The Simpsons

So I started my project thinking I was going to write about Jaws, but I wasn't able to narrow my topic down to a strong, social issue worth arguing. My alternative is now the Simpsons (Laura, Lindsey mentioned that you were doing that as well so I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to copy you! I just hope I can argue it as well as you can!) The main argument of my paper is going to deal with the family issues expressed in the episodes and how it was a drastic flip from the idea of the perfect, white-picket fence type family. Instead, Matt Groening turned that image on his head, showing that your family doesn't need to be perfect, we all have our issues. After a generation of people who grew up feeling that pressure, the Simpsons provided the relief people wanted in getting rid of that image and living a more free lifestyle. At the type the show originated, the edgy idea of a dysfunctional family took on some hefty criticism, but quickly gained respect in the way they depicted their messages. The jokes, sarcasm, and parody have attracted many viewers by taking problems and turning them into something to laugh at. Multiple age groups are able to relate to the show because of the age range in characters and the different messages that each individual can get out of the show. There's an underlying message of not taking life so seriously, everything will be fine in the end. The show is unique because it takes these sensitive cultural issues and mocks them in a way that is non-threatening, to where people don't (or most don't) get offended by them. It makes people look at life's problems in a different light, seeing another side, and being able to laugh at yourself for how you may be able to relate to it. I think this is why so many people like the show because our world has become so serious. If we can adopt some of those laugh-at-yourself type values into our own lives, people would probably be much more relaxed and far less judgmental. I mean, how much more problematic can we get than Homer, d'oh.

Hmm, this is tough because I'm not a big fan of looking at my own work (I know, not exactly a good thing). But I think for this purpose I will assess my close reading essay. In all, I would myself a middle because there are strong elements to my paper, such as explaining and relating sources to the overall theme - making them have a purpose. On the otherhand, I would like to revise the work and try to make it a little more focused or succint. Some parts may seem unclear because of the way I stated certain ideas, but I think my ideas are on the right track, and I've provided in depth analysis for my argument. I have attempted to explain why this subject material is important to the readers, but if revised, I could make my reasoning clearer. Overall, I want to make my paper clearer and more fluid. Getting the audience to see why Krakauer's epigraphs were so important and influential in his writing is crucial to my purpose; along with being able to see a connection out of context to the outside world.

I think that his credibility could really go either way after his recount of his own story. In many ways, it made me appreciate Chris and Krakauer so much more because it added in a personal interest element. I was exposed to a deeper side of both men and was able to relate better. Krakauer's critical analyzing was important for helping the audience understand himself, and Chris. Whether Krakauer is manipulating the details of Chris's life to meld better with his own, it's hard to say since Chris isn't here as living proof. Our basis and trust have to come from what Krakauer has told us, and the pieces seem to fit the puzzle. But on the otherhand, emotion is able to twist certain details in our favor, possibly creating bias in his conclusions of Chris's life and personality. While some may have doubts, I am beginning to trust Krakauer more and more as the book goes on; maybe just because I like the story, I'm not really sure. Either way, I think Krakauer is a great writer. If he is inaccurate or trying to make Chris relate to himself, well, I guess he's got me fooled.

Krakauer's Comparisons

Personally, Krakauer's comparisons of Chris to other said adventurers really enabled me to open up to Chris. Before that point, I was pretty convinced that was he was doing was purely foolish; who would enter the Alaskan bush with so little equipment and expect to get out alive? I have experience outdoors and have been to Alaska, and also have family members that live there - so I guess I just felt like he was asking for certain death. But as I got to know his personality, I realized that he was purely driven. I am one of those people who always believes that you should go after what you want in life and not hold back; you never know when it will be too late. And I think Chris would agree with me. He was stubborn, intense, and passionate, set on living a life that didn't constrain him. He wanted more out of life than the material world had to offer, and I can agree with him on certain levels. When Krakauer began comparing him to other adventurers who had similar experiences, I saw that Chris wasn't all that unusual. Like many others, he wanted to experience life, not just live it. A great comparison that sticks out to me is of Chris and Krakauer himself. The audience is exposed to a more personal level with both of them. No wonder Krakauer was so interested in Chris. I can imagine he asked himself why he survived and Chris didn't. I gained more respect for Krakauer, and felt that I better understood Chris, which I'm sure is what Krakauer's intentions were. Well, it worked for me. I think Krakauer did a great job of turning Chris's life into a story, not just another tragic news report. See you guys tomorrow! (P.S. We came up with a good prompt :))

T-Swift

Well, I will start by saying that yes, I do have her album and I love blasting the romantic fairytale love songs while driving. There is something so fun and satisfying about it. Maybe it's the idealistic view that prince charming will find me and we will live happily ever after (which of course I dream about). I wouldn't say that I'm all that impressed with her singing and I don't know much about her, but there is something catchy to her music. The author of the article we read made a lot of strong points in effort to prove her argument, and I really enjoyed her writing and how she went about making her argument. As to whether it really changed my opinion I don't really think so, but it did make my feelings stronger towards some aspects. As a vocalist, I don't think she can be compared to the power of Beyonce or Christina Aguilara, but I still like her music.
See you Thursday ladies!

Well I feel like an absolute dodo brain for completely forgetting to blog last week, I've beaten it in to my brain to do it now. :) This week you will for sure have something to comment on. Talking about rhetoric, I think that pathos is extremely effective when writing a paper because people are so dependent and affected by emotions. That is not to say that they are all important and I believe that each contributes to a different part of your argument. A certain rhetoric may not be as effective if another is not present as well. But personally, I really like using pathos, I think it can really add a lot to an argument. In my papers so far, I would say that I favored pathos and logos because I didn't focus on my credibility as a writer and my sources didn't necessarily come from scholarly sources. My argument and purpose would be much stronger if I had more of a balance between the three since as of right now it seems they are both lacking importance. They need some revising, but I can't wait until they get better!! I look forward to getting your guys' input!

Boot Camp

The most important thing I learned from boot camp was that it is okay to break the rules. My entire schooling career they always taught us to follow all sorts of precise rules and outlines. But if you want to break those rules, you it's OKAY. Writing is so much more than just writing a rogerian essay or constructing a one sentence thesis. It is about your purpose. What you want to do and how you want to convey that argument is completely your choice. There is much more freedom than they ever taught us, and therefore many students despise writing. If instead they let us make more of our own choices, maybe we would all be better writers. After all, we are in the land of the free aren't we? It's amazing how much of an impact you can have with words.
Love, Lauren