The End

Well this is my last blog post for the year and I'm not really sure what all to say. It's been a good class and I've enjoyed my cohort a lot. We all got along and never had any problems. I could not have asked for a better group.

Blogging has not been something that I liked about this class. I've never liked the idea of blogging and never thought that I would, and am glad that after this I will not have to blog again. I think the reason I don't like it is because whenever I think of a blog I think of the ones you hear about on TV where some random person has become famous by talking about famous people. I do know that those are not the only kinds of blogs but they are the only ones I hear about. Having to blog has not changed how I feel about it either. If given the choice I would choose not to blog. For the purpose of the class however I thought it was a new and interesting way of making us approach public argument.

Now that school is over for the semester I'm somewhat looking forward to the summer. I have a job doing grounds keeping work here on campus which will be nice, but I will have to start work at 7am. This is going to be rough for me because during this last semester the earliest I had to wake up was for an 11am class and a 955am class once a week. So if your sticking around Madison this summer I may see you, chances are though you will see me and I won't notice you.

Working 40 hours a week will be nice because I had an exam Monday and my last one is on Friday and I am already getting bored of not having anything to do. The only problem with working will be that it is going to cut into my valuable fishing time. Luckily I only work until 3:30 so I'll still have the weeknights and weekends to fish. So far my roommates and I have not been able to catch very many fish worth keeping but I'm hoping that as the summer goes on the fish will get bigger and be worth the time and effort to clean. When I say clean I'm talking about filleting them, taking the meat off the fish and cooking it.

I'm going to try and take a trip out to Yellowstone Park sometime this summer with my girlfriend, as well as going to Arizona to visit her grandparents. I've never been to Yellowstone Park and I plan on driving out there which I think will be a lot of fun. I know it is a long drive but there are a few places along the way that look like fun to stop at such as Deadwood. I'm a big fan of Westerns and cowboys and anything related to them so I know I will enjoy it, not so sure about my girlfriend though.

After I first posted this I realized that for my nickname I selected the name "Burns" and never explained why. The reason is because in high school I had very large sideburns and it was a nickname that followed me through high school and some people still call me that today. Just thought I would explain that and if your interested in great men in history with sideburns i suggest you look up General Ambrose Burnside.

Well I'm starting to just ramble on about my summer plans and can't really think of anything else to say. This class has been fun and I have enjoyed it and to end on a happy note here is a link to something I did over winter break before coming to this class, hope you enjoy it. http://gazettextra.com/photos/galleries/southern-wisconsin-snow-2008/3134/

The Sum

So in week 2, I missed a post for a variety of reasons. For one, I had to go home for a family matter, but the other was really why I didn't post. It was because I was without a group. I was like a lost little boy. Call me Oliver or Stuart Little. Either way you look at it, I was groupless. And yes, I did just make up a word.

But by the end of the week, I was placed with another group, and I had no idea what to expect. First there was Matt. A loud, talkative kid from New York who really epitomized what the term "coastie" means. It is funny because I hate kids who give people like me, people from the "coast", a bad name but all I really needed was a little time to understand who Matt was. Next, there was Jake. Jake was not the most talkative person but when he did say something, I knew that what he was saying was important to him. He was exactly what I expected of him.  A humble intelligent kid who was absolutely a positive in the group. And lastly, there was Courtney. Courtney was really the wild card in the group, even though she was one of the founding members of the group. She was the only female of the group and I really worried that she might be a little timid during group discussions. And like many other times, I was dead wrong. Courtney was personable, smart, witty, and my partner in crime when it came time to make fun of Matt. All in all, the group dynamic was great and I knew great things were on the horizon.

I think my favorite moment with the group, and they would probably agree, was when we were first coming up with our ideas for what we wanted our project to be on. While it was not the most coherent or official meeting, we all were springing our creativity, for better or worse that is. Our project idea started off as us playing drinking games on camera in order to teach kids how to have fun in college. Looking back on that idea now, its a miracle that it even came across our minds because Christine shot it down like Kobe on a buzzer beater. So we go even more creative. We put all jokes aside...kinda, and got down to business. After a few revisions, we finally landed on our idea of responsible drinking and the rest was history.

Our sessions together in library, although long, were really enjoyable, and it seemed like none of us ever wanted to go home. Now that may be because Matt lives in the dorms and Courtney lived a little far away, but I like to think it was because of how much we enjoyed each others company on both a social and work level. We had fun and were also effective. We joked around, but when it was time, we got down to work and it was really remarkable when we came up with our idea to do radio ads as our group project. The best part about the idea was that nobody can take full credit for the idea, because everyone came up with it. We thought about how we should take advantage of new media forms and believe it or not, the radio is the most watched/listen to media on the planet behind TV. From there, we all took our different writing and vocal skills and recorded it, all with the support of one another. No matter what grade we receive, I know I speak for everyone when I say that we are proud of what we handed in.

I think the only sad part is that we may never see each other again. This is a school of 40,000 people, and one of our group members is leaving. I will be senior and graduate, and then eventually Jake will graduate, and then it will be left to Matt. As depressing as it sounds, I prefer to have enjoyed and lost, then to have never had at all. This group gave me great memories, great learning tools, and great friends, regardless of if we ever see each other again. I hope that like me, everyone else in the group thinks about this, and at some point in their life, draws on a memory from a cohort meeting to accomplish something great in their life.

Pardon me while I reminisce :)

Well, needless to say, I have been feeling rather sentimental with my graduation quickly approaching this Saturday, so I ask for you forgiveness in advance as I enter a world of reminiscing. It’s rather funny because this blog is actually the first time I have taken to sit down and think about what will be happening five days from now, and I can’t tell you how many memories ran through my head before I snapped back to reality and remembered that I was supposed to be blogging. Of course I am excited to be graduating, but there is of course, a part of me that does not want to either.

I am truly awed by the gigantic heap of knowledge that I have somehow managed to jam into my brain over the past few years. I have also realized that after numerous years of science courses I have not only earned a Bachelor’s degree in Animal Sciences and Biology but a degree in science geekiness. The world of science excites me greatly and I continue to enjoy learning anything and everything about it. I have also discovered the world of research while attending this university. Before I came here, I had no idea the vast world that research entailed and how easily it was to get involved. After I leave here though, I will have lent a helping hand in three cutting-edge research labs with a new found passion for the world of scientific discovery.

I have to admit my favorite part of college lies within all the people I have met. I am without a doubt surrounded by the most amazing people in world that all happen to mean the world to me. They have been there through all too many ridiculous shenanigans, and they have also been there through the times that were a little less pleasant. I also cannot forget about many of those that maybe weren’t there through everything, but still influenced me in some way. Through them and my experiences, I have learned much more about life and myself than I would have never been able to fathom before I left for Madison from the suburbia of Mukwonago, WI.

So, I could go on and on about what I have learned life and about myself in the past few years, but I think that would most likely fill a novel, so to spare you some time, I will reveal only three. I think one of the most important things I have learned, something that has turned into one of my life’s maxims, is that it is essential to laugh through all of your tears. This motto my best friend and I developed together and it is probably the reason we have maintained sanity throughout these past four years. Its acts as a reminder that even when things in your life seem to be taking a nose dive that there are numerous others that are still soaring high that you need to smile about. It reminds us to not dwell excessively on the matter, and in the end, no matter how bad it gets, you will make it through, you will dust yourself off, and you will be okay. Keep your head up, keep that smile on face, and never stop laughing because it’s going to get you through the hard times and it’s just a waste of your time not to.

Secondly, the second lesson, I actually learned from my grandfather, yes I realize he is slightly older than a college age friend, but this man is wisest man I know and I feel this is a worthy lesson to discuss. About a year a half ago, my grandfather was diagnosed with Type 4 lymphoma. After undergoing months of chemo, he was finally allowed to come home as he entered remission. A few months later, he was readmitted back into the hospital, his cancer was back and a brain tumor had developed. Our family was devastated when we received this news, and it was even more difficult to know this man who had been my superhero had broken down and cried in the hospital room when his odds were revealed to him. He showed a mere ounce of being human before he transformed back into the superhero that I recalled. There was no way he was giving up, his hope did not falter, his positive outlook did not dwindle, and his passion for life still burned zealously. And I am lucky enough to say, that after his second treatment, he has gone back into remission and the brain tumor is nowhere in sight. So, what I have learned from my grandpa is to never stop fighting for the goals that you want to accomplish, that you can beat the odds, and to never take a day for granted because you are not sure when it will be the last. Also, did I mention that this man was a war veteran and survived polio…yeah, definitely a superhero.

Thirdly, I have learned a lot from all of you in English 201. You’re thoughts and opinions that you shared during class gave me numerous perspectives and provoked new ways of thinking. My cohort of course, I enjoyed working with all of your immensely and I thank you for all of the laughs and encouragement while working on a potentially stressful project. And Christine, you taught me a crazy amount of rhetoric as I actually had no understanding of any of its concepts before taking your class, your passion for the subject help to make my education a little more well-rounded, not to mention, you brought me to one of my new favorite books that I may not have read otherwise. And lastly, I thank you for giving us the freedom to create. It’s rare that we get the opportunity to do write or work on a project with so few rules, it was a hard concept for me to grasp at first, but then I kind of took it and ran with it, truly enjoying the freedom.

So, as one of my friends taught me in eighth grade, if you do not want to say goodbye, you can always say hasta luego…

Hasta Luego

Hey all,
I have always hated writing these reflections because I find them stupid and cheesy. Somehow everyone expects me to take time out of my day to write about how great my class is, how amazing my classmates were, how much I learned and how much I am going to miss my class. English 201 was one of my favorite classes that I have taken in Madison. My class was an eclectic group that was lead by a very good professor. I did learn a lot and will miss the discussion driven atmosphere.
Now that the sentimental stuff is out of the way, I can use my final few lines to say what is on my mind. Firstly, I was apart of the best cohort in the class. We had the best people, the best work and the most fun. We also found the best place to “study” in the entire Helen C White/College Library area. The place is furbished with a couch, dry, erase board, privacy and is easily accessible that is why we are the best
The second thing on my mind has to deal with my first post. At the time, I posted on Sean Avery and his suspension from the National Hockey League. After much criticism and a six-month hiatus, Sean signed with the New York Rangers. He finished the season with the Rangers and was an integral part of the Rangers turnaround this year.
The third thing that is on my mind has to deal with a few of my sports theories. These theories I hold as central tenets to any teams success in any sport and would like to officially document them. In my view a General manager needs to do three things in order to build a good team. First, he must draft good players and many of them. Look at the teams who played in the N.F.L’s conference championship. The Patriots had four picks in the first hundred overall selections while the Eagles had more than 10 total selections. Every year these teams are criticized by so called experts because they failed to make a big signing in free agency.
These experts forget that drafted players have been thoroughly reviewed by a team’s scout who understands teams system and what the team culture is. They take this knowledge and apply it to incoming athletes. Scouts are professionals and for the most part do a good job of finding the right talent to fit the right situation.
My second postulate is to avoid signing free agents to mammoth contracts. Often, these contracts are bloated and eat up most of the cap space a team has. Look at major Yankee signings over the past few years (this years group is not mentioned because it is too early to pass judgment). Carl Pavano, Jose Contreras, Jason Giambi, Jonny Damon, Steve Karsay, and Kyle Farnsworth, All these players were signed to big deals after producing in a contract season. If a franchise does not believe a player is worth being that teams franchise player than do no sign him to a monstrous deal and make him yours. Odds are they know something you do not. Instead of spending millions on “franchise” players, sign veteran role players who can help your team’s young nucleus grow without killing your cap. The Detroit Tigers did this with Kenny Rodgers, and the New York Rangers with Brendon Shanahan. Sign veteran players to fill a specific need and teach your youngsters.
The third way to build a champion is defense. The Iron Curtain, ’85 Bears, and New England Patriots have built dynasties around having a fearsome defense that can prevent scoring and get the ball for the offense. This theory is also true in Hockey. Last years Stanley cup champions and perennial president trophy candidate Detroit Redwings are the perfect example. Detroit’s lineup is stacked with Norris trophy winner Nick Limstrom and Selke trophy winner Henrik Zetterberg. Detroit’s two best players have won awards for their defensive prowess!! Add in Brad Stuart, Brian Rafalski and Marian Hossa and this team is electric on both sides of the ice. By doing these three things, a general manager can build a playoff team that is a contender every year.
Now that I have my final thoughts on paper I would like to thank everybody for a great semester. Although I have only had two of them, this semester was awesome and I will miss Wisconsin over the summer. I love it here. The sports, academics and parties are great but what makes this place special is the people who inhabit it. I have met the most wonderful people over the past year at the University and cannot wait to meet the many multitudes of others that I do not know about.
On Wisconsin,


Matt

How to recap

It's funny. In my high school, we all got a senior page, where we tried to recap the past four years, or for some of us that went to school since kindergarten, 13 years. And the worst part about it was that they give you a character limitation. Could you imagine if for every citizen, when they are on there death bed, they are given the order to recap their life...in 400 words or less. Stupidity.

But as I did in high school, I will attempt to do it for this class. The fact of the matter is that I hated every single person in this class...just kidding. Truth be told, I thought everyone brought something good to the table. Some were quiet, some were talkative, and some were like Matt. Either way you judge one of the students in this class, they were enjoyable, and helpful. I also thought the class itself was great. I enjoyed all of the books and short pieces we read. I also enjoyed some of the current rhetoric articles we looked at. However, my favorite part of the class turned out to be the first few weeks, where we were basically lectured at. 

I really thought the lecturing point of this class was going to be...well dumb. I didnt see its purpose since their was no final and to be honest, I had no idea what Christine was talking about for the first two class. I mean really. You bring in 20 kids from completely different backgrounds, most of us just taking this class for fun, and tell them about ethos, pathos, and any other greek word you can think of. It isn't the easiest thing to comprehend like learning rocket science. Anyway, I remember sitting down to right my paper on Bruce Springsteen's Jungleland, and like in a movie scene, it all just clicked. I understood how pathos and ethos come in to play in daily life, in song, in just about everything we as humans do. And as it all clicked in my head, I realized that this was the class for me. I am not trying to be dramatic, but it really looked like a well written play when I come to the realization in the very chair that I am in now.

And that is what it all comes down to. The moment of clarity. The sudden realization of why I am learning a new technique, idea, or theory. And like 3 months ago, when I had this moment, I share that same happiness right now. I am happy that I attended all but one class this semester. I learned not only how to bring my writing to the next level, not just how to manipulate words and sentences, and certainly not how to do well on papers. I learned how to take lessons from class and apply them indirectly to my work, both on paper, and in my cohort. Never once, did Courtney, Jake, or Matt say, "Geez Drew, thats some ethos you have there." But through our various discussions, we said claims that declared what one anothers ethos was, and how they portrayed it through their own individual rhetoric. And I am also thank full for this blog. When I started this blog, I use to re-read everything I wrote, as if it was the most important paper ever. But what I realized about this blog is that it is a external internal monologue. It is a place to get all my thoughts down and also a place to enhance my writing. And that is how I feel that I have used this blog.

So in the end, I want to say thank you to everyone in the class, as well as Christine. While I didn't interact with every one of you, you all helped me in one way or another...except for you Matt, you hindered me...once again, just kidding.

"If you fail, I'll kill you"

When I write I don't usually think about any rules in particular, I mostly just think of my high school English teacher Mrs. Schroeder. For my junior and senior years I had the same teacher for my English classes, and I learned a lot from her. On the outside she was your typical nice little old lady. She had worked at the school longer than most other teachers and met her husband there. At my school there were a lot of teachers that did not really care about the students, they were just concerned with getting a pay check. Luckily Mrs. Schroeder was not one of these teachers, she really cared about all of her students and it was very easy to see this after just a couple of her classes.

During my English 11 honors class all she was concerned about was making sure we were prepared for the writing portions on the ACT and SAT exams. It was nice to have a teacher who told us what the class was going to be like and stick to it. At first I hated it because while all other English classes were taking multiple choice exams on books and short stories they had read, my class was writing five paragraph essays for everything in the class. When we first started it was hard having to write this much in a fifty minute class period at the level she wanted us to. During my senior year though I was glad I had her the year before because for my AP English class she spent the entire year getting us ready for the AP exam, which she did in the same way as my junior class.

When I learned the most about writing was not while I was writing or before I wrote something, but after all of our papers had been handed in and graded. Mrs. Schroeder liked to teach us by showing us a couple of really good papers and a couple of not so good papers and asking the class what was good and bad about them. I liked learned like this because we were being shown papers written by others around our own skill level instead of from a book. Doing this helped me personally than any writing rules that I had been shown before in a book because when she asked us to find what was good and bad about the papers, we actually had to apply the rules that we had learned in previous classes.

I mentioned earlier that from the outside she was a typical nice little old lady but once you get to know Mrs. Schroeder you quickly learn that she is...eccentric I guess is the best way to put it. She was always full of energy and had no problem getting really excited in the middle of class telling someone if they were doing something right or wrong in front of everyone. During one of these moments she told the class who had the worst hand writing in class while she was grading papers. She said one of my friends had the worst, and I had the second worst hand writing of the class. Anyone with a normal teacher would probably be embarrassed, but to this day it's something that I'm still strangely proud of. When someone would finally get something they did not understand she could go from being very calm to very excited instantly. This made her class more fun because you could actually see how happy she got that her students were learning.

Once she found out when people were going to start taking the ACT or SAT she started to focus the class mostly on writing instead of what the curriculum was supposed to be. It was the first time that we actually spent some days just talking about proper rules and writing techniques. These were the most boring days of her class, partly because it all just seemed like review and nothing new. Part of me thinks that is why we spent a couple days going over rules, so she could show us that what we would be graded on we already knew. It was a nice little boost of confidence before taking an exam that would get us into college. She showed her eccentric said after we were done going over rules when she said to our entire class "If you fail, I'll kill you." Everyone knew that she was only kidding and everyone just laughed when she yelled this because its hard to picture someone like her ever hurting anything.

I'm glad I had her for two years because to this day she is my favorite teacher and I learned a lot about writing and English in general from her. What I learned from her shows because on did excellent on the writing portions of the ACT and SAT and got a 4 on the AP English exam. So when I sit down to write I do not think of any rules or proper conventions but instead the image of Mrs. Schroeder coming at me if I were to fail.

Hey all,
I just realized I forgot to post about what helps me write effectively. I have always felt that writing is a personal thing in which each person has their own little quirks and suggestions that helps them translate what they have in their mind to what the say on paper.
In order to do that I have always believed a person must understand what situation allows them to be most creative. For me, I need to spend time showering and contemplate what I want to say. After having this mental outline, I then sit down and just write about the topic. I avoid paying attention to the rules, and nuances that are involved in writing. I write and present my argument. After finishing my argument, I then go back and proofread my work. At that point the conventions of English are brought back into play as I tinker with phrases and word choice.
Once I have a piece that I am confident in, I then print it out and read it with a pen. I use my pen to both proofread and edit my work. Often, many mistakes that I have missed are found and corrected. I also, substitute new words and vocabulary that I am seeking to include in my works. After making these corrections, I click save and go on ESPN.Com
I have also found that the setting that somebody writes in is essential to that works success. Some people can sit in front of a television and write an electric essay while others need the quite of a library. I find myself somewhere in the middle. I need noise and activity to be going on around me in order to match my fast paced writing style however, I get distracted very easily and have noticed that 10 min breaks have an ability to last much longer. As a result, I often listen to music and write my paper on Bascom Hill or in my room. This is decided by what time I sit down to write and the weather outside.
That to me is the most important part of writing. Finding a setting that fosters creativity and productivity. I like writing essays but prefer to do them quickly so I can go out later that night. I believe an essay should be written quickly and thoroughly. Over-proofreading and over thinking can lead to disastrous results and undermine what you are trying to say. A person is better off having a well-written sentence then spending hours trying to find the perfect one. No writing is perfect and often that is what makes a piece of writing so exhilarating. I understand that my work will never be perfect and I seek to capture those imperfections.
People are inherently imperfect beings and a writer must understand that. I have always felt that mistakes are what make works interesting, different and revolutionary. The one suggestion I would like to leave you with is the suggestion of truth. Be true to the voice in your head. Writing is relaying YOUR ideas to the public. Do not spend time trying to say what people want to hear rather focus on saying what you are thinking. If a writer can do that than who is to say a work is poorly done?

Heeding advice and praying for a little skill...

I have probably struggled with writing since I began in four-year-old kindergarten. Throughout the years, this fact has made me rather willing to listen to and utilize as much writing advice as possible, in order to finally perfect the art of writing. I am still waiting on this perfection….Something tells me this will not be coming anytime soon, so in the meantime, I will just continue to heed advice and pray for a little bit of skill. While striving for this perfection, I have collected numerous writing tips and have found my favorites and well, my not so favorites.

One of the best writing tips I have ever received applies to writing rather indirectly. This writing tip is to just read. It allows me to learn by example, shows me numerous techniques, expands my vocabulary and complexity of sentence structure, betters my understanding of proper phrasing and grammar practice, and the list could go on. Not to mention, reading is rather enjoyable and furthers my education in both school and life, enabling me to kill two birds with one stone.

Along with reading, I also believe that conversing or even listening to conversation can improve your writing, well, as long as its not being modeled after a bunch of five-year-olds’ conversations (no matter how witty you think they are). I also feel that this makes a lot of sense because when we were babies, we learned how to formulate sentences through listening to those who spoke around us, it’s not like we were handed a pencil and told to write sentences right off the bat. I realized that conversation had much influence on my writing as I reminisced back to four and half years ago, when I began dating an English major. His speech was much more eloquent than mine and over the past few years, I have thankfully picked up on his style, ability to structure sentences, and vocabulary, intermingling it with my own and improving myself as a speaker and writer. Not to mention, he enjoys buying me books for any occasion, which as I had mentioned earlier, reading helps to improve one’s writing.

Also, going hand-in-hand with this, I feel that reading your writing aloud will help to improve it too. Being able to hear what the piece sounds like allows one to check for phrasing, comma placement, sensible word order, flow, and allows you to grip a little better what is being said and how it is being explained. It really allows you to check your writing over, and I feel that is a very useful practice. I wish that I had remembered this piece of advice before turning in my personal statement for my graduate school application. This is because as I read it aloud AFTER turning it in, I realized how much I disliked it, a little too late. Now, I do not think I will ever be able to forget it this piece of advice.

Another lesson that the writing of my personal statement taught me is to “kill your darlings.” With a 5000 character limit, the writing must be clear and concise, getting to the main points, and cutting out much of the detail and description that I would have liked to have included for increased support. It is often tough to figure out what should be kept and what should be discarded, especially when much time and effort has gone into the piece, but it often has to be done, and the writing will survive without “your darlings.”

As much as I enjoy writing advice, sometimes the wrong advice is given and it can be detrimental to a writer’s development. For example, one of my English teachers ingrained in me that I was not allowed to use contractions EVER in my writing. Any writing assignment that I turned in would be severely downgraded for any contractions residing inside of it. Being young and impressionable, it became ingrained in me that contractions and writing papers should never commingle. Since I never had much time to pursue writing outside of school, it took years before I was set straight and realized that this was a stylistic element that I could include if I chose too. I also had a teacher who would down grade students for using helping verbs too often, which “too often” was determined by her. Yes, I know they are not the only verbs we should use, and it is a good practice to use more active verbs, but how are you supposed to develop as a writer when you cannot write in your own style in fear of being penalized. I can understand their practices a little bit, but I feel that it would be helpful if the allowed students a little more time to practice more expressive writing.

In the end, I feel that I have come across some great writing advice that has truly aided me in developing as a writer. I know that there is still so much to learn. I appreciate any of the tips that I can get…so if you have any to offer, I am all ears.

No Advice Necessary

It's not that I haven't ever gotten any good our sound advice. It really just comes down to the fact that nothing has ever stuck with me. And in this post, instead of trying to think about the tidbits I have received from teachers, friends, and others who have guided my writing career, I am going to explain why I don't feel it is necessary to have writing guidelines for every single paper I write.

Now this is not to say that I don't think anyone should follow guidelines. I have a friend who will spend two days researching his topic, spend another day or two writing out a detailed outline, only to spend another two days finally writing out the paper. Now to me, this is ridiculous. To me, it is just a waste of time. But for him, it is the best process in the world and is how he achieves the grades he wants. But for me, I don't like guidelines. It's the same reason why I didn't like to color inside the lines when I was a little kid. I just don't like rules. I don't think the freest form of expressing ones self, writing or spoken word, should have any rules or guidelines. There is a reason why it is called "freedom of speech" and not "guidelines for expressing ones self".

I love writing. I love writing about sports one day and then writing about the most embarrassing moment of my life another day (if your interested, it was a time when I was in the ocean and...well this isn't the time or place). Writing is the basis of all forms of expression. Whether it is poetry, song, novel, movie, anything, it starts out on paper. In fact, many people who write music (Bruce Springsteen for one) write in journals without lines. Now while it may not be for the same reason as I perceive it to be, I would like to believe that he does this so he can just get his ideas out on paper. He doesn't need to make a guideline of how the screen door slamming leads to him wanting to pull out of a town full of losers because he wants to win (I'm sorry if you aren't a Springsteen fan but he is a genius). To me, there is no need to rationale a story or create an outline. For me, the easiest thing to do is write what I am thinking, finish my thoughts, and then revise. When I write, I feel that I start to get into a groove. I feel like John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever. I feel like MJ against the Jazz in '98. I feel like Tiger on the 16th at Augusta. I just feel invincible, I feel like MIdas. Everything I touch just turns to gold in my mind. So why would I ever stop my groove, or not even enter a groove, by creating an outline or just jotting my ideas in bullet points. To me, setting any sort of guidelines are just unnecessary. I don't like being bound down by a rule and don't plan to write that way.

So how has my writing been in my career, even without any sound advice. Well quite frankly, I think I have done quite well for myself. I believe that my writing has evolved to a point where I am writing concise and comical papers. So what if I haven't gotten any advice or don't follow any guidelines. Hell, I gave myself my advice. And I pass it along to anyone who wants it. "Write whatever, however, and whenever you feel like writing. It is the best way to express yourself without rules."

Our project focuses on drinking safely while still having fun. Our goal is to educate the public through humorous and light-hearted public service announcements to be aired over the radio and possibly through other forms of media as well. They will be play at strategically based times when people will be consuming alcohol. We hope that through the education of our audience about certain facts regarding alcohol's effects and the social implications of drinking that our audience will be able to formulate their own decisions instead of just being told what to do (because no one actually likes or responds well to being told what to do).

CREATE!

Literature, Movies, TV, and a variety of other forms of entertainment have been around for centuries. People have been exposed to comedy, drama, action, adventure, and every other genre that exists and it is difficult to be original. It is difficult to be engaging. The fact of the matter is that it takes a different form, genre, and style to engage every person. So what engages me? Its simple. Originality. 

I am a big fan of comedy. I think it is the best way to be original while still providing a great form of entertainment. I think South Park and Seinfeld are genius and I think Dane Cook and Family Guy are ridiculous. The first two are original, creative, and have been able to be fresh for years. The latter two are repetitive, loud, and quite absurd. Being funny is easy when their is no set topic. What sets South Park and Seinfeld apart from all other shows, with the exception of The Simpsons, is that their jokes are built into the plot of the show, and they stick to the main idea while still bringing a genius form of comedy to their viewers. 

It is actually quite easy for me to point out what I like. I have been alive for almost 21 years so I have been able to put a grasp on what I like and what grinds my gears. As for what I don't like, well that takes a little more investigation into what I don't prefer to watch, read, or listen to. One concept that really bothers me is whining. I hate hate hate Radiohead, and any of those boy bands that sound like someone is stepping on the lead singers "family jewels". Their high pitch voice, whining about how they weren't the cool kid in high school, or how they can't play sports, or never got girls. I just don't care. I have heard it before and quite frankly, my life has enough of its own problems that I don't need to care about some band who is making millions of dollars but still has some problems. I may get destroyed by whoever responds to this post but I think The Matrix is stupid. Three movies, three depictions of the exact same thing; a washed up actor time traveling. The first one was good, original, creative, unintentionally funny. But the second and third. I mean even the titles are bad. Almost as bad as the creators of The Fast and The Furious Trilogy. I mean really, here are the three titles of that group; The Fast And The Furious, The Fast And The Furious Tokyo Drift, and Fast And Furious. They are better off naming it, "Here are Two Actors Who Can't Get Other Jobs." At least that would be creative and honest. But I digress. 

The truth of the matter is that I could ramble off a million different examples of what I like and what I don't like. The one consistent concept throughout everything is that what really engages me is originality. It is almost that it doesn't engage me, it impresses me. I guess they are one in the same. To engage me is to impress me. Show me something new. Show me why you are creative, different, and deserve the spotlight. The amount of writers that create terrible books, TV shows, and movies bothers me because I would say about half of them are full of crap. You can't honestly tell me the writer of Gigli is a genius. And if you believe he is, well then promise we will never talk again.

One of my best family friends, Alan Zweibel (he is googleable), is a great writer. He was an original writer for SNL, wrote for Curb Your Enthusiasm, and has a variety of books out. But about seven years ago, I remember a period when he couldn't get anything published or even made into a pilot on TV. The problem was that the Reality TV Show genre was in the midst of a boom and anyone who was the least bit creative couldn't get anything put into production. Reality TV, arguably the least creative genre their is. I mean really, how hard is it to come up with an idea of having "celebrities" dance on TV. Not to mention that the most successful reality TV shows in America were rip-offs of shows in other countries. Maybe I am biased because this is one of my great family friends, but either way, when I remember the times that he struggled to produce anything, I remember thinking about why it was like that. Now that I am older, and realize what I like, what really engages me, I realize that it is all about being original. It is all about being creative.

The Powers of Chuck Norris

I'm sure almost everyone has heard of Chuck Norris and knows all about the "Chuck Norris Facts" that have come out. If you have not heard of them, Chuck Norris Facts and things such as "When Chuck Norris was born, the only person who cried was the doctor. Never slap Chuck Norris." These lists of facts helped Chuck gain widespread fame on the Internet. What some people may not know is that these facts were inspired by Conan O'Brien, who after NBC gained the rights to Walker, Texas Ranger, began doing a segment where he would pull a lever that played a random clip from the TV show. Doing this revitalized Chuck Norris and brought him to a whole new audience.
Video Of Conan with Walker Texas Ranger lever.

I had to tell you all of that to make sure you knew the background of what I'm going to talk about.

What engages me is comedy, if something can make me laugh then I am able to pay attention very easily. I think it also makes it easier to connect to the speaker, because if you can make people laugh and still talk about serious topics, then it can make it easier to get people to pay attention to what you say. Doing things this way does run the risk of people not taking you seriously, but it will still make them stop and think about what you were talking about, which in the long run is an accomplishment.

During his campaign to try and become the Republic Party Nominee, Mike Huckabee took advantage of the new found fame Chuck Norris had gained with a younger audience by making an ad with Chuck. In this ad Mike took the risk of creating a comical political ad, which could have backfired and made people not take him seriously. Luckily for him though, it helped get his name out to the masses, and he came close to winning the Republican Party nomination.
HuckChuckFacts video.

After seeing the video on YouTube, I became very interested in Mike Huckabee, and wanted to learn more about him. From the one minute video he had me interested in his campaign. After watching the video a couple of time I decided to go to his website and see what all he stood for. This was the first time I had ever looked into a politician like this, and was also the first Presidential election i was voting in, so i figured I'd find out about the candidates. After reading his website, I discovered that I agreed on most issues with Mike, and decided that I would vote for him.

I doubt I would have looked into him or any of the other candidates if I wouldn't have seen the video on YouTube. It was something that instantly appealed to me because it made me laugh. I had never seen a political ad before that I found funny, most of them just annoy me and I can't wait for the election to be over so I won't have to see them anymore.

An important lesson that I can take from this for my oral presentation is to try and make people laugh in the beginning of our presentation. This will help to grab every ones attention and help us relax and probably make our presentation go smoother because we won't be as nervous. This works out for our group because we are taking a more comical approach to get our point across.

Book vs. Movie

Writing came first. It was how caveman would communicate with each other rather than loud sounds of "Ohh" and "Ahh" and "Mmm". Then as time advanced...really advanced, humans began to write books and journals that would tell tales of heroic men like Odysseus' journey in The Odyssey and The Illiad. This is an example of a traditional story that has been passed down through centuries through written and spoken word. One could even argue that the reason it has been passed down through so many centuries and cultures is because of its explicit details that tell the tale of a man who fights through wars and evil beings just to take back his homeland. However, when man, or woman, discovered the idea of film and pictures in motion, a new breed of story telling was born. While it is not something that has replaced written word, it is a form of entertainment that has certainly gained the attention of the world.

Movies, films, or whatever you want to call them, are just plain different then books. The biggest difference is that they don't leave anything up to the audience member, which for some is a good thing and for others is a bad thing. With any movie, their is a director who creates the story with his image in mind. He, along with a producer, assigns a cast, a setting, and everything else that goes along with the movie. With a book, the author basically sets the stage for a reader to let his mind wander. While a story is told, it is up the reader to figure out what the location looks like, the physical description of characters, and just about everything else that makes up a novel. So the real question is, what form of entertainment really gives the best depiction of an epic story and gives the reader a true experience of the events that unfold?

The fact of the matter is that there is no perfect answer to this question. I personally could think of examples to counter each side of the argument and would basically find myself in a chicken or the egg situation. While something like Lance Armstrong's biography, which has only been made into a book, is something that would clearly be better as a literary piece, a story like Miracle, the film about the 1980 US Hockey Team, is a piece of work that would be much better as a film. Everyone knows that Lance Armstrong's journey through life, both on and off the bike, has been difficult and amazing. However, I don't believe I would have a great experience watching him on a bike for an hour and in the hospital for another hour. Rather, hearing him explain his journey through written word is more compelling and gives a better depiction of his story. With that being said, a novel about the miracle team may not give a true depiction of how hard this group of men worked to achieve their goal. Rather, seeing these men give everything they have in a motion picture truly gives the viewer a real experience of what happened. In fact, I remember watching the movie with my father and him recounting the game the same way that it was portrayed in the movie. 

Language is a great tool that has been around as long as anyone can remember. There is a reason why it has survived this long and has not been replaced by another form. With that being said, it is not fair to say that language is the best way to give an account of a story. However, you could say the same about films. There is no clear cut answer in this quarrel and while for some it comes down to a matter of opinion, for me, I can't answer the question. I like both sides. Sometimes I like to read and sometimes I like to view a film. This debate will never be settled for sure. It is up to the authors and directors to keep making greats pieces of work so that this debate lives on forever.

Language comes close

Language is a very good way of being able to get across a person's ideas and beliefs to an audience, however when it comes to capturing the experience of a moment it falls short. While writing someone may be able to get across a general idea or tell a story to the reader, but the experience that the reader has can never be the same as the authors. The problem with trying to get a cross a certain experience is that unless you are actually there when it happens, it's very difficult to get others to share in that moment the same way that you did.

What language does do is give writers a way to describe and tell others about something that has happened to them. A writer is able to tell the emotions he or she felt at the time, and a personal reaction.. This is where language is not able to successfully create the same experience for another person. Someone reading what someone else went through will have a different experience because they are living it through someone else. This means that any experience you got out of reading something is based on the authors retelling of it, and not the actual event.

Everyone is different, including how they experience something. An example of two people going through the same event and having a different experience is a roller coaster ride. Some people are terrified to go on one while others love the thrill it gives them. These two people reacted differently and therefore would be influenced by their person experiences while reading about someone else's. If for example you read about someone who was terrified of a roller coaster and you loved them, you would have a hard time putting yourself in that person shoes and seeing it from their point of view.

Sometimes a person's beliefs just make it impossible to get across a certain experience. A personal experience that I have had that falls into this is when I shot my first buck which was a big 10 pointer. There are some people that are completely against hunting and killing animals, so no matter how I worded it, I would not be able to describe the experience that I had when I shot it tho this group of people. Even to people that have hunted or are fine with hunting, it would be hard for them to fully understand the experience I had when it happened. It was one of those moments that when asked about its hard to find the words to describe it. I could tell people about how excited I was when I first saw it and how suddenly I calmed down once it was in my cross hairs and how shaky I was for the couple of minutes after I shot it because of the adrenaline rushing through me. Even though I could tell people all of this, they would still not be able to get the experience I had or was trying to describe to them because they weren't there, didn't do what I did, and there aren't words t o describe this in great enough detail to allow another person to get the full effect.

With all of this evidence I do not think it is possible for language to be able to completely capture an experience. It can do a good job of telling others about an experience but it is unable to make the reader feel the same as if they had been there themselves.

Be careful What you read

Hey all,
This weather is great and I wish it could stay that way in Madison. After reading our prompt, I thought about it while on my jog. Can a work of fiction be as influential as a work of non-fiction? While running, I came up with the conclusion that yes it can be and that in some cases a work of fiction can be even more influential than non-fiction. Whether it is Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncles Toms Cabin or F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby it appears as though a great work of fiction immediately precedes a great man-made calamity. While many other causes can be attributed to these events, I believe it is the rhetorical power and freedom that fiction provides allows an author to discuss a wrong or problem in society.
An authors ideas and values are imbued in the text that they put forth. Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncles Toms Cabin is a perfect example of this. While the story is fiction, the plotline provides a rebuke of the southern practices of slavery. This fictional story of black slave who serves his white masters became one of the most published works during the mid 19th century. The work was very popular in the abolitionist north and helped stir anti-slavery sentiment their. A few years after publication, a little skirmish between the abolitionist North and pro-slavery South broke out. After four years and 600,000 lives, the issue was resolved and slavery in America was abolished.
While some works have a direct impact on historical events, others can be viewed as startlingly accurate predicators of events. F Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby is a good example of this. Fitzgerald’s story about life on Long Island during the roaring 20’s describes the social norms of the time period. Nick Carraway, the main character of the novel, is symbolic of the greed, extravagance and aimlessness of the time period. The decade after the Great War is accurately depicted in F Scott Fitzgerald’s work. A few years after the text was written, the greatest finical calamity in American History struck. In October 1929 the stock market crashed prompting what is now called the Great Depression. Historians have concluded the exuberance, similar to Nick Harraway’s parties, fueled by easy money lead to a stock market bubble that burst and started the Great Depression.
While the events in fictional novels can foreshadow future events, they can also describe the mood and fears that can arise after these horrific events have occurred. George Orwell’s work 1984 fits into this category. Orwell’s novel takes place forty years in the future in which the world is separated geographically into three areas. The main character Winston lives in one of these areas where the government has complete control of everyone’s thoughts and actions. The omnipresent though police arrest, torture and kill anybody who does not follow exactly what Big Brother says. Despite being one of my favorite works, the story highlights the fears over fascism and communism that plagued the world immediately after it was written. 1984 was written a few years after Hitler’s reign in Germany and during Stalin’s leadership in the Soviet Union. Remarkably, fifty years after the death of these tyrants, 1984 is still relevant today. The term “Big Brother” is often used by politicians, media and political activists to protest laws that they feel infringe upon their rights as an American Citizen. This argument has been used for everything from the Patriot Act to the Stimulus Bill. Overall, the text has made people weary of the federal government. They believe that while these laws may have good intentions, they believe the government can use them to commit nefarious crimes. At this point I would like to discuss how the argument, while often overused, can be used legitimately when discussing things like the Patriot act, rendition and Abu Ghraib, however it would deviate from my thesis and purpose of writing this essay.
The three examples, I provided are only a few examples of the impact fiction can have on society. Thousands of works could have been used, many which probably would have been better examples, and in the coming years many more will be produced. Fiction allows writers to connect with their readers and explore subjects on an emotional level that is unparalled by any mode of communication known to man. It is for that reason; fiction can be an invaluable rhetorical tool

Ahhh, The Power of Falsity

So last night, on my way home from the library, I was held up at gunpoint by a man in a sweatshirt. He demanded that I hand over my computer, wallet, and any other personal belongings I have. Of course, I leapt into action and kicked the gun out of his hand and in the same motion, knocked him on conscious. Just kidding, I didn't hit him. In fact, I was never robbed at gunpoint last. After all, I am typing this blog on MY computer. 

So this little anecdote I just shared is a blatant, and certainly exaggerated form of fiction. Is it completely useless. Well since I wrote it, it probably is. I agree, its a piece of crap. But how useless is it really. It was only last semester that there were a string of robberies, be they at gunpoint or with any other weapon. So what is something to take away from my realistic yet false encounter? Well for one, don't walk home alone from the library late at night, be careful if you have to walk home alone...etc yada yada yada. 

See, my stupid tales can teach some knowledge. But lets look at a more accomplished author to get a really good perspective of how fiction can be effective. One of my favorite books (really) is Upton Sinclair's novel, The Jungle. It is a tale of an immigrant from Lithuania, Jurgis Rudkus, who arrives in Chicago and tries to chase the "American Dream". Upon his arrival to America in Packingtown, Rudkus realizes that the American Dream is not an easy concept to acquire and it is going to take a lot of work to make it anywhere. Right there, Sinclair poses the very real theme of how hard it is for an immigrant to make it America. It was hard back when Sinclair wrote this novel and it is still hard, just ask anyone south of the border. Furthermore, Rudkus continues to run into corruption as he progresses in America. Laws are no longer enforced, politicians and salesman are making illegal deals, and everyone else in Packingtown is trying to get a leg up on the other immigrants. If you have never read this novel, you can imagine what I just described as really early in Scarface when Al Pacino is in that refugee camp playing basketball. And if you haven't read The Jungle or seen Scarface, well then you and I are on two different wavelengths.

The best example that the Jungle has to offer though is its ability to force the Government (in real life) to pass the Pure Food & Drug Act of 1906. This happened because in the novel, Sinclair described the poor quality of meat that was being given to immigrants. The meat was considered to be filled with diseases and illnesses and the government reacted swiftly to try and quell any rumors that would circulate once the book was published. This right here is a clear example of how fiction can really have an impact in the real world.

So what do I hope you have learned from my quasi-fictional rant? Well since only half of this was fictional, maybe you should have learned a lot of life lessons from half of this blog. Well actually, I guess we can learn that truth can be told in Fiction and Non-fiction. Imagine that, a world where Fiction and Non-fiction come together in harmony. How romantic. 

But seriously, Fiction is always a great read for pleasure but usually when a writer produces fiction, they still have some message that they are trying to get across. Some are subtle, some are blatant, and some are downright stupid. So what was the message I was trying to get across with my original story? Well obviously it is that you should look out for people when they are leaving the library. Also, bring a weapon, people tend to be scared of them...Just kidding.

Sour Patch Kids are the Best Candy

The art of persuasion was something I believed I had skillfully mastered by the age of five. Convincing others that the best candy was without a doubt “Sour Patch Kids” or that spinning the tire swing as fast as possible would truly benefit them, was something I maneuvered well. I also could convince my dog to do most anything, my favorite included eating any bugs that flew in my path. I was quite disheartened when I noticed flaws in my skills, as I attempted to persuade my parents, my big sister, her friends, or any other adult that I encountered. I was quite perplexed by this fact, especially after thinking that I was a master, and maybe in the sense of my five-year-old friends and dog, I was, but when it came to adults, I still had some refining to do. In time, I realized that my ability to persuade truly relied on my audience. And nowadays, when people are beginning to question whether or not persuasion is dead, I like to believe that is indeed alive, it just depends on whom you are trying to persuade.
I often realize this while strolling about campus. There are signs advertising free subs, free pizza, free ice cream, free burritos…the only catch is, you have to apply for a credit card. They convince you that you are just applying and that you are not actually opening up an account. They lead you to believe that it is okay and that your free meal will come with no strings attached. Two cancellations and a credit card in my wallet later, I realized that this was not true. I was persuaded by the thought of free food and no strings attached, it seemed perfect in my mind, I am a hungry college student. These people know exactly whom they should appeal to. It is not like you would see these advertisers sitting in the parking lot of a business building, trying to convince the businessmen. They are aware that their persuasion methods will fail. They recognized their audience; they determined who could be persuaded and who could not be, and that is who they aimed for.
In terms of a more influential act of persuasion, it can be demonstrated when considering the presidential election. There are always those who vote strictly republican, democratic, or to whichever party they are loyal to, but then you have those who are open-minded and who truly would like to have the best candidate for presidency. Those who sit with their ears, eyes, and mind open will truly be persuaded by what the candidate has to say. This is often the reason that the candidates spend much of their time campaigning in the “swing” states. They know that the speeches they make are being heard, internalized, and hopefully have taken effect in their favor. I recall talking to my Grandpa Allan, a rather conservative man, and asking him which candidate he had chosen in the election. His answer had astounded me, he had voted for Obama; he had voted democratically, which was very unlike him and his past voting habits. He then explained to me that he had chosen Obama because he believed him to be the right man for the job. If Obama had not made influential speeches in order to persuade those such as my grandfather to vote for him, if persuasion was truly dead, there is the possibility that a different president may be sitting in the oval office.
Also, the art of persuasion is not limited to public affair such as credit card applications and presidential speeches, it is also used amongst our interpersonal relationships. Whether you need a helping hand, want company while procrastinating, want permission to stay out late, or anything else, persuasion helps you to fulfill those wants and needs. Some will be easy to persuade, some will take more prodding, and even some will be relentless. As I know that I can easily persuade my best friend to hang out instead of do homework, that I have to work a little bit for my mom to extend my curfew, and that I will never be able to convince my father that piercing my nose is a good idea. It truly depends on the audience you desire to convince.
So, if you hear that persuasion is “dead,” think twice. Consider that articles discussing this topic are ironic, as they persuade you that persuasion is dead…or maybe I have just persuaded you to that fact…

Persuasion is not dead

While some may believe that persuasion is dead, it is clear that it is not. Some may not agree with this is what I have to say because they believe it is and refuse to change their mind on the subject no matter what they hear. This is fine because there are those that it is very difficult or even impossible to persuade.
Matt Miller wrote on article on this idea titled "Is Persuasion Dead?" In his article he wrote about politics and said that politicians and the press had killed off persuasion, but not intentionally. I disagree with him. I'm not sure what Miller's opinion is when it comes to persuasion in places other than politics because he ignored these other areas in his article, but it is in these places where persuasion is still alive. When deciding where you want to shop many people will either go to their favorite store, or somewhere that is having really good sales. It is these sales that persuade customers to come to the store and buy their products.
Proof that persuasion is not dead lies in the simple fact that advertising is still going on, both in politics and in everyday life. It is in these ads that people are persuaded to buy products, shop at certain store, eat at a restaurant, and vote for someone. We are constantly seeing ads for products everywhere we go. When you are in a city it is impossible to go down any street without seeing a billboard somewhere or even an ad painted on the side of a bus. The problem is not that persuasion is dead, its simply that people no longer realize that we are being persuaded. When is the last time you have watched a commercial and thought to yourself that the company just tried to persuade you to buy your product? Chances are you didn't think this, all you thought was why is this junk playing instead of my show? While you may think you just ignored a commercial for something you actually didn't. If you just saw a commercial for a certain brand, next time you are at the store and see the name, chances are you will think about trying it out. If you do, then you were just persuaded to buy that product. The same goes with politics. There are a lot of positions that many voters don't even realize they are going to have to vote on until they show up at the polls. Chances are that sometime leading up to the election, one of the candidates for one of these lesser known categories ran a commercial or put up a billboard somewhere. When you go to vote and recognize the name, if you vote for that person over the other one you haven't heard of, you were persuaded to vote for this person.
Even in every Presidential election there is persuasion. This is made obvious by the so called "swing voters." These are the people that are undecided sometimes right up until they cast their actual vote. These are the people that are unsure of who they want to vote for and sometimes win an election for one candidate. A lot of time is focused on these "swing voters" because candidates know that they are the ones who have to be persuaded in order to win their vote. There are even "swing states" that candidates have to pay attention to because if they ignore them and their opponent does not, then they will vote for the one who paid the most attention to them.
It's for those very simple reasons that I disagree with Miller and I know that persuasion is still alive. It is used in everyday life and it is also still alive in politics today. The only difference is that now instead of people realizing it's going on, we have gotten so used to it that we just ignore it until the product or person pops into our head later on.

Marathon Runners

The argument that the New Balance ad is trying to make is that their shoes help runners take on challenges they set for themselves. The ad is trying to make a very broad appeal to all types of marathon runners, from first timers to those that have done them before. This seems like a very good attempt tby the ocmpany to attract business from all types of runners. By not focusing on die hard runners or those who are just getting into it, they can make an appeal to a group without making anyone feel left out. Looking at the ad it is very apparent that the ocmpany is trying to make an emotional and sentimental appeal to the audience.

Three short blurbs are put inext to the pictures of three different runners which gives the audience the feeling that these runners wrote each little statement. However the ad does not say if these are from actual people or just the marketing people. However this does not make a big difference because the average reader will probably not consider this when reading through the ad. I did not realize this until I sat down and started to type this. Each of these follows a small trend. All three make mention of a different number of miles at least twice. They also tell the emotions that are going through each person at different parts of the race. This helps the audience to make a personal connection with the ad by putting in real emotions that actual people feel. By doing this New Balance is able to become more personal rather than just a faceless company.
The passages also have a similar style of language and writing. They all use short senteces that contain very simple words. This almost gives it a feel like the people are actually saying this or thinking it as they are running the marathong. Doing this makes it seem as if running the marathon is going easily for the people, which could be a result of wearing comfortable New Balance shoes.

The bottom portion of the ad also does a very good job of appealing to people in the Chicago area. They are able to make an appeal to the entire city by mentioning that they have sponsored the Chicago city marathon since 1997. Saying this shows that the company cares and is giving back to the area and supporting their sport.

By featuring a picture of both men and owmen as the focal point, New Balance was also able to appeal to both sexes with one ad. This is very important because a lot of ads are focused more on one sex than the other. There are also three different shoes shown, and it is noted that they are all available in both men's and women's. Having both men and women helps to show that the company does not favor one sex over the other, and support both sexes.

This ad overall is pretty effective. It focuses more on an emotional appeal of people who run marathons, which is a market that doesn't seem to receive much publicity. A good job was done targeting this group of athletes which tend to get neglected by more popular sports. The language used also helped make this strong by using emotions that go through a runners head during a race. Through this ad the company was able to make a connection to its customers.

-Jake

THEY'RE PATHHHHETIC

Before I get into the nitty gritty of what this class is all about, I must say I don't really care for this advertisement. If there is one type of personality that bothers me its smug and that is all that this advertisement appears to be. I mean really, who likes that on person in the corner of the room who sits with a smile on their face constantly and loves to share facts with their eyes closed. I move on.

The argument here is clearly that people should be eating food that not only benefits them but also benefits the environment and society. This is clear through their use of metonymy as the flavor of the cereal is referred to as socially and environmentally responsible and how those adjectives go well with milk, just like typical cereals such as Frosted Flakes and Cocoa Puffs. Ironically, they also mention at the bottom of the ad that they are not your typical cereal company. They even make a pathetic appeal through comedy to say that "typical" isn't even in their language. I don't find it funny but maybe the older crowd that are in dire need of flax oil and omega-3 will have a bit of a giggle. On second thought, probably not.

I am not sure what magazine this ad came form but I assume that it was well placed. This ad appears to try and garner a certain audience's attention in a hope to make them buy the cereal. The appeal is quite clear. They are trying to make the audience feel better about buying the cereal for a few reasons. For one, being environmentally and socially aware is quite "in" now a day. People love the idea of being "green" and caring about the environment. Some of those people love to even show it off. Examples of people showing off would fall under Hollywood stars. See George Clooney. No seriously. Go look at George Clooney's 2006 Oscar speech and see how long it takes you before you are running for the nearest trash can or toilet. Please, I can wait.

(tapping feet)...

Once again, off course, but making a point. This cereal wants to make people feel better about themselves for not only eating it, but for buying it.

Another appeal that is made through this advertisement is how the company makes the cereal seem like its more than a cereal. One could even argue that they are trying to say its the Captain Planet of cereals. Maybe even the Jack Bauer of cereals. They build up this idea that buying this cereal that buying the cereal is just like "having respect for the cereal". The fact of the matter is that it is just cereal. While some may buy it so they can show off their caring side for the world, they aren't really doing all that much. There are bigger moves that can be made by the average family to become more environmentally conscious then buying an organic cereal. In fact, it is probably better for the world if the family doesn't even drive to the local store to buy the cereal. Well maybe that's not totally true. I guess it depends on where the family lives and where the store is and if you use a car and... off topic again. Sorry.

As you can tell by the tone of my little rant here, you can see I find this ad to be quite poor. Its pathetic appeals are quite pathetic in their attempts to convince consumers that this cereal is the end all be all of the world. Look, if people want to eat healthy, they will. There is this little thing called the Internet in which people can search for tips on how to eat healthy. i personally don't need or don't care for an ad like this to tell me how I can help the environment. 

Ah, I am now absolved. I can return to my happy self.

Ethos...

When Aristotle argues that ethos "should result from the speech, not from a previous opinion that the speaker is a certain kind of person" (1.2.42), I feel he is proposing a worthwhile idea as it would eliminate much bias, though to some degree, I feel it is rather unrealistic. In a perfect world, people would be able to forget their previous judgements and assumptions, but we all know that is rather difficult to do. For both public figures and those not in the spotlight alike, once they have gained a reputation, it is difficult to change it in others’ eyes. It especially difficult to change a negative view because many tend to focus on what went wrong versus what went right. This fact is disheartening because we are human and make mistakes, so if we do something wrong, that may be out of character, many will not view it that way. They will just assume it is a characteristic of us, even if we have been nothing but the opposite otherwise. It also does not help that people do not like uncertainty and will make up false assumptions in order to make themselves feel more certain and secure in whom they are dealing with. Not to mention, people are often rather stubborn and are not quick to give up or forget any judgements that they have made, even if they are false.

When I first meet someone, I try to judge ethos based on current speech, but am sometimes guilty of judging based on past reputation. I prefer to give most the benefit the doubt and often make a conscious effort not to be judgmental, even if I had a poor impression earlier. I feel the way in which to arrive at a proper ethos is to be aware of the judgements that you tend to make or have already made. Also, you should do your best to make an attempt at providing the orator with a clean slate while speaking. I have noticed though, that the closer and more knowledgeable I am of a person, the more I make judgements based on their reputation. For example, one of my friends often says things that come out wrong and to an outsider may seem hurtful. Since I am aware she often does this, I know that her intentions are not bad, that she is not trying to hurt me, and my positive impression of her does not change.

As much as people would like to discount someone’s reputation, it is difficult to decipher to what degree. People are human and often make mistakes, should we hold it against them forever? I mean, people do have the potential to learn from their mistakes and change into a better self. Although, they also have the potential to keep making the same mistakes and change for the worse. Seeing the glass half full, I would like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but should probably be careful as to not be made a fool. For example, Paris Hilton is a person that many refuse to take seriously. I myself sometimes struggle to do so too. Her past is not perfect, but what if in the future, she grows up and changes for the better. If she attempts to do anything meaningful, who is going to take her seriously? What if she tries to rally for an important cause or attempts to give an influential speech? People who listen to her speech may feel that it was unintelligent and fake, due to their former judgements on her past actions. Also, there is the potential that many would not even bother to listen to the speech based on their present views of her. But what if they same speech was given by someone who was credible and well liked by the public? The speech may be interpreted completely differently. For example, when Obama gives a speech, it is generally well received and judged as credible due to his reputation as a good orator. I feel that is rather unfair to Paris because she does have the potential to be an influential human being, everyone does, but many will not be able to discount her reputation, so she will be put on the back burner in the grand scheme of credible public figures. I also feel that we must use some sort of judgement when it comes to giving the benefit of the doubt. I feel like we should be slightly hesitant, especially when it comes to those who are repeat offenders. For example, when determining a proper ethos for Ed Gein, many would and should struggle to forget his reputation, even if he had told us that he had changed and would like to be freed, he still had killed on multiple occasions, which is kind of a big deal.

What are you thoughts and feelings on the subject? I hope my ideas sparked some thoughts. Until next time…
~Courtney

Aristotle did not play hockey!!

Greek philosopher Aristotle believed that a person’s reputation should have no bearing on one’s evaluation of that person’s rhetoric. He believed an opinion should be formed on what was said and “not from a previous opinion that the speaker is a certain kind of person” (1.2.42). It is clear that NHL commissioner Gary Betmman and his chief disciplinarian, Colin Campbell have not read Aristotle. Their treatment of Sean Avery has violated both Aristotle’s ethos and the ethical belief that people in power have the responsibility to avoid using cruel and unusual punishment on their subordinates.

Sean Avery’s main transgression occurred the morning December 2 in 2008. In front of the media, Avery poked fun at Flames star Defenseman Dion Phaneuf who is dating his ex-girlfriend:



While Avery’s exercised bad judgment in his not so subtle jab at Jarret Stoll and Dion Phaneuf, both of whom are dating people who have been romantically involved with Sean Avery, the response of the hockey community was disgraceful. Instead of being reprimanded for inappropriate remarks, the league castigated Sean Avery because of his controversial career as a hockey player.

Sean Avery has made a career out of being the most hated player in the NHL. He relishes in being the games dirtiest player, a claim backed by an ESPN player poll that overwhelmingly verified that claim. For years the hockey community, most notably Barry Melrose, has seethed at every “injustice” perpetrated by Avery. He has been chastised for violating the “code” or unwritten rules that NHL players abide by. Despite his antics, two things can be said about Sean Avery. Firstly, he wants to win at all costs. His overly competitive nature is the engine behind all of his comments and actions. He’d rather the opposing team focus on beating him rather than his opponents beating his team. Time and time again Avery has sacrificed his body so his team may win. Avery’s other attribute is that despite all his questionable behavior, prior to December second the league never ever suspended him. Although never suspended, Sean has a reputation for causing trouble and speaking in a passionate and candid manner.

After being spending his first year and a half with the Detroit Red Wings, Sean Avery was part of a multi-player deal that sent him to the Los Angles Kings. While a member of the Kings, Avery quickly established himself as an offensively gifted forward who had a knack getting under peoples skin. His reputation started to build during the lockout of the 2004-2005 season. Sean Avery accused the NHL Players Association of lying to its players about work stoppage.

Sean Avery started to grab headlines when hockey resumed the following season. After his teammate Jeremy Roenick suffered a concussion at the hands of Coyotes defender Denis Gauthier, Avery irked many French-Canadians by saying "I think it was typical of most French guys in our league with a visor on, running around and playing tough and not back anything up." His narrow-minded rebuke of Gauthier’s caused quite a stir. Later that season Avery found himself in the center of another French-Canadian controversy. This time, Avery found himself in the middle of an argument with Montreal Canadian great Brian Hayward after Hayward mentioned Avery’s perceived hesitation to fight enforcer Todd Fedoruk. Although the validity of Hayward’s remarks is a source of debate, publicly questioning player’s manhood in the machismo world of hockey is considered a disgraceful act. After a similar incident involving Georges Laraque, one that lead to a public spat with disciplinarian Colin Campbell, Avery had worn out his welcome in Los Angles.

It was under these circumstances the Avery was brought to the New York Rangers. The offensively gifted Avery provided an instant spark to a lethargic Rangers team. He sparked a 17-4-9 run that lead to Rangers to the playoffs. Sean Avery’s edgy style immediately endeared him amongst the Ranger faithful, an amazing feat for anyone who follows New York sports. The following year, Avery excelled in his two best facets of the game: winning and turmoil. Avery led the rangers to the playoffs against the archrival New Jersey Devils. It was during this series Sean Avery became a household name. During a two-man advantage, Sean Avery placed himself at the top of the crease facing Goalie Martin Broudeur. Avery remained at the top of the crease waving his stick and distracting Marty. The play (which can be seen here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec_2oKWe2Gw) immediately became a talk radio sensation. Although legal, no rule existed prohibiting it, the screening tactic was viewed by the hockey elite as a violation of hockey’s unwritten code of ethics. After the play, the National Hockey League hastily banned the maneuver. After the playoffs, the Dallas Stars offered Sean Avery a four year $15.5 million dollar deal.

As a member of the Stars, Avery could not replicate his earlier success. The Stars, like Avery, struggled in the early part of the season. It was under these conditions, Sean Avery stepped up to the microphone. Searching to motivate a languid Dallas Stars team, Sean Avery made fun of star defenseman Dion Phaneuf. After his remarks, the National Hockey League promptly suspended Sean Avery six games and the Dallas Stars suspended Sean Avery indefinitely.

While legitimate debate can occur over if Avery deserved to be suspended by the league; In our modern hypersensitive world of a minor suspension would not have been without merit. The appalling part was length. Mattias Ohlund’s Barry Bonds impression on the back of Mikko Koivu’s leg ( seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xa3jGBUIwBs) earned him a lengthy two game suspension. Star forward Alexi Kovalev was not reprimanded at all after his vicious elbow on forward Ryan Hollweg (seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1JyfSQzalg). With these two previous precedents in mind, one cannot help but question whether Sean Avery’s comments was the main reason he was suspended. I cannot help but believe Avery’s previous public spats with Colin Campbell and constant strife with opposing players and not his chauvinistic comments lead to his suspension. As a student of Aristotle, I cannot help but lament the fact the former has clearly influenced the latter. That one man’s career has been ruined and his reputation tarnished because of another mans personal vendetta. These injustices must stop and I cannot help but side with Sean Avery in the grievance filed by the NHL Players Union on his behalf.