I learned a lot

            This last semester has taught me many lessons, which have not always been apparent to me. Over the last semester I have learned many things, but the most important is to write like myself and not someone else. I learned this lesson through the article How to write with style by Kurt Vonnegut which gives a message of just be yourself.

            One of the most important things that I have learned is that I am capable of much more than I would imagine possible. I am my worst enemy in the fact that I am the only thing stopping myself from being able to achieve my goals. When first looking at the research paper I had to do, my jaw dropped. Having completing it I now know I can do and the only thing that was in my way previously was my attitude.

            Out of the readings I had trouble picking just one piece that spoke to me the most and I couldn’t decide on just one. Most inspirational to me were the Letter to America by Margaret Atwood and Jennifer Turpin’s Women Confronting War. Both were written by strong independent woman who spoke their mind to try inflicting change for the better. The least favourite reading was 30 Little Turtles by Thomas Friedman due to it seeming arrogant. I have learned that this could possibly be an attempt at reverse psychology, but I do not agree with trying to trick readers into agreeing with you.

            Although it has been a hectic time there was always method to the madness and this has treated me well. On the other hand I do wish that there was more time spent on learning the methods to citing. Possibly had worksheets so we know where I make mistakes instead of seeing it after the fact. Wouldn’t have made it through the semester without helpful classmates who are understanding and also a good teacher.

Just be me

Kurt Vonnegut writes a matter of fact inspirational article, How to write with style. In the article Vonnegut gives 8 simple steps on how to become a better writer by generally being true to who you are. He states that by keeping things short and simple for both readers and yourself your personal style will come naturally and from the heart (Vonnegut, 1980, p.66). Also trying to write a masterpiece will not come from trying to write like someone else.

            Young American students are who this article is directed towards, because Vonnegut makes comments about his experiences with teachers. Relating his thoughts back to teachers helps a student reader make a connection by experiencing a similar frustration or understanding. One example that he uses is; “The one most vehemently recommended by teachers has no doubt been pressed on you, as well: to write like cultivated Englishmen of a century or more ago.”(Vonnegut, 1980, p.67).  I believe that Vonnegut is trying to show up-and-coming writers that striving to write like someone else is not the way to become a great writer.

            Using a clearly laid out format of numbered headings allows the readers to easily remember the main points of the essay. One of the most affective points is the first one where he explains the importance of having passion in your subject. Having to write a paper about something that does not matter to you will show through in your writing (Vonnegut, 1980, p.66). Having fun and enjoying writing are the core messages of Vonnegut’s piece, and this also shows through in the pictures that accompany the writing, which show a humorous side.

            The paper is somewhat dated and that shows by the actually visual of the paper, but is still seems current maybe that is because the message he sends is somewhat timeless. Vonnegut restates this message as his concluding sentence by saying that you could be the most poetic writer, but when you do not have anything important to say, no one will listen (Vonnegut, 1980, p.67)

So the question I pose is this; what point if any is there to study different types and styles of reading when we should just be ourselves?

This little piggy had none

I found Thomas Friedman’s 30 Little Turtles, to be somewhat vague as to the actual purpose of the excerpt, which remained so until the very end when it is put in perspective. Friedman’s article talks about his first hand experience in situations dealing with young people from Bangalore and Ramallah. Through these experiences Friedman discovers some positive effects of outsourcing from Canada and the United States. These jobs translate to high paying jobs in other countries and enable people to obtain a higher standard of living (Friedman, 2008, p.176-177).   

I believe the intended audience for this article is your working class American and Canadian, and I believe so because there is a lot of turmoil around sending jobs to other countries. There has been a lot of negative press around this issue and hearing the positive side of the argument might help people see how it can benefit us. Friedman uses a form of pathos by using first hand experiences and stating that the people whom he interacts with is just looking for a better standard of life like many of us are trying to do as well. This I find to be very effective, but the example where talking about a caller saying “I am glad I reached an Indian” (Friedman, 2008, p.177), this I find contradicts the general public’s opinion. There is also a form of ethos, which is not in the writing particularly, but in the mini biography before the writing. After reading the bio, which lists his numerous successes, I found myself thinking this has got to be insightful; he’s won three Pulitzer’s!

                I found the ending to be quite strong, but it was partially because I was now finally learning his point, which I actually found to be more effective that way.  One conclusion that does not seem to be effective is, “we make not only a prosperous world, but a safer world” (Friedman, 2008, p.177), which makes me question his thinking. In reality it is making North America a more unemployed continent, and although it helps them it also hurts us.

Do you think that there could be a better solution than outsourcing to help other countries have higher standard of living instead? Do you think that Friedman’s article length helps or hinders making his point?

Women at the Frontline

                Jennifer Turpin’s Women Confronting War talks about the affects that war has on women in active military counties and war occupied countries. Some of the affects are women becoming refugees, being subject to more domestic violence, being sexually abused, and even death (Turpin 2008 325-326). Turpin’s collection of facts and layout creates a logical understanding and an emotional reaction. I believe that her target audience is mainly women because this would create a stronger reaction thinking it could happen to you. Laying out the facts she is also able to create an understanding to a male reader.
                Turpin uses deductive reasoning to show her point of how much women really are affected by war. She has tons of informative facts that show the percentage of women who die in war and how domestic violence increases. Turpin is also able to give numbers for amount of women who are sexually assaulted and/or placed into prostitution. The amount of facts that she presents is over whelming and makes it difficult for even the people who oppose her ideas to refute them because of the amount of facts. 

                On another note Turpin is also able to connect it emotionally to readers by explaining what some of the situations are like for women in different situations. She talks about the stage a refugee would be in and what they go through and usually all while they are trying to support a family (Turpin 2008 324). Turpin describes how many women enter prostitution houses or rings because they have no other means to support their family. Lastly she talks about military authorities responses to charges of rape. The examples she uses show a disregard for the victims and they treat the situations as boys being boys (Turpin 2008 327).
                Using both logic and appealing to the readers’ emotional side she effectively engages the reader to want to make a difference. The best examples she uses are the ones where she has stats of grotesque proportions. One of the least effective examples are domestic violence ones which are the only real examples that affect North America, but they seem so miniscule compared to the concreteness of the other examples.

I have decided to post two questions because some may not like the first one.

Do you think that Turpin poses women as someone who needs to be protected by men? Why or why not?

What are some possible solutions that would prevent things like sexual assult being inflicted by soldiers?

Is Entertainment Brainwashing us?

Sissela Bok’s essay Aggression: The Impact of Media Violence tells readers that just like smoking is banned from public places, there needs to be a guideline in censoring the amount of violence in our media. Bok talks about how violence and aggression are showing up more and more everywhere and in younger people more often. I believe that she directs this essay at families and working class people because these people will most likely identify with the concerns of violence in entertainment.

As for the intentions of the author I am somewhat confused because after reading this I am leaning more so towards not allowing others to decide what I can and cannot watch.  Before reading this I would have generally agreed with the author’s intent, because I do feel strongly about keeping violence from children who cannot comprehend its meaning. Bok does use a form of ethos by stating the refuting evidence that would contradict her conclusions, but because she does this so well she makes her own evidence seem insignificant. At one point she states that “No reputable scholar” (Bok 87) would blame television for crime rates being so high. Then after she uses a study that estimates TV violence being accountable for half of the violent crimes, which completely takes credibility away from the case study. Many of Bok’s examples are not very effective, but there were a few that did hit home. When she related TV violence to a study done with sexual violence and watching violent pornography, she showed how becoming desensitized to crime makes it easier to commit one. Bok also ended on a strong point by using an example that would have a protective instinct on families. I realize that this article was written about ten years ago, but many parents that I know would not allow their children to watch Loony Toons because of the violent nature, so all in all Bok would get two thumbs out of five.

So if you could rewrite this essay today would you push for censoring children’s programming? Adults? Or maybe none of it? Why?

Looking the other way...

While reading Stephen Lewis’s “Pandemic: My Country is on its Knees” I questioned why and how people can know about these things and still am able to just go on with our life like we didn’t know. How even though many of us care a majority will do nothing because it does not directly affect us. Stephen falls in love with Africa and its attempt to free its people. Returning quite a few years later he finds a different Africa that is discouraging because of its pandemic of AIDS. While reading this essay I find myself thinking about the numerous times I have seen TV programming asking me to sponsor a child. Many of the things that Stephen talks about, I can honestly say do not shock me. Knowing what Africa is going through and doing nothing about it makes me feel ashamed not of just myself as an individual but as a Canadian as well. I think he is trying to shed some light on what the people of Africa are going through. The intended audience are Canadians of all ages, which it is not hard to compare what we have and what they don’t and to think something needs to be done. The writer does use pathos, which is an emotional appeal and he does this by using many of his own experiences while visiting Africa. Using the examples is very effective and makes it hard to disconnect from the situation that he is presenting. This in turn makes a very convincing essay.

Do you agree with Stephen that this problem should be more than just Africa’s problem?

Your future is my future...

After reading Margaret Atwood’s “Letter to America” she talks about America as if she were talking to a best friend that had grown apart. The letter conveys a disappointment in the political direction and flaws of some moral choices. Margaret states her concern because when something negative happens to America it also happens to Canada. I do agree that when Canada’s neighbour has a problem we do too, but many of the problems that she talks about are also problems that we ourselves have.

I believe that the purpose of this essay is to make people both from Canada and America think about what America used to be like and how it has strayed from its moral path. The intended audience is most likely a generation that is a bit older that can reminiscence about what good things came out of America. Other than Donald duck and Mickey Mouse, which still are present today, I do not have a connection to the people and things that she speaks about in her letter like Ella Fitzgerald and Sinclair Lewis. I believe the examples of people, books, and movies she uses are very effective, but only to her target audience. Even though I do not know many of these people I still could feel the tie she is trying to embody.

In this letter Margaret uses quite a bit of general statements like “You stood up for freedom, honesty, and justice; you protected the innocent.” (p.169). I think almost every generation in some form believes the present generation is way worse than how things used to be. There was just as much scandalous happenings back then, it was just more acceptable and easier to get away with. Many of the problems that she discusses are caused by a miniscule portion of people who are in power. To be particular George Bush seems to be at the root of most of the problems, which is why I think that the letter should be more accurately titled “Letter to George”. All in all I enjoyed reading this letter for it was a more subtle take on America’s affairs and almost humorous in a way.


If George Bush could be honest for five minutes, what do you think his reaction to this letter would be?