TOW #10

In his political cartoon depicting the 2017 presidential inaugural address during which president elect Donald Trump will be sworn into office next January, author Mike Luckovich uses humorous irony to make a powerful statement about the man which American has decided to run this country. Mike Luckovich created this image for the Atlanta-Journal Constitution, which he has been creating similar political cartons for since 1989. He has won a Pulitzer Prize for editorial cartooning and the Reuben Award for Most Outstanding Cartoonist of the Year. The image shows the United States Presidential Inauguration, set to take place on Friday, January 20^th 2017 in which Donald Trump, who was elected president this year, is drawn swearing on the bible. In the image, Donald Trump is drawn saying, “For a limited time, you too can own one of these fabulous Trump Bibles.” (Luckovich). There is irony in how Donald Trump is using the most esteemed honor in American history as a ploy to make more money by selling the Holy Book for profit. By using this rhetorical strategy, Luckovich is making a powerful statement about how Donald Trump is more a business man than political figure, and that he will treat this high-ranking position as such. He is also making a statement about how Donald Trump plans to use his position in office to benefit himself and his business and that he does not respect the honor that has been placed upon him. It is clear that this image was created in spite of Trump, to undermine his political agenda and reason for running for office. Mike Luckovich used his skills as a political cartoonist to convey such thoughts of his and to show his audience the real man which they have voted for and placed in office. I believe that his use of rhetoric, specifically irony, convey a strong and pronounced message about this year’s president elect. Luckovich strategically employed the irony in his cartoon and it helped him effectively achieve his purpose. 

TOW #9

      Jesse Wegman employed subtle symbolism in his editorial piece, ‘The Doll in the Blue Pantsuit’ to convey how Hillary Clinton supporters showed such interest and commitment soon after she announced she would be running for her chance to become the 45^th president of the United States, although not long after that her supports lost interested which ultimately cost her the election. This piece was thoughtfully composed by Jesse Wegman, editorial writer on law and the Supreme Court for the New York Times and previously the managing editor of The New York Observer, days after Donald Trump was announced the president elect in the 2016 presidential election. In his article, Wegman talks about how his daughter once idolized a doll depicting Hillary Clinton, then discarded it until the day of the election. The doll was used by the author as a symbol of Hillary Clinton and his daughter’s ephemeral amusement was used to depict that of Hillary’s supporters. Wegman writes about his young daughter’s time spent playing with the doll, stating, “For a while, Sami loved the doll; she called it Blue Baby, and when her language got better, Hilly Kinton. Then she lost interest” (Wegman 3). Many people, mostly democratic voters in support of Clinton, blamed poor voter turnout on the account of liberal youth as the reason she lost to her seemingly incompetent opponent. In this text, Wegman uses the symbolism of his daughter’s doll to express to his readers how many people supported Hillary in the beginning of her campaign, then forgot about the ongoing election for a few months in between, only to regain interest in the last minute. Wegman later reveals in the article that he and his wife were devastated by the result of the election thus Wegman used his writing and employed various rhetorical devices to subtly intertwine his thoughts into his work. I found this symbolism to be powerful, although very hidden. If it was more pronounced, I feel like it would be much more effective in achieving the author’s purpose.

TOW #8

In Prozac Nation by Elizabeth Wurtzel, the author employs the rhetorical strategies of allusion and metaphor to convey how sad and hopeless she felt in order to make her audience understand what it is like to have chronic depression. In this book, Wurtzel reminisced on the true story of how she came to realize that she was depressed and bipolar at a young age. She was a published author prior to the release of Prozac Nation and this book made her a national bestselling author. The rhetoric is evident when Wurtzel writes, “Just like Gregor Samsa waking up to find he’d become a six-foot-long roach, only in my case, I had invented the monster and now it was overtaking me.” (Wurtzel 46). By alluding to The Metamorphosis, a 1915 novel about a man who transforms into a giant cockroach, Elizabeth Wurtzel is able to support her metaphor that follows. She does so by relating a possibly confusing statement to something that is more commonly known and understood. Wurtzel’s mention of creating and becoming a monster is a metaphor for how she created and became a victim to her own sadness. By comparing the depression to a monster, Wurtzel is able to show her audience how terrifying and violent the illness is for most people and that it is often inescapable. She also states that she created the monster or the depression as a way of saying that she felt as though the depression was her own fault, which is a common and often misunderstood feeling for depressed people. Overall, Elizabeth Wurtzel strategically employs various rhetorical devices to further support her purpose of the book. I believe that she is very successful in doing so since I found that, as someone who has suffered from both bipolar and depression, what she said was very relatable and true. I can imagine that for people who have never experienced either disorder, reading this book would help them understand the common feelings associated with them. 

TOW #7

In “Getting In” by Malcolm Gladwell, the author employs the rhetorical strategy of repetition to support his idea that the pressure to get into top colleges is constant and repetitive for students in the United States. Malcolm Gladwell is a well-known writer, speaker, and journalist for the New Yorker. He attended college at the University of Toronto in Canada, as he recalls in his essay, and first heard of the competitive nature of U.S. college admissions soon after arriving in the country. Gladwell writes about how this surprised him and varied quite a bit from his experience with college admissions in Canada. He explores the purpose and reasoning for the prominence of this idea of getting into the best of the best schools. In the essay, Gladwell discusses the competitiveness revolving around college admissions in the United States and the pressure to get into a top university. He makes a point about this by writing, “the precocious and sensitive protagonist always went to Harvard; if he was troubled, he dropped out of Harvard; in the end he returned to Harvard to complete his senior thesis” (Gladwell 4). By repeating the name Harvard three times in one sentence, Gladwell makes a bold statement about how prevalent these prestigious Ivy League schools are in American society and that the proud, outspoken nature of the colleges creates stress for applicants to want to get in. The repetition of the prominent university name shows how Malcolm Gladwell believes that it is talked about far too often in the ambitious United States society, making the name almost seem redundant for people and students. I found that this device greatly aided in Gladwell’s strive to achieve his purpose throughout his essay. It made me think about and question the stress that society puts on students and that students put on themselves as well to get accepted into schools like Harvard. 

TOW #6

In this political cartoon by Jerry Holbert for the Boston Herald newspaper, the author uses hyperbole and humor to capture the audience’s attention and cause them to understand the bad situation this nation is in as a result of the nominees running for president. Jerry Herald is a photographer and political cartoonist for the Boston Herald, a reliable and dignified news source. The cartoon depicts three people sitting down near a board game. The man on the left says “Would I rather get thrown off a cliff or run over by a truck?” (Holbert) and the reader, as well as the lady sitting to his right, assume that it is a question from a ‘Would-You-Rather’ board game. The man on the right then clarifies the reality of the situation by saying, “[It’s] not a game, he’s deciding ‘Hillary’ or ‘Trump’” (Holbert). The man was referring to the 2016 presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, suggesting that neither would be a good fit for president by comparing the choice between them to picking one of two awful deaths. The hyperbole in Holbert’s comparison is in the extreme nature of the options the man on the left was trying to pick between. This rhetorical strategy draws attention to how horrible he thinks the two candidates are and that either one is going to have devastating effects on America’s government and citizens. The author also used humor in his depiction by comparing something so important as choosing between presidential candidates and playing a silly bard game. This draws the attention of the reader and makes them more attentive to the message which Holbert is trying to get across. The two devices work together to create an extreme and joking tone for an image regarding a heavy topic. This pulls the reader in and shows them how serious and horrible the state of the election is in. I believe that the author was definitely successful in his strive to achieve his purpose and I found that the cartoon was very funny and knowledgeable at the same time.

 

TOW #5

Mikayla Joffe

TOW #4

In The Butterfly Effect by Jennifer Lunden, the author uses drastic comparisons to help the reader understand the migration of Monarch butterflies, the beauty in their journey, and, overall, form a new appreciation for the spectacular creatures. This essay by Lunden won her first place in the Creative Nonfiction’s Winter 2011 issue and a Pushcart Prize. More of her works have been featured in Orion and Wigleaf and the Yale Journal for Humanities in Medicine. In this essay, Lunden depicts her journey from the frosty Canada to a more temperate area in California, similar to that of migrating monarch butterflies, although she traveled via plane. By employing the strategy of comparison, the author explains the differences between the journey of Monarch butterflies in their migration and the human journey on an airplane. She does this to create a feeling of envy in the reader, making them jealous of the simplicity in their migration and thus bring the reader to further admire the elegance and magnificence of the often over-looked insect. Lunden writes, “When a monarch butterfly sets off on its journey to its winter destination, it does not have to pay a $100 fee because its suitcase is 25 pounds over the limit. It does not have to take off its shoes, its watch, its coat and scarf, in case of bombs. […] It does not have to worry about going down. It does not worry.” (Lunden 10). By describing all of the small nuisances of travel which humans going on planes have to endure, like paying fees and removing various articles of clothing as a precaution against bombs, and comparing that too the simplicity of the butterflies’ journey, the author supports her purpose. Jennifer Lunden therefore sparks a newfound appreciation and admiration of monarch butterflies in the reader. I, too, experienced this feeling of jealousy and appreciation for the butterflies. I was swept up in the author’s writing and use of rhetorical strategies and I believe that she achieved her purpose with ease. 

TOW #4

In What You Learn in College by Karen Donley-Hayes, Hayes uses powerful anaphora to provoke a sense of urgency and anxiety in the tone so that the reader can feel what she was feeling and understand the terror she experienced. The author is the College Editor at Hiram College and has published many works in sources like The Journal of the American Medical Association and The Healing Muse. What You Learn in College is a short nonfiction story about a dreadful period of revelation for the author in which she agrees to play strip spin-the-bottle in with her college friends while under the influence. The text was written for other college students to prevent them from partaking in risky or dangerous activities, given that they have just received a tremendous amount of independence. In order to achieve her purpose, the author employs the rhetorical strategy of anaphora, repeating the same two phrases in order to change the tone of the essay. This device is evident when she writes, “The bottle spins. You learn you couldn’t leave even if you had the nerve […] The bottle spins. You learn […]” (Hayes 3-7). Not only does the author use anaphora at the beginning of each paragraph by starting each with ‘You learn’, but she strategically uses the device here as well. By repeating the phrase ‘The bottle spins’ followed by the sad revelations she discovers afterward, it builds up to her regretting the decision, and it creates a feverish sense of anxiety for the reader. The urgency can be felt as the reader quickens their pace and devours the words to reach her final lesson. This makes the reader’s heart race and breaths shallow as they follower her on her similar journey, thus making them feel the same way, understanding her fear, and knowing not to make the same mistake. I whole-heatedly believe that the author accomplished her purpose. Her work made me fear for her and feel scared with her. It taught me not to make quick decisions like she did, which is what she was trying to achieve.