Rhetorical Analysis - April 13

This rhetorical analysis is going to be about the book "Alas, Babylon" by Pat Frank. It has nothing to do with healthcare or energy or schools, but it does try to make a point. Mr. Frank was in a line of work that had something to do with nuclear missiles or something like that, but then he realized the inherent danger of atomic energy. He began trying to lobby against the use of nuclear weapons. So he wrote this book about what would happen to a small community in Florida if the Cuban missile crisis (yes, it's an old book) escalated to the nuclear level.

S - It is not quite sufficient. He set out to educate everyone on what would happen in nuclear winter, and it turned into more of a novel than an educational story. He provides a lot of information, but not in a format that would convince anyone of anything.
T - It is not typical of environmental-type warnings at all. I have yet to see Michael Moore write a novel about an issue. Or do anything else worth mentioning.
A - The information seems to be quite accurate, as the writer seems to be familiar with government procedure, protocol, and course of action. He also is familiar with the part of world in which he places the story.
R - Not all of it is relevant. Again, it is a novel.

Ethos - His credibility is high, both from the information given and his personal background.
Pathos - The emotions played to are really angst and the human sense of drama. There is love, loss, family, and survival all tied together, but nothing to really convince the reader to protest nuclear missile programs.
Logos - He does try to play to logic in this book. He gives a very possible scenario, and makes the decisions that the characters make very real and typical of people in those types of situations.

All in all, it was a good read, but it didn't really forewarn me of the nuclear apocalypse, which was his original intent in writing the book.

Technique - April 10

I'm going to do some more brainstorming today about healthcare.

How much would taxes go up if a mandatory national healthcare system were implemented?
Would the training and/or selection of doctors and nurses change?
What would determine the funding of hospitals: population or track record?
Would students be "recruited" to become doctors, in order to fill the need?
Would more scholarships then become available for those students?
How would those scholarships be funded?
If students are recruited to become doctors and nurses, would the government necessarily pay for their education? For their malpractice insurance?
What would the restrictions be on which doctors you could visit: by town, county, state?
Would any additional funds be allocated to hospitals besides those raised from healthcare taxes?
During times of low economy, what takes more precedence: the army or healthcare? Most republicans would try to balance it out, whereas many democrats might believe that the army should be withdrawn from all its foreign posts, so as to get more funds to healthcare.
If every citizen in the nation has the same healthcare provider, which is funded through taxes, what happens to those people who do not pay taxes? Not children or the elderly, but people who choose to not pay taxes? They have a right to be healthy, but they have not paid for their healthcare with their own taxes. Would tax records then become part of the procedure at hospitals?

If we kept our current system, what could be changed to better it? Maybe a combination of federal and private funding, so that insurance starts at medicaid for everyone, and then additional insurances could be added by citizens?
If there is healthy competition between medical providers and innovators, would those advancements as a result of competition decrease if more unbiased federal funding is added to the system?

Free Write - April 8

My wife had to go to the hospital about 7 months ago. She had a cough that wouldn't go away, and chest pains. They ran all sorts of tests, only to find out it was pleurisy, which has a very simple cure: take some antibiotics and wait. Of course, the bill was tremendous, because they did an X-ray, did blood test, etc., etc. I'm not arguing this. What I don't understand is how such a high-tech place like a hospital can not have its act together when it comes to billing. Over the course of the three months following her visit, we had bills come from over 5 different sources. One from our insurance, one from the radiology department, one from the council of physicians, one from the hospital itself, blah, blah, blah. We had no idea who needed to be paid what or why, because all these bills came at the same time. Couldn't there be an easier way? Couldn't they just make up a bill and send it to us? Granted, it would have been a very large, one-sum bill, but it would have saved us a lot of grief. I mean, come on. Such a frequently-used and modern institution should SURELY be able to rake all the payments into one bill for the consumer, and then distribute it among those that need to be paid. But no. I mean, with all the money pouring into those places, they couldn't hire a couple of people to consolidate bills and mail sent out? O, well. Such is America, I suppose. If they consolidate bills, then the next logical step would be complete and total socialism, no? And goodness knows how many hippies would be up in arms about that . . .

Free Write - April 3

I was reading the news the other day, when I came across a story that triggered thoughts on another subject. In Georgia (USA), some 8 year old third graders had been scolded by their teacher for something insignificant, and they decided that they needed to teach her a lesson. They came to school with handcuffs, duct tape, and a steak knife. The plan was to knock her unconscious, handcuff her and tape her to the desk, then stab her with the steak knife. First of all, when I was 8, I didn't even know that rebellion was an option. If I got scolded, it was my fault, and I had to face up to it. Second, even if I HAD decided to rebel, the idea of physically harming an adult was the furthest thing from my mind. Where did these kids get the idea from? The police chief in the area blames it on video games and violence. I tend to agree with him on the video games part of it, but not the violence part. The last 500 years or so have been the first time in the history of the world that kids did NOT grow up with violence. British children in the 800s saw Viking raiders torch, murder, and rape. Roman children saw executions, sieges, and sackings. But they didn't turn into little homocidal freaks. At least, not in comparison to their times. But for some reason, our age seems incapable of bringing up children with an "appropriate" understanding of violence. It's not that being exposed to violence makes someone a murderer. I grew up playing soccer, and I am not David Beckham. That may be a bit of a stretch, but this is my reasoning: I played soccer on a team. I went to practice, ran laps, played drills, got yelled at by the coach, won and lost games, and saw everything that it takes to become good at that sport. I didn't just see a soccer game and immediately think that I could become amazing with no effort. I didn't play FIFA on my XBox and then suppose that those hours in front of the tube would translate into real world skills. How does this relate to 8 year old kids in Georgia? They may have seen violent actions on a video game, and thought that no real world consequences could come of their decisions. Children who grew up in another age saw what physically happened when someone was stabbed. They saw the blood, hear the cries, and knew (even if they only experienced it once) that being stabbed or stabbing someone brought with it actualized results. So, in my mind, it was not the violence that corrupted those children in that third grade class, but the FALSENESS of the violence they had seen. Everything is capable of traumatizing and warping a person, if no context or support is given to the person.

Free Write - March 23

I hate dancing. I truly do. The idea of clubbing makes me cringe more than almost any other idea. Why would anyone want to go to a crowded room of strangers, bumping up against each other, sweating to overly loud music, gyrating themselves in what can only be described as controlled epilepsy? I just don’t get it. I will add that dancing itself is not disgusting. Just the modern version of it. People used to dance for reasons. Celebration, worship, competition, intimidation, and courtship. These days, people just seem to do it for fun. I don’t see the merit in it. Despite my inability to justify the reason for modern “dancing”, there are certain times when one cannot help but dance. Each time has its own dance that every person, I believe, instinctively knows.
The first instance is that song from the Mac commercials by Yael Naim. You know the one. Its called “New Soul”, and it begins with a quaint little piano ditty. When this song plays, I firmly believe that every human, almost by obedience to some unknown law of nature, must bop his or her head from one side to the other in beat with the song.
The second instance is that of “The Impression That I Get” by the Mighty Mighty Bosstones. The jury is still out on whether or not they are, in fact, mighty mighty or just plain mighty. But nonetheless, when this songs plays, the body human must perform that ridiculously stupid ska dance of kicking its feet one at a time while doing a half-skip.
The third instance involves Ricky Martin. Yes, you already know what song I’m going for. When “Livin’ La Vida Loca” plays, EVERYONE, even elderly Jewish women from Brooklyn, secretly believes themselves to be exotically tan salsa dancers. Everyone.
The last instance I will mention is not a dance, but it is a historically cheesy action that must be undergone. There is a physiological reason for it. During the performance of "Open Arms" by Journey (or any other epic ballad of the 70s/80s/early 90s), one must hold up a lighter, or at least hold up their hand as if they had a lighter. This is because the song is so emotional, makes the listener so in tune with the universe, and shakes the pillars of Rock so tremendously that if one were NOT to hold up one's hand with or without a lighter, one would actually burst into flames. If the emotional flame does not have an outlet, spontaneous combustion will occur, and you will be sitting with your buddies at the IHOP after the concert wishing you had just held up the daggone lighter.
There are other instances of involuntary dance or action, but these are the ones I have encountered lately. I firmly believe that these dances are near impossible to stop. Try to quelch that inner Latino from wiggling his or her hips, and you might need something to bite down on so as not to scream out from the agony. Thinking of not making an idiot of yourself by rocking out to the Bosstones? Don’t expect a happy ending. And, while I cannot substantiate this scientifically, I am nearly without doubt that holding back the cute head bob during “New Soul” may have permanent physical side effects. The next time any of these songs comes on, please do not try to NOT dance. You may be so negatively affected by the experience that you may go blind.

Free Write - March 17

Recently, a woman was taken to the hospital. She was a special woman. The reason she was (is) special: she hadn't left her bathroom for two years. She set up camp in the lavatory because she had a fear of leaving it. I'm not trying to make fun of her. Really. I'm just curious about the situation. Most of us with irrational fears realize how irrational they are, and are usually determined to conquer them. People who are afraid of heights do not live their lives at ground level, but rather make attempts at stairs, higher buildings, and airplanes. What I am wondering is: at what point does one realize exactly HOW irrational their fear is? I mean, if you haven't left your house in a whole day, you usually recognize that and try to get out for a little bit. Was there never a day in those two years when the woman looked around and thought "Geez, it's been a while since the last time I left."? Did she never get bored of staring at the towel rack? And the second part of the story that baffles me: her boyfriend supplied her with food, clean clothes, and (apparently) companionship for the 24 months of her confinement. He claims that he tried to coax her out several times, and eventually just decided to let her work it out on her own. Personally, I think my relationship with such a person would be a bit strained due to lack of change in venue, if you get my drift. I mean, kudos to you, bathroom-lady-boyfriend, for sticking it out those two years faithfully. But, it's like, come on. Two years? That's going a little far. Or not far enough, I guess.

Free Write - March 9

I am writing to alert the world of a recent disease that is creeping its way through America, and soon will spill over into the rest of the world. Someone you know may have this disease and not even know it. It's name is SoCalNarcissnoma-Encephalmonia-itis. This may be something you have seen before, and didn't even realize its danger. I will tell you of my encounter with this brain-destroying affliction that has ruined the perfectly good days of thousands of people.
I work with a young man from Southern California. He decided, at some odd point in his so-far-inexperienced life that everyone he met should be dubbed "fool". Actually, "foow", as he seems to have lost the ability (either through evolution or choice) to pronounce word-final "l"s. I guess I'm a little old fashioned, or perhaps it's because I'm from the South (yes, Virginia IS in the South. if you doubt me, ask yourself where Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and JEB Stuart are from. go on. i'll wait.)(and if you don't know who those three are, then you are hardly in any shape to declare what is "South" and what isn't), but I was raised that if you called someone a fool, you had better be prepared to back that claim up with either a fist or examples of that person's foolishness. After he calls you a "foow", he then proceeds to insult in any way he can whatever ancestry your last name claims. If you're a Smith, he bashes the English. If you're an O'Brien, he spits on the Irish. If you're a Chavez, then Heaven help you from the onslaught of anti-Hispanic remarks that will soon overwhelm you. Next, he will tell you that he's joking, smack you on the back, and tell you to lighten up and take a joke, even if his tirade of racial slurs raised no reaction whatsoever from you. Covering his bases, I suppose. He will then tell you how, no matter what state you're from, you have no idea what a real "gangster" is. How he got on the topic of gangsters, and why any sane person would care about the definition of a "real gangster", the intelligent world will never know, but he seems to feel that you brought it up, and he needs to comment on it. He will say that the only real gangsters live in LA, and that he used to hear gunshots every day in his neighborhood. As he is a well-off white kid that drives a relatively new Mustang, gels his hair, and wears cologne every day to work, I doubt he was anywhere near a neighborhood with gang rivalries. But, at the risk of having to listen to him defend his position on his "gangsta-ness", I listen to him go on about how tough his neighborhood was, and how whatever state anyone is from is "lame", while his state is "so ill".
IF YOU COME ACROSS THIS YOUNG MAN, WALK IN THE OTHER DIRECTION. DO NOT GET SUCKED UP INTO HIS FANTASY WORLD OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUPREMACY. If you do get caught by him, just grin and bear it. Don't worry. The rest of the world is behind you all the way. We've been there before, and we know your pain. If you or a loved one has had their day ruined by someone like this, please have them contact a grief counselor in their local community. The road to recovery from these incidents is long and hard, but we're there for you.

Rhetorical Analysis - March 06

"Kilowatt Ours" by Jeff Barrie

Audience - People living in the Southeast who think that their current energy production means are safe and sufficient.

WACTO - He didn't really have one. The film was just sort of informational, not problem-solving.

S - The film spends a lot of time looking down on current sources of energy, but doesn't cover sufficiently the ways to improve energy.
T - This film is typical of people who think that their film will change the world.
A - It is accurate enough. He interviews people like park rangers, power plant technicians, and the like.
R - Everything he says in the film is relevant.

Ethos - He appeals to the moral "right" and "wrong" of certain manners of energy production. He goes on and on about how immoral, not dangerous, pollution and mining are. He isn't pervasive in it, and doesn't try to trick viewers into thinking a certain way. He does, however, push his own cause quite a bit.
Pathos - There is a clip in the movie about a small community in the Southeast who try to deny a bill allowing a nuclear power plant being built nearby. He shows the emotion that the townspeople went through, interviews some of them, and tries to bring the feeling home to all the viewers by attempting to apply their situation to the country.
Logos - Facts, figures, and statistics galore dot this film. Percentages and measurements are around every corner. He tries to logically explain why pollution is immoral, and tries to show future effects of immediate actions.

All in all, the movie got done what it wanted to. The figures were convincing enough, and it wasn't overly presumptuous. The creator of the film, though, has his own website, and is still pushing what he pushes in the movie: an overall revamp of the Southeast's power supply methods.

Technique - March 4

This week, I am going to just brainstorm about audience needs, etc. for my paper on healthcare.

Audiences possible:
1. Newly married couples or graduates from college
2. Families whose healthcare provider is switching due to work/location change
3. People expecting children

Concerns that may arise:
1. Rate of premiums (do they apply per person or per plan?)
2. Flexibility of hospitals and doctors to accept smaller, private insurance providers
3. What percentage of birth defect/labor difficulties is covered? Are there any specific cases or conditions that do not get covered by most healthcare providers?
4. Do healthcare providers actually live up to their duties? Are there any out there that are 100% honest when it comes to payments and treatment options?
5. Is there a way for private healthcare providers to accomodate everyone, even the very impoverished?

Questions about the public healthcare option:
1. How much will taxes go up? Does the amount depend on persons per household, or is it a flat rate?
2. Will inflation or the economy have any effect on the tax?
3. Will there be any room or legality for private doctors or clinics?
4. What will be the requirements for doctors, nurses, and staff? Will there be a unified battery of tests for each position? Will salary for them be the same, regardless of location?
5. Will building care and technology go down once they are left in the hands of the government?
6. What things will be covered by a nation-wide healthcare provider? For instance, cosmetic surgery might not be covered, but what about reconstructive surgery?
7. Will the amount of lawsuits go up or down with the de-privitization of healthcare?
8. Is there a happy middle ground between private and government healthcare providers? Can there be a basic, all-citizens-covered government-run provider, and then the option to have your own if you don't like the one given to the public?
9. If the answer to the above question is yes, then what "price-gouging" laws will have to implemented to prevent unhealthy competition?

Amendment on my Free Write

Lovers of 60s music will note that I mis-referenced the song "And Then He Kissed Me" with the chorus from "Da Doo Ron Ron". This will be forgiven me, because the connoisseur of all things Oldie acknowledges that both "And Then He Kissed Me" AND "Da Doo Ron Ron" were released by the Crystals, and both released in 1963. So, my Freudian slip will be accepted with lieniency.

Free Write - March 2

Once, on my mission, I was kissed by a man. A large, drunk, Russian man. While walking down the street in a town in Latvia, my companion and I happened across a very large Russian. Picture, if you will, the weird white guy from "Daddy Day-Care" (yes, regrettably, I did see that movie). Now put a "Newsies" style hat on him, inebriate him with large quantities of vodka, and lather him up with some Eau D'SweatyNonBathingMan, and you've got the guy that approached us. Seeing that we were missionaries, he stopped us and began asking us some interesting questions, which we attempted to answer. He asked if we believed in reincarnation, if Mary really was the mother of God, etc., etc. He then posed us the question “Where did God come from?” We tried to skirt around the question by saying that God’s origins were not important in this life, and that we should try to live good lives, yadda yadda yadda. “Wait. Where are YOU from?”, he asked (I should preface this by saying that he phrased the question to mean “From whom did you come?”). So, I replied that I was from my mother. He then asked “Well, then, from whom does God come?” I realized that I had better give him an answer that would end this line of questioning. So, I said that God came from His father. The man asked who God’s father was. I said “I don’t know. Ask His mother.” This made the man think for a moment, then laugh that big-bellied sardine-scented laugh that only a drunk Russian can laugh. He said “I like you, American.” And then he kissed me (“A-doo-ron-ron-ron, a-doo-ron-ron…”). Not on the mouth, mind you. Just on the cheek. So, there you have it. As a parting note, I will say that I was kissed by more drunk men on my mission than I have ever been kissed by sober women OFF my mission. Fellas, take note – when with Russian men, look out for the drunk kiss. Beware.

Free Write - Feb. 24

Is there a finer food than Little Debbie's Fudge Rounds? If there is, I’m sure I have never tasted it. In fact, the complete gastronomical bliss attained while delicately savoring one of these divine bestowals of nature is utterly incomparable. Nothing on this planet can even approach the Fudge Round in its deliciousness or the spiritual fulfillment it provides. In fact, most other sugary treats will hide their faces in shame, knowing that they are not worthy to share a cupboard with Diminutive Debbie’s masterpiece. Many’s the time I have observed Ho-ho’s, Twinkies, Ding-Dongs, and Macaroons shy away from the pure, untainted presence of the Round. Even the presumptuous Oreo, with her self-absorbed conceit, cannot face the grace and simplicity of the treasured Fudge Round’s all-appeasing beauty without blushing. O, Oreo. You think you are perfect. You presume that we all crave you constantly. But we don’t. We don’t. There are times when that dry crumbliness of Oreo does nothing to a sweet tooth. There are times, and we all know them, when the only thing to quench our needs is a small, chocolaty, tantalizing slice of paradise individually wrapped by the gentle hands of Deborah herself. If Little Debbie were to assume human form (and I don’t think all her glory could be contained in the flesh), I would propose on the spot (if my wife let me).

Rhetorical Analysis - Feb. 21

"The Eagle and The Hawk" by John Denver

I'm not really sure how to analyze a song. Most songs, as far as I know, don't present an "argument". Some may, but not the music I listen to. After all, why would you risk writing a song that people won't listen to because they don't agree with you? I immediately change the station when I hear a song whose theme I don't agree with or can't identify with. So, I guess I'll just do the best I can. In the song "The Eagle and The Hawk" by John Denver, the idea is really that nature can help you become who you really are.

"I am the eagle, I live in high country
In rocky cathedrals that reach to the sky.
I am the hawk and there's blood on my feathers,
But time is still turning - they soon will be dry.
And all of those who see me, all who believe in me
Share in the freedom I feel when I fly.
Come dance with the west wind and touch on the mountain tops,
Sail o'er the canyons and up to the stars,
And reach for the heavens and hope for the future
And all that we can be and not what we are."

As cheesy as the words sometimes seem, Denver (or Dutchendorf, if you're an aficionado like me) is trying to say that the freedom of nature is a way to get out of the rut you're in. The song is very typical for the style he sings. It is more musical than beat-based, with crescendos and scale runs as a backdrop for a melody that tries to represent the flight of a bird: high, floating, and rhythmic. Even the choices of rhythms try to portray the pattern of wings flapping by raising quickly and dropping slowly.
Songs like this have a hard time being truly persuasive. If you don't like folky/country music, the words will never help you. Often, melodies and styles do more convincing than words. However, if you can put aside your bias against country and folk-style music, this song does the job. If you listen to this song with the volume up all the way and still don't feel like you have control over your life (or at least want to go for a day-long hike), then my personal opinion is that you weren't really listening.
I suppose the audience is people that feel like their life is getting away from them, but know that there is a way to get back in the driver's seat. At least for me, this song always makes me feel like I'm actually looking up at a hawk flying above me, and it reminds of the feeling we all get when we see flight: limitless possibilities. No one thinks of flight and equates it with constraint or borders. If you think of flight, and imagine that YOU are the hawk in the sky, you will never feel trapped. I think that was what my good friend Johnny was going for. He was trying to make you think of flying, trying to make you realize that you are part of NATURE, not just this bustlingly metallic world. Anyway, this is my best shot at analyzing a song.

Technique - Feb. 19

So, apparently we can just brain-storm this week. I can't guarantee anything brilliant, since my brain doesn't storm too much (not like Schwarzkopf, anyway). Energy? I guess I'll just list some of the topics I'd like to research ("like" is a relative term here, since I voted for the government topic) (Esplin, I'm sticking my tongue out at you right now. Yeah. How do you like that?).
1. What are the pros and cons of renewable fuels? Wind turbines are very clean, but only run when there's wind. Also, they require quite a bit of space to set up enough turbines to power anything larger than a few homes. Hydro-electric energy is wonderful, but only so many rivers can be dammed up, you know? Powering automobiles on biodiesel stinks (literally), but it makes use of some wastes (like cooking oils and organic trash). Some "green" fuels, though, require acres and acres of land to produce enough plant product for a feasible return.
2. Exactly how much would it cost to switch modern cities to renewable fuels? How big of a dam would we need to power New York City? How many wind turbines does it take to light up a neighborhood? How many New Jersey gangsters does it take to screw in a light bulb? These questions almost burn kind of faintly in my mind. (The answer is 6, by the way. One gangster to off the old light bulb and his close friends, one to procure a slightly used, untraceable light bulb from a recent shipment in at the docks, one to screw it in, and three to scare the light bulb into paying them protection money. How do I know this number? I have my contacts. Thanks, Jimmy. See you in the Meadowlands.)
3. How much is the government interested in reimbursing regular citizens for efficiency upgrades? I got paid $300 for putting air conditioning in my house. What else do they incentivize? incentivate? incentivify?
4. Exactly how much oil does the US consume daily for energy (not counting cars, trucks, etc.), and how much does it spend on renewable resources?
5. Can switching to cleaner fuels now actual reverse ecological damage, or does it just halt it?
6. Will Batman and the Boy Wonder be able to escape the Riddler's spinning question mark of doom? Will Commissioner Gordon ever leave his office to do anything other than call Batman on the screamingly obvious Bat-phone? Will I actually hear the sounds "biff", "zappo", and "ka-plow" if I punch one of Penguin's henchmen? Tune in tomorrow. Same Bat-time, same Bat-channel.

Free Write - Feb. 17

This weekend, my wife and I are at the Zermatt resort. We received two free nights here as part of some promotion at work. How nice. So, it's this world class resort in Midway, has been stayed in by Olympians, rich snobby types, and superficial ski junkies alike. Let me tell you, I was not impressed. I guess I shouldn't write this, since I am using their internet connection. But, they should welcome the criticism, no?
Walking in, I was almost impressed by the entryway. Stone flooring, nice counters, etc. Big fireplace, big mantle, carved statues, and the whole works. Then I looked closlier. The fireplace was one of those cheesy gas ones with the fake logs. The carved statues were ceramic, not wood. The crests and shields on the mantle were poorly carved and even more poorly painted. Minus 3 points for them. I thought that an Olympic-famous ski lodge would pony up for a REAL fireplace.
Next, we walked to our rooms. The carpets were the kind that make you wonder if either your grandmother or a color-blind dark age beer wench picked them out. The walls in our room were so thin that your could hear the people in the next room talking on the phone.
So, my wife and I decided that perhaps just our room was the worthless one. We went exploring. The staff scared me. Some of them were wearing jogging suits. Some of them didn't speak English very well. Some of them were wearing pants down around their butts and unlaced Vans. And, to complete the shockingly odd entourage, all the bellmen were wearing lederhosen and funky Swiss hats. Kind of like the Klopek kid from "The Burbs". You remember him. With the creepy facial hair and the pasty-white skin. O, yes. Not only was he a little freaky in "The Burbs", but he remains his old freaky self here in Midway, bustling people's bags off to their rooms.
Have you ever seen real Swiss architecture? I'm sorry, but the Swiss' creative prowess ended at hole-filled cheese. Dancing bears, weird floral patterns, paintings with vaguely uncomfortable scenes of people dressed like British sissies in court. Not exactly 5 star, you know? Maybe our experience was unique. Maybe my wife and I are just spoiled, having lived in Alaska, Hawai'i, and Europe. I suppose I shouldn't complain, since we stayed for free. But I can't help but wonder: if this resort is so swanky, then why did they hire Hans Klopek?

Rhetorical Analysis - Feb. 7

I recently attended one of those "get a free vacation if you listen to our pitch" things at a timeshare company. The pitch was simple, easy to understand, and fairly unremarkable.
Audience: Obviously, it was people with some money to spend who like to travel
Ethos: Credibility was established through pictures of resorts, customer reviews, and the presence of other customers in the store.
Logos: The salesman tried to appeal to logic by crunching numbers, comparing how much a hotel room costs to the average cost per stay at a timeshare location.
Pathos: The only emotion played on was the desire to travel, trying to convince the customer that traveling will improve the quality of life.

Sufficient: The sales pitch was long enough to get the information across, but short enough to not be boring. Also, the argument was presented in a way that enough information was left out to make the customer want to hear more.
Typical: Having never attended one of these sales pitches, I can't say if it's typical of the industry, but it was pretty much what anyone would expect for a sales pitch. Nothing to catch the consumer off-guard, no unheard-of gimmicks, etc.
Accurate: As far as I could tell, all the information given was accurate, up-to-date, and comprehensible to the average consumer.
Relevant: While the salesperson did spend some time asking us personal questions, all the answers we gave were later incorporated into the pitch. There were few, if any, tangents, and almost all of the presentation was to the point.

Free Write - Feb. 5

In semantics class, we talked about the differences between how men and women phrase things. The example used was as follows:
A man and woman are on a long drive home.
Woman: “Are you thirsty?”
Man: “Nope.”
Upon returning home, the woman then turns to the man and scolds him for being insensitive and not stopping to get her a drink.
Of course we all laugh, but secretly, every married or involved guy cringed as he read that, remembering the many and not infrequent occasions this has happened to him. I have the double whammy, though. Not only is my wife a typical female who makes statements like the above, but she is from a closely knit family in which they all finish the others’ sentences, leading to the assumption that sentences do not have to be finished by the speaker, and that everyone automatically knows what you’re talking about, so you never have to introduce a topic. This can lead to humorous situations, but more often leaves me confused. If my wife and I are talking about Charlie’s Angels, then we switch to talking about Hondas, then we switch to talking about Canadian geese, then we switch to talking about kidney stones, my wife (and the members of her family) would see fit to bring back the subject of Charlie’s Angels by saying out of the blue “I sure do like them”, never saying whether the “them” referred to Hondas, kidney stones, geese, or Angels. Another common occurrence is at a restaurant. If I order something different from her, she will inevitably ask me if my dish tastes good. This question carries with it the assumption that if, indeed, my dish DOES taste good, then I should gladly share it with her so she can enjoy it as well. After that comes the assumption that if my dish does NOT taste good, then she would need a bite to confirm that my dish does NOT taste good. Either way, some of my food ends up on her fork.

Technique - Jan. 31

1. a - WATCO texting while driving on the chances of you getting in a wreck?
b - People who think that they can successfully control both their cell phone AND their car at the same time.
c - Texting while driving will raise the chances of getting in a wreck BECAUSE concentrating on anything besides driving will cause you to stray from your lane often.

2. a - WATCO eating nothing but carrots and cappuccinos on your health?
b - Self-conscious people who think that the weird "carrot and cappuccino" diet will make them thin and not affect their health.
c - Eating nothing but carrots and cappuccinos will ruin your health BECAUSE overloading on certain substances while ignoring others will weaken your immune system and decrease bone density.

3. a - WATCO climbing Mt. Everest without ever training on your lifespan?
b - Gungho executive types who believe that money alone will get them to the world's highest point.
c - Climbing Mt. Everest without training will shorten your lifespan greatly BECAUSE the inability to cope with difficult conditions and the physical inability to react to sudden situations over 25,000 ft. above sea-level will most likely result in extremely severe frostbite and pulmonary edema.

4. a - WATCO telling your wife that her dress DOES make her look fat on your comfort tonight?
b - Tired husbands who think that maybe today, for once, honesty should win over, and their wife should know the truth instead of hearing another little white lie.
c - Telling your wife that her dress DOES make her look fat will completely shatter your comfort tonight BECAUSE an angry wife will most likely make you sleep on the sofa.

Free Write - Jan. 29

"Bobo, the Magical Beagle"
Once upon a time, there lived a remarkably unremarkable beagle named Bobo. As far as beagles go, he was fairly average. Right up there with Tinkly-Winkly, Snuggles McCuddlyflop, and Butch, all three being irresistibly normal beagles themselves. Yes, Bobo matched every other beagle in floppy-earedness, cuddlocity, and sad-eye-aciousness. He lived in a typical beagle den, which had a typical beagle doormat on a typical beagle front step. His bedroom was typically beagle-esque, having in it a fuzzy bed, several chewy bones, and numerous pictures of Jennifer Grey. Pre-nose job, when she looked innocent in an adult-like fashion, like she looked in Dirty Dancing, which is, in fact, the very reason why all male beagles have posters of Jennifer Grey in the first place. Female beagles are known for their somewhat inexplicable, yet somewhat understandable, attraction to Patrick Swayze, mostly due to the same movie that inspires male beagles, and partially due to his stunning career in Disney on Parade. But that’s another barrel of fish.
Gazing from his window, Bobo wondered to himself if his evolution to the present had taken him so far from his origins as a forest-dwelling rabbit hunter that he could not survive in the wild. Could his captivatingly cute looks keep him safe in the woods? Would his waggedy tail ward off the dangers that so often beset domesticated animals when released into the wild? Being a slightly adventurous beagle, he made the decision to wander off into the vast unknown forest near Beagleton, taking with him nothing but his exceptionally floppy ears, his fabulously waggedy tail, and that adorable puppy-dog look that has long been the main weapon in beagles’ snuggly arsenal, all ready for any sudden situation that may warrant an onslaught of “Awwwwwlookathimhe’ssocute”. During his first night in the forest, Bobo remarked to himself how cold it got without his fuzzy bed. He also could not help but notice how lonely it got without Jennifer Grey’s intoxicating gaze watching over him in his adorable puppy-sleep. Settling into a burrow of dried grass and pine needles he had used to create a bed (he could not wipe the smug look off his face, thinking of how, were the other beagles of Beagleton to see him, they would “Oooo” and “Ahhhh” at his Man-vs-Wild-ness), Bobo dreamt of bigger and better things than his small den. He dreamed of traveling to Hollywood to achieve the dream of all beagles: becoming the lap dog of the incomparable Jennifer Grey. He was almost asleep, kicking his hind leg absent-mindedly, fluttering his perfectly cuddly eyelids. And then he was eaten by a pack of ravenous wolves. And thus we see that beagles, cute though they may be, will never be able to reinhabit the wild, and so should be adopted into warm homes with plenty of love, food, and a weekly viewing of “Dirty Dancing”.

Technique - Jan. 27

1. a - WATCO playing video games all day on the chances of getting a girlfriend?
b - Audience: College-age men who spend hours of every day playing video games and then complain that they can't get a girlfriend.
c - Playing video games all day will crush your chances of getting a girlfriend BECAUSE doing worthless things with your time shows that you probably aren't mature enough to handle a relationship.

2. a - WATCO of not getting enough cardio activity on your ability to compete on American Gladiators?
b - Audience: People who are training to get onto American Gladiators, but think that muscle mass is all you need to win.
c - Not getting enough cardio activity will ruin your ability to compete on American Gladiators BECAUSE weak lungs will not impress Hulk Hogan.

3. a - WATCO feeding Gizmo after midnight on your chances of getting a good night's sleep?
b - Audience: Someone who owns Gizmo and feel sorry for him when he gets hungry at night.
c - Feeding Gizmo after midnight will destroy your chances of getting a good night's sleep BECAUSE evil, mischievous gremlins will make lots of noise and probably try to kill you.

4. a - WATCO admitting to your friends that you like "The Sound of Music" for its musical and ethical qualities on your manliness in their eyes?
b - Audience: Guys who have secretly liked "The Sound of Music" for years, but think that it's OK to admit it to their friends now because, hey, it's the 2000s, and everyone should be open with every feeling they have.
c - Admitting to your friends that you like "The Sound of Music" will diminish your manliness in their eyes BECAUSE declaring your affinity towards Julie Andrews will make them wonder what other femmy secrets you've been keeping from them.

Free Write - Jan. 22

"Under God"
It has always been a matter if intrigue to me. “Under God”. The reason this statement intrigues me is not the statement itself, but rather the riled sentiments that come about by it. In the last few years, a man attempted to have it removed from the pledge of allegiance, claiming that he, as an “atheist”, did not want his daughter to be forced to say those two words. What I don’t understand is WHY he was so upset. Never has “god” been defined as the Christian God, the God of Islam, or any other specific entity. The pledge of allegiance just says “God”. Quite simply, “god” is the power that got you here, and back to which you will someday return. For that reason, I hold that I have never met a true “atheist”. There may be those who deny “God” as a being, but no one ever said that’s what “God” has to be. For those who believe in Fate, that is who created their circumstances, and who controls their future. Fate is then God. For those who believe in science, evolution, and nature, those are the things that created them, and those are the end products of existence. Nature is then God. For those that worship Satan, he is their interloper, and the one to which they hope to return*. There is ALWAYS a god of some sorts. No one ever said that “God” had to have a white beard, robes, be male, or even have a physical representation. But there is always someone or something that got us here and that ultimately (whether consciously or not) gets us where we’re going. So, if there is always a “God”, then shouldn’t we, as a nation, be under Him/Her/It/Them? After all, that is what the concept of America is: people of different beliefs, backgrounds, and morals all united to improve their lives. We don’t all have to pray to Buddha or aspire to sing with angels or read the Torah or leave offerings on altars for the Spirit of the Sun TOGETHER. The key idea is that we are united under SOMETHING, and that we all recognize that that SOMETHING is higher than us, no matter what that SOMETHING may be.
*By the way, Satanism has always confused me. Even sadists, masochists, and Satanists like pleasure, comfort, rest, and sustenance, though their ideology may be against it. So they really want to spend eternity in a lake of unending misery and torture? I personally do not think they do. So they want a heaven, correct? But, honestly, can you picture the Source of All Evil sitting on a sun-soaked beach, smiling, sipping piña coladas and laughing it up with all his demon hoards?

Technique - Enthymemes

1. a - WATCO owning a dog on emotional well-being?
b - Audience is lonely old men with no kids
c - Owning a dog will improve emotional well-being b/c owning a dog gives you someone to care for and love

2. a - WATCO not having a job on the chances of getting a girlfriend?
b - Audience is slacker college students who mooch off their parents
c - Not having a job will hinder your chances of getting a girlfriend b/c not having a job shows that you do not care about your current or even future economic stability

3. a - WATCO lying to your wife about what you did all day on your relationship's stability?
b - Audience is husbands who spend time at friends' houses when they should be working, and think they can get away with it
c - Lying to your wife about what you did all day will ruin your relationship's stability b/c lying to your wife will always come back to show her that you don't trust her

4. a - WATCO becoming a lawyer on the amount of quality time you can spend with your family?
b - Graduate school students consdering going through law school, hoping to be able to spend time with their kids
c - Becoming a lawyer will restrict the amount of quality time you can spend with your family b/c becoming a lawyer will require massive amounts of overtime and travel

Free Write - Jan. 15

I have always been confused by women. Like most men, their apparent lack of logic has been a topic for deep thought and even deeper frustration. Being now married, I have learned to just accept my wife's occasional wandering from sanity, and love her for who she is. There is one thing, above all, though, that still gets my goat. Or, at least, if I had a goat, it would be gotten thereby.
Long have the words "You're so shallow! All you care about is looks!" echoed in the emotionally-abused ears of men from every corner of the globe. These two short sentences encompass all the deceiving self-righteousness of uppity women throughout the ages. And while these stinging barbs of criticism sink their poison into the minds of confused males, those same females smear on lipstick, blush, eye-liner, cover-up, earrings, jewelry, girdles, waist-slimming pantyhose, high-heels, push-up bras, fake nails, and fake eyelashes. Then, to top it all off, they cover up all these cover-ups with latest (however horrible) fashion in clothes. They dye their hair, bleach their teeth, wax goodness-knows-what, inject botox, pluck their eyebrows to finely-sharpened spears of hair, and enlarge, reduce, rearrange, and modify almost every body part possible. What I have always wondered is why WE, as males, are the shallow ones who only care about looks? While we may be somewhat base, we are not so superficial as to alter our bodies so that other people's opinions will make us feel good about ourselves (it should be noted that all metro-sexual, hair-gelling, manicured, perfumed, and waxed males are also lumped in with women, as most have done little to distinguish themselves as men). Men have been happy with women's looks for thousands of years (and don't tell me that you do it for men, because we all know that getting dressed in the morning is, for women, preparation for some invisible, unending competition between estrogen-bearing beings). If no woman on earth ever had plastic surgery, no real man would care. If no woman on earth ever wore makeup or dyed their hair, we would never notice. Just take care of your body, and you'll be fine the way you are, no matter what Cosmo or Victoria OR her Secret tell you.
Don't get me wrong. I find a well-groomed, makeup-ed, tweezed, waxed, well-dressed woman as attractive as any man does. But stop telling me I'm shallow.