TOW #4 "In Cold Blood" IRB

I have never liked nonfiction.  With the exception of a few books on prehistory and an excellent autobiography about John Elder Robinson, I usually steer toward fiction.  This book, In Cold Blood by Truman Capote, has officially joined the ranks of great nonfiction books that I enjoy.  Mainly because Capote uses two view points; a factual-based side while introducing the family that is murdered and an almost entirely narrative-based side when talking about the murders.  For me, switching between two characters or multiple story lines was preferred, because I would often get board in the middle of a book.  I used to counteract that with reading multiple books at the same time.  In Cold Blood feels like two books in one, which keeps my interest throughout the first half of the book.  Also, since the audience is most likely murder-fanatics (as I am), Capote must have four key pieces to make this a riveting murder tale: history of the victim, history of the murder, the murder, and catching the culprit (not necessarily in that order).  So far, Capote has given us the history of Clutter family (the victims), the history of Dick and Perry (the assumed murderers), and the murder.  I feverishly await the actual catching of the perpetrators, but that is yet to come.   

I feel like the narrative is the most important rhetorical device.  Not only does that keep the interest of the audience, but it develops ethos and pathos for the author.  Capote tells us details that only someone who was either at the crime scene or someone who has done more than extensive research into the topic, such as the normal routines of the the family, the social standings of the family members, and the pervious lives of the two murders.  Also, by telling us about Nancy teaching Jolene how to make pies even when Nancy had no time, it connects the reader the family.  I remember thinking "I would love to be friends with this family."  It makes it even sadder when the entire family is murdered.  On the flip side, it makes you more angry and disgusted at the murderers.  In Cold Blood really makes you realize that just about anyone can fall victim to crime.  The Clutter family were loved by all and seemed to be a pillar of the community.  They were alive one night, then all murdered by morning.  Put's life in perspective, doesn't it?  

TOW #3 "Over Spain's Objections, Catalonia Plans Referendum On Independence"

          The world watched as Scotland, in a display of democratic peacefulness, voted to see if it should succeed or remain part of the United Kingdom.  Even though the Scottish people eventually decided to remain British, some parts of the world decided that they want to emulate Scotland.  The article Over Spain's Objections, Catalonia Plans Referendum on Independence by Lauren Frayer talks about Catalonia attempting to travel down the same path that Scotland did by succeeding from Spain

Spain with Catalonia

The people of Catalonia have been wanting to form their own country for a while now, and by mimicking Scotland by voting on independence, the people figured that they might have a chance to be independent.  The Spanish government, however, is not as happy about the idea of independence.  In fact, they seem determined to make sure that the vote never happens.  The purpose of this article seemed to be about more than just this corner of Spain.  It’s showing how many areas in Europe may start striving for independence.  It reminded me of the Arab Spring, with people rising up and speaking their mind.  Hopefully, this will not turn violent.  Fingers-crossed!
              Lauren Frayer is an NPR writer who constantly covers news involving Spain and Catalonia.  Her audience is most likely supporters of Catalonian independence.  The article glorifies the idea of Catalonia splitting from Spain, as shown when Frayer writes “Spain's northeast region of Catalonia… has long sought autonomy from Spain. Emboldened by Scotland, the region is planning its own independence vote in November” (Frayer 1).  By using the words “emboldened”, Frayer explains that before the Catalans were either timid or afraid.  Now, the Catalonian are ready to speak out to gain independence.  Who is making these people scared and timid though?  Frayer immediately attacks the Spanish government by writing “the Spanish government says that's illegal, and vows to block it at all costs” (Frayer 1).  By blocking a people’s right to vote, it makes the Spanish government look evil, controlling, and unwilling to listen to its citizens.  Frayer may be biased, but she really knows how to name drop.  She builds up some major ethos by quoting the Catalan president and the words of pro-independence groups to build up credibility.  She also uses logos, by including polls on Catalonian separation, to also build up her ethos as an expert on the subject.  Even though I totally agree with Catalonia’s right to vote on its future, it troubles me to think about where is this going to led.  Will it emulate the Arab Spring and cause bloody civil wars and let rise to terrorist groups?  Will it be shot down and stopped in Catalonia?  Or will Catalonia succeed, opening the doors for many other countries to be formed?  Only time will tell.

                                                                                                                       

For those who wish to read the article:

http://www.npr.org/2014/09/20/349904266/over-spains-objections-catalonia-plans-referendum-on-independence

TOW #2 "Story"

This past Wednesday, I was privileged to listen to the Wissahickon guest speaker, Alex.  His speech was entitled Story, which he gave to the audience, a group of 11^th and 12^th grade students.  Very attentive 11^th grades, might I add.  And we were so attentive, because Alex was hands down the best speaker that Wissahickon had ever seen.  Well, that’s my opinion, but everyone should agree with me.  Let’s start with the basics.  Alex’s speech was on the hard-to-find-a-consistent-definition topic hate.  And instead of lecturing us about how bad of people, Alex connected with us, telling us through his words and through the visual aspects.  The speech was a compilation of narratives, both from Alex’s life and from the lives of people close to him.  But, even with the effective used of narratives, it wasn’t that which kept my attention.  It was the visual aspects of the speech. 

As I walked into the auditorium, ready for a good 45 minute session of eye-clawing-out boredom, I was greeted to a young, blond man with a simple PowerPoint entitled Story.  It took me aback, because usually guest speakers make two mistakes: thinking that teens need to be thoroughly distracted with a slideshow crammed with pictures or the idea that a 40 year old can ever actually tell teenagers what to do.  So, already standing there with the correct PowerPoint, Alex had my friends and mine’s attention.  Ok, now that he had our attention, how was he going to keep it?  During his presentation, Alex moved a lot.  Now, that may not seem significant, but the constant walking around made the audience move to see him.  Those brief moments of movement helped, especially for me, kept me from nodding off.  Finally, he kept most of the attention off of the PowerPoint.  Most presenters using PowerPoint tend to bullet point the things they wish to mention.  Well, I can read, so I read their bullet points, know what they are saying, and stop paying attention.  Alex’s slideshow had a title, a picture, and maybe a short blurb.  He used it less of a notecard and more of a visual.  My favorite part of the presentation was when he showed us the picture The Weeping Woman by Pablo Picasso.   

Weeping Woman, By Pablo Picasso
She really does not look like a real human, therefore is dehumanized

He used the point that the painting does not show a human as we know them.  He made a very effective point about dehumanization and what it can do to people, while using the visual to relate an abstract idea to a concrete visual aid.  I left that auditorium thinking, which I rarely do after guest speaker, but not just because of what he said.  It was the use of positive visual manipulation that he kept my attention and hopefully the attention of everyone else.

IRB Intro #1 "In Cold Blood"

I have always been interested in murder.  Some have called my slight obsession “creepy” or “psychotic”.  I joke of course, but this subject is not a subject one would readily admit that they enjoy.  So, that interest in murder led me to the book In Cold Blood by Truman Capote.  This murder story is Capote’s most famous work, although he has written numerous other pieces, including plays, movies, short stories, essays, and the eternally famous Breakfast at Tiffany’s.  What drew me to this book was the idea of reading a true crime novel.  I usually read fiction murder stories by the genius Agatha Christie.  This was a great way to transition from the comfortable world of fiction to the unstable, unknown realm of nonfiction.  I hope to learn more about real crimes, since I mostly stay in made-up crime scenes.  It will also be a comparison to works of fiction, because as they say, “The truth is stranger then fiction.”  If that’s true, I’m in for a rollercoaster.       

TOW#1 "How to Say Nothing in 500 Words"

Intriguing title, isn’t it?  Mr. Perlman, my high school gifted teacher, always said to avoid saying nothing in your essays.  He attempted to tell us to make every word in your essay should be used in a precise way, each word should have meaning, and nothing should be redundant or unnecessary penguin. Paul Roberts, writer of great English textbooks, tells us the very same thing in this essay.  His main point is to inform modern high school or college students, his intended audience, how to make their writing matter by teaching them both what to and what not to do while writing an essay.  And Roberts comes out fighting with a killer exposition.  The introduction is a narrative of an English student attempting to write a 500 word essay on college football.  Since he has no interest in the subject, he writes the essay, but the essay is weak in content and practically the same as every other essay.  This narrative style helps the audience understand what saying nothing actually means.  Within that narrative, Roberts uses humor to help keep the attention of the reader.  My personal favorite was the line “he [The English Teacher] wonders how he allowed himself to get trapped into teaching English when he might have had a happy and interesting life as an electrician” (Roberts 2).  By adding the humor to the narrative, it keeps the point of the essay precise and interesting to the reader.  And androgynous young person, was this fun to read!  I felt like every word was carefully crafted to

While reading this essay, I left reading the essay feeling like I understood what saying nothing in an essay was.  His explanation of what to include (such as the least argued point and using the abnormal view) and what to chuck in the dustbin (such as clichéd phrases like “chuck in the dustbin”, abstraction, and colorless words).  His main point, as pointed out in the title, was to tell the audience what saying nothing in an essay was.  BUT, by teaching the audience how not to make an essay mean nothing, Roberts sneakily informs us how to write a better essay.  Much like his “Take the Less Usual Side” (Roberts 3) stance, instead of beating me over the head saying “MAKE YOUR ESSAY BETTER”, Roberts coolly sakes my hand and says “make you writing mean something”.  Of course when I look down at my hand, I find a note saying “Ha! You now know how to write better”, but Roberts has fled the scene.  I know chasing him would be futile, so I just soak up my lessen, well-learned.

I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings

As an essay I have heard about for years, I’m glad I finally had the chance to read this incredibly famous, very well written, and timeless autobiography by Maya Angelou (rest in peace Mrs. Angelou) called I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.  Being one of the most prolific African American writers of the 20^th century, Angelou needs no introductions, but I’ll give a little background information to those of you how have been living under a rock.  Maya Angelou is a famous African America poet, thespian, and civil rights advocate.  She has received over fifty honorary degrees, an amazing accomplishment, considering she was a black woman writing a best-selling autobiography in the 1970s, where desegregation was in full swing, with many people still harboring racist attitudes toward the “colored” community. Using a very effective narrative voice, Angelou writes to explain her and her family’s struggles in Stamps, Arkansas as a black, business-owning family.  They are met with disrespectful (in modern terms) white-trash how try to feel better about themselves by kicking downward.  I’m not saying that Maya Angelou’s family was beneath the white trash, but it was the feeling at the time that black people where under any white person on the social ladder, especially in the south at the time.

Angelou has many massages in themes throughout her autobiography.  My favorite comes at the end, where her grandmother stands on the porch as so white girls come and tease and insult her grandmother.  Angelou and Momma (that’s what Angelou called her grandmother) react in two totally different ways.  Angelou gets upset and angry as the girls continue to mock and mimic her grandmother.  Angelou writes “I thought about the rifle behind the door” (Angelou 355).  She reacts negatively, her mind turning to threatening, or even murderous, means.  Momma reacts in a totally different way.  She ignores the girls and goes on singing.  Angelou writes “Momma changed her song to ‘Bread of Heaven, bread of Heaven, feed me till I want no more’” (Angelou 356).  By ignoring these girls, eventually the girls lose interest and leave.  Angelou was shown that the route of passive and peaceful resistance can calm and dissipate an unpleasant situation.  If Angelou had threatened the girls, they would get a reaction.  Like all bullies, that is what the girls were after.  When Momma did not give the reaction they wanted, the girls left.  Angelou is supporting the Civil Rights Movement’s use of nonviolent means and civil disobedience to bring about change.  We can all learn from Angelou’s timeless story.  I know I really enjoyed reading her story.  It gave an accurate portrayal of segregated life without blaiming anyone in particular.  It simply gave the facts of her life, showing the injustice and unfair treatment of the black community.  I end with saying, Maya Angelou, you gave me a new perspective through which to think.  And I am grateful.

Rest In Peace Maya Angelou (April 4, 1928-May 28, 2014).  Thank you!
(Found on google images)

Insert Flap “A” and Throw Away

Insert Flap “A” and Throw Away was by far the funniest and most abstract essay I have ever read. Yet another New Yorker essay, this time written in 1944, this essay was written by S.J. Perelman.  Very rarely do I actually laugh when reading a so called “humor” essay.  But there is something about Perelman's writing that tickled my funny bone mercilessly.  Humor was definitely the most important rhetoric device used by Perelman, which is expected from a famous comedic screen write and essayist.  This is best shown in the line when he finally beats the truck’s flaps until they finally fit into the holes, only to find out it doesn’t move.  Perelman reacts to the tragedy as so: “As merciful blackness closed in, I was on my hands and knees, bunting the infernal thing along with my nose and whinnying, ‘Roll, confound you, roll’” (Perelman 189).  See, I laughed for a good minute straight at the idea of this dad, who is obviously foaming at the mouth at this point, trying to push this haphazardly put together car along with his face.  By using humor, Perelman managed to create an essay with something for people of all ages and genders.  But, the main audiance for Insert Flap “A” and Throw Away are the fathers of the world who desperately struggle to place even the simplest of flaps. 

Insert Flap “A” and Throw Away captures the madness that trying to assemble Jiffy-Cloz and toy trucks.  The main conflict of the story arises when Perelman attempts to put together a Self-Running 10-Inch Scale-Model Delivery-Truck Construction Kit for his children. 

I'm pretty sure this is how Perelman reacted to his carboard delivery truck, with almost cartoonish violence
(Found on google images)

As he struggles through attempting to put together a truck for his poor kids, while using as many excuses as he can think of to get out of it, Perelman is send a clear message: Assembly is made needlessly complicated.  The many mentions of flaps and missing or improper parts, both in the Jiffy-Cloz and the Delivery-Truck Construction Kit, show how unnecessarily complex the instructions make putting these should-be simply toys together.  The complexity of these instructions is best shown when Perelman writes “Poising tabs C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, and L in one hand and the corresponding slots in the other, I essayed a union of the two, but in vain… Some idiotic employee at the factory had punched out the wrong design” (Perelman 188).  First off, the matter of the tabs.  Tabs are very flimsy and very hard to every fit into their designated slots.  Secondly, tabs are made out of weak cardboard, so they rip about every third time you attempt to insert the tab.  Lastly, we have all had the joy of almost completing a project, only to find out the manufacturer left out a few pieces or the pieces are the wrong size for the project at hand.  Perelman is calling out these barons of insanity, telling manufacturers to take pride in their work by giving us the correct and proper amount of pieces.  And I agree.  End the madness, do away with the flaps.