- What is the song about?
This song is about the small percentage of Americans who suffer because of our government and our society. The small percentage of military wives are hopeless under the hands of the "cannibal kings" (the government) who control their husbands' actions and lives. Also, the celebrity minds are hopeless under the "cannibal kings" (the media) who portray the celebrities in only the ways that society wants to see them.
- What is the theme of the song?
Our country isn't as great as people think. Even though most people have the freedom to do as they like, there's a small percentage of people who have no control over their lives/the lives of their loved ones and they suffer because of that.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
"Race for the Prize"
What is the theme of the song?
There are people in the world devoted their entire lives to bettering mankind. These people sacrifice their own lives to move our species one step forward. In the song, the instrumentation and tune makes the song seem happy but the lyrics seem sad. This is to show that these people are willing and wanting to put their own lives in danger for everyone else, they aren't forced to sacrifice they're own lives. I think this song also wants to show that individual people are not very important in the grand scheme of the world. The lyrics say that there are scientists fighting to reach a prize even if it kills them, and then it says "they're just humans". This shows that the loss of an individual isn't nearly as important as an improvement for our entire species.
There are people in the world devoted their entire lives to bettering mankind. These people sacrifice their own lives to move our species one step forward. In the song, the instrumentation and tune makes the song seem happy but the lyrics seem sad. This is to show that these people are willing and wanting to put their own lives in danger for everyone else, they aren't forced to sacrifice they're own lives. I think this song also wants to show that individual people are not very important in the grand scheme of the world. The lyrics say that there are scientists fighting to reach a prize even if it kills them, and then it says "they're just humans". This shows that the loss of an individual isn't nearly as important as an improvement for our entire species.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Death Penalty Essays
Mencken and Kroll used two very different approaches to persuade their audience. In their arguments, Mencken was almost completely logos while Kroll used mainly pathos. In Mencken's essay, he spends the majority of the time explaining 'katharsis' to support his claim (directly) that capital punishment is justified in certain circumstances, whereas Kroll uses a personal anecdote to indirectly show his opposition towards the way executions are carried out. Kroll's argument is much more effective because instead of using logic and facts to state an opinion, he gives an emotional account of the impact of the issue. For example, in Mencken's essay, the last paragraph starts off with, "the wait, I believe, is horribly cruel". These words have hardly any effect on readers. It's common sense that waiting to be executed is not pleasant and Mencken's argument gives no support for how it is "horribly cruel". Saying the same exact message, Kroll writes, "when they brought Robert in, he was grim-faced, tired and ashen. Beyond the horror of having stood at the brink of the abyss just two and a half hours before, he had been up for several days and nights. He was under horrific pressure". Kroll's argument of the same message is much more effective because instead of thinking of a hypothetical criminal, Kroll provides us with an image of a real person that has gone through the slow wait to be executed. Kroll uses the method of painting a picture for us through descriptions, whereas Mencken only leads us through a series of logical thought. Because pictures stand out much more in our memory than a single train of logic, Kroll's essay is much more effective.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
JFK Speech: Fallacy
In John F. Kennedy's inauguration speech, I found an example of a non sequitur fallacy in the last sentence of the eighth paragraph when he says "If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich". This is an example of a non sequitur fallacy because the conclusion (a free society that cannot save the few who are rich) does not follow the established premises (a free society that cannot help the many who are poor). The conclusion is irrelevant to the first statement, the logic does not follow, therefore it is non sequitur. However, this example of fallacy is beneficial to the speech as a whole because it implies that Kennedy wants to satisfy the needs of all (the poor and the rich).
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Duck and Cover Video
- Overt message? The overt message is that atomic bombs can explode at any time and people need to know how to protect themselves in all situations. I also think the video is trying to say that the government (the civil service people) is here to help and protect citizens in every way possible, in this case it would be by informing the citizens.
- Covert message? I don't think there is a covert message in this video.
- Propaganda/persuasion or informative? I think this video was strictly informative. I don't think the producers of the video where trying to persuade or convey a hidden message, I think they simply wanted to inform young students of all the ways they could be best protected when exposed to potential danger of an atomic bomb explosion.
- Covert message? I don't think there is a covert message in this video.
- Propaganda/persuasion or informative? I think this video was strictly informative. I don't think the producers of the video where trying to persuade or convey a hidden message, I think they simply wanted to inform young students of all the ways they could be best protected when exposed to potential danger of an atomic bomb explosion.
Propaganda Video
- Overt message? Oil is a great resource. We use it for all different kinds of purposes and it's in many different products that we buy. But, it is also very hard to find. Competition pushes the motive to find more oil, and therefore we get more products out of the oil drilled.
- Covert message? This video is pushing individuality and freedom to do as one likes. In the video, the leader of the martians is against competition and individuality and he is also seen as the antagonist. Also, the video stresses the need for people to go out and compete to achieve more for your "industry" (which is again, your individuality and prosperity). I also think the video is sending a message that the United States is a model nation for others countries and the US is what others should strive for. I think this is the covert message because it is never said straight-forwardly, however, every prospect of our daily lives is marveled by the alien.
- Is the video propaganda or persuasion? I think the video is propaganda because the video not only persuades people that drilling oil is great, it also gets people to think about how individuality pushes competition, which then turns into rapid achievements. The video uses glittering generalities to make their message seem better than it is.
- Covert message? This video is pushing individuality and freedom to do as one likes. In the video, the leader of the martians is against competition and individuality and he is also seen as the antagonist. Also, the video stresses the need for people to go out and compete to achieve more for your "industry" (which is again, your individuality and prosperity). I also think the video is sending a message that the United States is a model nation for others countries and the US is what others should strive for. I think this is the covert message because it is never said straight-forwardly, however, every prospect of our daily lives is marveled by the alien.
- Is the video propaganda or persuasion? I think the video is propaganda because the video not only persuades people that drilling oil is great, it also gets people to think about how individuality pushes competition, which then turns into rapid achievements. The video uses glittering generalities to make their message seem better than it is.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
"Propaganda"
- What is the overt message?
The overt message is "eat less bread". This is shown by the woman standing in the picture carrying a soup pot. The message is very clear that the creators of the ad want people to eat less bread.
- What is the covert message?
The covert message is that people need to change. At a time when most people mainly ate bread, the ad tells people to eat less, meaning they have to find something else to eat and change their habits. I think message says this is because they want to get people to start thinking about change, to start creating new ideas and advancements. Change is the key to victory, the key to winning the war.
- How does the disparity between the two make it propaganda?
Instead of straight out telling people that change will bring them victory, they disguise it with a comparison the the kitchen, making it a covert message. They are trying to persuade people without them realizing it, they are trying to get people to think about change, this is why it's propaganda.
The overt message is "eat less bread". This is shown by the woman standing in the picture carrying a soup pot. The message is very clear that the creators of the ad want people to eat less bread.
- What is the covert message?
The covert message is that people need to change. At a time when most people mainly ate bread, the ad tells people to eat less, meaning they have to find something else to eat and change their habits. I think message says this is because they want to get people to start thinking about change, to start creating new ideas and advancements. Change is the key to victory, the key to winning the war.
- How does the disparity between the two make it propaganda?
Instead of straight out telling people that change will bring them victory, they disguise it with a comparison the the kitchen, making it a covert message. They are trying to persuade people without them realizing it, they are trying to get people to think about change, this is why it's propaganda.
"Clampdown" the Clash
- What is the song about? How do you know?
I thought the song was about the Holocaust. I thought because in the song, the man who doesn't fit in is assumed to be a Jew. Also, the lyrics say "no man born with a living soul can be working for the clampdown." The people working for the clampdown would have been the Nazis and they treated the Jews in a very inhuman manner. It also says "stop wasting your time, there's nothing coming, only a fool would think someone could save you." During the time of the Holocaust, the situation seemed pretty hopeless like the singer mentions.
- What music elements add to your lyrical interpretation?
The beat of the song is very steady and fast making the song seem extremely structured. This can be connected to the Nazis who were very structured and uniformed.
- How does it relate to propaganda, rhetoric, and persuasion?
There's one particular line in the song that struck me as a connection to propaganda. That would be when he says "we train our blue-eyed men to be believers". Instead of saying the blue-eyed men ARE believers, he says that they have to train them to become believers, this makes it seem as if they're forcing them to believe in what they say.
I thought the song was about the Holocaust. I thought because in the song, the man who doesn't fit in is assumed to be a Jew. Also, the lyrics say "no man born with a living soul can be working for the clampdown." The people working for the clampdown would have been the Nazis and they treated the Jews in a very inhuman manner. It also says "stop wasting your time, there's nothing coming, only a fool would think someone could save you." During the time of the Holocaust, the situation seemed pretty hopeless like the singer mentions.
- What music elements add to your lyrical interpretation?
The beat of the song is very steady and fast making the song seem extremely structured. This can be connected to the Nazis who were very structured and uniformed.
- How does it relate to propaganda, rhetoric, and persuasion?
There's one particular line in the song that struck me as a connection to propaganda. That would be when he says "we train our blue-eyed men to be believers". Instead of saying the blue-eyed men ARE believers, he says that they have to train them to become believers, this makes it seem as if they're forcing them to believe in what they say.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Rhetoric/Propaganda/Persuasion Quote
Quote: 1033 "To the academician, the language of the reporter is excessively casual, trivializing, and simple-minded, if not downright wrong or silly. To the journalist, the language of the academicians is excessively passive, technical, and complication, if not downright wordy or pompous. ... Academic language strives to be informative and accurate. ... To the reporter, though, the result sounds like nitpicking; it encumbers the research with so many qualifications and exceptions that the results seem meaningless." Carol Tavris
In this quote, Tavris explains that there are two different types of using language to convey a message or an argument. The first, the language of reporters, focuses completely on emotions and rhetoric devices to persuade or inform. Tavris also explains that this causes academicians to view them as "simple-minded" and inaccurate, which may also make them seem ignorant or "silly". The second type of language, the language of academicians, does not use rhetoric devices or emotions to persuade but rather it is strictly factual and statistical. The evidence and support is extremely concrete, however, to a reporter the argument often seems "wordy or pompous" and may even cause the message to seem meaningless. With this said, I think Tavris is trying to convey that the most successful way of using our language is to incorporate both rhetoric devices AND informative facts. This way, the argument will not be overwhelmed with research and yet, it will certainly not be dismissed as "simple-minded". Therefore, the strongest argument will be one that includes both rhetoric devices to persuade and irrefutable evidence to support.
In this quote, Tavris explains that there are two different types of using language to convey a message or an argument. The first, the language of reporters, focuses completely on emotions and rhetoric devices to persuade or inform. Tavris also explains that this causes academicians to view them as "simple-minded" and inaccurate, which may also make them seem ignorant or "silly". The second type of language, the language of academicians, does not use rhetoric devices or emotions to persuade but rather it is strictly factual and statistical. The evidence and support is extremely concrete, however, to a reporter the argument often seems "wordy or pompous" and may even cause the message to seem meaningless. With this said, I think Tavris is trying to convey that the most successful way of using our language is to incorporate both rhetoric devices AND informative facts. This way, the argument will not be overwhelmed with research and yet, it will certainly not be dismissed as "simple-minded". Therefore, the strongest argument will be one that includes both rhetoric devices to persuade and irrefutable evidence to support.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)