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.