Anna Juan

In her New Yorker cover for September 12, 2011, Ana Juan persuades the viewers to mourn the loss of the victims of the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center. To persuade the minds of the viewer, Ana Juan creates a New York skyline, with the reflection of the Twin Towers in the water, rather than the buildings, in reference to the new memorial pools that were being built for the tenth anniversary of the attack, dark colors, and sharp lines. By creating this image of closure and reflection, Juan forces her readers to sense a loss in New York. She hopes that by connecting to those that view the cover in this way, they will commemorate the attack and the victims, on the tenth anniversary.

Write a Reflection about the way past and present are depicted in the drawing.

Juan perfectly brings together the past and the present in her drawing to create a better future. To represent the past, she shows the reflection of the Twin Towers that used to stand in the drawn out New York skyline. To represent the present, she creates a New York skyline where these two buildings are missing. To represent how these two components can look towards a brighter future, she places the buildings in the water to represent the memorial pool that was placed at Ground Zero a few months after this was published. Ana even said of her drawing “I have to brainstorm while grieving”. Even while she was reflecting on the past, as someone who witnessed the 9-11 attack first hand, she brainstorms how to commemorate the victims in the future.

Apple and Big Brother

Apple’s privacy dilemma, which is currently being argued in the court system, is one of many crucial components. While the government should not be lacking any information helpful to a criminal investigation, the government should also not infringe on the privacy of the citizens or the amount of loyal customers Apple receives. While Apple should give access to government officials with a search warrant, there should be a set bar the government cannot pass. The government should not reach the point where they take away from the relationship or the privacy between Apple and its customers, but they should not be withheld from gaining information about a criminal. The government should be given the right to view the information on the phone of a criminal suspect, but there should be some set of boundaries to maintain the first amendment rights.

In the specific cases of the December California shooting and the drug dealings the US government wishes to uncover, crucial information may be being withheld from government investigators. Requesting information from Apple is just a simple routine for investigation. If it is legal for government officials to ask a company to unlock a safe, a home, a car, or anything else that may block them from receiving the information they need, why should an iphone be different? Judge Orenstein stated that “Apple is not doing anything to keep law enforcement agents from conducting their investigation,” and while this may be true in this specific case, what if there is another case where critical information is left on an iphone? If this happens, will Apple still continue to refuse giving the government access?

Although I do believe in criminal cases Apple should grant the government needed information, I do see that a clear boundary needs to be set, in order not to infringe on the business Apple conducts. Since the 1983 commercial pitch where Steve Jobs asked the question, “Will Big Blue dominate the entire computer industry? The entire information age? Was George Orwell right about 1984?”, Apple has been known for their concerns of their privacy and freedom of their customers. This is one factor of Apple products that appeals consumers. Once the government takes away this appeal, Apple could lose business. Two boundaries that could be set to avoid this infringement are forcing all technology companies to unlock their products when needed and not forcing Apple to remove their ten tries policy, where an iphone owner can choose in the settings to delete all data after ten incorrect password attempts to unlock the iphone. Setting these boundaries would insure that the government does not effect the competition of technology and the company of Apple. This idea is supported by previous Supreme Court cases dealing with Roosevelt’s New Deal acts that were declared unconstitutional because they interfered with business competition, including the National Industrial Recovery Act.

The government should also set boundaries to insure they do not infringe on citizen’s first amendment rights. Apple responds to 1984 in their 1984 ad, by giving off the message that citizens should have freedom with their technology. After 9-11, the inspection of phone calls became a huge debate, but was constitutional because it was a time of emergency. If the safety of citizens depends on whether or not the government has access to locked information, the government should be granted this information. However, to insure that the government does not take advantage of this privilege, like in 1984, certain boundaries should be kept. The government should only be allowed access when really needed and the ten try policy should be kept. Citizens have a right to privacy on their phones, and the benefits of removing this setting will not outway the costs. People may feel that all their information is more accessible to the public and feel a loss of privacy the first amendment grants them. United States courts have even previously ruled that coding is a form of free speech, so the ten try policy may make citizens feel a lack of free speech.

While both Apple and the government have strong cases, the government is trying to do its job in protecting the safety of the citizens and enforcing the law. While I do agree that certain actions may take place that affect the business of Apple and the first amendment rights of customers, certain boundaries can be put in place to insure that this does not happen.

Go Carolina

David Sedaris, in his essay “Go Carolina” (2000), claims that there are flaws in the system of therapy and treatment of unique students. Sedaris supports his claim by comparing his teacher to an agent, having a careful choice of diction, having a humorous tone, exaggerating, and using personal anecdote throughout almost his entire essay. By using personal anecdote and his touch of humor, he is able to drag the reader to empathize with his daily life as a student who has experienced this flawed system. He hopes that he will connect with his readers in a way that they will understand and do their best to make people who seem different or weird feel comfortable with being themselves or working to improve or change.

2. Reflect on how humor is used to get across a point that may not be funny.

As students, especially of middle and high school, use humor as a way to pick out issues or abnormalities another kid or adult may have. Sedaris uses humor when explaining the stereotypes of different types of kids in school, including himself. He makes jokes of the way he talks, the fact that he does not like sports, and the possible future he may have, as this is the way other students take about his different characteristics. Sedaris not only points out the humor in the challenges of his life, but in his speech therapists’ as well. He is showing that the humor kids use to make fun of or ostracize other students can be harmful, but is so common. He shows that students use humor against both other kids and faculty and presents this as a serious issue, as it clearly affects him in the story.

3. Use a few lines from the essay to characterize Sedaris’s tone.

“Whereas those around me might grow up to be lawyers or movie stars, my only option was to take a vow of silence and become a monk. My former classmates would call the abbey, wondering how I was doing, and the priest would answer the phone. “You can’t talk to him!” he’d say. “Why, Brother David hasn’t spoken to anyone in thirty-five years!”

These lines show Sedaris’s humorous, yet embarrassed tone. While he makes jokes of his ability to speak, like any other student would, he is still bothered by the fact that he has both a voice and personality that may cause people to make fun of him. While he jokes of becoming a monk, so he will no longer have to speak, there is some truth to his yearning to be silent. He does not want his voice to be so noticeably different.

4. Locate a few places where Sedaris uses hyperbole to get across his point. How and why is he using that exaggeration?

Sedaris uses hyperbole when he compares the speech therapist to a secret agent and calls her “Agent Sampson”, when he overthinks the response to his favorite football team, and when he ponders the reasons for Mrs. Sampson’s party at their last therapy session. Sedaris uses exaggerated details to get his point across. while he could simply state that the therapist was calm, yet on a mission, he created a whole idea of how he viewed his therapist that we could connect to. If he did not exaggerate, it would be hard to understand his view of the story. We would not be able to understand how it feels to be a student in this type of position. The use hyperboles allows the reader to understand how the author feels throughout his experience.

The Nobel Lecture in Literature

Toni Morrison, in her Nobel Lecture in Literature (1931), suggests a reform in the way the modern world uses language. Morrison uses an formal diction and analogy of a bird in a human’s hand to support this reform. She uses this unique word choice and analogy in order to show the unstable situation words are in and the idea that humans have the ability to bring words to life in a meaningful way. She hopes that her audience of writers and influential personalities will see language in a new light and be inspired to rethink their word choice to give off images and thoughts through the use of words.

1. Write a paragraph that discusses Morrison’s attitude towards language.

Morrison is greatly appreciative towards language. She recognizes the beauty of being able to put thoughts and images into words that can be vividly describe to anyone, even the blind. She believes it is even more exciting to be able to use the correct diction, syntax, and other rhetorical devices to give an artistic style to language. She is upset that the world has become so accustomed to language, and therefore misuses it. She sees that people rather just look at something than describe it. In a world where vision is the most popular form of communication, she wishes that society would return back to using carefully thought out language.

2. Do you think the use of the fable within the speech works? Why or why not?

I thought the use of the fable worked in the speech, as it drew the audience’s attention in while proving her point. As she speaks about the importance of language to describe a scene, she uses thought out language to describe a scene. She uses this fable of the bird, not only as an analogy for language, but as an example of how we can use language to describe a scene. She wrote a beautifully written fable that perhaps will inspire the audience to describe their own stories with thought out language.

3. Respond to the line “Word-work is sublime” (paragraph 25)

As humans, we have the privilege of being able to use language. Unlike animals who communicate through various sounds that say they want to mate, are hungry, or a preditor is coming, humans can use any words they want to describe thoughts, stories, or feelings. It is a sublime thing that as humans, we can have a feeling in us and then we can describe it to someone else through the use of words, and if we use the incorrect word, we are describing something completely different. We have to greatly appreciate how special it is that we can articulate our thoughts into a sentence and allow the rest of mankind to understand what we feel or think.

The Importance of Getting History Right

It is important to completely understand the situation of Chinese immigration in the early twentieth century, because this led America to almost completely close its borders to fleeing European refugees during the second World War. Americans blamed the Chinese for their crime, the unsanitary conditions of their city, and their lack of available jobs. Since the Chinese worked for less money, they were offered jobs instead of Americans and Americans felt that the Chinese were only in the country to steal their money. This led to a portrayal of immigrants as gross, inhumane groups that came to benefit themselves and destroy Americans. Because of the anti-Chinese propaganda, immigrants as a whole began to look dangerous, and therefore a limited amount were allowed in the country. Immigration dropped by 8,000,000 from the beginning of the century to the 1930s and fleeing Europeans failed to find a safe home during World War II. Many of the deaths that took place in the second world war could have been avoided if the victims were given access to America. We are in the same situation today. We have anti-Islamic propaganda going around the world and country. We are in fear of the Syrian refugees terrorizing our country, as the Americans in the twentieth century feared the Chinese would take all of their money. We cannot be the cause of the tragedies that may happen to these Syrian refugees because of fear. We must close our eyes to propaganda and see the bigger picture. The refugees need our help, much like they did only a few decades ago.

Vietnam Veterans Memorial

Maya Lin’s Vietnam Veterans Memorial (1982), pushes viewers to think about the importance of the people and environment around them. By creating a reflective wall, slowly lowering viewers into a sea of names, and placing the sculpture in the famous national mall, Lin is placing the viewer in an environment where they are forced to think about where they are and the individuals named on the wall. She places the viewer in this environment, in order that they will begin to think about what each individual did to service the country they are in the capital of. Maya Lin is trying to force those viewing her work to think about what each human being does to contribute to a others’ surroundings and situations.

1. The memorial is unusual in design and it’s naming of all armed services members killed in the war. Comment on your reaction to its appearance and to the names on its wall.

Two major characteristics of this memorial are the reflective walls and the declining ramp that lead to the center of the memorial. Both of these aspects create a dense and crowded feeling, as if you’re surrounded on all sides by these names. Vietnam was the first war that was constantly viewed through television and it really allowed people to feel empathy for the soldiers and view them as individuals. Perhaps Maya Lin felt the same way. She wanted the viewer to enter the memorial and be surrounded by these names and really feel gratitude for each individual that was killed defending our country. When I visited the memorial this past summer, I wished that I could know who each of these soldiers were. There were so many names on the wall at the beginning, and as the walls got taller, the names began to crowd more and were filled. I really began to think about who these individuals could be. It was overwhelming, yet forced me to open my eyes to the power of the individual.

2. Speculate on the message this kind of memorial sends about armed services veterans, viewers, and war.

Rather than showing an example of what war was like, or a significant event in a war, like most memorials, Maya Lin creates a memorial that includes every individual that was killed throughout the entire war. She even makes sure that the center of the memorial includes the meeting of the names of individuals who died at the beginning of the war and names of individuals who died at the end. The memorial shows us the individual lives that were taken throughout the Vietnam War. It shows the viewers that every individual soldier is important and deserves gratitude. Rather than ignoring the large group of veterans we hear about, we should do our efforts to appreciate and feel empathy for every single one. It should also inspire the viewer to recognize how important they can be, despite the fact that they are only an individual. The memorial also shows the cost of war. So many individuals’ lives ended in this war, and the only information a viewer has on their lives is an overwhelming amount of names.

Living Like Weasels

Annie Dillard, in “Living Like Weasels”, suggests a lifestyle that includes exploration and not giving into fear. She uses a personal anecdote to support her idea, keeps the reader interested by the use of alliteration, parallelism, and metaphors, and appeals to the audience’s emotions by telling off her deep, vulnerable thoughts. Dillard delivers personal thoughts and uses rhetorical devices in order to add a more poetic feeling to her writing that will carry the reader through her ideas. Her goal is to connect to the emotion of her readers, in hopes that they will not turn away from opportunities, because of fear, like she did when she came face to face with the ferret.

Question 3: Write down the verbs that are most important to the argument Dillard makes and consider what they contribute to her aim.

The most powerful verbs Dillard uses in her argument are to “vow”, to “seize”, and to “dangle”. The three actions go together in order to fill the initial goal Dillard wants her audience to achieve. She wants them to keep sticking to their interests and opportunities, and not turn away in fear. In order to do this, a person needs to first vow to take on this task. This is how they develop their motivation to be successful. Next, a person must seize the day. They must take every opportunity given to them to accomplish this goal. The last step a person must take to accomplish this goal is to let himself dangle. He must be able to not fear any challenges that are in the way and continue to focus on accomplishing the goal.

Question 4: Find two lines or so that characterize the tone of this essay and comment on how they reveal the tone.

“I have been reading about weasels because I saw one last week. I startled a weasel who startled me, and we exchanged a long glance.”

These lines characterize Dillard’s calm and enlightened tone. Dillard creates a calming poetic style by the use of alliteration and description of nature. Like many transcendentalists, Dillard’s writing reflects the calm feeling of being surrounded by nature. Dillard also seems enlightened throughout her essay. She had an interaction with a weasel, and now she is taking a life lesson from it. In these lines, the fact that she researched weasels because she saw one, shows how enlightened and inspired she is by her interaction.

Question 5: This Essay suggests the need for the wild in life. How would you describe what Dillard means by “wild”?

Dillard does not mean that one should do the most risky and outrageous things in life, rather, she is suggesting to not let fear stop you from achieving what you want to achieve. She uses her personal example of seeing the weasel. She was curious and would have wanted to learn more about it, but she was so stunned and scared it might attack her or hurt her, that she froze and cannot even remember the instant. She suggests that people, when coming close to their dreams or opportunities, should not run away in shock or fear. She wants people to take risks and give all that they possibly can to achieving their goals.

Oregon Militia

Bruce Vanwyngarden, in his article Making Tennessee Great Again (1/7/16), suggests that the militias occupying the wildlife refuge in Oregon are ridiculous, wrong, and crazy. Vanwyngarden uses satire to bring out the seemingly ridiculous points the members of the militia, and its supporters, has made. He declares his views towards government in a disrespectful manner, threatens his audience with extremely dangerous weapons, and assertively mentions the fact that he is white in order to bring out the ridiculous declarations the militia has made over the past few weeks. Vanwyngarden hopes to raise America’s attention to the unacceptable  behavior the militia is getting away with, in hopes that the attention will bring a stop to this occupation and justice to the militia.

I am disturbed by the fact that the militia occupation, that started a few weeks ago, is still going on today. Although I understand that the members are not threatening anyone, they are breaking laws and threatening the power of the government. Until today, I was unaware of this event, and to read about this event was upsetting and angered me. Not only do I disagree with the views of the militia, I also disagree with their tactics and the actions the government has taken to solve this issue.

Although America is a free country, there are limits to insure public good and safety. While trespassing would not upset me so much, a well planned occupation of government property does. Especially while they are announcing the many weapons they have and shouting insulting slurs, how can someone expect to get respect and be successful? Sadly, they are accomplishing their goals. They are getting respect, in the sense that people see them as a threat. They are successful, in the fact that they are still occupying this land and the state government in Oregon has not been able to function properly, because they have had to deal with this issue. The fact that an immature group of people can get achieve their goals in such a disrespectful manner makes me angry.