A lot happened in chapters 13-16. The biggest event, I would say, is Narciso's death. However, what struck me the most about this section of the book are Antonio's thoughts and dreams about God. At the very beginning of the chapter, Antonio wonders why the golden carp chose to punish sinners just like Antonio's christian God. He wishes for a god that would forgive everyone. However, I remember thinking frequently that the book seemed a bit contradictory, because it preached about universal kindness and forgiveness but still condemned some characters as evil and deserving punishment. However, in Antonio's dream this exact issue is addressed. God and Antonio's favorite angel, Guadalupe, talk about forgiving Tenorio as well as Narciso. God says to Antonio "You would have a God who forgives all, but when it comes to your personal whims you seek punishment for your vengeance" (Anaya 173). I thought that this was a very significant quote. It is easy for people to say, theoretically, that we should forgive and love everyone, but when it comes to actual practice, it becomes very difficult. In Antonio's case, it is difficult for him to forgive Tenorio, who killed Narciso and swears that he will kill Ultima. Perhaps Anaya is trying to say that nobody is perfect, and we can't judge others harshly without expecting to be judged ourselves. In addition, if we believe strongly in something, we must also believe consistently, even when it is difficult. It is easy to preach forgiveness if you or someone you care about has done something bad, but it is difficult to preach forgiveness to people who have hurt you. Yet, like Antonio, you must either forgive both or forgive neither, or else be a hypocrite.
I have felt bad for Tenorio throughout the book, because everything he has done has been to save his daughter from death. And I can't help but wonder whether Ultima is in fact responsible for the death of Tenorio's daughters. She did create the voodoo dolls of them, after all. And if Ultima is responsible for killing Tenorio's children, is she really any better than they are? Antonio wants to see Tenorio punished for hurting Narciso, and Tenorio wants Ultima punished for hurting his daughters, so it is hard for me to condemn Tenorio and not Antonio. I wonder if Anaya was trying to make Ultima and Tony represent good and Tenorio represent evil, as it seemed at first, or if he deliberately made the situation open to interpretation. After all, very few things in life are black and white the way they often are in books and movies.
Another interesting aspect of the book is Andrew's role in everything. Is Anaya condemning Andrew for giving in to temptation, or suggesting that society is too harsh on people like him. Perhaps Andrew could have saved Narciso, but there was no way for him to realize the gravity of the situation. He obviously felt very guilty after. Antonio was shocked to see his brother at Rosie's, and blamed himself because he thought he must have somehow lost his innocence. However, I don't think Anaya was trying to say that Andrew was a bad person because he was at Rosie's. I think that he was just trying to show that everyone does things like that sometimes, and so it is silly to judge each other so harshly. The idea of being more forgiving and open-minded continues to be a theme throughout the novel.
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Deportation Without Representation
Like many other articles I have blogged about, this one was written to point out something that should make people angry. In this case, immigrants are being deported without any legal representation, a blatant violation of the American legal system. The article states that 67% of the people who are represented by attorneys are allowed to stay, while only 8% of the unrepresented defendants avoid being deported. Obviously this is incredibly unfair. This article makes me very upset because we aren't just sending criminals away, we are deporting people without even giving them a fair trial! If the statistics are accurate, 59% of the deportees would be allowed to stay if they had been represented. That is more than half of them, and deporting someone isn't something that should be taken lightly.
The article was written very well. It was short and to the point, which I like, because pages of unnecessary details can get very boring in articles like this. There was enough logos to convince people that the problem is real, with statistics and evidence to back it up. There was enough pathos to get people upset- the title should appeal to any American's sense of patriotism- and the article concludes with a nice little paragraph of ideas on how to improve the situation. Personally, I find it annoying when people complain about things without having any idea how to make them better, or any willingness to take action. I much prefer articles like this, where the author describes a problem then offers solutions.
Article
The article was written very well. It was short and to the point, which I like, because pages of unnecessary details can get very boring in articles like this. There was enough logos to convince people that the problem is real, with statistics and evidence to back it up. There was enough pathos to get people upset- the title should appeal to any American's sense of patriotism- and the article concludes with a nice little paragraph of ideas on how to improve the situation. Personally, I find it annoying when people complain about things without having any idea how to make them better, or any willingness to take action. I much prefer articles like this, where the author describes a problem then offers solutions.
Article
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Jurors Need to Know That They Can Say No
This article interested me because it talked about Juror Nullification, which I had never heard of before. I am very impressed with this guy, because he openly expressed some very controversial views which could actually get him into legal trouble. In fact, one of his main arguments was that it is ridiculous to arrest people for spreading information about juror nullification. This is when a jury agrees to throw out a case, regardless of whether they think the defendant is guilty. An example the author gave was when people are caught using marijuana- he advised jurors to vote "not guilty" no matter what. This might seem to go against our legal system, but personally I think that this balances things out. I understand why many things are illegal, but if a kid gets caught with marijuana, I think the consequences are often much too harsh, especially since so many people do it. Being able to nullify a case makes it so that we can use our judgement, rather than blindly applying a general law that might seem to harsh for an individual case. Regardless of how often you think juror nullification should be used, it would be hard to convince me that at least spreading information should be illegal. What about the first amendment?
The author appealed to logos, pathos, and ethos in this article. Logos was used primarily in his argument about our civil rights. It doesn't make sense, considering the first amendment, that people should be prohibited from spreading information about juror nullification. Pathos was used a little bit, because civil rights definitely appeal to our patriotism and pride. Also, the marijuana example probably struck many people personally. Who has never met someone at some point in their life who has been in possession of marijuana? The thought of those people's lives being destroyed by a court is certainly upsetting. Ethos is also used because the author has written many other articles and pamphlets on the topic, which he mentions in the article. In the end, I agree that more people should at least know about this; where it should be applied may still be debated, but at least some public knowledge would be a step in the right direction.
Article
The author appealed to logos, pathos, and ethos in this article. Logos was used primarily in his argument about our civil rights. It doesn't make sense, considering the first amendment, that people should be prohibited from spreading information about juror nullification. Pathos was used a little bit, because civil rights definitely appeal to our patriotism and pride. Also, the marijuana example probably struck many people personally. Who has never met someone at some point in their life who has been in possession of marijuana? The thought of those people's lives being destroyed by a court is certainly upsetting. Ethos is also used because the author has written many other articles and pamphlets on the topic, which he mentions in the article. In the end, I agree that more people should at least know about this; where it should be applied may still be debated, but at least some public knowledge would be a step in the right direction.
Article
Friday, December 16, 2011
In Iraq, Abandoning Our Friends
I would say this article has a much stronger argument than the last one. Perhaps this is only because this author is angry and upset, while the other writer seemed optimistic. Either way, the writer of this article had strong appeals to logos, ethos and pathos. He used logos by using statistics and comparing the current situation in Iraq to past historical issues, such as the Revolutionary War and the Vietnam War. Pathos was appealed to when he said how many people were dying. He said we were committing "betrayal" and sarcastically remarked "If you can survive the next 18 months, maybe we’ll let you in," regarding American allies in Iraq. Ethos was strong as well because the writer of this article actually founded an organization dedicated to helping our allies in Iraq. Overall, the article is powerful, well-written and persuasive.
Personally, I was very upset by this article, but not particularly surprised. One comment that struck me was when the article said "The sorry truth is that we don’t need them anymore now that we’re leaving, and resettling refugees is not a winning campaign issue." After all, that seems to be the only things politicians concern themselves with now. They need to dedicate one hundred percent of their time to creating a good reputation and sabotaging the reputations of their competition. They don't have any time left to actually act based on their beliefs and American ideals. It's the same in the upcoming election. All the candidates for the Republican primary are attacking each other- when one of them is chosen, all the fighting against other candidates will have weakened their reputation and hurt their chance to win the actual election. Shouldn't their first goal be to put their party in power, so that their beliefs can prevail? No, candidates nowadays care more about having the power themselves. I find it sad how politics work nowadays, and the knowledge that our loyal allies in Iraq are dying because of it is very disturbing. The article quotes Obama years ago, promising not to abandon our allies. But, like most politicians, he does not seem to be keeping his word since it is not one of the big, popular issues. Maybe it's really the voters' faults. If we looked at the actual actions and beliefs of the politicians, instead of putting so much emphasis on personality and image, maybe politicians would have the confidence to follow their beliefs and go through with their promises.
Article
Personally, I was very upset by this article, but not particularly surprised. One comment that struck me was when the article said "The sorry truth is that we don’t need them anymore now that we’re leaving, and resettling refugees is not a winning campaign issue." After all, that seems to be the only things politicians concern themselves with now. They need to dedicate one hundred percent of their time to creating a good reputation and sabotaging the reputations of their competition. They don't have any time left to actually act based on their beliefs and American ideals. It's the same in the upcoming election. All the candidates for the Republican primary are attacking each other- when one of them is chosen, all the fighting against other candidates will have weakened their reputation and hurt their chance to win the actual election. Shouldn't their first goal be to put their party in power, so that their beliefs can prevail? No, candidates nowadays care more about having the power themselves. I find it sad how politics work nowadays, and the knowledge that our loyal allies in Iraq are dying because of it is very disturbing. The article quotes Obama years ago, promising not to abandon our allies. But, like most politicians, he does not seem to be keeping his word since it is not one of the big, popular issues. Maybe it's really the voters' faults. If we looked at the actual actions and beliefs of the politicians, instead of putting so much emphasis on personality and image, maybe politicians would have the confidence to follow their beliefs and go through with their promises.
Article
A Formal End
I chose to do this article because the first sentence reads "It is a relief that the American role in the misguided Iraq war is finally over." I found this interesting because another article right below this one was called "In Iraq, Abandoning Our Friends." I found it interesting that these articles seemed to have opposite views, especially in the same newspaper, so I will blog about both of them.
Actually, it was hard to figure out exactly what the author was trying to say. He used pathos, discussing the many lives lost and the corruption and discrimination happening in Iraq. He also used logos, listing many numbers and facts to support his idea. Despite all this, though, it was unclear what his idea actually was. At first, he seemed to be saying that it is a good thing that we are out of Iraq. Towards the end, he adds "President Obama, who first ran for office campaigning against the war, has never wavered on his promise to bring the troops home." So it seems that the author of this article is glad that we are out. However, he goes on and on about the many issues that remain unsolved, so I guess he is saying that as glad as we are for this "formal end," there is still a long way to go. He mentioned that we should continue to offer support and limited assistance. He also wrote "The Obama administration was unable to reach a new defense agreement with Baghdad that would have allowed several thousand American troops to stay behind as backup," which I found interesting because it implied that it was in no way Obama's fault that this agreement did not work, but it also implies that it was perhaps a good idea, and should have happened. In the end, I guess the idea is that we are out of the war and optimistic about the future, but we need to be ready for problems to arise. So is this article really so different than the other? Tune in next blog to find out!
Article
Actually, it was hard to figure out exactly what the author was trying to say. He used pathos, discussing the many lives lost and the corruption and discrimination happening in Iraq. He also used logos, listing many numbers and facts to support his idea. Despite all this, though, it was unclear what his idea actually was. At first, he seemed to be saying that it is a good thing that we are out of Iraq. Towards the end, he adds "President Obama, who first ran for office campaigning against the war, has never wavered on his promise to bring the troops home." So it seems that the author of this article is glad that we are out. However, he goes on and on about the many issues that remain unsolved, so I guess he is saying that as glad as we are for this "formal end," there is still a long way to go. He mentioned that we should continue to offer support and limited assistance. He also wrote "The Obama administration was unable to reach a new defense agreement with Baghdad that would have allowed several thousand American troops to stay behind as backup," which I found interesting because it implied that it was in no way Obama's fault that this agreement did not work, but it also implies that it was perhaps a good idea, and should have happened. In the end, I guess the idea is that we are out of the war and optimistic about the future, but we need to be ready for problems to arise. So is this article really so different than the other? Tune in next blog to find out!
Article
Monday, December 12, 2011
Bless Me, Ultima: Part 2
As you might be able to guess from the fact that I am posting my second blog now, I am really enjoying this book. Halfway through, it still seems like a series of anecdotes rather than one cohesive novel, but I am looking forward to some rising action beginning soon. I hope there will be something exciting at the end, and I am feeling fairly optimistic.
An interesting theme that has become more defined in the second quarter of the book is the questioning of religion. At first, I thought this book was a strongly Christian book. After all, Antonio's mom spends hours at a time praying, and Antonio seems like a dedicated boy as well. However, despite everything, I am beginning to think that Anaya is steering the reader away from religion. I am not suggesting that he has no religious views, but I am starting to see some parallels between Bless Me, Ultima and The Grapes of Wrath. Both seem to share a theme about the natural goodness of people, regardless of what exists beyond life. Antonio is starting to see that God did not heal his uncle, but Ultima did. Like I said before, the ideas of forgiveness and gentleness have always appealed to Antonio more than the idea of a supremely powerful God. I think Anaya is suggesting that regardless of our beliefs, we should be kind and generous to other people and be grateful to those who help us.
One thing about this book that I am having trouble understanding is the doubt that Anaya allows us to feel about Ultima. Why did Antonio discover the metal cross lying on the ground? Why did Ultima make voodoo dolls of the three girls, and why did one of them shrivel up and die when the girl died too? Why did Antonio compare Ultima's power, which was like a whirlwind, to evil power? Basically, Anaya creates a great deal of doubt as to whether Ultima is actually a witch. However, perhaps I do know the reason for this. Maybe Anaya is saying that it doesn't matter what Ultima is. What matters is that she is gentle and kind and saves many lives. Challenging her to walk through a door with a cross on it, and being ready to murder her depending on the result, is silly. People should be judged by their tangible actions on earth. Personal beliefs about an afterlife should not affect how we treat people.
I suppose I can't possibly discuss this group of chapters without mentioning the Golden Carp. The Golden Carp is an enormous, beautiful fish that is told to be a god in disguise. I think this story supports the message that I have gotten from reading this book. The Golden Carp chose to be a fish so it could watch over the people, whom it loved. This contrasted sharply with the opinions of the other gods, who had wanted to kill them all. The idea of the Golden Carp conflicts with Antonio's religion, and I think this shows that our specific beliefs do not matter as much as our personal morals and actions. Also, the Golden Carp, like Guadalupe, is gentle and forgiving.
An interesting theme that has become more defined in the second quarter of the book is the questioning of religion. At first, I thought this book was a strongly Christian book. After all, Antonio's mom spends hours at a time praying, and Antonio seems like a dedicated boy as well. However, despite everything, I am beginning to think that Anaya is steering the reader away from religion. I am not suggesting that he has no religious views, but I am starting to see some parallels between Bless Me, Ultima and The Grapes of Wrath. Both seem to share a theme about the natural goodness of people, regardless of what exists beyond life. Antonio is starting to see that God did not heal his uncle, but Ultima did. Like I said before, the ideas of forgiveness and gentleness have always appealed to Antonio more than the idea of a supremely powerful God. I think Anaya is suggesting that regardless of our beliefs, we should be kind and generous to other people and be grateful to those who help us.
One thing about this book that I am having trouble understanding is the doubt that Anaya allows us to feel about Ultima. Why did Antonio discover the metal cross lying on the ground? Why did Ultima make voodoo dolls of the three girls, and why did one of them shrivel up and die when the girl died too? Why did Antonio compare Ultima's power, which was like a whirlwind, to evil power? Basically, Anaya creates a great deal of doubt as to whether Ultima is actually a witch. However, perhaps I do know the reason for this. Maybe Anaya is saying that it doesn't matter what Ultima is. What matters is that she is gentle and kind and saves many lives. Challenging her to walk through a door with a cross on it, and being ready to murder her depending on the result, is silly. People should be judged by their tangible actions on earth. Personal beliefs about an afterlife should not affect how we treat people.
I suppose I can't possibly discuss this group of chapters without mentioning the Golden Carp. The Golden Carp is an enormous, beautiful fish that is told to be a god in disguise. I think this story supports the message that I have gotten from reading this book. The Golden Carp chose to be a fish so it could watch over the people, whom it loved. This contrasted sharply with the opinions of the other gods, who had wanted to kill them all. The idea of the Golden Carp conflicts with Antonio's religion, and I think this shows that our specific beliefs do not matter as much as our personal morals and actions. Also, the Golden Carp, like Guadalupe, is gentle and forgiving.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
The SAT Cheating Scandal
Being a high school junior, taking the SATs and applying for colleges will definitely require a lot of time and dedication for the next year or so. That is why I was rather interested in this article. Well, it turned out to be two letters to the editor regarding a recent article about kids on Long Island who have cheated on the SATs. I read the article as well as the two letters. The article was very upsetting; rich kids have been hiring stand-ins to take the SATs. One boy even took the test for two girls, without getting caught immediately. After all the rules and stuff we have to go through when we take standardized tests, people are still cheating easily for a fee. The article says that stand-ins are like drugs. They are easily available and it is merely a question of whether someone wants to use them. Personally, I don't understand the ultimate goal of cheating on the SATs. Do you really want to get into a college that you aren't smart enough to get into? Where everyone else in school will be smarter than you? There is a college out there for everyone, and people should go to the ones where they fit in.
The first letter to the editor was very good. A woman relies on ethos and pathos to consider the underlying problems that have caused the cheating. She thinks that, in part, parents are responsible. Being a parent herself, the article is persuasive because she knows what she is talking about from experience. Parents, she suggests, put pressure on their children to succeed rather than do their personal best. Children should want good scores because they want to be proud of themselves, and if this was true cheating would be pointless. I agree with this parent, and think it is good advice for the parents of any child.
The second letter was from an alumnus of the school in question, who was upset at the way the school was portrayed in the article. She uses ethos, being an almunus, to persuade people that the school is not as corrupt as the article suggests. She claims that there are plenty of struggling families as well as rich ones, and usually students succeed through hard work and dedication rather than cheating. I think this letter seems true because the woman who wrote it is discussing her personal experiences, and I agree that articles frequently paint an unfair picture of the things they discuss.
The first letter to the editor was very good. A woman relies on ethos and pathos to consider the underlying problems that have caused the cheating. She thinks that, in part, parents are responsible. Being a parent herself, the article is persuasive because she knows what she is talking about from experience. Parents, she suggests, put pressure on their children to succeed rather than do their personal best. Children should want good scores because they want to be proud of themselves, and if this was true cheating would be pointless. I agree with this parent, and think it is good advice for the parents of any child.
The second letter was from an alumnus of the school in question, who was upset at the way the school was portrayed in the article. She uses ethos, being an almunus, to persuade people that the school is not as corrupt as the article suggests. She claims that there are plenty of struggling families as well as rich ones, and usually students succeed through hard work and dedication rather than cheating. I think this letter seems true because the woman who wrote it is discussing her personal experiences, and I agree that articles frequently paint an unfair picture of the things they discuss.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Bless Me, Ultima
After the first seven chapters, I'm still not too sure how I feel about this book. I hope it gets into a real plot soon, because I think the author seems talented but I could definitely get bored if nothing really happens throughout the book. I also wish there wasn't quite so much Spanish in it, although the people who don't take Spanish have more of a right to complain than I do.
I think the main point of this story will be the process of Antonio growing up and deciding what he wants to do with his life. His mother wants him to be a priest, while his father wants him to be a man more like him. However, now that Ultima is in the picture I predict that Antonio will not follow in the footsteps of either of his parents. I think he will follow Ultima.
One interesting aspect of this book is the role of magic in it. Ultima is frequently accused of witchcraft, which seems sad because she uses all of her abilities to heal people. Antonio also has supernatural dreams, like the dream where he saw himself being born. Finally, Anaya frequently refers to the presence of the river. I wonder if Ultima is supposed to possess actual supernatural powers, or if she is supposed to be a kind and wise woman who is unjustly discriminated against. I also wonder if the river's presence is supposed to be taken literally, and if the author is suggesting that nature has its own soul or spirit, or if it is a metaphorical thing.
Religion obviously plays a big role in the story. Antonio's family is constantly praying, and they go to church. Antonio's mom wants him to be a priest and Antonio thinks frequently about God and sin. When Lupito is killed, Antonio spends a lot of time pondering the way God would view the situation. He thinks of murder as a mortal sin, and worries that his father might be condemned for it. Lupito murders as well, although he was somewhat mentally unstable, and Antonio wonders what will happen to his soul. I think this book is somewhat realistic in the way that it shows situations where there isn't a very clear right or wrong.
At one point, Antonio admits that he prefers Saint Guadalupe to all other saints, and even to God. I think this shows a very significant aspect of the book's theme. God is the one who judges and punishes people, while Guadalupe is gentle and forgiving towards everyone. Since Antonio prefers Guadalupe, I think Anaya is praising kindness and peace over punishment and harsh justice. I expect that this will be a recurring theme in the rest of the story.
Although I think this books is a little boring at parts, it manages to touch on many subjects and conflicts that most people can relate to. Antonio, like many children, feels pressure from others pushing him in different directions. He is afraid of having to grow up and decide what his future will be. The book, like I have mentioned, also touches on religious and moral conflicts and questions. At the end of this section, the book described the feeling of being different as a child, which many children must face and which is very difficult. Antonio is laughed at by the other children, but he eventually finds friends who share his troubles.
At the end of this section, I think this book is very thoughtful and well-written, and it contains a lot of powerful themes and ideas. However, in spite of its content, I still worry that I will begin to grow bored if nothing more interesting begins happening soon.
I think the main point of this story will be the process of Antonio growing up and deciding what he wants to do with his life. His mother wants him to be a priest, while his father wants him to be a man more like him. However, now that Ultima is in the picture I predict that Antonio will not follow in the footsteps of either of his parents. I think he will follow Ultima.
One interesting aspect of this book is the role of magic in it. Ultima is frequently accused of witchcraft, which seems sad because she uses all of her abilities to heal people. Antonio also has supernatural dreams, like the dream where he saw himself being born. Finally, Anaya frequently refers to the presence of the river. I wonder if Ultima is supposed to possess actual supernatural powers, or if she is supposed to be a kind and wise woman who is unjustly discriminated against. I also wonder if the river's presence is supposed to be taken literally, and if the author is suggesting that nature has its own soul or spirit, or if it is a metaphorical thing.
Religion obviously plays a big role in the story. Antonio's family is constantly praying, and they go to church. Antonio's mom wants him to be a priest and Antonio thinks frequently about God and sin. When Lupito is killed, Antonio spends a lot of time pondering the way God would view the situation. He thinks of murder as a mortal sin, and worries that his father might be condemned for it. Lupito murders as well, although he was somewhat mentally unstable, and Antonio wonders what will happen to his soul. I think this book is somewhat realistic in the way that it shows situations where there isn't a very clear right or wrong.
At one point, Antonio admits that he prefers Saint Guadalupe to all other saints, and even to God. I think this shows a very significant aspect of the book's theme. God is the one who judges and punishes people, while Guadalupe is gentle and forgiving towards everyone. Since Antonio prefers Guadalupe, I think Anaya is praising kindness and peace over punishment and harsh justice. I expect that this will be a recurring theme in the rest of the story.
Although I think this books is a little boring at parts, it manages to touch on many subjects and conflicts that most people can relate to. Antonio, like many children, feels pressure from others pushing him in different directions. He is afraid of having to grow up and decide what his future will be. The book, like I have mentioned, also touches on religious and moral conflicts and questions. At the end of this section, the book described the feeling of being different as a child, which many children must face and which is very difficult. Antonio is laughed at by the other children, but he eventually finds friends who share his troubles.
At the end of this section, I think this book is very thoughtful and well-written, and it contains a lot of powerful themes and ideas. However, in spite of its content, I still worry that I will begin to grow bored if nothing more interesting begins happening soon.
Unsettled Justice at Upper Big Branch
I read this article to find out what "unsettled justice" was referring to. As it turns out, 29 miners died because the mining company refused to meet safety regulations. This was not just a few little mistakes either; the company kept fake records, destroyed documents, and fired employees who complained about their safety. In addition, there has been little progress in finding who is responsible due to mining laws. I agree fully when the author says reforms should be made for the future. I certainly don't think the mining company should have been allowed to do whatever it wanted until people started dying; when 29 people die, it's too late. They should have been stopped a long time ago. If it is discovered that a company broke a regulation that could have resulted in the loss of lives, I think they should be punished as if people had actually died, so that they will never do it again,
The article relied on pathos and logos. The fact that 29 people were killed definitely encourages readers to become angry and upset. The way the article talks about the investigation is clearly designed to get people angry that more is not being done. To support these ideas, the article uses logos, providing details and evidence from different reports and investigations. He quotes a report by the federal mining safety agency as well as federal officials. The article is very persuasive, and is likely to get people angry. The author makes his opinion very clear, saying that the lack of reform is "shameful". He also provides ideas of how the situation can be improved with stricter regulations, which enforces his idea that it is very possible to do something about this. The article is also kept short and interesting, which I consider to be a good thing because I often get bored if an article contains pages of small details and statistics.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/08/opinion/unsettled-justice-at-upper-big-branch.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
The article relied on pathos and logos. The fact that 29 people were killed definitely encourages readers to become angry and upset. The way the article talks about the investigation is clearly designed to get people angry that more is not being done. To support these ideas, the article uses logos, providing details and evidence from different reports and investigations. He quotes a report by the federal mining safety agency as well as federal officials. The article is very persuasive, and is likely to get people angry. The author makes his opinion very clear, saying that the lack of reform is "shameful". He also provides ideas of how the situation can be improved with stricter regulations, which enforces his idea that it is very possible to do something about this. The article is also kept short and interesting, which I consider to be a good thing because I often get bored if an article contains pages of small details and statistics.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/08/opinion/unsettled-justice-at-upper-big-branch.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Thursday, December 1, 2011
My Bridge to Nowhere
I decided to read this article because, based on the short description of it underneath the link, it seemed to be saying that it was very difficult to adopt a child, which surprised me. I thought there was an excess of children who needed adoption out there. I wondered if the legal process was too difficult for some people, which I thought would be very unfortunate, since we should try to get every child into a good home rather than worry about legal details. As it turns out, the article was a narrative by a woman who has been trying to adopt a child. She has already attempted it several times, and in this particular story, she finally meets one of the potential birthmothers. After meeting her, emailing her constantly, texting, and forming a relationship, she discovers that the woman was never pregnant at all. It was a scam, oddly enough. I was very surprised that anyone would pretend to be pregnant in order to meet with potential adoptive parents. I can't imagine what her motives were.
Although it was an interesting, well-written story, I was left slightly uncertain of what the author was trying to say. I think her point was how difficult it is to find a child to adopt. She could definitely have emphasized the point much more. She basically tells the story and that is the entire article. There isn't really any explanation of what she learned, or why it is relevant or anything like that. She did not any general statements to suggest that this is an actual issue rather than a weird one-time thing. If adoption is this hard for everyone, I think that is an important thing that ought to change. However, maybe this woman is unlucky. Or maybe it's easy to adopt from orphanages, while adopting from actual birth mothers is more difficult. The article included very little logos. Since it was a personal narrative, the appeal to ethos was strong. It would be very silly to question whether she has her facts straight. The appeal to pathos was also strong, as she described her longing for a child and her inability to become pregnant or adopt. However, I don't know if I would call her argument "persuasive" since I really can't say one way or another whether there was an argument. If she was simply telling a story, she told it well. If she had a greater purpose, however, she might have stated it more explicitly.
Article: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/my-bridge-to-nowhere/
Although it was an interesting, well-written story, I was left slightly uncertain of what the author was trying to say. I think her point was how difficult it is to find a child to adopt. She could definitely have emphasized the point much more. She basically tells the story and that is the entire article. There isn't really any explanation of what she learned, or why it is relevant or anything like that. She did not any general statements to suggest that this is an actual issue rather than a weird one-time thing. If adoption is this hard for everyone, I think that is an important thing that ought to change. However, maybe this woman is unlucky. Or maybe it's easy to adopt from orphanages, while adopting from actual birth mothers is more difficult. The article included very little logos. Since it was a personal narrative, the appeal to ethos was strong. It would be very silly to question whether she has her facts straight. The appeal to pathos was also strong, as she described her longing for a child and her inability to become pregnant or adopt. However, I don't know if I would call her argument "persuasive" since I really can't say one way or another whether there was an argument. If she was simply telling a story, she told it well. If she had a greater purpose, however, she might have stated it more explicitly.
Article: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/my-bridge-to-nowhere/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)