TOW #7: Barack Obama Speech- Against Going to War With Iraq

http://www.famous-speeches-and-speech-topics.info/famous-speeches/barack-obama-speech-against-going-to-war-with-iraq.htm

After analyzing JFK's inaugural address, I decided to analyze one of Barack Obama's many speeches, mainly because I know Obama was inspired by JFK in terms of his delivery. This particular speech is called "Against Going to War With Iraq". Barack Obama had some pretty big decisions to make at this time. In his speech, he starts off by telling his audience that he is not a person who opposes all wars, and then uses the example of the Civil War, which drove out slavery. He repeats the sentence, "I don't oppose all wars" three more times. Right off the bat, he establishes a persona. He makes a huge deal out of saying that he is NOT against war. He then goes on to declare which kinds of war he is opposed to. He says he is opposed to dumb wars. I think that within the first half of his speech, he is basically explaining his take on war itself, and then the people that are involved in the current situation with Iraq (Sadam Hussein and others). In this speech, I found the most interesting part was when Obama directly addresses the previous president, George W Bush. Bush wanted this war to happen. Obama uses anaphora when he asks, "You want a war, President Bush?" as the first line in 4 paragraphs. He then goes on to say what America should really be fighting for. He says that we should fight for the freedom of people in other countries who don't have it. This definitely appealed to pathos in the sense that it allowed the American people to want to reach out to the other countries that don't have the freedom that we do in this country. Overall, I think the speech is effective. He basically compares the idea of going to war with Iraq to the ideas of using the United States' Army to fight for more important causes. In that way, he also uses juxtaposition. All of these rhetorical devices combine to get across the message that going into Iraq and fighting this war is not only stupid, but worthless as well. When examining his delivery, he does use similar tactics, He makes lines their own paragraphs, and separates ideas with commas and new paragraphs. In this way, his syntax and diction were very similar to JFK's. This speech was successful because he does get straight to the point, and because the speech is short and sweet, it leaves the audience (the US, George Bush, other countries) with something to think about.

Tow #6: ASPCA Advertisement

Every single time one of these commercials comes on to my television, I can't help but to tear up a little bit. I decided to analyze it to see how the ASPCA actually attracts people. Obviously, most of the ads, if not all, appeal to pathos. The image of the puppy, kitten, or another desperate animal is the forefront of the advertisement, pulling the viewer in to only get a closer look at how sad or hopeless the animal must be. While some of it may be a hyperbole- it works. Something else I noticed was the strong diction. For example, in this ad, it uses "barbaric cruelty" when describing dog fighting. I think that definitely supports the ad in the sense that people would want to save the puppy from whatever "cruelty" it's encountering. These ads definitely place a more emotional connection and even a more human connection to the animals. Many would start to feel bad for a dog in a picture. Something that also caught my eye was "as little as 60 cents" in reference to the donation that can be made to the organization. I think when using the words "as little as", it makes it seem like much less of a donation. Also, perhaps, people may feel obligated to donate MORE than that initial 60 cents, bringing in more money for the ASPCA. On the bottom of the ad, it states, "make a monthly gift". The word "gift" is definitely used cleverly here, because it's more of a donation, but they're trying to make the point that the donation is a "gift" to the animals. Overall, I think this advertisement is extremely effective. The mere color scheme adds to the sad, hopeless theme that the ad tries to convey. I think audience is definitely a factor here as well. People with dogs, in my opinion, would be more likely to have feelings toward the animal on the ad, while people without any relation to pets wouldn't have as much of an emotional connection. While rhetorically analyzing, it is easy to observe that the ASPCA ads do an extremely great job of connecting to their audience, while also attempting to get people to donate to a cause that benefits the life of animals. So, while tears may be rolling down my face as the sad music starts playing along with this commercial, I will be thinking, "Great rhetoric work, ASPCA. Well done."

TOW #5: How To Waste Your Life ~Jason Sanford

http://www.jasonsanford.com/jason/2009/11/how-to-waste-your-life.html

This is just an essay that I found entertaining. It's barely really an essay, but it's more like a list. I liked the title, so I went with it. When I first saw the title, "How to Waste Your Life", I thought of the obvious. I thought, well okay, you can waste your life by basically sitting around and being a boring person. You can watch TV too much and find a job that you hate and never find love ever. Those were the first ideas that came to my mind. While I was thinking these things and reading, but Sanford surprised me, and brought new ideas to the table. The one that really stuck in my mind was, "Obsess on anything" (Sanford 1). I just found it amusing because it reminded me of all of the things that I, personally, obsess over; such as artists of music, food, Starbucks, television shows, even people. He claims that there is a difference between dedication to a certain thing or hobby and an obsession. This really reminded me of what Mr. Yost said to our class at the beginning of the year: It's only school. It kind of makes me think that I shouldn't obsess too much over homework and school, but just let it be. I think Sanford uses hyperbole a little bit in his list/essay. He says ,"spends all day on Twitter", and "screaming about politics" (Sanford). I love how he uses hyperbole, because it really stressed his point. I think the purpose of this little essay is just what the title says, telling people how not to waste their lives. He basically provides something that would be considered something that would waste your life, and then explains the opposite of it, and why we shouldn't do it. He tells us to find something we love to do, and strive to do it more often, maybe for even an occupation. He tells us to spend time with family, and forget about modern day applications. He tells us to sleep more, and be happier. I liked this essay because it gave me an idea about how to be happy. Sanford does a terrific job of setting up his audience with an extremely relatable topic, and giving his opinion on what he thinks a satisfying life really is.

Tow #4: IRB Review

Daniel Tammet

Daniel Tammet is officially one of my new authors. Not only is he a new favorite author, but he's a new favorite person. Born on a Blue Day is basically about this guy, Daniel Tammet, who has autism, but it's a different and special kind of autism. He sees numbers as shapes and colors and textures. He can do insane mathematical problems in his head. He stressed these ideas while also stressing an even bigger idea: autistic people aren't much different from those who are not autistic. One of my favorite quotes from the book was, "You don't have to be disabled to be different, because everyone's different." (201). I loved this quote. At this point in the story, Tammet is talking about a man named Kim Peek, who goes on speaking tours and reads books to people in orphanages and colleges and hospitals. Peek was an inspiration for Tammet. The quote does give me a little reminder that everyone is different. A disability is just like have a unique characteristic or a unique personality trait. I think that's one of the main purposes of the book. Tammet wants to inform the reader that it's okay to think of the disabled as different, but never put a negative connotation on the word; everyone is different, and different is okay. Another idea that I love throughout the book is that he goes through many personal experiences that even I go through. One of them being relationships. He says, "No relationship is without its difficulties and this is certainly true when one or both of the persons involved has an autistic spectrum disorder. Even so, I believe what is truly essential to the success of any relationship is not so much compatibility, but love. When you love someone, virtually anything is possible.” (155). I liked this quote just based on the fact that he knows why something like a relationship would be more difficult for him. Not only is he autistic, but he is also openly gay. This really opened my eyes and allowed me to see how much Tammet really must go through every single day of his life just to be happy. I think it's absolutely incredible the way he lives. He's so proud of himself and he's so humble and modest. He appeals to pathos throughout the book as he describes the tough times that he's encountered due to his disability or homosexuality. This is one of my favorite books that I have ever read, and I am so glad I was introduced to it in my non-fiction course. It really makes me come to realize how lucky I am, but it also allows me to see autistic people differently; not with a disability, but almost with a certain gift, just like Daniel.