TOW #30: Letter to a New APELC Student

Dear Brand-Spanking-New APELC Student,

Take a deep breath and calm down. Seriously, it's not that bad. We all know that our beloved Wissnation (a term I use with little pleasure) is fond of telling younger students about how terribly unbearable Advanced Placement classes are. I'm not sure if it's because we just like scaring you or because we're wusses. It's probably a combination of both, but either way, don't listen to us, them whoever. If you play your cards right, you'll do just fine in APELC. That's my first piece of advice.
Regarding the summer work: you should start it on or before August 1st. Otherwise, you'll have too much to do in a short span of time, it will all come out horribly, and you will probably get a bad grade. This problem can be exacerbated if you have more than one AP class, so watch out. Also, when you start being a productive member of society earlier in the summer, you'll be well prepared in time for the school year, when you have to be productive all the time. After you turn in your summer work and get your grade back, don't get too disheartened if you get a poor grade: you can learn from your mistakes, and if you do well later, you can make up for the low summer work grade. On the other hand, if you do well on the summer work, don't start acting cocky. You're not hot stuff. I got a 7 (88%) on the summer essay, and while that seemed to bode well for me, I struggled on later assignments. So did other people who did well on the summer essay. How you do on the summer assignment doesn't determine your future in the class, so don't get too built up or brought down by it. 
On that note, do not tie your self esteem or your sense of self worth to your grades. Trust me. 'Tis a bad idea. You are much, much more than just a grade, a class level, a score, or a GPA, and things like that don't show who you are as a person. A person might get good grades, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything about their personality or character. If how you do in school has a huge influence on your self esteem, you're not going to feel very good about yourself when you do poorly (almost everyone does at some point, it's life).
APELC is not a class for the lazy, the faint of heart, or those who don't like English. To do well, you have to be interested in the subject matter and be willing to put in the time and effort to get a good grade. You can't really put APELC on the back burner, skip readings, or start essays the night before; you won't be prepared for class, and your grades will be, frankly, bad. All of the things you'll have to do in this class, even the things that seem like pointless busy-work, will help you get a good score on the AP exam and to do well in the class overall. Just take the work seriously, no matter how boring it is or how much time it takes. It'll be worth it.
Some final pieces of advice that apply to APELC students also apply to junior year students. First, find something that will keep you sane. You need something that will always make you feel better, less stressed, and more balanced. I recommend TV, music, or a game, or some other kind of relaxing hobby. Second, sleep at least six hours a night, because less is just plain unhealthy. Third, eat a variety of healthy foods so that you have a lot of energy. Fourth, always have a sweatshirt in your locker because our school is old and cold. 
I repeat: take a deep breath. Take a lot of them over the coming school year. Good luck.

From, O'Neill K.

TOW #29: The Failed Effort to Make the Rich "Just Like Us"

Jackie and David Siegel are not well-known to many members of the general public, but they are two of the most significant movers and shakers of real estate and business. David Siegel founded the enormously successful timeshare company Westgate Resorts. He, his wife Jackie, and their large family are based on Orlando, Florida, where they endeavoured to build Versailles, the biggest private home in the United States. However, David ran into financial troubles during the 2008 economic recession, and construction on their home was stalled. The Siegels and their troubles were detailed by director Lauren Greenfield and compiled into the 2012 documentary The Queen of Versailles. The documentary is narrated completely by the Siegels and their associates, so the opinions and views of the filmmakers are not directed shown to the audience. However, the documentary portrays the Siegels as hardworking people, not the greedy vampires that many would assume them to be; despite their wealth, the Siegels faced similar financial issues that a lot of families did during and after the recession. This idea can be extended to all of the other wealthy people that complained of financial problems. The Queen of Versailles does make the Siegels and others of their class more likable and relatable, but the fact is that their troubles are not similar in magnitude or importance to those of normal families. In the way they are portrayed in the documentary, the Siegels are not much like the typical viewer, despite their middle-class backgrounds.
In The Queen of Versailles, David and Jackie explain their rise to financial success. They both came from the middle class and started small: David owned a small real estate business, and Jackie worked at IBM as a computer engineer. Surprisingly, they are extraordinarily modest about and generous with their wealth, and serve as an excellent example of the "American Dream". However, David owns a timeshare business, and it took a big hit in 2008. The business and the family lost a lot of money; so much, in fact, that the Siegels had to stop building their home, had to sell a major company building, and worried about continuing their lifestyle. These worries echo those of many more typical Americans, as thousands lost their jobs, their homes, and their futures. Despite this superficial similarity, the Siegels cannot relate much to normal Americans. When normal people make a lot less money than they used to, it can mean skipping a car or house payment, or even being unable to put food on the table. For the Siegels, it meant buying fewer toys for their children for Christmas (they still received dozens each), having to put their unfinished mega-mansion (which was larger than anything a normal person would dare to dream about) on the auction block, and downsizing their housing staff. In 2008, middle-class people lost their livelihoods; the Siegels just had to downgrade their lifestyle to something a little closer to the average, at least the average for the rich. The stakes are, in many ways, bigger personally for the average American than for the Siegel family.
Throughout the documentary, the Siegels show off all of the things they are able to have and do because of their enormous wealth. David has a fleet of cars, portraits of him and his family painted to look like royalty, and a golden throne. Jackie has diamond and gold jewelry galore, a $17,000 pair of Gucci crocodile skin boots, and is the hostess of a party for all of the Miss America contestants. One of their children has a room stuffed with beanie babies, and they all have several exotic pets. While all of this extravagance may be interesting to watch, it is not relatable. As I watched the documentary, I personally did not know what this lifestyle was like, except for the fact that it seemed rather nice. I could not relate to the way the Siegels reveled in their material possessions, as neither me nor anyone I know live like the Siegels do. It was a good tactic of the director, Lauren Greenfield, to try to make the Siegels seem like normal people, but because they are at the far end of the social spectrum, her efforts failed.
The Queen of Versailles, is, frankly, a fascinating documentary overall; after all, who doesn't enjoy looking at how the other half lives? However, while the Siegels may not have the stereotypical snooty attitudes of wealthy people, they are not relatable to viewers. When viewed under a microscope, their economic problems are not similar to those faced by typical Americans during and after the 2008 recession. Simply put, everyone has problems and all problems are bad, but not everyone's problems are equally bad. This is where the portrayal of the Siegels in The Queen of Versailles fails.

TOW #28: The Queen of Versailles Documentary Analysis

It's only kind of trashy.

Few outside real estate, time share, and business circles have probably heard about billionaire David Siegel, his wife Jacqueline, and their huge family in Orlando, Florida. Over several decades, David worked his way up from the middle class to become the owner of one of the biggest, most profitable vacation timeshare companies in the United States, and he and Jacqueline are the proud parents of eight beautiful children. In the early 2000s, they began building a huge home inspired by the famous French palace of Versailles, and it was going to be the the biggest single-family home in the country. However, when the 2008 recession hit, the family's company lost so much business that David had to take a severe pay-cut, put their unfinished home on the market, and lay off thousands of employees. The Siegels' trials and tribulations are filmed in the documentary "The Queen of Versailles", directed by Lauren Greenfield.
Throughout the documentary, multiple sides of David, Jacqueline, and the other featured people are shown, giving an honest view of the Siegels and their associates. They are not portrayed as greedy, leech-like wealthy people, but more like wealthy people that worked their way to the top and are now facing major troubles. This is probably the main purpose of the documentary, to show the Siegels as people who just happen to be wealthy instead of vilifying them like a lot of people did during the economic crisis. One of the most obvious ways the filmmakers do this is by including many interviews and voiceovers with David and Jacqueline describing their climb to the top; they talk about their small-town, middle-class backgrounds, David's first business venture, and Jacqueline's college years and work as an engineer at IBM. This repetition implies that they understand what it's like to not be wealthy and that they sympathize with ordinary people, including the ones who work for them. It is supplemented by archival videos and photos of the couple when they were younger: they are wearing more typical clothes, going to school, working in an office, or, in Jacqueline's case, competing in beauty pageants. The old footage, photos, and their interviews show how normal they were when they were younger. This idea is also supported by the interesting juxtaposition between their wealth and some aspects of their lifestyles: for example, the Siegels are enormously wealthy, but eat from McDonald's on a regular basis and shop at stores like Toys "R" Us and Target. It sends the message that even though they are wealthy, they are "just like us". Another important feature of the documentary is where it takes place: Orlando, Florida. The Versailles-inspired house is so close to Walt Disney World that one could see the Disney fireworks from the house. David and Jacqueline had a dream of being successful and wealthy, and their dream comes to fruition near Disney World, the place "where dreams come true". The setting is inherently hopeful and magical, and reinforces the idea that David held onto a seemingly-impossible dream and worked very, very hard to achieve it; he exemplifies the "rags-to-riches" ideal that so many Americans hold onto. 
Much of the documentary may show that David and Jacqueline worked hard to get to where they are today, but their wealth is definitely on display. The Las Vegas office building is one of the tallest buildings in the city and has the brightest sign on the Las Vegas Strip. The Siegels' homes are enormous and luxurious, at 26,000 and 90,000 square feet apiece. Paintings of everyone in their family adorn the walls of their home, which is filled by eight children (many more than the average), maids, nannies, cooks, gardeners, and drivers. Each room is filled with toys, decorations, nice furniture, sculptures, and too many other fine material things to count. The Siegels have pools, tennis courts, bowling alleys, and huge garages. Despite their humble beginnings, the Siegels are still wealthy people. Part of the filmmakers' purpose in making "The Queen of Versailles" is to show the Siegels as "typical" people who are also rich, so that aspect of them is very, very important.
Even before the 2008 economic recession, caused in part by people who run companies like David Siegel, ordinary people both resented and looked up to the wealthy. However, few consider that not all wealthy people are bad, that not all of them take advantage of people. David and Jacqueline Siegel and their family might have different problems than most, but that does not negate the difficulty they have faced for the past several years.

TOW #27: TOW Reflection

In the beginning of the year, we students of AP English Language and Composition were assigned weekly TOW posts, which were intended to give us much-needed practice in analyzing arguments. It was assumed that at the end of the year, we were going to be able to look back at all of our TOWs and see how much progress we had made. Before I did that I wasn't sure I would see much progress, since TOWs are only small-scale examples of the work we did in class and had a very similar format every time. I was surprised when I did, in fact, see that my TOWs has gotten better throughout the year.
The TOWs I wrote during the first semester were all similar regarding the types of rhetorical devices I pointed out in the texts I analyzed, both written and visual. At that point, I understood very few rhetorical devices and what their effects were, so I kept pointing out the same ones over and over again; this included ethos, pathos, logos, word repetition, and exemplification for written texts and colors and words for visual ones. However, as we talked more about analysis in class, I became more familiar with rhetorical devices and could write about their effects in a more in-depth way. I could write about the arrangement of a text, the tone of the speaker (which I could more easily describe with a single word than I could before), and whether or not the audience would be swayed by the speaker's argument.
TOWs come with requirements about what you have to include in them, and I've noticed that I've gotten better at meeting all of them without sounding methodical about it. Earlier in the year, my TOWs sounded like a list: the title and speaker of the text, the devices used, their effect, the speaker's tone, and a judgement as to how effective the argument was. My early TOWs were all longer than the requirement as well. However, as I got more practice, I was able to fit all of these things into a TOW and make them flow better and switched up the order of all the required things. This is probably the feature of my TOWs that I have most improved over the past several months, and it is very beneficial, since this skill can transfer to other kinds of writing. I was not, however, able to shorten the length of my TOWs; even at the end of the year, they were still longer than they were supposed to be. Length is something I always have trouble with, no matter what I'm writing. I would very much like to improve this aspect of my writing, as saying something in a concise way is much better than saying it in a flowery, roundabout way.
Everyone in APELC, including myself, has whined about the TOWs all year, but those criticisms of the assignment were at least partially undeserved. Of course, it is an extra bit of homework that can take a long time to complete if one wants to do them well. Few students get to them during the week because of their other obligations, or on Saturdays because they want to have fun, so when it comes to Sunday, no one feels like putting the work in. For busy students, it can be another burdensome form of stress. These complaints make sense, but do not outweigh the benefits that TOWs have. They are an excellent form of practice, as they are essentially mini-essays. TOWs provide a lot of opportunities to do things that students have trouble with, which they might not always be able to get to practice in class. I think I definitely benefited from writing what was essentially an introductory paragraph  and practice recognizing rhetorical devices every week, as I struggle with that. They served as a good benchmark for me by helping me recognize what I needed to improve on in my writing. While TOWs can be annoying assignments that seem to forever chase you, at the end of the year, their value and worth become apparent.

TOW #27: "Roughly 1 Person Every 10 Minutes Is Diagnosed with HIV in the U.S., so Why Aren't We Taking AIDS More Seriously?" by Karley Sciortino (my, what a long title)

Karley Sciortino is a writer for Vogue Magazine and also an independent blogger.

The HIV/AIDS epidemic came to the forefront of global consciousness in the 1980's, but over the years, people have stopped taking the diseases, and the risk of contracting them, seriously enough. Blogger Karley Sciortino comments on this dangerous phenomenon in her piece for Vogue, "Roughly 1 Person Every 10 Minutes Is Diagnosed with HIV in the U.S., so Why Aren't We Taking AIDS More Seriously?" Using personal anecdotes and statistics, Sciortino argues that HIV/AIDS is just as big a problem as it used to be and that Millennials often make unsafe health decisions.
Sciortino opens her article with a harrowing anecdote to show the irresponsibility of today's young adults. She talks about having unprotected sex with a stranger one drunken evening, and describes how she awoke the next morning, highly aware of the potentially devastating consequences: "I spent the next three months, which is the length of time it takes for HIV to show up in a test, on a double dose of my anxiety meds". She continues by writing "... I know I'm not the only one of my friends to have "messed up" and by mentioning a gay friend of hers who contracted AIDS and has gone almost completely blind. Her stories, though limited to herself and her social group, are emotional, and some readers may not only be able to understand the subjects' feelings, but to identify with them. They add a personal touch to the piece; it also features more concrete evidence, but things like that do not touch peoples' hearts. 
The anecdotes may get to the heart of readers, but to make a solid, effective argument about this topic, Sciortino must also get to their minds. One of the most prominent ways she does this is by citing numerous statistics. She even does this in the title of the article: "Roughly 1 Person Every 10 Minutes Is Diagnosed with HIV in the U.S.". In the third paragraph, she writes, "... there are about 1.1 million Americans living with HIV/AIDS... Gay and bisexual men continue to bear the greatest burden of HIV, accounting for an estimated 63 percent of new infections". These examples, as well as others not provided here, demonstrate how widespread HIV/AIDS is in the United States and how minorities are disproportionately affected with it. Faced with these statistics, it would be difficult for readers to claim that HIV/AIDS is not a major issue, and coupled with Sciortino's anecdotes, readers would think Millennials irresponsible for not addressing or considering it when it comes to the way they conduct their personal lives.

Article link: http://www.vogue.com/culture/article/breathless-aids-hiv-in-the-new-millennium-slutever-karley-sciortino/#1

TOW #26: Berger Paints Billboard

Billboard are often thought of as one of the best kinds of advertisements: their size, height, bold colors, and large lettering grab the attention of passing drivers. However, Berger Paints made a much simpler billboard and employs some unique methods in order to make those who see it think about buying their products. Among these are the apparent presence of a person hanging on the billboard, shaping the board in such a way that part of it looks like the sky, and putting very little decoration on the board.
When billboards feature people, it is usually in the form of a photograph or other form of picture. In this instance, Berger Paints decided to put a life-like dummy, dressed like a painter, smack in the middle of their billboard. This would certainly be a surprise to those passing the billboard: at first glance they would think that they were seeing an actual person hanging off of it. When they realize that the "person" is fake, they understand what the billboard is advertising. It is also just very unique to put something like that on a billboard, so it would impress those who see it, and they would think Berger Paints very creative.
The upper right area of the billboard is cut in rectangular shapes, exposing the sky behind it. Because the dummy on the billboard is holding out a paint roller, it looks like the dummy is painting the billboard itself the color of the sky. This, coupled with the logo in the corner that says "Natural Finish Colours", would lead a potential customer to believe that Berger has an excellent selection of paint colors that mimic nature. This is desirable to customers, leading to the message of the billboard: Berger Paints have natural colors, so you should buy them.
Besides the jagged edges on the right side and the hanging dummy, this Berger Paints billboard is not crowded with decoration: its colors are rather plain and part of it has been cut away to show the sky, and the only three words on the billboard are small and tucked aside in a corner. The overall simplicity of the billboard keeps viewers focused on its message.
If one knows anything about advertising, the Berger Paints billboard would not change one's mind. If one realizes that the billboard is cut to show the sky and not actually painted so well as to look just like it, it would still not be successful. However, it is very creative and interesting to look at.

TOW #25: "The Science of 'Happily Ever After': 3 Things That Keep Love Alive" by Eric Barker

Divorce has reached an almost-epidemic rate in the United States,
and people like Eric Barker are trying to figure out what can
be done to stop it.

According to some social critics, one of the most pressing issues in American society is the high divorce rate: most statistics show that the divorce rate has hovered around fifty percent for the past several years. Rushed marriages, financial problems, and a lack of communication are often cited as causes of divorce, but whatever the cause, divorce can be traumatic and complicated for everyone involved. Eric Barker of Time claims that the love between a married couple can be sustained and saved. He suggests three methods of doing this in his piece "The Science of 'Happily Ever After': 3 Things That Keep Love Alive", backs up his ideas with quotes statistics, and organizes the article in a very effective fashion.
One of the best ways to ensure that a reader understands an argument is to sort the information in a logical way, something that Barker does very well. He splits up his evidence into different sections depending on the subject matter, giving each section a bold, large header. For example, the divorce section is titled "'Happily Ever After' Ain't Easy", and the one about the happiness of those in arranged marriage is called "What You Can Learn From Arranged Marriages." The different parts lead into each other: at the end of the arranged marriages section, Barker writes, "So you need to actively keep the marriage happy. How do you do that?" The very next sentence is the heading of the next section, which answers his question with the words "Don't Fix the Bad. Increase the Good." By splitting up his information into sections, Barker keeps the reader from getting confused and walks them through his argument.
From beginning to end, Barker's piece is backed with cited statistics and quotes, two of the most convincing forms of evidence. He quotes the book The Science of Happily Ever After: What Really Matters in the Quest for Enduring Love: "The divorce rate often reported by the media is 50 percent [...] however, census data does not capture the 10 to 15 percent of couples who permanently separate [...]" He also quotes a research study that says "those who had undertaken the 'exciting' date nights showed a significantly greater increase in marital satisfaction than the 'pleasant' date night group". Both of these quoted statistics and more help prove to readers, if they did not already know it, that marriages are on the downward spiral, but that things can be done to fix them. They are objective evidence, much less open to interpretation than subjective evidence.
According to Barker, there are three things that can help keep a marriage alive: actively working at it, increasing the good things instead of focusing on the bad, and bringing excitement into the marriage. His article is very convincing, as his argument is both logical and can appeal to those who are married themselves.

Article link: http://time.com/62029/the-science-of-happily-ever-after-3-things-that-keep-love-alive/

IRB Post #4: Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women

When one looks at characters in television, books, and movies; at politicians around the world; at the heads of large companies; at the directors of Hollywood productions, one sees a distinct pattern: males fill the most of these roles.  It has been this way throughout history, as in nearly every major culture throughout the world, women have been subjugated and cast off as second-class citizens.  There have been great strides in the gender equality movement over the past century, but women are still not seen as completely equal to men, Few are willing to talk about or remedy this, but one exception is feminist author Susan Faludi. Her 1991 book Backlash: The Undeclared War Against Women examines the repercussions of the feminist movement; many women note that when they as a group try to change their situations, public opinion often fiercely turns against them. 

As a relatively realistic woman (or young lady or teenage girl or whatever feminine term you would like to use) myself, I am interested in feminist ideas and in the advancement of women, particularly in areas where we are underrepresented. When I found out about Backlash, the National Book Critics Circle Award that it won, and the fact that Faludi had won a Pulitzer Prize, I thought that Backlash did not sound like a book written by an uninformed, radical feminist who hates men and all of society (I am not one of the those people). Rather, I thought that, given the award it won and the clear skill of its author, it was probably a more even-handed book that appealed to a wider audience. It would also give me more specific information about the feminist movement over the past few decades, as my concrete knowledge about it ends after World War II and extends only to general shifts in opinion towards women. All in all, I am very much looking forward to reading Backlash and learning more about the history of feminism in the United States.

TOW #24: "Justin Bieber and the High Price of Whine" by Kurt Eichenwald

According to journalist Kurt Eichenwald, pop star Justin 
Bieber's antics represent bad brand management, not 
just something as common as bad parenting.

Just a few years ago, Justin Bieber was believed to be one of the most talented up-and-coming pop singers in the world. Nowadays, however, nineteen-year-old Bieber's immaturity and irresponsible antics have placed him a bit lower on the musical totem pole. In his piece "Justin Bieber and the High Price of Whine" that appeared recently in Vanity Fair, journalist Kurt Eichenwald examines Bieber's behavior and explains how damaging it has been to his "brand name".
Eichenwald is aware that because he dares to criticize someone like Bieber, people may instantly disagree with him without even hearing his argument or evidence. To combat this, Eichenwald declares, that he does not hate Bieber. In the beginning of the article, he writes, "I'll say up front: I think Bieber is immensely talented... He's obviously very hard-working. I found his rags-to-riches story inspiring..." At the end, Eichenwald reminds readers of his stance: "Again, I am not one of the 'haters'..." Eichenwald concedes that Bieber has many fine traits, and this makes him seem more rational. It indicates that he is not coming from a place of anger or hatred, but from one of interest. Readers are much more likely to consider Eichenwald's argument when they are assured that he is giving equal weight to both sides of the issue. 
Eichenwald includes several pieces of evidence to prove that Bieber's behavior is very bad for the brand that has been created around him. Besides providing the evidence, Eichenwald arranges it chronologically. He documents Bieber's speech after winning an American music award, which he began by addressing his critics, and the tantrums Bieber and his manager threw after a Grammy snub. Eichenwald also lists several of Bieber's other misbehaviors: "... passing out on stage; showing up so late to perform a concert that some fans booed; canceling a show; trying to attack a paparazzi while yelling obscenities..." It would be difficult for a reader to deny that Bieber has damaged his own reputation when they have so much evidence to prove it. The chronological arrangement walks readers through Bieber's hard and fast downward spiral, and they can easily compare the Bieber of the past to the Bieber of today.
"Justin Bieber and the High Price of Whine" may be an excellently written and interesting article, but Eichenwald did not totally prove that Bieber and his managers are not controlling the Bieber brand well. He did not mention serious infractions like reports of drug paraphernalia in Bieber's home and his drunk driving arrest, and did not provide any solid evidence indicating that public perception was turning against Bieber. If Eichenwald had done these things, it would be easier to convince readers that Bieber is following the path of many celebrities before him and is about to implode.

Article link: http://www.vanityfair.com/online/eichenwald/2013/03/justin-bieber-and-the-high-price-of-whine

TOW #23: iPhone 5c Packaging

Part of Apple's success as a company is the simplistic and unique packaging of their products.

Upon my return from a robotics regional competition this past Sunday, I was unexpectedly gifted with a new iPhone 5c.  It was not my birthday, Christmas, or any other special gift-giving occasion, but like any other teenager, I was thrilled.  When I picked up the box for the iPhone, I was surprised by how interesting it was.  Though simplistic in design, the iPhone 5c packaging expresses what Apple's goals are as a company and how they want to market themselves to their customer base: they want consumers to focus on the product itself, not on fancy packaging, and want to present their company as modern and innovative.
The shape of the box is vaguely rectangular in shape, but it has rounded corners.  By not having sharp edges, the box appears threatening and more inviting, as curves make the box seem 'cuter' than severe corners would; in the minds of consumers, sharp things could be dangerous, but the iPhone 5c box does not look danerous. 
The top of the box, the removable portion, is clear, allowing buyers to see the iPhone.  Seeing the product directly is more enticing than seeing a picture or some other form of representation, so people are more likely to buy the product.  The iPhone has a sticker on the top that looks just like the main menu screen, so buyers know exactly what they are getting into.
The bottom part of the box is white, decorated only the words "iPhone 5c" and with the Apple logo, both in black.  Both the label and the logo stand out against the white and make it clear that the product in the box is made by Apple, a well-known and widely admired company; Apple products are considered to be status symbols.  The "c" in the label has a box around it, as buyers take note of what version of the iPhone it is and how new it is.  Apple's customers, like many others, believe that newer is better.
Once the top of the box is taken off, the buyer can take out the iPhone.  Underneath there are a few pieces of card stock or a similar material.  The first piece says "Hello", a simple but friendly greeting that introduces the buyer to the product.  The next piece turns out to be a small pamphlet with directions about how to use the iPhone, written in various languages for accessibility across international markets. The third piece has two Apple logo stickers, which help advertise the company.  All of these things help a buyer to understand the product and the company better, no matter where they are from. 
When all of those pieces are removed, an earphones case, a charger cord, and a charger.  They are cleverly hidden beneath the iPhone, indicating that it is the phone that is the most important part and that the other things are just extras, despite their necessity.

TOW #22: "Good Riddance, Fred Phelps" by David Von Drehle

The passing of Fred Phelps, leader of the Westboro Baptist Church, five days ago
  resulted in media and Internet fanfare.

On March 19th, Fred Phelps, one of the most infamous figures in American culture passed away at the age of eighty-four. His death was marked by Internet celebrations, extensive news coverage, and numerous obituaries, all detailing the history and hatefulness of Phelps's congregation, the Westboro Baptist Church. However, in "Good Riddance, Fred Phelps", an opinion piece featured in Time Magazine, David Von Drehle successfully argues that Phelps stood out not just because he was a fanatically religious, homophobic bigot, but because he had a desperate thirst for publicity and was skilled at getting it.
One of the most distinct features of Von Drehle's piece is his hostile tone. The tagline is "He was the kind of person no one wanted to be around", which grabs the reader's attention. Von Drehle opens the article with the words, "Fred Phelps, a colossal jerk, died... after a long life in which even his few admirable achievements... stemmed from a deeply disagreeable personality." He says the Westboro Baptist Church was an example of "dishonesty and shabbiness" and that Phelps' genius for publicity is "the reason not to despair over a life like Fred Phelps's." Von Drehle's tone makes it quite obvious to readers that even though he may be acclaiming Phelps's ability to get attention, he still believes that Phelps was a horrible human being.
In order to prove that Phelps proved himself to be an apt attention-seeker, Von Drehele describes the manner in which he did this. He talks about how using the word "church", making signs that said God, not Phelps, hated homosexuals, and bringing his family to protests made people identify Phelps and his followers with other religious conflicts and "gave the impression of numbers". The intensity of Phelps's beliefs, Von Drehle argues, made him seem all the more shocking and worthy of media coverage. To demonstrate the effectiveness of Phelps's efforts, Von Drehle mentions his own experience in the media: "... I watched as one journalist after another took Phelps's bait." It is clear from all of these examples that Phelps made garnering publicity into an art form, and that this set him apart from all of the other run-of-the-mill bigots that preach hateful messages.


Article link: http://time.com/32564/fred-phelps-westboro-baptist-obituary/

TOW #21: "Paul Ryan's Irish Amnesia" by Timothy Egan

American politician Paul Ryan often talks about the hardship
faced by his impoverished Irish ancestors, but writer Timothy
 Egan says that Ryan neglects and demeans today's lower classes.

St. Patrick's Day is right around the corner, and as usual, everyone is celebrating Irish heritage, even if they don't have a drop of green blood in their veins. One of those proud Irish-Americans is Paul Ryan, a Republican politician who is best known for running for Vice President in the 2012 election. While usually no one would bat an eye at his antics, writer Timothy Egan fiercely condemns him in his New York Times essay "Paul Ryan's Irish Amnesia". Egan claims that Ryan, who does not support programs that help the lower classes, has turned his back on his Irish heritage and now acts like the aristocratic British did during the horrible Irish potato famine. He successfully argues this stance by comparing quotes from Ryan and British officials and by inciting readers' passion with his heated tone.

To prove that Ryan has forgotten the suffering of his ancestors, Egan compares the British refusing to send food to the Irish to Ryan refusing to support programs that benefit the poor and working poor. Egan does this by using quotes. For instance, he quotes Sir Charles Trevelyan, the Englishman in charge of "helping the Irish": "'Dependence on charity is not to be made an agreeable mode of life". Over a century and a half later, Ryan stated, "We have this tailspin of culture... just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and culture of work." Egan argues that the similarity between the two statements is quite clear, as is Ryan's role in this class conflict: he, like nineteenth-century Englanders did, believes that the poor are lazy and that their hardship is their own fault.
Another interesting feature of Egan's piece is how furious he feels about the subject. When criticizing Ryan's views on helping the poor, he describes him as having "a head still stuffed with college-boy mush from Ayn Rand" and called his statements about the poor "heartless remarks". Later, Egan calls an untrue story Ryan told about a boy who wouldn't accept his free school lunch "garbage". Egan's tone makes it quite clear to readers how he feels about both Ryan's political views and his ignoring of his heritage. It also makes readers more interested in the article: it is much more entertaining to read something written by a person who is passionate about the topic, rather than by someone who does not care. 

Article link: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/16/opinion/sunday/paul-ryans-irish-amnesia.html?_r=0

TOW #20: In Cold Blood by Truman Capote

These are the members of the Clutter family of Holcomb, Kansas, who were
viciously murdered in 1959. Their tragic story is the subject of Truman 
Capote's famous work, In Cold Blood.

In 1959, the Clutters of Holcomb, Kansas, were viciously killed in their home. Their murders and the six-week search for their killers captivated the nation, including talented screenwriter, playwright, and author Truman Capote. While writing his book In Cold Blood, he faced a challenge different from any he had ever encountered before: he wanted to be a pioneer of what would later be called "non-fiction novel-writing". Such works typically involve a huge amount of factual journalistic research, but the information is retold using methods similar to those used by writers of fiction. By alternating the story of the victims with that of the perpetrators and including an abundance of quotes and other pieces of research, Capote successfully blends fiction and non-fiction to create an innovative and captivating piece of writing.
In Cold Blood can be referred to as two stories in one book, as it switches between its 'characters', the Clutters (and the police), and the murderers, Perry Smith and Richard Hancock. For example, Capote alternates descriptions of the Clutter family's last hours and of the preparations Smith and Hancock made before killing them. Later, details of the police investigation are interrupted with information as to what Smith and Hancock did while on the run. This kind of structure makes In Cold Blood seem more like a work of fiction, as it is similar to the way that many writers alternate the points of view in their novels. It also contrasts the peaceful Clutter family with the unstable murderers, and the seriousness of the Clutters' deaths with the indifference Smith and Hancock felt towards the crimes. 
In order to write as accurate an account as possible, Capote went to the town where the Clutters lived and took thousands of pages of notes, interviewing residents and police officers about the family and the investigation. In Cold Blood compiles all of this factual information, which is the most obvious non-fiction element of the novel. One of the people Capote interviewed was Clutter family friend Andy Erhart, who said of patriarch Herbert Clutter, "Everything Herb had, he earned- with the help of God... He was a modest man but a proud man, as he had a right to be" (Capote 79). One section of the book includes a letter written from the father of one of the murderers to a court, as he tried to explain that his son was not a bad person. Genuine things like these examples are not found in fictional works, and they balance out the features of In Cold Blood that are common in fiction, aiding Capote in his effort to produce a non-fiction novel.
Although In Cold Blood was first published in 1966, it has truly stood the test of time, serving as an excellent example of both non-fiction novel writing and crime writing. It can be appreciated for its journalistic and fictional elements and for its ability to explain the unthinkable: the senseless murders of an innocent family.

TOW #19: "Happiness Is a Warm iPhone" by Charles Yu

"Her", the new Spike Jonze film about a man who falls in love with an operating
system, has prompted many people to reconsider their relationship technology.

Quirky filmmaker Spike Jonze recently released "Her", a movie about a man in the future falling in love with a 'female' operating system. "Her" has been critically acclaimed and is one of the most popular films currently in theaters. People interested in technology have commented on whether, as it advances, human-computer relationships could become common, and one of those people is Charles Yu, writing for The New York Times. In "Happiness is a Warm iPhone" Yu writes about how his once-ardent love of new technology has faded in recent years. He uses his own personal experiences, likens a love of technology with a romantic relationship, and describes current technological trends to argue to they are too similar to the real world and no longer "challenge" people. This results in a piece that may make a reader question their own relationship with technology.

Yu is in this thirties, so he was a child when computers became popular. He explains, "My first real crush was on my family's Commodore 64." Yu says that after giving up one making computer programs he 'fell out of love' with the Commodore 64. However, he continues, "It was my first experience with what I could call a possibility space... in theory, anything could happen." Later in the piece, Yu says that he also became infatuated with email and his first iPhone. However, he says, "... as in too many real relationships, I woke up one morning and found that, for all my affection for and dependence on that phone, I was no longer in love with it." By comparing losing love for a phone to losing love for a person, Yu shows that both changes are caused by the same thing: boredom due to familiarity. This helps him prove that we become dependent, and therefore too used to, technology, so we no longer see how wonderful it is and how much potential it has.
Although personal stories can help establish a writer's ethos, readers cannot always relate to the writer's experiences. Therefore, it was a good decision on Yu's part to generally describe what technology is currently like, which is something that readers can understand and relate to. Yu writes, "Our gadgets are engineered to fit just right, into your hands, our lives. Virtual environments, apps and sites are designed by experts with care, forethought..." It stands to reason that when things are made to be perfect and are made to be an outright improvement in one's life, its marvels are not recognized and it is thought of as just another part of life. Yu appeals to this logic to support his argument that technology is too familiar to be loved and appreciated. 
Charles Yu claims that technology is so integrated into our lives that it becomes just another uninteresting part of our landscape. Those who do not agree with him may argue that it is too advanced and too impressive to ever be thought of in such a way. However, as Yu says, "We're holding magic boxes, boxes that want to serve us and coddle us, instead of challenge us. And how can you love something that doesn't challenge you?"




























Article link: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/23/opinion/sunday/happiness-is-a-warm-iphone.html?ref=opinion

TOW #18: Super Bowl Coca-Cola Commercial

On February 2nd, 2014, Super Bowl XLVIII was played between the Seattle Seahawks and Denver Broncos. As usual, the game itself received a lot of media attention, but one thing that also did was a simple minute-long Coca-Cola commercial that played during the game. The commercial is made up of short clips of people of all races dancing, eating, bowling, socializing, overlaid with the song "America the Beautiful". However, instead of being sung in English as one might expect, each part of the song is sung in a different language, which matches the race or ethnic background of the person or people in the clip that song section overlays. To the average viewer the Coca-Cola commercial is probably very cute, but to many, its point and the way the point was made were disgraceful.
Historically, racial and ethnic minorities in the United States have not been given fair treatment or representation. Fortunately, Coca-Cola clearly opposes this, as the actors in its Super Bowl commercial come from a variety of ethnic and religious backgrounds; some, like the Jewish men in the yarmulkes and Muslim women in the hijabs, are even wearing traditional outfits. They also sing "America the Beautiful" in languages other than English, including Spanish and Hebrew. Since none of these people are shown doing anything bad or out of the ordinary and are all singing a traditional patriotic song, the message is clear; all people in the United States are equal and all can be patriotic Americans. Coca-Cola used a very simple method of getting their message of equality across, so the point of the commercial was easily conveyed to the audience. The audience members understood exactly what Coca-Cola was conveying, and many were disgusted. They claimed that people like those in the commercial could not possibly be true Americans if they could not or would sing "America the Beautiful" in English, that Arabic was the language of "terrorists" and Spanish the language of "illegals", and that Coca-Cola was "on the road to perdition". Even though all level-headed and open-minded people decried this racist criticism and agreed with the message in the commercial, the criticism still got Coca-Cola more media attention and probably caused more people to see the commercial. The simplicity of the commercial's point made it easy to understand for everyone who saw it, and their views on it, whether positive or negative, got Coca-Cold a spot in the headlines and helped the company to spread their message of equality.







Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MEsOzzunPQ

IRB Post #3: In Cold Blood by Truman Capote

One of beloved author Truman Capote's most celebrated works, In Cold Blood tells the real-life stories of the Clutter family of Holcomb, Kansas, of their brutal murders in 1959, and of their killers, Perry Smith and Richard "Dick" Hickock. The perpetrators seemed to leave no clues behind and there was no apparent motive, so they escaped scrutiny for a few years before being caught and executed. Capote himself interviewed and gathered background information about those involved, before gathering all of his findings into one book. However, the truthfulness of the account was questioned after In Cold Blood was published. Despite any criticism or discrepancies, the Clutter murders are still well-known today, thanks to how horrific they were and to Capote's storytelling talent. 
I have heard about both In Cold Blood and Truman Capote for years, but never knew precisely what the story was about or why it is one of Capote's most famous works. I chose the book almost randomly, and when I found out that it was about a quadruple murder, my interest was macabrely piqued. I am interested in many subjects, and one of them is true crime; I frequently watch crime shows, have taken a psychology class, and am currently enrolled in a forensics class. Of course, I do not want to commit crimes myself, but instead simply enjoy studying them. Having the opportunity to read a book like In Cold Blood for school is very exciting to me. Now that I have begun reading it, I cannot put it down; Capote was right in calling his book a "nonfiction novel" because it is written in a very compelling way, characterizing and describing each person while still reminding the reader that they were all real people. I am very much looking forward to reading the rest of In Cold Blood and perhaps to reading more of Capote's work.

TOW #17: "Are You My Cousin?" by A.J. Jacobs

This old family tree may appear large and complicated to some, but to those
who dream of constructing a family tree of everyone on the planet, it is minuscule.

Services such as Geni, 23andMe, and Ancestry.com have become rather well-known in recent years due to their ability to help people learn about their ancestry and connect with distant relatives. However, it seems that few people think about what these services could possibly accomplish in the future, especially the connection of all human beings, both dead and alive. Editor and author A.J. Jacobs ponders this possibility and its implications in his editorial "Are You My Cousin?", published in The New York Times opinion section. He focuses on the benefits and drawbacks of so-called "quantum genealogy", especially whether it may lead humans to love and understand each other better. It seems that Jacobs presents a convincing argument and presents himself as a very informed person on the subject of genealogy. 

The personal experiences of an author may be limited in terms of the scope of evidence it provides to readers. However, in Jacobs' case, it proves rather valuable. When he writes about finding out, through the website Geni, that he is related to television show host Judge Judy Sheindlin, he says, "I'd always found her grating, but when I discovered our connection, I softened. She's probably a sweetheart underneath the bluster." By writing about his change in opinion after he found out he was related to Judge Judy, Jacobs showed that if humans were to build a complete family tree, they would see each other as family. Family members are more likely to see the good in each other, and Jacobs argues that this could lead to more understanding and peace worldwide. There is also the 'cool' factor in finding out one is related to celebrities, like Jacobs did with Judge Judy and others, including Paul McCartney and Gwyneth Paltrow. Obviously, these are positive consequences, but, to make a complete analysis of the subject, Jacobs does not and cannot end there.

Obviously, something world-changing like the advent of mega family trees have negative consequences, not just positive ones. Jacobs writes, "Critics point out, convincingly, that the shared trees are often poorly sourced and packed with errors that will take years to untangle." When addressing how public many family tree services are, he adds, "... If the general public knew how much of their family information was accessible, they might have a conniption." By addressing the opposition to his opinion that a worldwide family tree would be beneficial, Jacobs makes himself seem a lot more level-headed and informed. It also gives him the opportunity to argue directly against the counterargument, whereas he would not have been able to so effectively without bringing up the fact that people disagreed with him. 

Article link: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/opinion/sunday/are-you-my-cousin.html?ref=opinion

TOW #15: "The Civil Rights of Children" by The New York Times Editorial Board

While humorous, this cartoon makes a valid point: public schools are becoming
increasing strict about topics such as violence and drugs and alcohol, even to
the point of punishing students when they do nothing more than
allude to those things.

Nowadays it is not out of the ordinary to hear news stories about school officials crossing the line: punishing students, even young ones, for making gun shapes with their fingers or saying things like, "I'm going to kill you", obviously without meaning it. Sometimes the punishments are as harsh as suspending or expelling students, calling the police, or even arresting students. There has been some backlash, and it has been featured in the article "The Civil Rights of Children", which argues that not only that the constitutional rights of students are violated when "zero-tolerance policies" are enforced, but that those students usually belong to racial minority groups.
In the third paragraph of the article, the Editorial Board name-drops the entire United States government. They state, "Over the last several years, civil rights officials in the Obama administration have begun to focus on this problem, increasing civil rights investigations and forcing school districts to revise disciplinary policies that disproportionately affect minorities." Mentioning the fact that the President of the United States and those who work with him are concerned about the effect of zero-tolerance policies on minorities will cause readers to believe that the matter is much more pressing; after all, it is the job of the President and his administration to tackle tough issues. As the article is meant to convince readers that minority students are much more affected by zero-tolerance policies than non-minority students, mentioning that the federal government is concerned is an excellent tactic.
For the first several paragraphs, the article only says that students who belong to a minority group are "disproportionally" subjected to punishments because of zero-tolerance policies, without giving any real data. However, about halfway through, the Editorial Board writes, "African-American students represent only 15 percent of public school students, but they make of [sic] 35 percent of students suspended once, 44 percent of those suspended more than once, and 36 percent of those expelled... research has shown that black students do not engage in more serious or more frequent misbehavior than other students." Later the article provides statistics about the unfair treatment of disabled students. Statistics and other forms of data are much more convincing than anecdotal evidence, as they are more concrete and are gathered in a more scientific manner. As the statistics featured in the article show the disparity between the percentage of African-American students in public schools and the racial breakdown of students being severely punished, they help prove that students of color are punished harsher and more often than white students thanks to zero-tolerance policies.
With the combined effects of the ethos of the Obama administration and the use of statistics, it seems that any reader would recognize that minority students receive harsher punishments than non-minority students and that public schools are becoming too harsh when it comes to disciplinary infractions.

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/12/opinion/sunday/the-civil-rights-of-children.html?ref=editorials

TOW #14: The Hot Zone by Richard Preston

Richard Preston is the author of The Hot Zone and numerous other works about
bioterrorism and infectious diseases.

Published in 1994, The Hot Zone tells the terrifying true stories of viral hemorrhagic fevers, a group of deadly diseases that includes the infamous Ebola virus.  The book focuses on the discovery of the Reston virus, related to Ebola, that popped up in a monkey holding facility in Reston, Virginia, not far from Washington, DC.  Since the Reston virus killed nearly all the monkeys it affected, the prospect of it crossing into the human population scared researchers and medical experts out of their wits.  The process of identifying the disease and decontaminating the holding facility takes up about half the book, which is told through the perspective of any one of those at the site of the Reston outbreak or of Preston himself.
The Hot Zone is mostly made up of testimony from people who are experts on viral hemorrhagic fevers or where at the Reston holding facility, so a lot of the book does not have a very 'personal touch'.  However, the book's last section is entirely about the author's own experiences visiting two places central to The Hot Zone. The first is Kitum Cave in Kenya, where two people fatally contracted the Marburg virus in the 1980's.  Their experiences were crucial to the beginning of the work, as the research done on their cases set the stage for later exploration into similar diseases.  When Preston writes about his own visit, it is somewhat of an appeal to ethos, as it makes it seem like he understands the topic better; nothing is better than first-hand experience.
The second place Preston visits is the monkey holding facility where the Reston virus had broken out, but this involves a different rhetorical device.  Long abandoned, vines had grown up the sides of the building, which was inhabited only by spiders and other insects.  Preston writes at the very end of the book, "Life had established itself inside the monkey house.  Ebola had risen in these rooms, flashed its color, fed, and subsided into the forest.  It will be back" (Preston 411).  By the end of the book, readers know that the Ebola virus is deadly to humans and that the Reston virus would be equally devastating.  By wrapping up with a phrase as ominous as "It will be back", Preston ensures that readers will think about his book for a long time and even be haunted by it; I can attest to this idea, as I certainly thought about The Hot Zone for a long time after finishing it.