1. Pollen says " Men have become tools of their tools." I believe this means that now a days people rely more on their tools then there own handywork. You drive your tractor for a few hours that plants your seeds for you and your done for the day. Back in the day you only had your hands and a few essential tools to get your entire farm up and running. Men have become overly relient on their tools thats there becoming tools. You find your self thinking what ever happened to good hard labor? I guess people have become to lazy for hardwork. Don't get me wrong tractors are a lot easier and quicker and do the same effcient job as your hands could maybe the tractor is even better then your hands but people have become to consumed with technology and tools and whatever else we have out their that we basically forget who we truly are because now we're all just tools of our trade.
2. Obrach continually speaks about woman's problems and how we must be a certain way to conform with society or otherwise be an outcast to society. Yes this is true woman do feel that way but what about men? Obrach says, " The current ideological justifications for inequality of the sexes has been bulit on the concept of innate differences between men and woman." (200-201) I tend to disagree with that, men are no different then woman when the corcern is body type. Men like woman have issues with weight. No man wants to over weight and they'll go on diets just like woman to fit the certain stereotype everyone has to be this month. Men actually try harder then woman to look good on some occassions, a man will spend hours at the gym getting "buff" because thats what the females like, they'll drink their protein shakes and raw eggs all day to look good. So in reality yes woman struggle with weight and diets but so do men. So really when you think about what is the difference between men and woman and body types ? I don't see any.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Blog #3- Asimov and Sedaris
Asimov and Sedaris both speak similarily about language. Asimov believes basically that your only as smart as what you know. He says if your a mechanic then you know only about cars. If your a book worm you educated and know about academics. That's his language, that you only understand what you have learned to understand. Sedaris on the other hand speaks about his harsh teacher he had while studying in France. He talks more about actual language. His teacher would abuse her students if what they said wasn't perfect or she didn't approve of what the students were saying.
Both writer's to me are saying that your only well educated on the language you know. Asimov was well at learning and doing well on tests. So his language was more academically strong. He was unable to speak about how to fix a car because, that wasn't his language. Sedaris language was English and in France the French didn't like how him and some other's metioned in the story could not speak perfect French. He was also saying your only as good as the lanuage you speak. Both men's aspect on language were very interesting to me, who would have thought language could be more then just how you speak?
Both writer's to me are saying that your only well educated on the language you know. Asimov was well at learning and doing well on tests. So his language was more academically strong. He was unable to speak about how to fix a car because, that wasn't his language. Sedaris language was English and in France the French didn't like how him and some other's metioned in the story could not speak perfect French. He was also saying your only as good as the lanuage you speak. Both men's aspect on language were very interesting to me, who would have thought language could be more then just how you speak?
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Blog #3 Goffman/Bordo
A.
Goffman says "Correspondingly, holding the body erect and the head high is streotypically a mark of unashamedness,superoity and, disdain." (Goffman,40) I find thos qoute significant in many ways. If I see a person walking down the street looking at the ground and, shoulders slummed , I would think they were self-conscious or had low self-esteem. However a person walking with there head held high shows a sign of confidence.
B.
In Susan Bordo's article she states " Face-lifts, implants, and liposuction are advertised as impowerment, "taking charge" of one's life."(Bordo,152) This statement is significant. You can't watch a television show or read a magazine , without hearing how some famous actress just got her nose done and now she's a whole new woman. You hear their entire life changed just because of the surgery the got, or the implants or whatever else these woman received. Advirtisments also make it out to look like every woman can do this and if you do you'll also be a whole new person. With the non-stop craze about how wonderful plastic surgery is, is does make a girl think, wow I could have needle injected in my forehead and m life won't suck so bad anymore.
C.
Goffman and Bordo's analysis', I believe still hold true today. According to Goffman men are usually superior to woman in advertisments. That is still mostly true. I believe it will always be that way. I myself don't usually see a woman superior to a man in an advertisment. Goffman's analysis shows woman as feminine and caring. In his atricle about the "Feminine Touch" the woman's hands are shown I guess to make the advertisment's more appealing and sexy. Which is still true today. A commerical of a woman holding a glass of wine would intrigue more people to the wine then if a 90 year old man was holding the glass.
Bordo talks more about perfection. She speaks on how in our society, in this generation it's more important for a woman to me seen as flawless, perfect then, normal. This is quite true. Yes, of course you see more regular sized woman on T.V. and Ads then you used to , you know the woman I'm referring to, the one's that aren't stick thin aren't completely flawless. But, stick thin , "perfect" woman are still ruling the world of advertisment and television. That's never going to change in my oponion. You will never see an ad for beauty supplies with a 250 pound woman on it.
Goffman says "Correspondingly, holding the body erect and the head high is streotypically a mark of unashamedness,superoity and, disdain." (Goffman,40) I find thos qoute significant in many ways. If I see a person walking down the street looking at the ground and, shoulders slummed , I would think they were self-conscious or had low self-esteem. However a person walking with there head held high shows a sign of confidence.
B.
In Susan Bordo's article she states " Face-lifts, implants, and liposuction are advertised as impowerment, "taking charge" of one's life."(Bordo,152) This statement is significant. You can't watch a television show or read a magazine , without hearing how some famous actress just got her nose done and now she's a whole new woman. You hear their entire life changed just because of the surgery the got, or the implants or whatever else these woman received. Advirtisments also make it out to look like every woman can do this and if you do you'll also be a whole new person. With the non-stop craze about how wonderful plastic surgery is, is does make a girl think, wow I could have needle injected in my forehead and m life won't suck so bad anymore.
C.
Goffman and Bordo's analysis', I believe still hold true today. According to Goffman men are usually superior to woman in advertisments. That is still mostly true. I believe it will always be that way. I myself don't usually see a woman superior to a man in an advertisment. Goffman's analysis shows woman as feminine and caring. In his atricle about the "Feminine Touch" the woman's hands are shown I guess to make the advertisment's more appealing and sexy. Which is still true today. A commerical of a woman holding a glass of wine would intrigue more people to the wine then if a 90 year old man was holding the glass.
Bordo talks more about perfection. She speaks on how in our society, in this generation it's more important for a woman to me seen as flawless, perfect then, normal. This is quite true. Yes, of course you see more regular sized woman on T.V. and Ads then you used to , you know the woman I'm referring to, the one's that aren't stick thin aren't completely flawless. But, stick thin , "perfect" woman are still ruling the world of advertisment and television. That's never going to change in my oponion. You will never see an ad for beauty supplies with a 250 pound woman on it.
Monday, September 7, 2009
Blog #2 McCloud-Fallacy
A.
McCloud himself writes " The fact that your mind is capable of taking a circle, two dots, and line and turning them into a face is nothing short of incredible." (202) McCloud's point is basically saying our minds have an odd way of working. It's strange how dots and a line form a face in our minds. If anyone was too ever see two dots, a line and a circle they would automatically presume it's a face. I wonder how is it that our minds can turn such a simple image into something that well known ? Our minds work in mysterious ways I must say. This qoute intrigued me very much. It made me think like, you know I never really thought of it like that. How our minds turn dots and lines into a face. It is indeed incredible. It's sort of like how our minds transfer thoughts into actions. You think you want speak so you speak. McCoulds views on this subject were all very interesting. They really make you think.
B.
An example of a logical fallacy would be " my house burnt down,so buy a new one ." This is an example of oversimplifcation. Oversimplification is a simple solution to a complex problem. Obvisously if your house burnt down it's more complex to purchase another house.
C.
If ever there was an idea custom-made for Jay Leno monologue, this was it: that male students usually dominate class discussions. Isn't that like a typical double standard? Whatever happen to men and woman were equal?
I happen to sympathize with the woman,though, perphaps because I feel woman or more self -conscious about how they will sound and are more concerned of what people will think about them. Men don't really care about that sort of thing like woman do.
McCloud himself writes " The fact that your mind is capable of taking a circle, two dots, and line and turning them into a face is nothing short of incredible." (202) McCloud's point is basically saying our minds have an odd way of working. It's strange how dots and a line form a face in our minds. If anyone was too ever see two dots, a line and a circle they would automatically presume it's a face. I wonder how is it that our minds can turn such a simple image into something that well known ? Our minds work in mysterious ways I must say. This qoute intrigued me very much. It made me think like, you know I never really thought of it like that. How our minds turn dots and lines into a face. It is indeed incredible. It's sort of like how our minds transfer thoughts into actions. You think you want speak so you speak. McCoulds views on this subject were all very interesting. They really make you think.
B.
An example of a logical fallacy would be " my house burnt down,so buy a new one ." This is an example of oversimplifcation. Oversimplification is a simple solution to a complex problem. Obvisously if your house burnt down it's more complex to purchase another house.
C.
If ever there was an idea custom-made for Jay Leno monologue, this was it: that male students usually dominate class discussions. Isn't that like a typical double standard? Whatever happen to men and woman were equal?
I happen to sympathize with the woman,though, perphaps because I feel woman or more self -conscious about how they will sound and are more concerned of what people will think about them. Men don't really care about that sort of thing like woman do.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Blog #1 Rhetoric Criticism
A.
Foss defines rhetoric in different types of ways. He basically defines it as a means of communication through symbols and they way we act.Foss wrote "A symbol is something that stands for or represnts something else by virtue of relationship,association or,convention" (Foss pg.2) From my point of view I believe Foss is saying if you see something you know what it is because your fimilar with it.Foss gives examples of what he means by rhetoric.Foss said "Smoke is a sign that fire is presentwhich means there is a direct relationship between the fire and the smoke." (foss pg.2).We connect everything with what we known it connects with.If you smell food you know their is food around right?,it's just what we have grown to know that's what we have learned' thats the connect Foss is trying to make. In my own experience I understand what Foss is talking about I was in my room one night and I smelled gas I automatically made a connection with the gas and the stove.I knew your not suppose to smell gas in the house. To me this is what Foss is trying to interpt.
Foss also goes on to talk about rhetoric criticism. Rhetoric criticism according to Foss is who we respond to rhetortic.Foss says " the process of rhetoric criticism often begins with in interest in understanding particular symbols and how they operate.A critic may be interested in a particular kind of symbol use or a particular rhetorical artifact -The Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C. or Eminems music for example- engages in criticism to deepen appreciation and understanding of that artifact." (Foss pg.5). To me I take rhetorical criticism as if I'm interested in something I will go in depth with it to understand it as well as I could. Also rhetorical critism is explaining how you feel about something with more meaning.
B.
rhetoric:
1.the art of speaking or writing effectively: as a : the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times b: the study of writing and speaking as a means of communication or persuasion
2 a: skill in the effective use of speech b: a type or mode of language or speech
3. verbal communication
www.merriam-webster.com
3. the study of the effective use of language.
www.dictionary.com
Foss defines rhetoric in different types of ways. He basically defines it as a means of communication through symbols and they way we act.Foss wrote "A symbol is something that stands for or represnts something else by virtue of relationship,association or,convention" (Foss pg.2) From my point of view I believe Foss is saying if you see something you know what it is because your fimilar with it.Foss gives examples of what he means by rhetoric.Foss said "Smoke is a sign that fire is presentwhich means there is a direct relationship between the fire and the smoke." (foss pg.2).We connect everything with what we known it connects with.If you smell food you know their is food around right?,it's just what we have grown to know that's what we have learned' thats the connect Foss is trying to make. In my own experience I understand what Foss is talking about I was in my room one night and I smelled gas I automatically made a connection with the gas and the stove.I knew your not suppose to smell gas in the house. To me this is what Foss is trying to interpt.
Foss also goes on to talk about rhetoric criticism. Rhetoric criticism according to Foss is who we respond to rhetortic.Foss says " the process of rhetoric criticism often begins with in interest in understanding particular symbols and how they operate.A critic may be interested in a particular kind of symbol use or a particular rhetorical artifact -The Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C. or Eminems music for example- engages in criticism to deepen appreciation and understanding of that artifact." (Foss pg.5). To me I take rhetorical criticism as if I'm interested in something I will go in depth with it to understand it as well as I could. Also rhetorical critism is explaining how you feel about something with more meaning.
B.
rhetoric:
1.the art of speaking or writing effectively: as a : the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times b: the study of writing and speaking as a means of communication or persuasion
2 a: skill in the effective use of speech b: a type or mode of language or speech
3. verbal communication
www.merriam-webster.com
3. the study of the effective use of language.
www.dictionary.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)