude of these people because of their situations one cannot help but see the irony in the perspective of the doubtful. In a supposedly meritocratic culture those who are in unfortunate circumstances are assumed to be lazy or deficient in some way or another. This misunderstanding of the way the world works leads to misleading stereotypes. Joey Franklin witnesses these stereotypes in action in a Wendy’s bathroom when a man conceitedly asks him if he had “ever thought about college”, assuming that he hadn’t or was not already going, because of his place employment, Wendy’s (31). This stereotype seems comical because of Franklin’s position of being “in the top five percent of students in [his] college” and the way he uses his temporarily painful experience in his essay which vaults him to an admittedly more comfortable job as a professor (26). Franklin was stereotyped as a parasitic, deadbeat dad who doesn’t want to have a good job to provide for his family. This misunderstanding demonstrates the lack of empathy that people have. Franklin illustrates how the man didn’t even think about how Franklin’s move to work at Wendy’s for two semesters was actually selfless giving his wife a chance to finish her degree
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
and having him watch the kids. Franklin uses these experiences of people using stereotypes to destroy the validity of them and to reveal the real humans that lie behind the assumptions others make of them. Lars Eighner also addresses these dynamics as a homeless man where he lives off of the dumpsters in his area. He writes about the core tenets of dumpster diving along with what he finds on his journey as a “scavenger” in his essay “On Dumpster Diving”. Even Eighner’s friends ask him questions like “Do you think these crackers are safe to eat?” which are presuming that Eighner would offer his friends food that is unsafe or unsanitary because of his time as a dumpster diver (13). This is a very similar implied accusation to the one leveled at Franklin while washing his hands in the bathroom as people think because just because of their current situations that they are on a lower moral plane or somehow less human. These two anecdotes combined make their claim that people are accusatory and treat others differently when they seem to be on a lower social stratum. But these conversations create a grave contrast between who mainstream society sees these people as and what they do and who they actually are. They are seen as weak and small but are actually award-winning authors. Rosie Meraglio Rose is a slightly different case that makes the exact same distinction between people’s views of the working class and the actual working class. The man who condescended Joey Franklin would probably have the same view of Rosie, the mother of Mike Rose, the author of “Blue Collar Brilliance, who also worked in food service. However, “Rosie was intrigued by psychology” and used her position among the public to “refin[e] her ability to deal with people in a difficult world” (6). While Rosie may just be viewed as the woman that dropped out of school after the seventh grade, she saw herself as the girl that was powerful enough to raise her siblings as a teenager and then learn every single day as a waitress working in a restaurant. People might see people in the working class like Rosie as “a bunch of dummies” because of their lack of education or a perceived inferior intelligence, but Mike Rose proves that belief is outdated
T E
and misguided because many people such as Rosie are curious and brilliant and only are in the situation they are in because of her difficult childhood (9). Rose’s essay was initially subtitled “Questioning assumptions about intelligence, work, and social class” which is exactly what Franklin, Eighner, and Rose all do with their writing. They look through the lens of the white-collar workers, and what they think of the working class and then prove how their assumptions about the inferiority of people based on their work and class are generally incorrect and offensive. Stereotypes are the driving factor of their argument. Without stereotypes people would not be able to have the unfounded beliefs they express without sounding delirious or offensive and would be able to see the practical brilliance of the layman. Some people are assumed to have a ‘rougher’ character because of their social class. To combat this idea the three essays, “Working at Wendy’s”, “On Dumpster Diving”, and “Blue Collar Brilliance”, delve deep into the characteristics and attributes of the workers and subjects to refute those beliefs. Dawn Livingston is the mother of Joey Franklin’s best friend and was formerly a drug dealer. Dawn badly wanted to provide for her children and on the days when she received her welfare checks she “went grocery shopping and brought home twelve packs of Pepsi, stacks of frozen steaks, crinkly bags of potato chips, several gallons of 2-percent milk, and bag after bag of Malt-O-Meal cereal” (12). While after this smorgasbord was depleted, they ate “lots of ramen” which many would consider poor parenting. A mother who does not budget well, spoils her kids until she has almost nothing to feed them seems like criminal negligence. People only see the surface aspect of people like this disheartening retelling of the culinary ups and downs of the Livingston household. But what people don’t think about is that Dawn gave up her lucrative drug dealing business to be a better mother to her five children. But when she was a drug dealer “nobody thought she was a bad mom then” (14). Franklin describes Dawn very specifically to make the point that she was never a great mother to her children but
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
when she finally tried to become one, she was judged for being a bad mother. Society should have a lower opinion of drug dealers than of hard-working blue-collar workers. One group is ruining people’s lives and making money illegally and the other is toiling honestly. This description of Dawn’s life truly isolates how people are too willing to ignore the good of the working class but are not willing to ignore their weaknesses and faults. Another person that is very deeply described is Mike Rose’s uncle, Joe Meraglio, who left school in the ninth grade to work various manual labor jobs. While society would like to emphasize “his muscled arm, sleeve rolled tight against biceps” rather than the “brightness behind the eye” and the startling intelligence that is constantly “evaluating a flurry of demands quickly, parceling out physical and mental resources” (10-13). Joe was not the most educated and would say so himself but was informed by his own experience as a laborer and by his canny sense of how things worked, and that type of intelligence did him just as much good as a classical education would have done for him. He made his way all the way to the top of the paint and body department of General Motors and developed many tweaks and changes that dramatically improved the department. Rose wants to prove that Joe’s innovative mind is different than that of a stuffy college professor but still just as effective with an explosive “Blue Collar Brilliance” that could do just as much good and make just as much of a difference as the brains of those who were more classically educated and made more money. Rose would look at someone like Joey Franklin who made the decision to work at Wendy’s to provide for his family for a year instead of making the idealistic, cruel decision to put his education over everything else. Rose and Franklin want the reader to understand that they knew the value of hard work, wherever it may be, and that when they are contributing to society and to their families it is honorable regardless of the public image of their jobs. Lars Eighner did not have a house or a very steady income when he wrote “On Dumpster Diving” but with a sense of duty he used what
T E
others didn’t instead of begging because he knew the resources were there for him to take and use. He knows that he could even figure out which discarded food was good to eat. He also used his experience and know-how to figure out when “bogus” pizzas were discarded at pizza shops and knew how to cook out botulence from canned goods. While he actually did get an advanced education like Joey Franklin, they both still used their hard work and practical skills and knowledge to keep themselves afloat in a destructive world. These authors aren’t writing to try and discredit university education. They just want to develop the idea that people can learn a lot from pure life experience and an uncanny ability to understand the way various systems work by just being exposed to them for various amounts of time. The multiple characters focused on are not the only examples in these three essays but definitely reveal the intense abilities the working class have, that remain unsung among the rest of the world’s population. Some of the most persuasive bits of all three essays that reveal the hardship and resilience of the working class are crafted with appeals to pathos and logos that emotionally connect to the reader and then give them fully developed explanations to back up their more emotional claims. Lars Eighner speaks of his monthly fight with dysentery which is truly a heartrending experience. But to provide for himself and to avoid taking sustenance from others he takes the risk of acquiring a life-threatening disease. He then logically lays out the facts. He eats a variety of foods from dumpsters, most of these foods are safe and do not cause him harm. He knows that he is gambling every time he eats but takes the risk because his methods are fairly secure and much more inexpensive than purchasing the food himself. Joey Franklin also writes emotionally about his experiences with Waymon Hamilton who is just a normal hard-working man that works a “thankless job to provide for his family” and does not flaunt his time as a “fleet footed running back who helped Brigham Young University win” (53). Waymon is described at a service project putting in a new driveway and did not recount his
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
time as a beloved football player as many would expect, he just talked about his children and teaching public school. Rose describes his “cognitive biographies” of working-class people (15). These cognitive biographies are an appeal to logos creating a way to measure the intellectual and physical effort workers input on a daily basis and what their job really entails. These cognitive biographies convey workers receiving an impromptu education in all sorts of fields such as chemistry and physics on the job. These little lessons that workers learn on the job can equate to the skills that many white-collar executives receive. Working class people are shown to require curiosity and a willingness to learn. All of these are attributes that are extremely admirable and come with prodigious talent and should not be ignored due to a profession; Waymon is not somehow less intelligent because he is a schoolteacher, just as innovative Joe Meraglio is not less of a man because he left school after ninth grade, and Lars Eighner is no worse a person even though he has no home. Eighner, Franklin, and Rose want to explain to the readers that message, that someone’s career or circumstances do not define them and shouldn’t define them. They are able to have the reader truly understand and believe them by utilizing powerful and persuasive anecdotes and then by using an appeal to logos in the cognitive biographies. These fundamental powers of persuasion are fantastic at completely unveiling and celebrating practical brilliance. All three essays aim to shine a light on the seemingly invisible brilliance that is patently different from the intelligence that is traditionally cultivated in the classroom. Their focus is real brilliance. These people do not learn or excel just for the purpose of pure learning or just for recognition; they excel in circumstances unknown to the privileged which is extraordinary yet mostly ignored. These essays and many others could remain almost completely unread and unknown just like their subjects if they did not use their rhetorical devices and make even their incredible arguments more alluring.
Intimate Modifications: Eighner, Morrison, and Staples L R
A
uthors Lars Eighner, Morrison, and Staples find themselves speaking on issues and philosophies that surround today’s day and age. They all detail their experiences that have led them to write their essays, and also work to establish their credibility as the right individuals to speak on these issues. Throughout all three of their essays, “On Dumpster Diving,” “Strangers,” and “Black Men and Public Space” they share intimate moments where they recall how they felt in the moment of the encounters they speak of, and help them depart from simply explaining what occurred in their pasts, to actually placing themselves and the readers in the moment. Confrontation is an experience that all three authors would have to face, in their respective experiences, but their attitude towards confrontation is what differentiates them. Such as how Eighner acknowledges that there will be people skeptical of others going through their personal trash, and so he avoids them, but Morrison is under the pressure of preconceived ideas about strangers, and so she chose to confront the stranger amicably. Yet, Staples would find himself actively avoiding any, potentially, dangerous confrontation by changing
T E
how he would behave in public. Everything surrounding their experiences, from the time of day, to who was involved, and even the manner in which the authors acted, will serve to establish their credibility, and fuel their persuasiveness. Their continuous use of rhetorical appeals throughout their essays develop their credibility as an experienced individual under the topics they’re discussing, but also influence the audience and their reaction to the encounters presented. Lars Eighner, Toni Morrison, and Brent Staples all detail polarizing stories, and demonstrate how someone considered invisible in the face of society, will modify their way of being, and drastically change people’s attitudes towards them. This invisibility often comes in the form of discrimination, isolation, and even unfamiliarity; that will all drive individuals to change their outlook on situations, and at times even themselves, in an attempt to ease tensions. A variety of issues are covered including social restraints, skepticism, and even racial discrimination which, in themselves, are relatable to many readers. Yet, the conscious decision made by Eighner, Morrison, and Staples where they detail their own personal encounters, from the first perspective, is done for multiple reasons. For the purpose of establishing credibility, detailing personal encounters dealing with these issues is done to demonstrate that these authors are the suitable individuals to speak on such complex issues that will affect many readers. Apart from “Strangers”, Eighner and Staples refute the stereotypes around them in an indirect manner, and rather, get rid of these preconceived ideas directed towards them by demonstrating how intelligent, and civilized they are; which is another way in which they will establish their credibility. Starting off with Lars Eighner, the experiences that he endures as a dumpster diver, and dedicating a large portion of his life to trying to make it through the day as a homeless man, may seem unsettling to many since there’s the stigma surrounding those living in poverty; such as them being deceiving or untrustworthy. In order to address these preconceived ideas about the homeless, Eighner dedicates a large
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
portion of “On Dumpster Diving” to detailing his thought process when going through a dumpster, and the judgement he uses to determine what should be consumed or avoided. Eighner presents the reader with facts such as how “nonorganic peanut butter does not require refrigeration and is unlikely to spoil in any reasonable time” and how finding food without its original package “is not so much a positive sign as it is a sense of a negative one” (57). Eighner’s facts and conclusions demonstrate how much thought goes into the actual process, and how observant one must be; not only does this work to ease the idea of health risks, but since they’re encounters that Eighner has gone through himself, it portrays him as eager to learn. Something that Eighner does, that is particularly interesting when it comes to establishing his credibility, is his indirect critique of academia; the wording of the title, “On Dumpster Diving”, uses the same format that scholars would use for texts dealing with, typically, highly academic topics, and for Eighner to use that same format when talking about dumpsters would juxtapose this intellectual format with such an unseemly topic, such as dumpster diving. As previously mentioned, Eighner talks about the durability of peanut butter, and how he tends to find them in dumpsters affluent to college students, but Eighner also takes this opportunity to play on academia yet again. His tone when it comes to describing the college students has a mocking undertone, and describes them as able to buy another jar of peanut butter with “daddy’s money” and as naive when it comes to these common motor skills of knowing when food is good or not, rather than tossing it without question (57). Lars Eighner plays with the popular idea that students in higher education will be, by default, intellectually superior to others, yet he’s able to distinguish certain areas where he reigns more knowledgeable due to his experiences being homeless. Getting rid of the stereotypes surrounding the homeless directly worked to establish Eighner’s credibility, and it tends to come in the form of him detailing how he went about his scavenging. He talks about how he has “never placed
T E
a bogus order to increase the supply of pizza” but rather he will take the pizzas that are actually placed wrong (57). Here, Eighner is slowly diminishing the stigma surrounding the homeless, in which they’re seen as deceiving and liars. Not only so, but he also distinguishes between those who make a mess with the garbage from the bins and how disorderly they are which would also display how he disapproves of such behavior. He also discusses how he wouldn’t look through trash bins from houses since they would be a lot more personal than dumpsters outside an apartment complex. If he’s capable of keeping all of this in mind, and being respectful of others’ privacy and comfort, Eighner demonstrates how civil he is and how, by default, those living in poverty aren’t barbaric, or set out to cause havoc. Everything being discussed in “On Dumpster Diving” comes from Eighner himself, and develops his credibility as someone in a position to speak about the realities of being homeless, and what is required of them. For Eighner to be able to detail all the nooks and crannies that must be kept in mind while dumpster diving rejects the idea that those living in poverty are intellectually inferior, but also helps him establish his credibility as someone who has lived through a wide variety of moments and has learned equally as much as someone in higher education. He paints himself to be observant and resourceful, but at the same time, very respectful, but these aren’t attributes he’s decided to fulfill randomly; Eighner acknowledges that he’s in a position to be heavily criticized due to his status, and must use his best efforts to demonstrate that he is not untrustworthy and deceiving, but he also realizes that if doesn’t use his best efforts those around him would get uncomfortable and could, potentially, stop him from going through dumpsters which is the only resource he has. In “Black Men and Public Space”, Staples grapples with the struggles that black men face in public spaces, and the reactions many take when they come across them. Stigmas surrounding black men are heavily outlined with them being seen as a po
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
tential threat, or more of a threat when compared to white men, but the essay also details the horrid ways in which Brent Staples is actually addressed and treated. Right in the beginning of the essay, Staples begins detailing the encounters he’s had where he’s profiled for being black, and how in one instance, “To her, the young black man [...] seemed menacingly close”, and would then cause her to run away (267). The issue of racial discrimination that Staples is evaluating, isn’t any issue in today’s society, and in this case, the perspective in which these encounters are discussed, and how impactful these encounters are, will play a large roll in establishing Staples’ credibility; he’s making himself seem as someone who has gone through the effects of discrimination, and would know, first hand, what it’s like and would know how to approach the audience who also relate to these issues. The topic of racial discrimination may be one that the audience may very well relate to, but Brent Staples then goes on to note how “Such tales are not uncommon. Black men trade tales like this all the time” which, in this case, knowing more encounters, and pointing out how normalized these instances are, helps him build his credibility as someone who has experienced discrimination (269). By taking into consideration that “Women are particularly vulnerable to street violence” and that these fears aren’t simply “hallucination”, Staples will differentiate the fears that women experience out in public, to the different type of instinct they get around black men that is more impactful to Staples (268). Although there may be those out there with very conservative ideologies that will still view African Americans as inferior to others, and could possibly question the intelligence of the author, Staples doesn’t really need to highlight his educational credits for that purpose; instead, his credibility comes from a place of assuring the reader that he has gone through some of the worst times, and truly understands that hurt that come from preconceived ideas. Staples has seen the horrors that have happened to black men around him, and how vulnerable and overlooked they are in today’s society, that he finds himself overthinking how he
T E
must act out in public, and lead him to rearrange how he behaves. Staples is already surrounded by deeply rooted stereotypes that affect all aspects of his life, and he understands that he must be the one to approach situations differently, and be overly calm, because those around him continuously refuse to change. As a result, Staples has been forced to modify his way of being out in public to ensure his safety, and prevent matters from escalating. In Toni Morrison’s “Strangers”, the author directly addresses how we’re all so quick to think of strangers as those who will “Disturb. Betray. Prove they are not like us” and so they’re pushed away as a way of keeping oneself safe (130). Toni Morrison’s credibility comes in the form of distinguishing themselves from the majority, and making decisions that, typically, wouldn’t be done by others. By them addressing the stereotypes that come along with strangers, and highlighting the initial thoughts that one would have, and then choosing to go against them, would demonstrate that Morrison is willing to delve into the experiences that one may come across with someone new. Throughout the entirety of the essay, Toni Morrison is hurt by the mischief that this utter stranger brought, but their credibility still stands as they were willing to make such a bold decision, speaking to a stranger with the objective of getting to know them. The manner in which they’re capable of retelling these stories will be pivotal to hooking the audience, and demonstrating that they have this broad outlook on the complex issues they’re talking about. The essays are meant to leave an impact on the reader, and so the authors must establish that they’re in the position to, basically, educate the audience. When Eighner details how he would never go through someone’s personal trash, when Morrison says that they directly contradicted their initial judgement of strangers, to even Staples’ whistling mechanism all demonstrate how they’ve modified who they are, and attempt to ease tensions around them. If Morrison were to avoid the stranger by the lake, there’s a possibility that they would then find themselves skeptical of who they really were, and would feel a lot more paranoid. Staples having
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
to make an effort to make those around him feel comfortable are attempts to ease the tensions that would come if someone were to let racially fueled ideologies come between them. Then, if Eighner was to recklessly go through bins, and invade the privacy of others, he would find himself being confronted by others, and falling into the stereotypes placed around him. All of these authors have had to set boundaries for themselves in order for matters to be kept rational, and to prevent them from escalating. The encounters that Eighner, Morrison, and Staples have gone through have placed them in a position to speak about the complex issues they faced; the manner in which they speak about these instances is what primarily engages the audience, and moves away from just telling stories, to actually placing the readers there with them. When the authors detail how they felt and actually make that emotional connection to the audience, they’re making the essay a lot more intimate. The intimacy carried throughout the essays, as they speak about hurtful moments, will, in itself, let the audience know that they’re speaking from a personal place and are willing to open up about it all. This appeal to pathos aids their persuasiveness since they’re tugging at the emotions of the audience; It’s important to note the manner in which they go about sharing these intimate moments is also a way to strengthen their credibility. Although “On Dumpster Diving” is very informative at times, there are moments where Lars Eighner lets his emotions show, and is one of the few moments where he doesn’t make dumpster diving seem like the best option. He talks about how his dog, Lizbeth, will eventually pass away, and “[...] when her time comes she too will go into a dumpster” and the audience is struck with a feeling of empathy as they realize that Eighner has come to such a conclusion (61). Eighner never really mentions a close relationship he’s ever had with others through his adventures, but Lizbeth is the only one he’s had by his side, and so for him to talk about losing someone so dear to him would hook the audience, and begin to sympathize with him. In a similar manner, Staples details how he felt in
T E
moments where he’s seen as a threat and how “Her flight made me feel like an accomplice in tyranny”, and the way in which he describes these feelings makes it seem like he’s viewing himself in a different manner (267). By those around him lashing out, and demonstrating all the hatred held against him, Brent Staples slowly began believing their inaccurate ideas about him. The intimacy comes in when he lets the audience in on how he feels, on how these moments made him feel like he had discovered something new about himself, which is not even true, but that also struck the audience even more as they realize how miserable these moments were for Staples; he’s being alienated and held to this low standard that causes him to rethink about who he is, yet, these standards are nowhere near true and are only set out to hurt him. Morrison’s encounters are a bit more peculiar, since she consciously placed herself in a position where, in reality, anything could happen, but at the same time, she romanticized the outcome of her relationship with the stranger and ended up getting hurt. When she talks about her fantasies about what their relationship will be like, from her clothes to the manner in which the stranger speaks, Toni Morrison feels as though she will build this motherly relationship with the stranger; she believes that they will go on and learn from each other, but remain by their side. Realization hits Morrison in one of the worst states, when she’s vulnerable and, to an extent, delusional. When she realized that the stranger didn’t actually know the owners of the house, and had actually lied to her, Morrison feels cheated and deceived. Although she wishes to move on, “A certain view from [her] window is now devoid of her, reminding [her] every morning of her deceit and [her] disappointment”, and the audience begins to see how hurt Morrison is left, and one really can not hold those illusions against her, since speaking to the stranger was done out of hope that they wouldn’t be like notorious strangers (130). Seeing Toni Morrison be so hopeful for what the future held for her and stranger, and then seeing it come crashing down placed the author in such a vulnerable position, and all the emotions that
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
went through them are displayed to the audience. All three of the authors took a very courageous step where they reveal these emotions to the audience, and demonstrate how impactful these moments were to them; their approach in attempts of persuading the audience is very similar, where they all reveal their emotions, and impacts that these instances had on them, so that in turn, their encounters seem a lot more intimate and connect with the audience. “On Dumpster Diving”, “Strangers”, and “Black Men and Public Space” all demonstrate how individuals dealing with stereotypes will find themselves having to modify how they go about manners, and changing the thought process behind their decisions. Choosing to modify the way they handle themselves is a voluntary action that all three authors could’ve chosen to ignore, the same way they chose to accomplish, but the goal of these essays is to invite the audience to see how making these decisions is necessary, and at times, challenging. Doing so would require them to be persuasive, and directly telling their stories wasn’t going to get through to the audience entirely, and so, they all strive to influence the way the audience responds to the essays. The audience would begin to see just how impactful these experiences would be; they would realize how Eighner’s only companion would eventually just be another object he would lose along the way, they would realize how horrible it would be to be chased down the halls of your own job the way Staples had, and they would be walked through the painful revelations Morrison went through as she realized she had been lied to. These authors are all speaking from a place of pain, and a place that has caused them to have a different outlook on matter as well, but the appeal to pathos was done to influence how the audience would react, and to ensure that they’re on their way to having a similar outlook that Eighner, Morrison, and Staples now have. In their essays, the authors create this eloquent atmosphere where they demonstrate how educated they are, and how capable they are of looking back and perfecting what they made of those instances. A particular way that their credibility is depicted, is
T E
how they’re telling these stories very well after they have taken place, and avoid speaking from a highly sensitive spot that could sway their judgement on matters, and make them come to biased conclusions. Although they come to the same realization that confrontation must be addressed in a different manner depending on the situation, and they must modify how they approach circumstances, Eighner, Morrison, and Staples all come to different sub conclusions. Starting with Eighner, he has realized that ought to take what you can, and let everything else go by, and if you can’t make use of them then they shouldn’t go along with you, but he has also learned the transience of material being; meaning that material things will only be permanent, but the sentiment behind them will last (63). The conclusions that Eighner has come down to, not only come from his extensive experience as a dumpster diver, but are also universal, and demonstrate the intellectual realizations he has come to after partaking in such a stigmatized practice. Toni Morrison had tried to ignore the stereotypes that come along with strangers, and how they may be deceiving, and found herself imagining what her life would be like after befriending the stranger. Her conclusion then deals with how “Image increasingly rules the realm of shaping, sometimes becoming, often contaminating knowledge” and that any image of others, whether deprecating of flattering, will change how the interaction goes with them (130). What Morrison realizes after being, as they said, cheated, is that she allowed herself to be hurt because she placed an image of someone before the actual interaction, and was then disappointed. The motherly image that Toni Morrison created before approaching the stranger is her own stereotype that she made, in hopes of refuting the pre-existing one. In one instant, Staples discusses how he has been “been calm and extremely congenial on those rare occasions when [he has] been pulled over by the police”, meaning that even after he made an effort to seem calm, the police still fell into their racial ideologies, and stopped him (269). His conclusion wasn’t directly stated, but through his experiences it
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
can be assumed that it deals with the stubborn discrimination some fill face, even after one modifies their manner. For all of the authors to be able to reflect on what has occurred to them, and formulate it into lessons displays the time they’ve invested in understanding these moments. For them to avoid speaking out of an overly sensitive place, is to speak from a reasonable and orderly place that has taken the time to truly come to conclusions. Authors Eighner, Morrison, and Staples have clearly reflected on the events that have taken place in their life, and how they must live off those experiences and the lessons brought along. All of them have gone through moments that have forced them to change their attitudes towards confrontation, meaning that they know they must approach situations in a specific manner in order to maintain tranquility, and allow hostility to lower. The encounters that they’ve all gone through challenged their judgement, and made them admit that in order to go about matters calmly, they must modify how they treat those around them. The topics that the authors talk about are very complex, covering issues such as racial discrimination, societal constructs, to even the misconceptions of those around you, but they all build their credibility through the use of stories that have allowed them to gain a broader outlook on these issues. Although the experiences themselves are very different in the cases of Eighner, Morrison, and Staples, but having those experiences is what establishes them as the right individual to speak on these issues; these topics will be relatable to a lot of the audience, in themselves, but the authors demonstrated that they comprehend these issues very well, and have learned from them. Credibility not only comes in the form of educational credentials, but, as these authors have realized, also comes in the form of one’s interactions, and how they present those to the audience. Their persuasiveness comes in the form of connecting to the audience in a very intimate manner, in which they reveal their emotions, and detail very vulnerable moments in their life. By revealing their emotions to the audience, and making that intimate connection
T E
to them influences how they responded to what the authors were talking about. Authors Eighner, Morrison, and Staples all have come to the unanimous conclusion that they’re all going to go through difficult times, but from then, have realized that they must change how they approach these scenarios. Taking it a step further, they all deal with stereotypes that affect them, and so, they must change the manner in which they behave to avoid fulfilling those stereotypes, or refuting them indirectly with the way they act. In the face of such a judgmental and critical society, individuals must then realize the deprecating standards being held to them and work against them since they’ve come to the conclusion that it’s easier to change who you are, rather than expect society to change for you.
Deciding The Rest of Your Life at 18
K R
W
hat are your plans after high school? Where are you going to college? What are you going to do with your life? Influential adults ask high-school students these questions daily. Instinct says to reply by stating “some four-year college” without a second thought. Yet, I can’t help asking myself, do I even want to go to college? Or does society want me to go to college? High school students are conditioned to believe that going to college is the sole way to have a successful, meaningful, and fulfilling life while being able to provide for themselves and their future families, even if it means voluntarily sacrificing their own desires. Societal pressures are a large factor in the decision-making process for many people because of their fear of judgment if they happen to choose another career path that is seen as less intellectually demanding. Joey Franklin’s “Working at Wendy’s,” William Zinsser’s “College Pressures,” and Mike Rose’s “Blue-Collar Brilliance”, challenge this prevalent notion using ethos and pathos. By providing anecdotal evidence, the three essays refute this all too common belief and analyze society’s reasoning for pressuring high school students to go to college even if the stu
T E
dents are not ready, want to pursue a different path or just simply don’t want to go to college. Franklin, Zinsser, and Rose are able to connect to the reader on an almost personal level, humbly acknowledging that other careers and life paths are valid and necessary. These three essays claim that, maybe, college isn’t exactly the intellectual wonderland society praises it to be and that it is possible to be successful and intelligent while working a blue-collar job. Joey Franklin’s “Working at Wendy’s” expresses the embarrassment and shame he felt when applying for and working the night-shift at Wendy’s while he and his wife go through college. Franklin feels as though he’s making a “mistake” before he even “hand[s] the manager [his] résumé” because he, like many others, believed that working a blue-collar job is beneath his level of intelligence (80). Children learn this societal stigma at a young age. Franklin remembers telling his friends that his father worked as a pizza delivery man but later “wish[ed] [he] hadn’t told them anything about [his] father’s job” because of the shame he felt knowing his father didn’t have a “real job” (83). During his time at Wendy’s, Franklin grows to realize that many of his co-workers aren’t there by choice. Franklin provides anecdotal stories of each of his co-workers’ hardships and personal issues that have landed them a job at Wendy’s. Whether it be an expecting mother trying to make money to provide for her future baby or a teen boy who was kicked out of his house until he can attend military school, all of his co-workers work at Wendy’s because they found themselves in unexpected situations, not because they are incapable of working at a “higher-level” job. When one customer assumes that Franklin is not going to college because of his job, he wants to inform this man that “[he is] on [his] way to grad school to get a Ph.D. in English literature,” that he is “in the top 5 percent of students at [his] college,” but he resorts back to his same response, knowing that this man assumes he is “another wasted life, another victim” (83). By including his credentials and the personal stories of his co-workers, Franklin is appealing to
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
pathos and ethos. His highly advanced degree contributes to his credibility as an author by establishing his background in English and writing while simultaneously furthering his argument that nobody is too good to work at a blue-collar job. Franklin wants the reader to sympathize with the prejudices he deals with daily from customers who have fallen victim to society’s preconceived notion of fast-food workers. The personal stories of his co-workers work as an appeal to pathos because Franklin is providing the background of his co-workers that many assume. Franklin hopes to evoke empathy and almost make our society feel guilty about our preconceptions and our hasty judgments. Ultimately, Franklin hopes to dispel the stigma surrounding blue-collar and fastfood jobs and wants society to challenge their own presumptions and stereotypes through his use of pathos and ethos. Today, intelligence is measured by testing scores, grades, transcripts and the amount of higher education required for a certain field of work. Intelligence is considered to be how well a student is able to regurgitate information taught through a textbook. Today, most people associate more education with more money and believe that “work requiring less schooling requires less intelligence” (452). Mike Rose’s “Blue-Collar Brilliance,” questions the exact definition of intelligence. Rose claims that experience can teach more than a textbook ever will and that intelligence is more than just test scores and transcripts. Rose begins by providing his mother’s experience of “quit[ting] school in the seventh grade to help raise her brothers and sisters” by becoming a waitress (451). He describes sitting and watching how intricate and skill-demanding being a waitress actually is. Their tips rely on forming the ability to cater to all the needs of the customers “from physiological ones, including the emotions that accompany hunger, to a sometimes complicated desire for human contact” (450). School may teach algebra and chemistry, but work teaches efficiency, communication, and problem-solving- all life-long skills that cannot be taught through school, but through experience exclusively. Rose utilizes anecdotes of his
T E
mother and uncle to produce an ethical appeal. Using his family members’ experience working a manual job contributes to his credibility as an author and furthers his claim. The experiences his mother and uncle have had directly contribute to his argument and are a prime example of the successes blue-collar jobs can offer. Rose is promoting that different jobs are intellectually challenging in diverse ways; that the different cognitive tools required for different jobs don’t equate to lesser work. A manual worker’s training “enhances knowledge and informs perception” in a constantly changing environment rather than learning in a classroom setting and not being able to apply the knowledge to a real-world situation (455). Rose is not claiming that blue-collar work is superior to white-collar work, but is hoping to eradicate stereotypes surrounding blue-collar employment. Rose believes that the majority of adults value book smarts over experience and should be more accepting of different forms of intellect. Rose says that the “affirmation of diverse intelligence is not a retreat to a softhearted definition of the mind,” but “is to take seriously the concept of cognitive variability” (456). Ultimately, Rose uses an ethical appeal to develop his credibility and to inspire a more welcoming and understanding view of what is now a hierarchy of jobs. Societal pressures to pursue higher education are more prevalent than ever. All of this pressure stems from the “clammy grip of the future,” the “if I don’t get in my life is over” mentality (438). The constant “economic pressure, parental pressure, peer pressure, and self-induced pressure” can be too much for most students to overcome and pursue the path they want (438). William Zinsser’s “College Pressures” examines this slippery slope fallacy that has a tight grip on too many high school students. The college admittance process makes students believe that the only way to be successful is to get an edge on the student sitting next to them. That there must be something unique and better about them that will get them ahead. This harmful mentality leaves students constantly unsatisfied; making them dwell on
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
the downfalls and brush past the successes. Zinsser knows this mentality all-too-well as he taught writing at Yale University and was the master of Branford College. Zinsser says that “one of the few rights that America does not proclaim is the right to fail,” that the “young are growing up old,” being forced to choose their life path and where it ends before it even begins (438). In a world where “A is for admirable and B is for borderline,” the self-induced pressure on students is severe because the “transcript has become a sacred document, the passport to security” (438). In today’s world “looking very good is no longer good enough” in order to ensure financial security and success (438). Many students believe they will never be good enough, never living up to their own standards, let alone other’s expectations as well. Zinsser uses his credentials as an ethical appeal to describe the thoughts and feelings of students he has taught and advised. It is evident that Zinsser is deeply affected by the stresses of his students and the whole college system as it is devised today. Seeing these struggles first-hand as a college educator and administrator has changed Zinsser’s whole outlook on societal pressures and how it relates to higher education. Pressures to pursue higher education are harmful to all students and to society. These pressures are an excuse to justify prejudices towards those who do not pursue higher education and choose another career path. Zinsser claims that not only is the college process harmful to students but society as a whole. All three of these essays reflect on the dystopian world our society is becoming. To ask 18-year-olds to choose the path of the rest of their life before it has even begun is obviously, very stressful and exhausting. To most students, however, pleasing parents, peers, and teachers is more important than pleasing themselves. On top of pressures from others, college students are forced to absorb tens of thousands of dollars of debt owed to billion-dollar corporations that will cause them to be “already behind as [they] go forth” (439). The stigmas surrounding other career paths are also a factor that holds many students back from pursuing what
T E
they truly want to do, whether that be a trade school, community college, a gap year or no further schooling at all. All three authors attempt to refute the stereotypes through ethos and pathos. By providing personal success stories, Franklin, Rose, and Zinsser are encouraging students to pursue their passions and are advocating for change in our judgmental and stress-filled society. By using pathos, the authors hope to provoke empathy and challenge readers to examine their own downfalls when it comes to making hasty generalizations and the use of ethos contributes to their credibility as an author. These three authors are promoting the change in our society that is so desperately needed. In a world filled with anxious and depressed teens, there needs to be a reevaluation of the college and career system as it stands today. All types of work contribute to society in some way, no matter what the salary is. No person working a blue-collar job should feel ashamed for bettering themselves and doing what they have to do to pursue their goals, because most people who believe they are too good for this type of work have benefitted from their employment in some way. Students are trapped in a capitalist, for-profit society that capitalizes on outcomes but never the journey. The success at all costs mentality is a cause of self-hatred, stress, and the rising rates of mental illness in teens. The workload, debt, and life adjustment that comes with college is something that not everyone is capable of taking on and that should be acceptable. Many students crumble under the pressure of choosing their life path and just choose what their others think is best for them. Americans need to make a conscious effort to eradicate the preconceptions surrounding plans after high school by valuing all types of work for what they contribute to our world, not how long it takes to get there.
The Reconstruction of Social Perceptions of Stereotyped People
S T
O
ne of the most controversial and grossly abused devices in the inventory of humanity’s perceptive toolkit is the stereotype. It is convenient, available, and often reinforced by the human’s own biases through which their perceptions are molded. Much like other tools awaiting use in the human psyche, the stereotype is ancient and primitive; It needs naught the batteries of logic to function, as it is no more than a crude contortion of wood and rock requiring only the emotional strength of the user to construct an assessment, belief, or pyre of ignorance. However, as the utility of a tool is altered in harmony with its demands, the crudeness of the stereotype can be replaced, revamped, and reintroduced with the proper direction. Zora Neale Hurston, Nancy Mairs, and Brent Staples offer tutorials on this revamping, within their essays “How it Feels to be Colored Me”, “On Being A Cripple” and “Black Men in Public Space”. They address the inaccuracy of stereotypes, and attempt to redefine—and in some sense eliminate—the mass perception of and regarding certain stereotypes. Through similar installments of rhetoric such as appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos, along with similar organiza
T E
tional techniques, the essays establish a fortified base of credibility and persuasiveness. The three of them are heavily anecdotal, and use little to no outside information in their process of redefinition. They, amongst other shared strategies, make use of a perspective switch. They exemplify how the seemingly harmless—in some cases presumably favorable—labels pasted upon them by society hold a deeper meaning only naturally discoverable by those being labeled; along with how these labels bleed beyond their diction and into the fabric of the authors’ social existence. This act of redefining a word, or stereotype, as its signified (Saussure)—and use of extended definition—is a strong attestation to credibility, and persuasiveness. The titles of these essays act as synecdochical previews to their contents, exemplars of their similarities, and testimonies to their credibility/persuasiveness. “How it Feels to be Colored Me” emphasizes the word “colored”—a loaded word with illusory benignity (at the time it was written). It implies, because of the social climate the essay was published in, that this essay is to be an account of the black or “colored” struggle, as that word is connotatively shorthand for the less fortunate African-American. Not intended to be a slur, yet carrying a negative weight based on ignorance of the black experience. The essay is a commentary on what the word colored is intended to mean, juxtaposed with how the author understands and wears it. “On Being a Cripple” utilizes a choice word, and by extension a stereotype, in the same fashion. Mairs demonstrates the duality of diction, the difference between the speaker’s intention and the listeners impression, much like Hurston does with “Colored”. The word “Cripple” is intended to be offensive, or insensitive, yet it is the author’s choice label. Other words that a non-cripple would presumably find more appropriate and neutral, like “handicapped” or “disabled” are objectionable to Mairs (64). She uses this juxtaposition to comment on society’s obsession with physical appearance, their inability to socially and verbally acknowledge a deviation from the norm, and the resulting marginalization and
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
stereotyping; which are rarely in favor of those being marginalized. As a formal able-bodied person, this rhetoric is a huge contributor to her credibility and persuasiveness. Brent Staples’ “Black Men in Public Space” uses the term “Black Men” in a functionally similar way, yet does not utilize an extended definition. His commentary is less on the difference between the intended and exacted meaning of a loaded word, and more on the stereotype associated with a marginalized demographic. He employs a use of juxtaposition similar to Mairs and Hurston, in which the “Public’s” understanding of a bracket of people is not consistent with the bracketed people’s understanding. As a black man, his narrative on being forced to accommodate for the stigmas attached to his social definition is powerful, credible, and persuasive. These three authors rhetorically communicate the inaccuracy of stereotypes, by anecdotally explaining their meaning and implications as stereotyped people. Organizationally, these essays have much in common. Each begins with a personal story, one intended to set a foundation for the upcoming commentary, by assigning a personal value to a conflict experienced due to their deviations from the social norm; the aspect they are stereotyped for. This blatant appeal to pathos sets the scene and interests the reader, along with offering a condensed symbolic example of the concept they base their commentary on. Staples begins his essay with a story of prejudice-induced fear, in which his white, affluent “victim” “worries” about a “youngish black man” and “run[s] [away] in earnest”, despite Staples (the youngish black man) doing nothing but having his “hands in[...][his]pockets” and wearing a “military jacket” (267). These details are irrelevant, the obvious cause of her anxious escape is Staple’s “menacing” male blackness. The dangerous, hostile stigma surrounding black men is the issue Staples reports on throughout his essay. He makes it a point to denote that this stigma does not disappear when the black man is actively attempting to be unimposing. It is this topic of subtle racism, the sub-verbal reactions to black men that place Staple’s essay in line
T E
with Mairs’ and Hurston’s. These reactions are not intended to be racist, to offend Staples, in fact they are not intended at all, they are merely compulsory. Much like the issues and perspectives Mairs’ and Hurston address, they aren’t meant to be derogatory, yet are experienced as such by those to whom they are directly affecting. Mairs’ essay begins with a story symbolic of the disparity between her view of her disability and the views of the able-bodied. She describes herself as having “fell over backward” in a “beetle-on-its-back routine” in a public bathroom (64). Within a “deserted” building, she felt free to “laugh aloud” at this comedic fumble, but then admits to herself that if with company, she’d’ve been “still and faint and hot with chagrin” (64). This anecdotal appeal to pathos provides motive for the writing of this essay, as it acts as a physical manifestation of the inconsistency between her self-view and how society views her, based on the marginalization of cripples. The word “cripple” is generally negatively connotative, yet it is her preferred description, as it most accurate, closest to “reality” (65). She provides other commonly used words for comparison, worst of all (according to Mairs) being “differently abled” as it is has no descriptive power, seeing as any one person can be differently abled than any other, meaning no information is being conveyed about anyone with the use of such a term. Like Staple’s social existence as a black man at night, it is the unthought use of terms like “differently abled” that carry a meaning unbeknownst to the user, yet all too visible to the recipient. Hurston, as can be expected, begins her essay with an anecdote displaying a difference between the author’s view of a characteristic, and how it is societally stereotyped. She introduces the anecdote as the “day she became colored” (42) and begins to describe her childhood in all-black Eatonville, where she would “‘speak pieces’ and sing” for the wealthy white passersby. It can be inferred that she did not understand her own racial identity surrounded by just black people there, as she did not become colored until she was plopped in the middle of white Jacksonville. The fact that she describes her coloredness as an emergent
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
relative condition proves that she sees it as a type of social reinforcement; it is not actually her, but a label accompanied by its own assumptions that has been placed on her. She says she is not “tragically colored” implying she wishes to separate herself from the “sobbing school of negrohood”; a generalization that was prevalent during the time Hurston wrote this (43). This association between past slavery and black voices—invoked by the word “colored”—doesn’t immediately create a negative connotation (at the time it was written). The issue here is the presumptive nature of the word, how it assigns a past, present, and future to Hurston without any consideration of the person beneath the stereotype. Like the word “Cripple’’ for Mairs, and the black male identity for Staples, the word “Colored” for Hurston is an unintentionally inhibitory attack on her individuality and extent of expression. The debuting anecdotes of these essays provide a concise, symbolic example of the contrast between the seemingly innocuous perception of a marginalized group, and an individual of that groups’ perception of themselves. These anecdotes appeal strongly to pathos, along with establishing a fair amount of ethos, as it proves the authors to have had first-hand experience with the specific marginalization they address in their essay. This results in a fully credible, fully persuasive, trio of essays. The trio of essays also rewire the inaccurate, somewhat offensive stereotype-based perceptions plaguing society, or at least offer insight beyond what the common, non-minority might have on the authors’ choice subjects. This presents itself as an extended definition in the case of Mairs and Hurston, and more of a repeated appeal to ethos in the case of Staples. Staples spends his essay making evident how little he fit into the violent, dangerous, thuggish stereotype that was nonconsensually assigned to him. He denotes being unable to “take a knife to a raw chicken” and mentions one of his strategies to assuage the white fear he causes; to “whistle [...] Beethoven and Vivaldi” (268). By describing these traits that are so unfitting to the stereotype he unwillingly wears, he installs a certain credibility, and redefines
T E
the generalized definition of male blackness. He puts an educated, “softy” black man in replacement of the violent, dangerous one that is so often portrayed in the media. Mairs does a similar thing with “Cripple”, through a very different method. She sheds a flattering light on the word “Cripple”, rendering it as “straightforward” and “precise” because it effectively describes her position, with no other added subtext aside from the negative connotation society falsely accuses it of having. She redefines it to prove the complexity of cripples; how they are stronger than their disability suggests, and should not be reduced to an all encompassing set of “semantic[ally] hopeful” words (65). Hurston, not unexpectedly, does the same. Hurston quite explicitly removes herself from the label “colored’, even going so far as to say she “do[es] not always feel colored” (43). In the act of detaching herself from a trait she treats as impermanent, she essentially redefines “colored” as a relative condition, and not an intrinsic, physical trait. She goes on to state that she is “off to a flying start” despite slavery, and does not treat it as a hindrance (43). This diverges from the pervasive “colored” stereotype by providing a self-view as unbridled by slavery, a bold redefinition for her time. By altering the societal perception of marginalized stereotypes, through definitions and rhetoric, the essays assume a new level of credibility and persuasiveness. They are credible in their ability to concentrate their experiences into a concept, a redefinition or perspective switch, and then strategically articulate the concept in a way that proves their closeness and relevance to the topic. They are persuasive in their convincing manner of displaying the merit of their claims, by offering anecdotal evidence and rationale to justify their social perspective alteration. Through use of anecdotal evidence, a hefty appeal to pathos, and the rhetorical editing of the social resonance of a stereotype, the trio of essays were able to convey the contrasts between the intentional meaning of an action or word, and the received meaning. With this difference noted, they were able to positively redefine the stereotypes responsible for the words and actions.
Part III: Thematic Synthesis
The differences between these meanings is very easily overlooked, and in dire need of further investigation. These differences, exacerbated by stereotypes, strenuously widen the gap between people of all flavors, yet are rarely identified or investigated. Like a lichen plant slowly writhing through the cracks of a brick building, eventually these undetected, shadowy differences will cause a societal implosion, leaving a ruin of debris in which the prospect of unconditional social equality will lie, buried forever. Or, less apocalyptically, a lack of connection between groups of different categorical criteria will only isolate each group, and by proxy individual, with no conceivable means of amelioration. This topic demands attention.
Part IV:
Etymology Study
Under Quarantine
K R, A F
E
tymology is the study of the origin of words and the way their meanings have changed throughout history. The word “quarantine” has an interesting background and has developed from its original usage. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word was first used to define the place where Jesus fasted for forty days, but has slowly transitioned into the definition commonly known today which is isolation imposed upon people to prevent the spread of disease. Quarantine’s religious use dates back to as early as the ninth century, where it assumed its form as a post classical Latin word. Later, it made appearances in the Anglo-Norman language, further making its way into middle French. Its meaning at the time still had religious connotations, along with being used to refer to the period of forty days in which a widow is entitled to a dower, and allowed to live in the house. Furthermore, quarantine existed as vocabulary related to law, containing some punishment inside the time constraint of forty days. If a crime was committed, it was common that a certain number of quarantines were assigned as the perpetrator’s penance. The development and growth of globalization and urbanization is the catalyst for the words transition; large scale disease became prominent and coastal cities would require ships ar
T E
riving from infected ports to anchor for forty days before entering. As previously mentioned, quarantine made its first appearance around the ninth century, and the original usage dates until the late 1400s with religious connotation. The prefix “quar” is derived from the Latin word quadraginta, meaning forty. The Christian church used quarantine to describe an unrelenting fast of forty days, similar to Jesus’ fast of forty days as told in the Bible. This fast was often assigned as penance in order to be forgiven for sins committed and confessed. The amount of “quarantines” assigned as penance would depend on the severity and amount of the sins committed. This usage of the word is obsolete today, as the Christian church no longer assigns “quarantines” as an act of atonement. The usage of quarantine slowly transitioned in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries from its religious meaning to “a period of forty days during which a widow who is entitled to a dower is supposed to be assigned her dower and has the right to remain in her deceased husband’s chief dwelling” (OED). This meant that the widow has the legal right to remain in possession of her deceased husband’s home for forty days to grieve and mourn before the eager family of the husband can legally take possession of the home from her. During this period, she also has the right to take up her dower, or her share of her husband’s estate. At this point, the word made appearances in Scotland and England, and was continually growing. For example, in 1628, Edward Coke mentioned quarantine while writing institutes of laws in England, stating that “if she marry within the forty days she loseth her quarentine.” This definition has been discarded from usage in modern times, slowly losing its resonance as time passed on. However, overlap occurs during this definition’s lifespan, as the new meaning that regards the containment of disease has been emerging. After the black plague spread throughout Europe in the fourteenth century, the fear of widespread infectious disease was more prevalent than ever. Because of this fear, quarantine’s modern definition was discovered. Many individuals who were believed to have been infected with the black plague were placed
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
in isolation in the hopes that it would help slow the rapid expansion. In Italy, they used the phrase quaranta giorni, which was synthesized when ships attempted to enter ports in Dubrovnik, Croatia. Regardless of these policies, the bubonic plague’s extremely infectious nature ended up wiping out a third of Europe’s population in just a three-year span. Furthermore, because of new innovations such as the compass and astrolabe, the Age of Exploration exploded worldwide in the early seventeenth century promoting interconnectedness, globalization, and unfortunately, disease. These foreign diseases spread like wildfire all throughout the world because of increased travel and commerce. Disease breakout caused quarantine’s definition to transform yet again to the meaning known today. Incoming ships carrying goods and people were isolated at the port for forty days to help prevent the widespread infection that could arise. Narcissus Luttrell’s famous diary, “A Brief Historical Relation of State Affairs from September 1678 to April 1714,” contains detailed accounts of current events throughout his lifetime. He writes on the isolation of ships, describing the quarantine they faced while travelling, saying, “those that come from Naples...are obliged to perform a quarantine before they come to Rome, because of the plague in that Kingdom” (OED). This entry displays the evident fear of disease that gives quarantine its negative connotation surrounding highly infectious disease today. Since then, the definition hasn’t changed. The United States has utilized quarantine countless times in recent history. The emergence of its usage in the United States started in 1878, when congress passed the National Quarantine Act, which paved the path for federal involvement to prevent the spread of yellow fever and cholera. The government continued to build on this policy, and by 1921, the quarantine system was a nationwide process. Quarantine inspectors now board ships flying a yellow quarantine flag, which can be lowered once the ship has been fully inspected and is clear to enter the docks. This job was previously carried out by the PHS, but in 1967, the Centers for Dis
T E
ease Control and Prevention (CDC) took over this responsibility. Currently, they have seven quarantine stations that cover all of the American ports. Quarantine stations report on sick travelers on airplanes, ships and land border crossing which helps them formulate an assessment of public health, and respond properly. As the death toll and infection rate rise daily throughout the world regarding the coronavirus, quarantine has been more prevalent in the news than it has been in years. Ships on the coasts of countries and infected people have been quarantined for weeks on end, no one letting them off in fear of the rapid spread of this deadly disease. Quarantine will continue to indicate precautions taken to prevent the spread of epidemics or widespread disease and will most likely not change in future years. The definition hasn’t changed since the fourteenth century when disease was spread on a worldwide scale because of new found interconnectedness, and will continue to describe future epidemics and infections.
LOVE: The Most Powerful Word of Them All
B C
N
o one knew that in approximately 84AD the most powerful and influential word would be created. The word that each and every one of us uses every day of our lives and has many meanings: love. Love is not only a word, but it serves as a sentimental feeling and brings people comfort; The Oxford English Dictionary defines love as a sense relating to affection and attachment. The meaning of this word has developed throughout all periods of English, but all of the definitions are relatively similar. The usage of love expands from someone’s physical attraction to someone else, emotional affection towards someone, affection towards God, and believe it or not competitive sports. Love is very powerful because no matter who you are, you need some type of love to survive. Whether it’s love from family members, a significant other, or even yourself, your life will flourish better than someone who doesn’t feel any love at all. The word love is used very frequently by the entire world and it has various meanings. Not only does it contain different dictionary definitions, but the word love can mean several different things to many different people depending on their backgrounds and experiences.
T E
One trend in the etymology of “love” involves the praise or extol with God, an individual or an object. While discussing the influence that Christianity and religion, in general, had on all people during the early years of society, it’s only right to deem love as such an important word. In the bible containing the old and new testaments, it’s stated by King James in 1611 in John 4:16 that “God is loue, and hee that dwelleth in loue, dwelleth in God” (OED). This demonstrates that God is, in fact, love and if you believe in God then you believe in love and love will be brought your way. In addition to this verse, in John 5:3 added in 1526, it’s discussed that “This is the love of god, that we kepe his commaundementes” (OED).This is also saying that if you praise and honor God that it is your duty as an individual to stay true to his commandments. Also, in the Christian Atonem, it’s stated by Joseph Gilbert that “The death of Christ was the expression of Divine love” (OED). The death of Jesus is what kept and strengthened the love towards him alive, which is quite ironic. These three examples are particularly significant to the development of the definition of love because it demonstrates the first generation in which the word was used. Love was primarily used to discuss an individual’s relationship with and devotion to God. It was later developed into what we now describe as having a deep physical attraction and emotional affection towards an individual. The second trend in the etymology of love is its more contemporary use containing the feeling or disposition of deep affection or fondness for someone and also the personification of romantic or sexual affection. Use of the word love can be towards any person, object or topic that involves a great passion. Love is also a sign of comfort, when you tell someone you love them, you feel safe with them. It doesn’t just have to do with romantic relationships but also family relationships and friendships. The idea of “be in love, have a passionate attachment” (OED) is from thirteenth century and is widely practiced still to this day and more than likely will be for the rest of eternity. The feeling of being connected to someone physically and emotionally is what
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
keeps society flourishing. Love in all reality is what we live for, we’re steadily looking for someone to love and someone to love us. The entire concept of love is an intimate feeling due to Eros, Amor, and Cupid in classic mythology. Cupid’s meaning desire is the Roman counterpart of the Greek god, Eros, who is the god of love and sex; Cupid is also sometimes known as Amor in Latin, but in Roman mythology is the same as Eros, but in Roman mythology, Cupid is portrayed as a baby because it symbolizes the combination of two people who are in love. Usually, when two people are deeply in love, they often feel the need to get married and produce a child in a typical society, for which another reason why love is so powerful; it allows for life to prosper and advance each and every day. Without love there would be no future generations because no one would be creating children or taking care of them because as bad as it sounds, if you don’t love something why would you want to keep it around? The concept of love has been around for centuries and is still used to great effect today in all parts of the world. Even the oldest definition is still captured in society, the majority of people praise and worship God or some form of a god. The people who don’t believe in God still are inspired by an individual, object or theory. It can be heavily argued that love is and forever will be one of the most powerful and influential words of the English language due to its large emotional appeal. Love is the foundation of human existence and it’s what we live for, what we strive for and what we need to live a successful life. Love is responsible for healthy relationships, successful careers, and happy life. Without love, none of those things are possible because you have to be passionate about something or someone in order to feel the feeling that love brings. That feeling is one of the best things in the world if it’s perceived and brought about in the correct ways. Love encompasses a large range of strong and positive emotions that bring out the true character in an individual, you can tell a lot about a person based on the way that they define and display love.
What Is Your Worst Nightmare? The Etymology of The Sleep Deprived T C, J R
A
h! I just had a nightmare. I forgot that I had an English paper due at 11:59pm that was supposed to be 5,000 words; there is only one day left, and my computer is broken. Mr. Goga might make me come in early to school if I don’t turn it in on time. Good thing it was just a nightmare—oh wait, this has me thinking. What is a nightmare? According to the Oxford English Dictionary, nightmare is “A female spirit or monster supposed to settle on and produce a feeling of suffocation in a sleeping person or animal” (OED). More commonly we think of a nightmare as a terrible or terrifying dream which is irrational most of the time. Almost everyone in our society reports having the occasional nightmare whether or not it is related to your English class including adults, the elderly, and children. Children have especially wild imaginations, so they’re able to recount what they saw in their nightmare. The word nightmare comes from the old English words mare, meaning demon, and night, meaning “a period of darkness after day” to stress that it is a dream that occurs while you are asleep and that it is not good (OED). The word made one of its first appearances around 1300 in Middle
T E
English when it was spelled ni t-mare and has since changed to its current spelling. The etymology of the word nightmare tells us that the word is Germanic in origin and has a negative and dark connotation. So what exactly is etymology? Well, etymology is the study of the history of words, and how they have changed throughout history. Etymology explains the origin of the word, and why the word has changed. Etymology came from the Greek word, etumologia, etumos meaning true, and logia meaning the study of something. Etymology was first used in 1790 by Wilhelm Tissot, who wrote down a recipe for a cup of coffee. He called it, “Capuzinerkaffe” and that word has now changed into cappuccino. The word night, meaning “the period of darkness after day,” derives from similar words in many Germanic languages. A few examples are the word “nacht” from middle Dutch and the word “nocht” in early Irish. These words both have the same meaning as the word night that we currently use. The spelling of the word night has changed throughout its use in the English language. In Middle English around the year 1450 the word was spelled “nyght”; then transitioned to its current spelling in the 1600s. The use of the word night in nightmare emphasizes the fact that a nightmare occurs when it is dark and there is no light. Darkness also adds to the fear associated with nightmares because many people are scared of the darkness associated with night. Night is a word commonly used in writing to symbolize something negative or eerie. For example, when people think about ghosts or crimes it is imagined that they occur in the darkness of night. Hamlet wrote “I am thy father’s spirit, doomd for a time / To walke the night,” implying that the night was a time when spirits would be out haunting people. The word mare stems from Germanic and Slavic folklore. They say that it brings bad dreams by riding on people’s chests while they sleep suffocating them. Mare has many different spellings like “mære” which is Old English, “mara” which is Old German and Old Norse, and “marrie” which is Old Dutch. But in many
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
other languages, it’s always been spelled “mare”. All of these words mean the same thing, they just have different spellings. Mare in nightmare belabors that nightmares are frightening. In Scandinavia, the tale goes as this; the king broke his promise of returning to his wife within three years. After ten years had passed, his wife hired a sorceress to bring him back or kill him. The king then said when he went to sleep, the “nightmare rode him” and it would seize his feet so he couldn’t move and press down on his head like it was trying to kill him. The word nightmare is a combination of the words night and mare. The two separate words come together in the English language to form the word we know and use to refer to our bad dreams. Both words are derived from words in early Germanic languages. They both have a negative and dark connotation so bringing them together emphasizes the dreaded terror that comes along with some of the worst nightmares. The mare is an evil spirit that visits you in your sleep and suffocates you, which is extremely similar to the terrifying things that often appear in people’s nightmares. The word night needed to be added to make it known that this occurs when it is dark, and people are asleep. Combining the two words also creates clarity to someone who may not know the folklore behind the word mare. This combination definitely creates a dismal connotation to the word nightmare itself; it is a word that is never used in a positive context unless it is being used to bring down the mood. Throughout etymological history, the meaning of the word nightmare and even the words night and mare that make it up have not really changed. Now, the word nightmare itself may change in the future but the meaning will also be the same, like it always has been. These two words together are meant to express that nightmares are supposed to scare you; they’re not supposed to be a good dream. Whether your worst nightmare is an essay, a crime, or something else, knowing the chilling etymology of nightmare will leave you more prepared for what is about to come.
No Cap: History of “Cap” S C, M R, A P
T
he meaning of the slang word “cap” is to lie or exaggerate something, and the slang use of this word just became popular in the past year. In the early 1900s, “cap” was created as a slang word, yet had an alternate meaning that meant to reach the limit or to surpass something; this has recently changed to the new meaning and is very well known to the teenagers in today’s society. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the definition of “cap” is “A hood, a covering for the head”. This word originated from Latin word cæppe in 1000AD and has transformed from Old English to Modern English. Through our research of these three definitions, we will see how each meaning of the word is used in its respective time periods. The original meaning of “cap” is referring to a hood, a covering for the head, this is what people know today as a hat. This term is more frequently used today rather than the term “cap”, making the original definition less relevant. The linguistics of the word “cap” has changed from Old English to Middle English. The Oxford English Dictionary definition of cap is different from the Urban Dictionary definition and slang term for cap in the way that the slang version means to lie about something or to exaggerate. According to Dictionary.com, the origin of the slang
T E
term for cap “dates back to the early 1900’s and the expression is closely associated with slang in Atlanta-area hip-hop”. This slang term has been around for longer than most people would think, but hasn’t been popular until this past year. Many teenagers have recently been using this term a lot, especially when socializing with their peers and having non formal conversations. Daily conversations between friends can include this term a lot, as it is an informal way of calling someone out for lying or faking something. Famous rappers are adapting to the new slang terms as well. Many rappers such Young Thug, 21 Savage, Future, Offset, and DaBaby have used various ways of the new slang word in their music. For example, these rappers all have recently used “Cap, No Cap, Capper, Capping.” These rappers are people who some of the youth and teenagers look up to. They use these popular slang terms to connect to their listeners; so teenagers can relate to the music more. It is almost as if teens learn these slang words from songs and music and incorporate them into daily life and conversation because it is catchy. Most slang terms have their own periods of time where they are most frequently used and then eventually die down when they aren’t as popular anymore. The original meaning for cap has changed and transitioned itself into a different style of linguistics. It is now used more as a slang term than the formal term for the original meaning. Since the slang form of “cap” is not yet included in the Oxford English Dictionary, it is however increasing in use, especially with the youth. The technical definition for this slang word should be to lie or be fake. Mostly because that is the majority reason for using “cap”, is to point out when people aren’t being truthful. “Cap” has led to the creation of new slang terms that extend from “cap”, such as “capping” and “no cap”, which could demonstrate how important the use of slang terms are and how they help you to expand your vocabulary at younger ages. Although adults tend to say that slang words are not true forms of English and aren’t real words, they have their own definition and meaning that the younger generations understand and use on a
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
daily basis. Personally, as teenagers, we use “cap” and many more slang terms such as “turnt”, “yasss”, and “lit” all the time which make communicating with each other much easier and informal. The possibility of this slang term still being around in the next couple of years is slim, seeing as most slang terms tend to fade in popularity and usage with time: “Plenty of slang that gained instant popularity at the time of its use has since disappeared.” Eventually, new words with similar meanings are created and become more popular because teenagers are creative and productive with new language. Seeing how “cap’’ has been around for years, it did not become frequently used until last year, and is used everyday by most teenagers. Teenagers at different schools and states may have different forms of slang and phrases that they say to a great extent, that are different from ours; some culture and environmental factors influence slang terms as well. For example, people who live in the south would not use the phrase “it’s brick” (it’s cold), since it does not pertain to the weather they experience. However, in New York, we use that phrase all the time because we experience colder weather. Another factor that influences slang terms is culture and traditions. For instance, “American slang was created mostly in gangster culture” according to listenandlearnusa.com. The slang word “cap” once meant to “put a cap in someone” as to shoot someone, but has since changed to what it means now: to lie or exaggerate. No cap, this word’s etymology is beautifully convoluted. This term’s meaning has changed drastically over time. From “hat” to “lying”, which has seemingly no connection whatsoever. This tends to occur a lot with slang terms because of the fact that the new generations come up with their own meanings for words. Throughout history, every generation has had their own version of slang, and today we continue to come up with new words or terms that society uses on a daily basis.
The Etymological Journey of The Word “Tadpole” M B
A
ccording to the Oxford English Dictionary, tadpole is “the larva of a frog, toad, or other batrachian, from the time it leaves the egg until it loses its gills and tails”. Chiefly applied in the early stage when the animal appears to consist simply of a round head and tail. The earliest known use of the word tadpole was in the fourteen hundreds and took many centuries to get to the spelling and meaning it has today. It originally was spelled out as “taddepol” and it took “several centuries to settle down”. When the word is broken up into two parts, Tad means toad while pole means head, which makes sense because all a tadpole is, is a head and a tail. This word is derived from Middle English. The Oxford English Dictionary also displays the word pollywog which is a synonym for tadpole. The earliest use of this word was in modern English, and polwygle which breaks down into the elements pol, which means head and wiglen, which means wiggle. The word tadpole is significant because it defines a metamorphosis. Not many reptiles and animals go through metamorphosis, and the word tadpole is the stage at which metamorphosis happens. Humans also go through metamorphosis when devel
T E
oping from babies to young children, young adults and so on. The word tadpole correlates with human life and human development which adds significant to the words meaning by correlating them to human life. The word tadpole, according to the Oxford English Dictionary has multiple uses, but the most frequently used and common definition is that a tadpole is the larva of a frog. The first known use of the word tadpole was in the 1400s, and while the spelling is different, the definition has remained the same since then. This can be seen as interesting because as time goes on, the meaning and spelling of words has changed significantly. The spelling has had multiple changes, like most words because new words and knowledge has changed greatly. The first known use was by Thomas Wright, in the “Anglo-Saxon & Old English Vocab”. In 1608, Shakespeare used the word tadpole in the King Lear, “Poor Tom, that eats the swimming frog, the toad, the tadpole, the wall-newt and the water; that in the fury of his heart, when the foul fiend rages.” In his writing, tadpole has the same meaning as it does today which is the larvae of a frog. Shakespeare uses the word tadpole and the words that follow it like frog and toad. Tadpole can be put into any story and any place because when people see the word tadpole they automatically think of the larvae of the frog. There is no common alternative to the word tadpole and by having no alternative slang meaning it also makes Tadpole noncontroversial, because many slang words are confusing and hated on. The second most used definition and more controversial definition of tadpole is a “black infant”. The Oxford English Dictionary states that this definition of tadpole was used in 1594 by Shakespeare and in 1881 by Macmillans Mag. Macmillans Mag uses this definition of tadpole in his writing but hasn’t been used in any piece of writing since 1881. This is mostly because it is offensive to many people because it can be perceived as making fun of their race; possibly calling black infants or African Americans incompetent of thinking and learning because they would
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
be just a tale and head like a tadpole, but it is understandable why people wrote about it centuries ago. During the fifteen and eighteen hundreds, slavery and discrimination against African Americans was very typical, and tadpole could have been just another word to offend African Americans. Tadpole means children who are African Americans, so this definition is not socially acceptable but is able to be comprehended on why it was used for children in previous centuries. We can see that as the centuries pass, definitions and different meanings of the word tadpole have slowly diminished mainly because of social standards. Tadpole isn’t a very popular word, mostly because it has a very basic meaning and isn’t slang for anything. The most common words today are slang words because of the new generation but it doesn’t make the word tadpole any less important. Tadpole is always going to have the same meaning, because it is one of the few words in the English Dictionary that can’t really have an alternative meaning, and while people can create slang words from its roots, there is no way to tell if the slang uses will ever get far. Tadpole has come a long way by having many different spellings, but the word has always had the same meaning. Since it has been so long since the word has changed and has had mostly the same meaning (when the word was first introduced it had a very basic meaning, tadpole being just a head and a tail) I suspect that the meaning of tadpole will not be changing anytime soon. With new generations though, comes new slang and it’s possible that anyone can change the word tadpole into a slang word. Hopefully, the word tadpole can stay away from turning into a slang word and keep its usage in today’s language.
“Awful”: The Fantastic History of A Horrible Word
C F, A P
T
he word awful was originally used as a synthesis between the word “Awe—to be deeply impressed or weakened by” and the suffix “ful”—which displays an abundance of the preceding virtue or value. This definition has a large gap in meaning between the way awful is used today. It was used extremely frequently in the early seventeenth century by people such as Shakespeare who used it as a sign of deference or respect to when it was used in a religious connotation as in the “awful power of God”, referring to his overwhelming power and might that frightened people into making better decisions. Now, in 2020 people use the word more frequently as an adverb such as in the sentence, “He’s got an awful lot of money, an awful lot of conceit, an awful lot of funk, and the best stud of horses in the shire” where awful is used as the modifier that demonstrates the large amounts of “money, conceit, and funk” that the man has. This journey from a sign of admiration, to fear, to descriptor is representative of the journey mankind has followed on its way through time. Awful was introduced to the English language around 1175 which was technically Middle English. The word was initially
T E
spelled a heful which has the character yogh in it which is clearly not a part of the English that is spoken today. It was formed in English, but the root, which is awe, originates from Scandinavia. The next two spellings ahefulle and auful, which were the last of the Middle English spellings which occurred in 1250 and 1475 respectively. After this we see the definition come very close to the current one, as the spelling awefull appeared in 1602 along with the adoption of Modern English. This version of the word still seems rather cumbersome as it is a completely compounded word with two full words residing within the one. The final spelling occurs in 1722 which is a bit shorter and streamlined but not much different. The word awful was first used to indicate great respect and admiration. This is probably because it originated in Scandinavia where people were constantly fighting, Nobles against other nobles, tribes versus other tribes, where there was rarely a peaceful time. This meant that lifespans were short and because people were fighting others constantly, there was no time to look at how the nobles were oppressing the commoners. Many commoners who were repeatedly discarded like toy soldiers saw God as their only consolation and viewed him as “Awful”, but not in a sense of fear, but in reverence. He was the only way their lives would be more than just being tossed into one war after another until their deaths. God was viewed in a much more transcendentalist sense rather than a deist one. God and Jesus were these people’s personal saviors rather than two fear inspiring props to ensure order. They viewed God Awfully, seeing him as the man that inspired them and saved them, and thought he knew them better than anyone else. This is the idea of a personal God and though there was an intermediary, the Roman Catholic Church, they mostly were inspired by their own personal belief and the church did not do much for the poor. The word awful was used commonly in the medieval period under numerous Germanic tribes in Western Europe where many people were heavily influenced by the church of the state.
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
The Church was used as a tool to keep people in order and keep them from rebelling against the inequitable feudalist system which continued to have inbred nobles ruling over a vast number of people. The only way these few nobles could inspire the peasants to stay under their thumb was by insisting that they had the awful power of God on their side and they had the divine right to rule. Thus, the feeling of trepidation in the word awful. People felt the brutality and inequality in their government and in their lives and felt that it was because God gave his power to those that ruled and oppressed them. Religion had overpowering reverential respect and power in the minds of the commoners, but the ruling class just saw it as a handy prophylactic for insurrection. If God wanted to keep the nobles in power the proletariat did not complain, even though “God” in this case was an institution run by the ruling class. In a current sense, the word awful is used as an adverb. People say things like “an awful lot” to display how much of something there is. This colloquial use is a huge jump from its past meanings. This is representative of the lack of God in the modern world. As a majority people don’t believe in the Awful power of any God as devoutly anymore. The numbers of religious people seem to stay constant but the presence of God in modern society is dwindling and it shows. As the word Awful had been utilized in a religious sense for hundreds of years, with less religion or fervor, people re-formatted the word to fit their lives. People then used it as a modifier to show how extreme something is. This definition is so far from the original awe-inspiring feeling people got when they thought about God, that one might forget that they are the same word. Awful’s definition has not remained constant, just as the world has embraced religion, confronted religion, and largely ignored religion through the last 1000 years. Initially treated as a sign of respect and love, then as a sign of fervent fear, and finally as an arbitrary adverb used interchangeably with others. Awful and Religion, specifically the Roman Catholic Church have followed
T E
similar arcs, both had been given great appreciation, then fear, and then pushed out of the modern lexicon and life. As Uncle Ben said to Peter Parker, “with great power comes great responsibility,” but as etymologists like to say, “with an awful amount of power comes an awful responsibility.” This exemplary sentence gives proper deference to both main meanings of the word, showing the great amount of power and the terrifying aspect of duty.
The Rise and Fall of The “Vibe” M G, K M, T C
V
ibe: vibe is a noun that was first used back in 1940 and it came from the original word vibraphone which is a percussion instrument used in the 1920s to present day. The instrument is very similar to a xylophone, as it has keys that are wooden blocks that make noises when struck with a mallet. These noises were said to give listeners “Instinctive reactions” which means listeners would react in a very natural manner which was said to be extremely calming. It was later used to describe a feeling in the 1930s when you listened to the famous bass saxophone player Adrian Rollini. This feeling was similar to the vibraphone because it caused a quite instinctive reaction coming from the heart and expressed through motions. These people listening could almost feel the music as it was being played. It was later abbreviated in the 1960s to the word known all around the world today as “vibe”. With the newfound abbreviation people started using the verb version. The verb altercation of the word can mean chilling. People would say, “I’m vibing right now bro”; which means that they are chilling. The word’s etymology also overlaps with the 60s hippie movement in the United States. At the time, some claimed to catching “good vibes”. This was the origin of the word and now it’s our obligation to explain the future of the word “vibe”.
T E
The word vibe is an individual emotional atmosphere you get from a person, place or thing. “Such as this guy is good vibes”, “this place is giving me bad vibes” or “the music is giving me crazy vibes.” The word vibe is an apocope of the word vibraphone which is a percussion instrument used in the 1920s to present day. The word vibe is a New York slang. My dad and I are from Brooklyn, and if I were to do something wrong he would usually say, “yo the stuff you are doing is bad vibes”. Meaning that the stuff is going to get me into trouble, it’s a bad look, or it’s messing with everyone’s mood. The word vibe has multiple meanings; therefore, if someone were to ask “what’s the vibes”, they are asking “what are you doing today” or they are asking “do want to make any plans today”. The word vibe mainly revolves around a person’s mood. When I used the word vibe I would usually say “you’re bad vibes”. Vibes can also be used in a romantic way. If two people are talking and the boy says to you “I rock with your vibes”, he is saying that he likes your personality, or he likes the way you treat him. Vibes are just everywhere. A vibe is the energy people give off, and the energy you’re giving back. It’s the way people treat each other. The word “energy” is also very similar to the word “Vibe”. “Energy” is a person’s attitude towards you. If a person is mistreating you they are giving “terrible energy” or “Bad vibes”. If a person is treating you well, they are feeding off “positive energy” or “great vibes”. Vibes represent a person’s mood, attitude, personality, and plans for the day. But vibes should never be bad, because bad vibes are not a vibe. People also nowadays use the phrase “check your vibe”. For instance, if someone says, “vibe check this man”, they are going to conduct an intense inspection that analyzes your vibe and if you fail, then prepare for the consequences but if you pass, then you may conduct your own vibe check. Vibe checks are a very important part of today’s society because vibe checks are used to help obtain peace in a certain area. Peace can be achieved from the vibe check because the people conducting the vibe check are concerned for your safety and if you fail, it might not even
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
be your fault. You could be having a stressful day due to stress from a girlfriend or family issues or even an aggravating class. Some teachers or classes can really mess up a kid’s day causing him to fail that vibe check. The guys will help you achieve happiness though. This phrase has really developed throughout history turning a word that was supposed to mean vibraphone into the instrument into a controversial inspection from a person to another person. Vibe has been a word that has existed throughout the past couple years of my life and the word has played a part in how my group and I speak to each other and other people. Although this word can only be practically used among friends and other teens it still has a great impact on how we speak. This word can make you seem less credible because most adults have no idea what the word means or how to use it. Throughout time more people have started to use it as it becomes more relevant. Celebrities use the word vibes in a common phrase, “You Know The Vibes”. This phrase is also commonly abbreviated as “YKTV”, meaning, “you know what’s good” or “you know what’s going on.” Most rappers will use vibes to explain how someone is acting or how they feel on a certain topic. Finally, the key part of slang is its instability so no one can guarantee that the word “vibe” will survive in present day vocabulary but soon it will be replaced with a new word like “bad juju” and “negative wizard” which both mean bad vibes or “narek”, “posiluv” or “vitting” which means good vibes but only time will tell when it will or if it will even change over time or what it will change to.
Nincompoop: The Strange Case of A Conflicted Word
D F, M A, C M
N
incompoop is not used commonly in the English language anymore, but only a few hundred years ago, it was a term frequently used to describe a “simpleton” or “foolish person”. We are studying this word because we like its pronunciation and spelling, and are fond of its research implications. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word was introduced in 1668 and has been around ever since. The meaning of the word has stayed the same since them, but its spelling has changed over time. When the word was first introduced in 1668, the word was spelled “nickumpoop”. The word was used the same way back than as it’s used today. For example, the word was first introduced in a passage that stated, “The ship of fools fully fraught and richly laden with asses, fools, jack-daws, ninnihammers, coxcombs, slender-wits, shallowbrains, paper-skuls, simpletons, nickumpoops, wiseakers, dunces, and blockheads.” This demonstrates how the definition of the word has stayed the same even since 1668. In this context, one can tell that the word still means a “simpleton” or silly/foolish person, as it is clumped together with many other insults. However, while here the spelling was
T E
nickumpoop with a ck, there were two main different, distinct spellings of this word. The word was introduced in 1668 and ten years later, the main spelling split into two groups: people spelling it with two n’s (as is done in our modern spelling) and people spelling it with only one n (the first spelling, or nicompoop). The first version with only one n stayed relevant for the rest of the 1600s and a majority of the 1700s, but this fell out of usage after 1762. With time, however, a modern spelling emerged and flourished. The use of the modern spelling can first be seen being used by Joseph Addison who, writing in the 1713 Spectator, describes, “An old Ninnyhammer, a Dotard, a Nincompoop.” Here, Addison uses a word like “ninnyhammer’’ which describes how there were different variations of the word because ninnyhammer’s definition is very similar to nincompoop’s. Although there is no certain origin of the word, a majority of people who use the word come from Europe. They would use the word for foolish people or people who could be manipulated easily, as demonstrated in this 1697 excerpt: “Daphne uses him like a meer Nincompoop, she makes him carry her Slippers, or mend her Stockings.” This demonstrates how the author used nincompoop to discuss a man who would do anything for women even when it is implied that the woman doesn’t really care for him. Throughout the late 1600s and the early 1700s, the word nincompoop was not commonly used, but its usage increased in frequency towards the end of the 1700s. In 1791, we are introduced to the first derivative of the word which most likely was made due to the increase in usage of the word. We see this derivative first being used by Horace Walpole, who used the word to describe “The nincompoophood of her Prince.” The definition of the word “nincompoophood” is the state or fact of being a nincompoop. Today, the word nincompoop is not commonly used in language and is not seen as a heavy insult anymore because people tend to use it in a joking manner. The word hasn’t become a term that you can use anywhere as it’s still considered somewhat
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
insulting. While the term’s definition has not seen significant change, how people use it has changed. It has changed from a rude insult to a niche, funny, and playful insult that isn’t used. We predict that the word will continue to fade out of existence.
Gremlins: Mischief, Mayhem, and Meaning L K
T
he Oxford English Dictionary defines a gremlin as “a lowly or despised person; a menial, a dogsbody, a wretch,” and as “a mischievous sprite imagined as the cause of mishaps to aircraft” and more generally,“a creature imagined as the cause of any trouble or mischance.” As far as words go, “gremlin” is a relatively recent one- it has its beginnings in the British Royal Air Force (RAF) in the early twentieth century. In its relatively short lifespan, the gremlin has broadened its horizons to include not only the destruction of aircraft, but interference with any technology. “Gremlin’s” exact origin is unclear; some sources propose that it originates from the Old English word gremman, meaning to “to anger” or the Irish gruaimin, meaning “bad tempered little fellow,” or even “goblin,” which denotes “a small, ugly, gnome-like creature [...] in early use considered as malevolent or demonic, in later use often as merely mischievous” (OED). The gremlin shares the goblin’s mischievous and/or malevolent nature, but is limited to the realm of aviation, and later technology in general. The first published use of the word seems to be in a poem in the journal Aeroplane in 1929, although all accounts indicate
T E
that it was in use before this, first as “a Royal Air Force term for a low-ranking officer or enlisted man saddled with oppressive assignments,” and later as “a mischievous sprite imagined as the cause of mishaps to aircraft.” Its oral use is thought to originate from Royal Air Force pilots around 1923 in Malta, the Middle East and India. Gremlins are usually charged with engine failure, poor radio connection, and cutting up the wings and wires of airplanes while in flight. The conventional wisdom surrounding gremlins is the legend originated during the First World War, but there’s no print evidence to substantiate this. Gremlins switch did and definitely exist during World War II, as industrial safety posters caution “Gremlins think it’s fun to hurt you—use care always.” As depicted on the poster, gremlins are small, translucent men in coattails, which contrasts with most accounts of them small spiky or furry creatures. Because all initial reports of gremlins were from British pilots, they were suspected to be working with the Axis powers. When German planes reported similar problems, it became apparent that the gremlins did not pick a side. Another theory on the gremlin’s origin notes is the word’s similarity to the Fremlin brand of beer; the Observer in 1942 wrote of them “they were the genii loci of the RAF messes in India and the Middle East, where Fremlin’s beer bottles were plentiful.” One account suggested that they appear after too many Fremlins. The word’s first meaning as “a lowly or despised person; a menial, a dogsbody, a wretch” casts into doubt “gremlin” as a derivative of goblin or any other mischievous pixie. Its earliest published use in Aeroplane refers to “a herd of gremlins, [...] who do all the flying, [...] who do much instructing” and who are “loathed by all the high and mighty.” Old English gremman or greme, meaning “to anger or vex’’ might still apply; my assumption was that the gremlins were doing the vexing, but if the word existed before it referred to obnoxious airborne imps, it could be either the “herd” or the “high and mighty” or both being vexed with each other. However, the connection to Old English is ten
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
uous, considering the word’s relative modernity. Any kind of popularity gremlins may enjoy outside the Royal Air Force is owed to Roald Dahl, who served in the 80 Squadron of the RAF between 1939 and 1946, which operated throughout the Middle East. Dahl wrote the short story “Gremlin Lore” in 1942, while serving as Assistant Air Attaché to the British Embassy in Washington D.C., in which an RAF plane is sabotaged by a small creature with a drill while chasing German planes. His first children’s novel, The Gremlins, was published in 1943 and featuring the mischievous creatures was even optioned for a Disney film; which was never made owing to a copyright dispute with the RAF. The introduction of gremlins to the mainstream lexicon marks a shift wherein a gremlin can represent not only an airplane-destroying imp but any technological saboteur. By 1944, only 21 years after its alleged genesis, American Speech wrote: “Now the gremlin seems to be extending its sphere of operations, so that the term can be applied to almost anything that inexplicably goes wrong in human affairs.” Tales of small troublemaking creatures are almost culturally universal, whether they be the goblins, elves, and pixies of European folklore, the pukwudgie from Delaware and Wampanoag stories, or even the ubiquitous American grey aliens, called “greys.” Gremlins, from their nature as mischievous creatures of legend to the possible origin of their name in Old English, seem to be remnants of these ancient European stories. The birth of the gremlin legend might then suggest a kind of tension between the new industrial society represented by the Royal Air Force, established in 1918, and British culture as it existed centuries prior to its industrial-colonialist machine. Both gremlins and greys assume the trappings of technology and aviation—gremlins with their airplane shenanigans, and greys with their association with downed weather balloons, military jets, and crashed spacecraft—and both can represent the awkward role of the folkloric and mysterious in an industrial society. What place could these creatures possibly occupy in a world with fewer and fewer secrets,
T E
mysteries, and ambiguities? Gremlins simply find a new place to occupy: technology. As for the future of the word, gremlins seem to be more easily associated with heavy machinery than the sleek, discrete design of today’s computers and mobile phones; their methods are crude, direct. No gremlin is a master hacker. It may be that gremlins give way to a new ghost in the machine, one that can inhabit circuitry and lithium ion batteries.
The Etymology of “Ostracize” and Ancient Greek Discourses L R
1. Introduction
A
ccording to the Oxford English Dictionary, ostracize is a verb meaning “to exclude from favour, or from a society or group” and “to refuse to speak to or acknowledge.” The use of the word ostracize can be traced all the way back to the Ancient Greeks, who would see this as a political process which would limit the overbearing influence of one single individual over the democratic city-state of Athens; interestingly enough, the meaning that ostracism held back in the fifth century BCE isn’t too far off the twenty-first century definition. Although the word ostracize can be very simple to grasp, with it simply being to exclude when those under question are out of the ordinary, it definitely holds a lot more weight, and may be used when a conversation is rather grave. The word ostracize, itself, will be capable of drawing the attention of others since it’s not meant to be casually used; when one picks apart the word, and places it in hypothetical sentences, the word will notably carry a mature connotation, or a connotation that it must be used in an eloquent manner. This paper
T E
will deal with the first traces of the word ostracize, and how the prefix alone reveals its complex history, and one will also delve into how centuries later, the word ostracize has maintained its meaning, a meaning that will signify instant exclusion.
2. Etymology The first traces of the word ostracize in the English language can be found less than four hundred years ago, and after reading through countless passages, the word ostracize has always had a, relatively similar meaning; all that has visibly shifted would be the context in which it’s used. In the seventeenth century, the English poet Andrew Marvell published “Upon The Death of The Lord Hastings” where he wrote to the young Lord Hastings, a supporter of Charles I, that “Therefore the Democratick Stars did rise, And all that Worth from hence did Ostracize.” At this point, one must note the interesting spelling of the word “democratic” which the ending being out of the ordinary to any, present day, English speaker, yet, the spelling of the word ostracize is still intact centuries later. Not only so, but the meaning of the word, when it comes to the notion of excluding an individual due to them being out of the ordinary, has remained nearly identical centuries later. About two hundred years after the publication of “Upon The Death of The Lord Hastings,” British Radical and Liberal statesmen, John Bright, published “Speeches on Questions of Public Policy” which is a collection of speeches he gave in countries such as India, Russia, and even Ireland. In volume one of “Speeches on Questions of Public Policy,” Bright discusses how “Your newspapers...denounced and ostracised hundreds of good men,” when speaking about some sort of, what he seems to think, oppressive government. John Bright uses the word ostracize to indicate how these “good men” have been deprived of some sort of knowledge that would be pivotal to their life and well being. These examples are roughly two hundred years apart,
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
but worthy to acknowledge is how their use of the word ostracize is very similar, one might even say far too similar; Andrew Marvell would use ostracize as a way to signify how the “Democratick stars” caused the “Worth” to be separated from where it previously stood, and John Bright used ostracize to mean that the “good men” had been forced to part ways, with yet again, the value of a healthy newspaper, not the one that belongs to whoever the speech was directed to. Most of the examples seen when looking at the context of the word ostracize will be in Modern English, but the history of the word itself dates back to the Ancient Greeks. According to Ancient History, “Ostracism was a political process used in the 5th century BCE Athens [...]” where individuals “considered too powerful or dangerous to the city were exiled for 10 years by popular vote.” Under the Athenian Democracy in the fifth century BCE, the ordinary people, otherwise known as the the demos, would hold the power of banishing individuals who held far too much power. The process of ostracism, if successful, would force these individuals into exile from the city for at least ten years. The process of ostracism would first begin in the hill of Pnyx where the ekklesia, or popular assembly, would consist of 6000 male citizens who would pass around a piece of pottery, ostrakon, in which they would scratch the name of the individual at risk of ostracism. The boule, or executive council made up of 500, would announce which candidate had amassed the most votes, and with no hesitation, were given ten days to gather their belongings and leave the city. The first person to be exiled under the system of ostracism was Hipparchus, son of Charmus, in the year 487 BCE who, most likely, was guilty of supporting Persia, or opposing the democratic government of Athens. The word ostracize came to be after taking an Ancient Greek prefix, but when looking back at how the Greeks would use it compared to its usage in writings done by English writers in the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries, ostracize has always meant to forcefully move others away due to them posing some sort of threat. Without a doubt, the word ostracize has come a very long way,
T E
and seen many different times, but it has always maintained its meaning of exclusion, and attributes which cause the conversation held to turn intellectual and insightful. In the twenty-first century, the word ostracize will still signify the exclusion of others, however, it will not hold the same repercussions as it once did, and with the meaning having been preserved, the prefix of the word is also what has kept it so closely knit with its origins. The prefix of the word, “ostra”, is derived from the Greek word “ostrakizein,” literally meaning “to banish by voting with potsherds” which goes back to the political process of ostracism held in the fifth century BCE. The word ostracize has been used for centuries on end, and the meaning of the verb hasn’t experienced any major shifts in its meaning; when comparing the works of authors from the nineteenth century to works more recently, the manner in which the verb is used and the meaning it holds has not been modified. Typically, ostracize issued during conversations that should be taken seriously, but also when one is trying to lead the conversation; using the word ostracize during a conversation could also help someone assert themselves as well educated on whatever the conversation might be on. There isn’t a specific demographic that is known to use the word ostracize routinely, but one can assume that those with higher education, or better understanding of their surroundings, will be capable of using such a distinctive word when expressing themselves. When looking into the vocabulary of the Greeks, the word “ostrakon” can be found which is far too similar to the word “ostracism,” and “ostrakon” is even related to the practice of ostracism, with it meaning “shell” or “potsherds”; yet, the English language has obtained the word “oyster” from this latter Greek word, and has nothing to do with what we not as ostracize today. The distinct background of the word ostracize, including the complex history, managed to keep the meaning of the word intact for centuries later, and makes the word stand out in an ordinary conversation.
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
3. Predictions Personally, I do find myself using the word ostracize every now and then, but usually when I’m writing for history class, or in some sort of assignment; I don’t tend to bring it up in the conversation or in random notes I take in class. The word ostracize isn’t held on some pedestal in my personal vocabulary, but there is a sense that it shouldn’t be randomly brought up in a casual conversation because others are simply not used to hearing it on a daily basis. The chances of the word losing its meaning are quite slim, and far-fetched, since the meaning of the word ostracize has been kept, nearly identical, for centuries on end; the style of writing in the eighteenth century to the twenty first century is very different but the use of the word, and the context in which it’s seen, are very similar. This then means that the word has gone through countless writing styles, and multiple moments in history, and yet, it has remained the same. Referring back to the origin of the word will always remind people of how it’s used, and the Greek word isn’t very different so there won’t be any far fetching connections between the way it’s used now to then. Although both ostracize and “oyster” have similar roots, they couldn’t get confused with each other because they’re in completely different fields; the only way it could lose its meaning would be if there was a great shift in how people look at prefixes. Meaning that if all English speakers were to suddenly forget, or choose to ignore, prefixes then there could be the possibility that the word ostracize could lose its meaning. Again, it seems far-fetched.
Your Ideal Society: Utopia
A P, C R, L R
U
topia. This astonishing word made its first appearance in the English language around 1516, first used to describe a fantastical imaginary place that is relatively perfect. It is very similar to utopie (French) and utopia (Italian), which also came about in the early 1500s. The word utopia has several different meanings associated with it. One of those meanings is that of the imaginary island, introduced by Sir Thomas More, the island is described as a utopia because it is perfect all around including all social, legal and political aspects. Generally, a utopia is a place that does not actually exist but in theory it is perfect in every aspect. Another meaning given to utopia is that of a place which actually exists and is perceived as perfect. A third meaning actually associated with this word is a utopia being just a “fictional narrative” about an “ideal society”. The last known meaning for the word is “A plan for or vision of an ideal society” that is not achievable, just an unattainable thought of a “fantasy, a dream”. Utopia has quite a long history since it came up in the early 1500s. Throughout its long history the meaning of utopia changes slightly but the basis still is that an utopia is or has something to do with a fantasy of an ideal place. Because the meaning of this word invokes a sense of a perfect society, it is often used po
T E
litically and sometimes religiously. Many political parties might use this word to describe what they would like to achieve so they could appeal to the general public. A good example of this is the idea that communism would theoretically create a utopian society. The meaning for this word originated from modern Latin, like many other words in the English language. However, in modern Latin, it refers to “nowhere”, we have adapted it to be an almost mythical place where everything is ideal. When people think of a utopia, it might ignite thoughts of a suburbia, a suburban utopia, or perhaps it’s opposite, a dystopia. This word is still relatively popular, but it’s not used as much as it used to be. Personally, we don’t use utopia as part of our regular vocabulary. However older generations who hope and dream for a perfect society are likely to use this word more frequently. Utopia has had several major shifts throughout history. As stated above, in the Latin language it quite literally means “nowhere”. But then this “no where” shifted to a fantasy perfect place defined in different ways depending on the individual. The word was created for people to have an imaginary escape from their lives. They use this fantasy as a coping mechanism. The belief in this word helps people continue living their lives with the hope that there is something better than the current state of life that they’re in. People continue to use this word because they don’t believe that they’re in a current perfect society. In the beginning the word was used for religious purposes. Churches would use the idea of a utopia to help gain a following. Then the word began to be used by others to describe a perfect society outside of religion. The word was most commonly used during the 19th century as people began to try to form their own utopian society. They did this because the philosopher Plato made a utopian class system for society which caused others to do the same. These people would actually form their own utopian communities. The most well-known one is Brook Farm that was near Boston, Massachusetts. In this community, they stressed the ideals of transcendentalism. This demonstrates how people attempt to make
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
these fantasies a reality and their ideas behind what would make a society perfect. In these societies they focused on things like the goodness of the people themselves, and the nature around them rather than organized religion or a structured government. Some may think of American society as a utopia but it’s not truly a utopia for everyone. Utopia is an individualized thought of how each person wishes to view society. However, the thought that it is a perfect place does not change much. There are places that are considered modern utopias. There are rules in these communities. These rules consist of little things such as being mentally stable, and financially stable. This allows for there to be no injustices due to someone’s mental state or financial ability since everyone would be on somewhat the same playing field. In these places there’s no violence and free education. There is also a sense of racial and gender equality, not only that but everyone would also be treated equally regardless of the religion they choose to practice. The future of the word utopia is vast, with the word already possessing multiple meanings and ways to interpret them. All the meanings share one thing in common and that is a positive almost fantasy aspect about the word. The future could mean more is added to the meaning already associated with this word. The word’s meaning can change from a fantasy almost imaginary place to the complete total opposite. I think the future of this word possesses positive meanings about place people aspire to be a part of. The word started as a fantasy world filled with the perfect everything, the future of the word may make this fantasy a reality. This word is commonly associated with dystopia, meaning the opposite or an imaginary “bad place”, but this connotation may change just like the meaning of this word may change. The word can start associating with a euphoric state of being where you just feel like your perfect self. This word will also have a future in the film industry because of the constant demand for sci-fi movies as well as other genres which are based in either a utopian or dystopian society.
The Misleading Moniker of America’s Favorite Patty
S T
T
o casually eat a hamburger is to indulge in the blissful ignorance of a truly enigmatic beef puck. Everyone knows that a hamburger is made of beef. This prompts the inquisitive to ponder why exactly the word “ham” is in the name. How has such an obnoxious, nearly pun-like misnomer stealthily implanted itself in the vernacular of the American people, without any detection? Such a patriotic patty as the hamburger is, at the forefront of every American stereotype, and its etymology is discussed at about the same rate that Pope Gregory’s direct aid in the spread of the black plague is. Didn’t know about that? Exactly. The OED defines a Hamburger, or more specifically, hamburger steak, as “a dish composed of flat balls of meat like fillets, made of chopped lean beef, mixed with beaten eggs, chopped onions and seasoning, and fried.” This happens to be the most modern definition available, and despite language’s dynamic behavior, the orthography has remained constant. The first recorded use of this word, in a context unrelated to the people of Hamburg, was in 1889; “You are asked if you will have ‘porkchopbeefsteakhamandegghamburgersteakorliverandbacon’” recorded by the Oxford Eng
T E
lish Dictionary, which has been directly cited in case something about that excerpt seems less than credible. This excerpt is quite nebulous, and strongly reminiscent of an enthusiastic keyboard smash, but if one is dedicated enough to sift through the alphabet soup, they may find “hamburgersteak” seven words from the left. From then on, its usage had increased at nearly the same rate as America’s abusive relationship with fast food. The culprits for the misleading “ham” in the name of a beef patty would be the natives of Hamburg. The ancestor of the beloved American hamburger is believed to be the “Hamburger Rundstück”. Then, through the processes of trusty language contact, the painfully foreign part of the name was translated to “steak” and Hamburger Rundstück disintegrated, allowing for Hamburger Steak to arise from its ashes. Interestingly enough, Rundstück most accurately translates to “some pieces” in German, the “steak” derivative being due to its steak-like shape, according to Google translate. At this time, the noun “steak” wasn’t indicative of meat type, but of shape, much as “patty” is today. Hamburger is Germanic in nature, as it has strong ties to the Hamburg people, which dutifully explains the ostentatiously inappropriate implication of pork in a patty made of beef. Although the spelling of hamburger has remained paralytically stagnant throughout its life, a slight change in its grammar begs to be mentioned. Originally, it was spelled with a capitalized H, as its most distinctive feature was its origin, Hamburg. According to Google’s Ngram graph of hamburger’s cited usages in literature, the capital H was favored up until around 1978, at which point it was surpassed by the more casual, informal, lower case h. The beginning of lower-case hamburger’s rapid increase in the American vernacular can be pinpointed to around 1955, which was, not coincidentally, the year of McDonald’s’ official establishment, as McDonald’s’ verified website would attest to. This is understandable, as the public sentiment regarding McDonald’s was of awe; it was the first fast-food restaurant to be erected. This of course firmly grasped public interest, and
Part IV: Etymolog y Study
McDonald’s token menu item began to drift into the mouths (both linguistically and literally) of the vast majority of convenience-hungry Americans. Of course, after observing the success of McDonald’s, countless other fast food chains popped up around and beyond the U.S, spreading the use of hamburger as diligently and gluttonously as the mayonnaise is spread beneath its golden bun. From there it met somewhat of a plateau, and then skyrocketed around 1965, two years after McDonald’s aired its first advertisement on public TV. From that point forward, public interest in the newly constructed Mecca of convenience gave way to public addiction, and the greasy, easy, hamburger became a staple in American discourse (it was during this very year that the casual use of lower-case obesity ascended to the heavens as well, one might find intriguing if they were to view this on Google’s Ngram graph). This transition from an uppercase H to its less nominal counterpart would be, according to the prescriptivists, an absolute debacle. Heinous, really, how little reverence the written word is given by these unscrupulous befoulers of the sacred English language. Although, it would be a testament to brevity in sufficing to call it slang. As words find their niches in the vocabulary of English speakers, or any speakers, they are then sent through the predictable conveyor belt of linguistic evolution, and subsequently transform into something less formal, more easily communicable, and as convenient as one would expect from a hamburger. On the topic of linguistic accessibility, the evolutionary track of America’s favorite cause of preventable death does not end at lowercase hamburger, but at burger, the epitome of convenience. No longer will the mind be plagued with wondering the etymology of a beef hamburger, when the ham part is entirely omitted. This of course, is not the reason. The linguistic slang-producer apocope is accredited with this fork in the phylogenetic tree of the hamburger species. The unconscious cultural removal of an unnecessary morpheme in a word, like ham, in hamburger, is a wondrous archetype of linguistic metamorphosis. Burger can
T E
be used interchangeably with hamburger, yet the reverse is not true. Burger, much like patty, and 19th century steak, describes a shape. Every beefy hamburger is shaped like a burger, but not every burger is beefy (i.e. turkey, vegetarian, pork). Colloquially, however, the use of burger without any clarifying attribute is used in reference to a beef burger, solidifying its position in the slang category; it is a shortened word with descriptive power equal to that of its predecessor. The word hamburger has had a debatably eventful life; born in Hamburg with a capitalized H, briefly followed by “Rundstück”, then by steak, then eventually by nothing. From there, the capital H retired, paving the way for the younger generation of lowercase h. The proliferation of fast food chains, specifically McDonalds, take a large amount of ownership for the informalization of the originally nominalized hamburger, and presumably its linguistic slang spawn, the burger. All in all, a documentary about the great linguistic adventures of the word hamburger would be binge-worthy, if one ever found themselves eternally falling in an abyss with nothing but that documentary.
Part V:
Miscellany
The Overrated Nature of Alone Time K R
E
very day, people wish they had “more alone time.” The thought of being alone by yourself and prioritizing the things you want to do sounds inviting and ideal. However, alone time is overrated and over-idolized. After spending some alone time, many soon realize how harmful alone time can be towards mental-health and how boring and lifeless it can become so quickly. American society as a whole values alone time far too much and therefore devalues human connection to a fault that has recently become obvious during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many don’t realize the value of human connection—even with strangers. The recent outbreak of COVID-19 has exemplified to individuals all over the world just how much we as a society take for granted the things most look at as inconvenient, mindless tasks such as a simple trip to the grocery store or stopping by a grandparent’s house. Now that most people in the world are under quarantine for an unknown, seemingly unending duration of time, we have finally received the blessings of what seems like the most sought-after concept in our modern world—alone time. Now more than ever, a trip to the grocery store, a hug from a grandparent, or a long day at school or work seem more and more enticing every day. All this alone time has left many wish
T E
ing for what most people longed to get away from. This unprecedented quarantine has exemplified the daily human connection that Americans have become too comfortable taking for granted every day. European nations are known for being more family oriented, affectionate people whereas American culture tends to be more self-centered and isolating. Most who praise alone time believe it is a time to “get to know yourself ” and “spend time with your thoughts.” However, when there is nothing but time to think and “get to know yourself,” there can be serious consequences to mental health. There is but a fine line between a healthy amount and too much alone time that many do not realize. Too much alone time can quickly send a mentally stable person down a violent rabbit hole of invasive self-loathing and self-deprecating thoughts. Although many may not realize it, a simple handshake, hug, or a pat on the back can transform an individual’s perception of themselves and boost their overall mood. Americans take for granted human connection because we have the freedom and liberties to expect it every day. It is more apparent now than ever that society has never realized the value of affection and conversation until it has been stripped away unexpectedly. American society praises those who are “self-made.” Most push away outside help because they want to be known as the person who built themselves up from nothing with no outside help. This individualistic rhetoric is why our modern society and American culture, more specifically, over-values alone time. In most situations, the concept of alone time itself seems enticing. However, it does not reveal the detrimental effects it has on mental health and how valuable human connection really is. The recent pandemic is an example of just how quickly life can change with no warning or explanation whatsoever. So, next time you find yourself wishing to be alone, instead revel in the laughs, hugs, and conversations that are so undervalued.
The Overrated Nature of Superhero Films
C F
O
ver the last few years, superhero films have become extremely popular, especially so with Marvel and DC both trying to create the next big blockbuster. These movies have become much easier to produce because of new technology such as CGI. Every year there are at least two new superhero movies, the most notable recent one being Endgame; now the highest grossing film of all time. Audiences have become captivated by these comic book-inspired stories. Although, as more and more superhero movies are produced, they become extremely overrated. Superhero movies have become overrated mainly because they all have very similar plots. A superhero is introduced at the beginning of the movie with some backstory then a villain is introduced who is then eventually defeated at the end of the movie. One of the reasons why movies are so popular in modern culture is due to their ability to immerse people in a story. However, the repetitive plot points in superhero movies end up ruining the immersion, as it is easy to tell the hero is going to win. This gives them an invincibility factor that is extremely unrealistic in everyday life. This invincibility is multiplied when sequels and
T E
trilogies are commonplace in superhero films so studios can milk the most money possible out of a single character. Obviously, studios wouldn’t want to kill off characters that are bringing in money. The lack of immersion often seen in superhero movies completely ruins the experience adding to the exaggerated value of these movies. Another sign that superhero movies are overrated is the fact that despite their popularity and large budgets, they often don’t win many awards. For example, Endgame, the highest-grossing movie of all time had one Oscar nomination for visual effects; while Avatar, the previous highest-grossing movie won three Oscars, and had six other nominations. This difference clearly indicates that superhero movies don’t meet the hype. There is nothing particularly unique or distinctive about superhero movies that really set them apart from other movies. The lack of awards demonstrates the overrated nature of superhero movies. Some may say that superhero movies are not overrated as so many people watch them, so they have to be good. The reason so many people watch superhero movies is because of their accessibility. The whole family can go out and watch a superhero film. Even kids can watch without fearing the movie to be as childish as an animated movie. Many things that are considered overrated are beloved by many. Superhero movies are still overrated as they do not deserve the prestige that is often associated with them due to their repetitive and unoriginal nature. This bandwagon fallacy is clear—just because a lot of people enjoy these movies, does not make them exemplary. The modern superhero movie is formulaic and unoriginal, resulting in the most overrated genre in the movie industry today. Film is a type of art and superhero movies lack all defining qualities of art. Companies keep creating cookie-cutter superhero movies to make as much money as possible which is justification for more to be made. So next time you go to the theatre to watch the latest and greatest superhero movie consider watching something more unique.
On Tim Kreider’s “The ‘Busy’ Trap” V
M B
T
im Kreider introduces the idea that Americans live such busy lives that when we do stop and think about our lives, we feel empty and feel like we need to be doing something productive. We surround ourselves with a busy lifestyle so we don’t have to face reality and realize that we spend most of our time focusing on jobs and money. One point that stood out to me in Kreider’s essay was one of his friends who moved away from the city to escape the crazy lifestyle that Americans live. It took her moving to France to realize how stressful her life was in America because some Americans hold themselves to impossibly high standards. People sacrifice their free time to the point that our family lives are beginning to suffer; every day, people become more and more connected to the ideas of success and materialism and constantly going and being busy is the reason for this. I agree with Kreider that society today focuses greatly on being number one and the only way to achieve this is by putting in massive amounts of work. There is nothing wrong with having a
T E
strong mindset when it comes to achieving your goals, but every once in a while, it is necessary to stop and think about the stability of your relationships and your social life. Kreider’s essay can also be connected to the global COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent quarantine. Many people are not dealing with the virus as well as others because they were always doing something at work or with friends and they’re used to being busy, but the virus has put that part of their lives on pause and they don’t know what to do with free time, while others believe that they deserve leisure time because they worked so hard. Some people don’t have the choice of having leisure time; they might have to work three jobs to support their family so they have no time or money to go out with their friends but I feel like if people have the opportunity to go enjoy time with their friends or family, they should because they have the choice.
C F
O
ne moment in Kreider’s argument that stands out to me is his discussion of escaping the trap himself. He uses the section to suggest that everyone should adopt a similar style of work as his. I do not agree with this as working from home won’t work for all jobs and I don’t think that I would like to work from home. I like to separate work from relaxation, and I don’t really like working from home which has become clear to me during quarantine. Another part I found problematic was the portion where Kreider suggests guaranteed paychecks which I think would ruin society. I think innovation stems from both one’s desire to innovate and the fear of failure which would be gone if everyone had a guaranteed paycheck. Most people probably wouldn’t have the motivation to work since they would get the paycheck regardless. I also enjoyed Kreider’s decision to describe the phenomena he talks about as a “trap”. This diction seems to reveal his purpose for writing the essay as trying to reveal
Part V: Miscellany
to the reader that they are probably stuck in this trap. A trap is something you don’t recognize, and I don’t think many of us realize we too are in this busy trap, though I don’t think this busy trap is necessarily a bad thing. Work can often be fulfilling and Kreider’s suggestion that “most of what we do doesn’t matter” is a rather gloomy take on life. People should definitely take breaks from work and enjoy life but suggesting that everyone should aspire to work from home like Kreider does is not realistic.
M R
O
ne of the main points that really stood out to me was when he said that people fall into the busy trap and how many people say that they will need to “sneak away from work for a few hours” just to go have some lunch. I think the author did a really nice job of connecting with the reader because I know that everyone falls into that so-called trap. Another part that stood out was when the author discussed his friend and how she felt that France and the community that she lived in were making her feel like she was in college and was always working. This goes back to the first point, where she was struggling with finding time for someone and time to do something she actually wants to do. I find this problematic but I also understand it because I find myself doing these same things, especially during this quarantine and if I take a break, I feel guilty for not getting work done. I think what was really helpful from our discussion was that I am not alone with this feeling of being stuck in the “Busy Trap” and felt that it was reassuring to not be the only one feeling like I had to work really hard. I mostly agreed with everything he was arguing and I felt as though it was directed towards me because I understood what he was saying and basically feel what he was saying every day. I don’t think my viewpoint has changed because I agreed with what he was writing.
T E
K R
T
he “self-imposed busyness” point resonated with me more than any other point. It is very often the people that have the opportunity to have some free time who claim to be the busiest and I think this is partially due to societal guilt. Sophia brought up the point of this being a distinctly American problem and I find that to be very true. American society forces us to think that if we are not working, we are immediately “lazy,” not just looking for a break. This mentality can be good to a point, forcing us to push ourselves and constantly be hungry for more. However, this leaves us unsatisfied, thinking someone else is always doing more. This mentality forces us to often push ourselves past the limit, feeling guilty for a minute going to waste even if it is not really being wasted, just being utilized in a way that will rejuvenate your mind and body. People who have the opportunity to take a break feel guilty and embarrassed for taking a break and people who are unable to take a break, who are working three jobs, feel embarrassed for having the need to work three jobs in the first place. The need to constantly busy ourselves, which is so evident in the current quarantine state we are in, makes us feel anxious when we go minutes without something to entertain or busy us (which Kreider brings up in the very beginning of the essay). American citizens work ourselves past our limit primarily because of the way others will view us, and secondly because of the psychological need we have embedded within ourselves to be constantly entertained. However, I do not agree with the government giving everyone money so they can pursue a white collar job or live their desired life because not everyone is cut out for these prestigious jobs and needs to have the foundation and routine of work because it makes them feel productive and like they are contributing to the greater good of society. Americans need to make an effort to normalize relaxation and time off without the judgment and connotations that surround taking a day off.
Part V: Miscellany
S T
T
he main portion that stood out to me is the part in which the author states that he feels like a “reprobate” for not writing; this exemplifies the feeling of purposelessness most people experience when they do nothing, or sit “idly.” This serves as an anecdotal premise for his main argument: people unnecessarily feel useless when doing nothing, or what they perceive to be nothing, despite it being the “vitamin D” equivalent for the brain (lack of which causes scurvy, or rickets, figuratively). I find this concept interesting—that doing nothing isn’t doing nothing. Nothing is just the absence of something seemingly productive, or something serving the purpose of maintaining this “busyness” illusion, not something entirely. It is comparable to cold, which is only measurable as the absence of heat, yet is just as requisite for productivity, much as a break inside an air-conditioned building is after an extended time beneath the hot sun. Doing “nothing” has been stigmatized by our individualistic American culture, as it ostensibly is the bane of productivity, the anti-success. In a nation whose cultural rhetoric is constructed around working hard and dismissing of the concept that one’s status is fixed, it can be misconstrued that doing nothing is the opposite of working to better yourself and your place. The author implies that doing nothing, or idleness, is a part of working hard, a crucial ingredient for productivity, as it allows you to step back, recollect, and move forward with renewed and re-energized perspective. Many people in class agreed that they feel this ubiquitous (vocab word) pressure to constantly be doing something, and were no strangers to the stress associated with such a “busy” life. Doing nothing for a time is the obvious cure, but it’s much harder said than done, especially in this cultural work-obsessed climate.
On David Foster Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster” V
A P
D
avid Foster Wallace wants to point out the fact that the way people cook lobster is fundamentally violent and maybe even unethical. People boil the lobsters alive and have created the theory that lobsters have no system to feel serious pain to reassure themselves of their total morality. He then also raises the question, is it alright for people to keep cooking and eating these lobsters even if it does cause them discomfort or pain because of a sort of Darwinesque natural ascension to the top of the food chain where anything goes for the apex predator. He brings up a few conflicting ideas; one he says that a main theory about the system that senses pain is bogus, but then brings up the possibility that maybe their feeling of pain really doesn’t hurt but feels like something we humans have no capability to feel for better or for worse. I think that the footnotes are more like the real essay. The whole time he just gives all sorts of conflicting evidence and other thoughts but in the footnotes, he shares what he really thinks through his bias in choosing articles and sources as what
T E
he cites and discusses is much more anti-lobster eating than what he seems to think in the actual essay. He is actually just talking about the poor lobsters and the people that eat these delicious lobsters and writing about his differing opinions and self-conflict and I think the footnotes are much more opinionated than he tries to project. He doesn’t fully seem to know what to think but I think his first gut reaction is to feel that people should stop eating lobsters because doing so is unnecessarily cruel and brutal. I personally like lobster and really think that both arguments are fairly speculative and stretch a lot of basic observations into conclusions. Until there is seemingly incontrovertible evidence that lobsters feel pain so acutely and terribly that it is worse than what humans do to other humans, I will continue to eat lobster.
L R
T
he structure of the essay begins with Wallace detailing the actual biological structure of lobsters, and the different categories they belong to such as “shedders” being more of a softshelled lobster. What’s striking about the essay is the beginning, where Wallace discusses his experiences at this sort of food festival surrounding the consumption of lobsters, and this sort of celebration of the consumption of lobsters. The purpose for doing so would be to demonstrate how much lobster is glorified nowadays, but the reality of how they’re cooked is very gruesome, and at times, discussions about the consumption of lobster may even be avoided. The title of the essay, “Consider the Lobster”, is posing the challenge of actually delving into the history of lobsters, and their different categorization; which then sets the foundation for seeing lobsters as less of a meal, and more of an actual living species. One point in the essay that stood out to me was how he addresses that he’s not going on some vegan-fueled argument, or tangent, and that we shouldn’t see lobsters as sort of amicable or similar to us, but rather, that the manner in which they’re cooked is wrong. Wallace doesn’t frankly state that eating
Part V: Miscellany
another living organism is wrong, but that the lack of consideration and cruelty is the issue here. The section in which Wallace discusses the myths about lobsters and details how there’s a chance lobsters suffer a different type of pain is particularly insightful. Not only did I find this section of the essay to be very interesting, and also an important section that revealed his credibility, but I also thought this section is where Wallace’s thesis may come from. The author didn’t really present a different method in which lobsters should be cooked, or reassure the audience that he knew the answer to this complex issue. The author was presenting all this information, and findings, so that we would take the process of preparing lobsters into consideration, and evaluate the conclusions we’ve come to as a society. The question Wallace presents that surrounds this prioritization of “gustatory pleasure” and the consumption done by humans is something I saw as more of an accessory to his thesis; throughout the essay, it seems that Wallace hasn’t really come to a staggering conclusion, but he’s slowly moving in the direction that some sort of change should take place, or at least that this, neglected, issue of lobster consumption should no longer be neglected. Wallace clearly acknowledges that as a society, we’ve glorified the consumption of lobster, and that overtime, we’ve chosen to avoid addressing the gruesome reality that occurs in the kitchen. The conclusion that he seems to have come to is very vague and broad, but it all seems to signal that as a society, we pick and choose what is socially acceptable, and what is discussed. As for myself, the extensive details that Wallace covers in the beginning all work to justify the actual title of the essay, where he challenges the audience to try and question their own values, or at least, not completely ignore the manner in which lobsters are prepared. In the second half of the essay and its footnotes, I get a sense that yes, we should discuss lobsters, but that there’s this other issue that we should also collectively consider. The issue of choosing to ignore topics that could, potentially, make us uncomfortable; and more so that by ignoring some issues, we’re allowing these issues
T E
to negatively impact others. Again, this issue is striving to start a conversation well beyond lobsters.
M R
W
hat Wallace’s wants us to consider about this text is partly the fact that so many lobsters are caught and he is almost arguing for animal safety at some points. This is evident when Wallace discusses boiling lobsters alive as well as the amount of trapping that happens in the New England waters. Another point that he seems to be encouraging us to consider is that people are over pricing and over catching these lobsters so the amount of authority that humans have over all creatures living on Earth is increasing. The reason the footnotes are so long is because he wants us to really understand what he is trying or also putting in other bits of information to try and makes his argument stronger than before. In his essay, he argues that it isn’t alright to boil these creatures alive and I agree with him. These are living creatures and even though they are delicious treats that people tend to get near the beach, the way that these animals are prepared is almost akin to animal cruelty. We must investigate alternative ways to prepare these lobsters.
L K
M
y conclusion is: eat the lobster, maybe don’t boil it alive. Is there a quick and relatively painless way to kill a lobster? How do lobsters die in the wild? Wallace suggests that it is easier to boil the lobster, rather than a chicken or a mammal because the lobster is less recognizably human, and when it does act in ways that we understand and empathize with—clinging to its container and banging against the lid of the pot, boiling it becomes much harder. I wonder if we should also consider the plants (and maybe fungi?) that we consume—if it’s wrong
Part V: Miscellany
to dismiss the lobster’s pain because it is unfamiliar to us, than can we dismiss the ‘pain’ of plants, even if we can’t comprehend their experience and expression of it? If we decide lobsters are much less morally important than humans, is lettuce much less morally important than lobsters? What about carnivores? What moral responsibility do they have to their prey? They don’t have a choice—they eat other animals or they die. Should moral anxiety over our diet be unique to humans? I think it probably is, but should it be? Eating is always destructive in some sense, so is there a difference between eating the lobster and a radish, besides the fact that it’s easier to see ourselves in the lobster?
B C
W
allace wants us to consider the ethics of eating animals and how we treat their existence as less important than human existence. To Wallace, eating animals is unethical but we do it anyway primarily without even thinking about what happens behind the scenes before any meal is placed before us. His argument about how it’s wrong to eat animals I don’t entirely agree with. The death of any human or animal is obviously morally wrong but the sole purpose for animals like cows, chickens, pigs, lobsters and more is for food. But I don’t believe that animals should be boiled alive just for our pleasure because he brings up a point about how when lobsters are being cooked initially, they tend to, “..hook [their] claws over the kettle’s rim like a person trying to keep from going over the edge of a roof ”. He also mentions in one of his footnotes about the screeching noise that a lobster makes while being boiled. It’s like we’re holding them captive for our own good which is just like holding a human hostage. The way we go about preparing these animals for our pleasure is absolutely wrong, but is there a way to make it less aggressive?
About the Authors Michael Avedisian
Michael Avedisian is a junior at Geneva High School.
Madison Burgey
Madison Burgey is a student at Geneva High School starting her senior year in September 2020. She is undecided about her future plans but plans on attending college. Outside of school, she enjoys running for the cross country and track team, where she has made many long lasting friendships. She also enjoys swimming, climbing waterfalls, and enjoying the sun with her friends and family.
Brionna Carter
Brionna Carter is an upcoming senior at Geneva High School. She plans on attending college in the fall of 2021 to major in physical therapy or sports medicine. She plans to play softball at the collegiate level as well. In her spare time, she loves being active, going on adventures, and spending time outside. She also enjoys hanging out with friends and playing with her niece.
Taylor Champlin
Taylor Champlin is a student at Geneva High School. In her senior year, she will be part of the New Visions program. She plans on attending college after she graduates. Taylor loves spending time outside in all types of weather and playing games. She also enjoys being with her family and friends. In her spare time, you may find Taylor riding her unicycle, running, hiking or kayaking.
Tyqwan Coles
Tyqwan Coles is an upcoming senior at GHS. He plans to attend college in the fall of 2021 to major in photography or sports management. He plans on wrestling and competing for triple jump and pole vault.
Sophia Cook
Sophia Cook is a student at Geneva High School entering her senior year. She plans to attend college to study physical therapy. She is an active volleyball and softball player and also enjoys swimming and spending time outside with her family and friends. Sophia loves to adventure and travel to new places with her friends and family. She plans to spend senior year furthering her interest in the medical field by obtaining an internship at a physical therapy practice.
Aiden Fallo
Aiden Fallo is completing his junior year. He is undecided about his plans for the future, but is considering computer science or engineering. In his spare time, he likes to spend time outside, draw and paint, read, and play PS4.
Collin Fitzgerald
Collin Fitzgerald plans on attending The Clarkson School during his senior year. He plans on studying either finance, computer science, or engineering in college. When he is not trading stocks, he enjoys playing tennis and fishing. In his free time you are likely to find him out on Seneca Lake.
Daniel Fladd
Daniel Fladd is an upcoming senior at Geneva High School. His favorite subjects are history and English and he enjoys playing lacrosse. In his spare time, he plays video games and roots for the New York Jets, the best team in the National Football League.
Michael Gardiner
Michael Gardiner is an upcoming senior at GHS. He also attends WFL Boces for electrical trades and plans training to become a commercial electrician. He enjoys music, baseball, football, and achieving his goals.
Laurel Kendrick
Laurel Kendrick is a member of the Geneva High School class of 2021, cryptid enthusiast, and artist. She will probably go into filmmaking or visual arts.
Kenneth Meyer
Kenneth Meyer is a junior at GHS. He is a hard working gentleman and loves finding solutions to problems. He indulges in soccer and looks forward to maybe playing for college. After graduating high school, he looks forward to possibly attending OCC and transferring to Syracuse University to study computer science or cybersecurity.
Connor Morley
Connor Morley is a junior at Geneva High School.
Ashly Paulino
Ashly Paulino is a rising senior at GHS. She plans on attending college after she graduates high school, and possibly pursuing a career in the medical field. She currently also attends WFL Boces for their Health Professions program in hopes of acquiring her CNA certificate. Outside of school, she enjoys reading, painting, and most things of that nature. She also enjoys being outdoors, especially by the water when possible.
Abraham Porschet
Abraham Porschet is finishing his time at Geneva High School. In college, he plans on majoring in mathematics and computer science. He plays too much tennis and is usually on the tennis court. He likes to play chess, quizbowl, and any other game where he can obtain bragging rights. He spends as much time in the Adirondacks as possible and is currently finishing hiking the 46 high peaks.
Ana Powers
Ana Powers is entering her senior year. She plans on attending college. Though undecided on her major, she is considering business management. In her free time, she enjoys being outside, spending time with family and friends, and exploring new experiences.
Leslie Ramirez
Throughout AP Language and Composition, Leslie Ramirez has added a level of complexity to their understanding of English rhetoric, and one that continues to push them to think critically whenever possible. They are currently looking at majoring in either history, political science, or potentially pre-law. In the future, they look forward to being heavily involved with the school’s Model United Nations club, and graduating cum laude. They believe they have merely scratched the surface of their academic career.
Jeanmarie Roach
Jeanmarie Roach is a student at Geneva High School with her senior year coming up. She enrolled in an AP Language and Composition course which helped and inspired her to become a better writer. She enjoys spending time with friends and family, being outdoors, and going on adventures. During her senior year, she plans on adventuring onward so she’s ready for what’s coming next in her future. She plans on attending college in the fall of 2021 to major in biology.
Chanai Roche
Chanai Roche is a current student at Geneva High School and Wayne Finger Lakes Boces, for cosmetology. She aspires to earn her cosmetology license and attend college for business to pursue a career in salon management. Outside of school, she enjoys spending time with her friends dreaming about their futures and planning out their lives. In addition to cosmetology, she aspires to broaden her knowledge of sustainability and to build a sustainable home in the future. Her ultimate goal is to obtain a successful career and life not only for herself but for the people in her life who have worked hard to help her get there.
Mason Rusinko
Mason Rusinko is an upcoming senior at Geneva High School. He plans to attend college to pursue physical therapy and to also play soccer. He is very active and enjoys staying busy. His favorite activities are playing soccer, going to hangout with friends, and enjoying and exploring nature. He is looking forward to this upcoming year to continue to learn and grow as a person as well as a student athlete.
Layla Russ
Layla Russ is currently a student at GHS where she will be a senior in fall of 2020. She also attends WFL Boces where she is pursuing the criminal justice program. Layla plans to attend college after she graduates but is still undecided on what she wants to major in; at this point, she is seriously considering majoring in psychology. In her free time, she occupies herself with painting, drawing, and reading if her schedule allows it.
Kiersten Ryan
Kiersten Ryan is a rising senior at Geneva High School. She has found a love for writing thanks to this course and is interested in majoring in either Journalism or Occupational Therapy upon her graduation. Most of the time, you can find her on the tennis courts or in the dance studio. Throughout the 2020-2021 school year, she looks forward to furthering her studies and broadening her interests prior to starting the next chapter of her life.
Sophia Turturro
Sophia Turturro is a junior at GHS. She enjoys long walks at the beach, the general Walmart ambience, and collecting salt lamps. Her post high school plans are still being discussed by The Fates.
