Saturday, December 8, 2007

Essay 6- Food Essay- My BIG Fat Italian Meal

When asked to write about one food that has had a strong impact on me, many different ideas came to mind, but all of them had one thing in common. They were Italian foods. I wondered if I should write about gnocchi, wedding soup, spaghetti and meatballs, pasta fazool, ravioli, or another one of the traditional Italian dishes my family loves to make. These foods are all so delicious and important to me, I couldn't choose just one. The dishes we enjoy are more than just food, they represent memories, traditions, and life lessons I hope to pass along to my children one day.

Because I could not choose one food in particular, I decided to discuss a whole Perno Sunday night dinner. Ever since I can remember, my huge crazy Italian family would pile into my grandmother’s house for dinner every Sunday night. There would always be something dramatic going on: plates being broken, drinks being spilled, people singing and dancing to Frank Sinatra or Dean Martin in the kitchen, kids breaking bones, people getting pushed into the pool, or even fights breaking out in the back room. It was always a fun time with family that we all still talk about and fondly remember today.

Right after arriving and kissing every member of the family, the kids would be sent outside to play house, freeze tag, baseball or swim. We might be lucky enough to watch Home Alone or some other movie with our older cousins. All the women would convene in the kitchen around appetizers of salami, prosciutto, cheeses, olives, and bread, chatting and finishing up any of the last minute details for the meal. The dads gathered in the living room to watch the weekly ballgame.

When the time for dinner finally came, a mom would round up the men and kids, and we would make a big circle around the kitchen to say the prayer, which was usually led by one of the kids. Then everyone would go to their weekly seat; men and older women in the dining room, young kids and mothers with babies in the kitchen, and the rest of the children on the porch, at the bar, or wherever they could find an empty seat. If we moved too slowly, my grandmother would worry that the food would get cold and make a huge scene. The meal often included salad, bread, spaghetti, meatballs, pork, chicken, and potatoes. On special occasions, we might have homemade ravioli, manicotti, or gnocchi, my personal favorite. We would impatiently wait our turns as the different components of the meal were passed around the large table.

I usually sat in the kitchen because of my age, and we got pretty silent as we devoured the best meal of our lives (or week). The kids listened to the conversation in the dining room, which was usually an argument, but we just laughed. We knew that no matter how loud the disagreement became, when the meal was over, so was the argument. If we were at the table with Grandma, she told us about growing up in a large, poor Italian immigrant family. We heard about how her mother made all the spaghetti by hand-no pasta machines and definitely no store bought pasta! She described the way her mother made gnocchi by hand, first making the dough, then cutting and curling each individual piece of potato dough with her fingers or a fork. Grandma, who still made gnocchi at the time, would tell us about wedding soup and the work it took to clean the escarole, roll the veal meatballs, and cut the small sponge cubes. She remembered that it was a treat because they could only afford it a few times a year. Knowing that Grandma made those things for us made us feel special, even though she seemed to forget we had heard all of her stories before. Now I realize that hearing them over and over made me remember them. The stories were about sharing what you had, loving one another, and being there for each other.

After we heard all Grandma’s stories for the billionth time, we would set our dishes next to the sink, thank the mothers for dinner, and run to the back to continue our game or movie. All the women and teenage girls had to help clean the kitchen and dining room and wash the mountain of dishes. It was a treat to avoid clean-up when we were younger because all the girls dreaded the day we would be old enough to help. Once everything was finally cleaned and put away, out came the dessert. Dessert might be anything, but it always included homemade biscotti or pizzelles. Biscotti are thick crunchy Italian cookies that can be made with nuts and are usually eaten with coffee. Pizzelles are very thin vanilla flavored “snowflake” shaped cookies. Whenever it was time to leave everyone would make the rounds to hug and kiss everyone goodbye until the next Sunday night. At least one kid always seemed to be crying because they did not want the night to end.

Even though we do not have Perno family Sunday night dinners regularly anymore, we still eat Italian food often. Whenever we do, I think of those weekly dinners with the whole family. They are the strongest memories from my childhood. These meals are not only important to me because I love the food; they are a large part of the traditions and values I learned from my family especially since all four of my father’s grandparents immigrated from Italy.

Grandma rarely cooks the big meals these days, so my mom and aunts have started to make some of these dishes. To keep these family recipes in the family, one day my sister, my cousins, and I will learn how to cook these foods. More than the food, though, the traditions and values I was taught while sharing food I loved with people I loved is what I want to bring to my own family one day. I think the way we have used Italian food during family meals as a way to share memories could have such an impact on families all over the world if they made the time for each other they way my family always has.

Essay 6- Artwork Revision

In the art exhibit at Woods Hall, there were two main pieces that caught my attention the most; The Dancing Goat by Fredrich Kerksieck and The War Horse by Laura Shill. These two pieces appeared to the eye as completely different, which is why I chose them. I wanted to discover “what art is” by studying two different pieces of artwork. As I spent the class time viewing the art pieces, I was able to come up with my own ideas of what the two pieces were saying to the viewer. In both of the art pieces, there is a message of hardship presented in two different cases.


The Dancing Goat demonstrates a relationship between a girl and boy that everyone experiences at some point in their life. The relationship shown through the artwork is one where a girl likes a boy, who does not have the same feelings back towards the girl, and instead has feelings towards someone else. To show this relationship, the artist created this piece to have two parts to it. The first main part shows a young boy dancing with a goat. Standing to the side of the two dancing, is the cut out of a young girl. The cut out has a glue border, and the cut out’s color is the same as the second part of this piece. The colors used in the work are bright. They are considered more girly, possibly because the art work deals with a girl’s emotions. The second part of the piece contains only the girl who was cut out of the first piece. She has her hands on her hips, and her face is turned towards the direction of the boy and the goat. Having this one piece of artwork split into two, the artist is showing how the girl is not only invisible to the boy, but also possibly enters into her own world, as she watches the boy dance with the goat. When the girl is looking at the boy and the goat, it shows that she is thinking about something involving the two of them. When she states on the artwork, “I just wanted to get closer, but all you ever did was dance with your dancing goat”, she is showing that she has feelings about the boy, and how she feels ignored by him. The girl in this piece demonstrates her jealousy towards the dancing goat being with the boy. She wishes the boy would turn away from the goat and pay attention to her.


It is sometimes said that a goat symbolizes a “younger loser”. This symbolism would make sense in the art piece, The Dancing Goat, for two reasons. First, we know that the goat is young because the boy and girl shown in this art piece are both kids. Second, the girl is jealous of the goat and feels that the boy is wasting his time with the goat, when he should be spending the time with her. She feels that the boy is wasting his time with her because she views the goat as a loser. After breaking down this art piece you are able to uncover that the message to this piece is about love rejection. The message was revealed by discovering what the different symbols of the art work were standing for and putting all of the parts together. This is the same way I discovered The War Horse’s meaning.


In the piece, The War Horse only dark images and colors are used. There are three main objects in this piece; a horse, wired fence, and black birds flying above in the sky. The horse is a shade of black. On the horse are bullet holes. The multiple bullet holes show that the horse was in some kind of war or fight because of the multiple holes. The horse is then surrounded by a wired fence that is shown circling around it in the picture. The piece also has black birds that look like crows or buzzards flying. The black birds symbolize death, since those types of black birds flock to dead things. Having the three images of the horse, fence, and the birds in the painting, the painting seems to be communicating about war and death. The message about death and war is that it is everywhere, just like how the fence is surrounding the horse; appearing everywhere. Situations about death and war are something we cannot escape.


Another way the picture is communicating to the viewer about death is through the 3D set up. The picture is displayed into four pieces of the picture. The pieces are not balanced on the same level. Through this set up the picture is showing how things are unbalanced in life because of different ideas and conflicts. Having a life that contains many different ideas and conflicts tends to lead to more arguments and hate. These arguments and hate are often followed by physical actions that hurt. This is why an unbalance life leads us to the dark lifestyle that surrounds us and is shown in the picture.


The two art pieces I chose cover two very different topics, but both artists use symbolism to allow the viewer to discover the unenthusiastic message that is shown in both pieces. In The Dancing Goat, a quote is used to help the viewer fully grasp the message of the work, while The War Horse results to the picture itself, to allow the viewer to discover what the piece is saying. The War Horse uses its dark color and symbolism to help the viewer understand its message. The Dancing Goat also uses symbolism but in a way that is not as clear because it could have multiple meanings. Both pieces then use a method of breaking their work into pieces, to help give the viewer an idea of their meaning. The two pieces also share the similarity of displaying a message of hardship that everyone can relate to. The Dancing Goat’s hardship message is of a relationship between two people when one has stronger feelings than the other, when the other is spending more time with someone else, who is thought of as a loser. This relationship can also be described as a love rejection. Then in The War Horse, its hardship message is trying to be portrayed is one that is of death or even possibly war. Both of the two hardship messages are ones that every person experiences more than once in their lifetimes.


The Dancing Goat and The War Horse both have two different examples of hardship that the viewer is able to relate. The message speaks to their viewers in forms that are obtainable but not obvious. The viewer is able to come up with their own idea of what the pieces are trying to say after studying the symbolism. Being able to relate to the two pieces allowed me to enjoy the artwork. I was able to relate more to The Dancing Goat because I have experienced a boy who I have liked spending more time with a girl, who I am not fond of, more than I have experienced with death or war which is what I thought of the piece, The War Horse. These two pieces both seem very different but are similar after studying just like other pieces in the art show that I did not write about. The art show was one that I enjoyed because each piece was very creative and different from the rest. I would encourage people to attend the art show because each piece was effective in sharing its message.

essay 6 Traditional vs. Abstract revised

Katie Creel

Traditional vs. Abstract

The synaesthetic art exhibit at Woods Hall was an intriguing experience. The artwork was very unique. There were a wide variety of art styles and mediums. It was difficult to choose just two works of art to describe. I like looking at art, but honestly it is not my favorite activity. The synaestheic art exhibit is hard to describe. It included more abstract and concrete art works than the ‘art’ I am used to looking at like paintings and portraits. It was more interesting than regular art museums though. I would recommend going to see this exhibit. It was entertaining to do something different.
I chose two different pieces of artwork. My favorite piece was the collection of the three photographs. The photographs captured very unusual and vintage images. The first was a picture of a charcoal grey horse in a field. Even though there was a background and other images in the photograph, the horse was the central image. I liked that the photographer captured the horse’s features in the photograph. The picture was simple yet defined. The next photograph featured a middle-aged woman holding a jar of eggs. This reminded me of collecting eggs at my grandparents’ farm from the chickens they raised. The woman was holding the eggs in a glass jar and had a bandana tied around her head. The photograph was stained in a way that made it look especially old. It was also very dark and dreary. It reminded me of the horror movie, The Ring. The last photograph was of a flock of Canadian geese. They were flying in the V formation. It looked natural and peaceful. The collection of photographs had an old-fashioned look to them, and I enjoyed viewing them. I loved how the three photographs were different yet flowed well together. I believe the artist was trying to emphasize simplicity in these three photographs. Sometimes art can be so busy and full of energy, which can be distracting. These three photographs really just focused on one subject and made it easier to find meaning in the art. I do not know exactly what the artist was trying to communicate, but it would be interesting to discuss it with the artist. I would love to hear the stories that go along with these three photographs.
My least favorite piece of artwork was the cylinder made out of shredded newspaper clippings. I think it was interesting how the artist made the newspaper stay in place. It was not my favorite because I did not think it was really art. I can see how some people may think it is a good piece of artwork, and that is why everyone can have their own opinion on things. Just because it is not favorite does not mean other people liked the artwork.
These two pieces of art are different in many ways. The cylinder is more abstract than the three photographs. The photographs are simpler than the cylinder, but I believe they hold a deeper meaning. Sometimes the simplest objects can be the most complicated at the same time. My taste in art is more traditional, not abstract like the newspaper cylinder, which is why I favored three photographs.

Stereotyping art is a mistake. It does not allow for creativity. Art is about being creative and inventive. Who is to say that one’s imagination must follow a set of guidelines to be considered art. Although, I do not like it when an ‘artist’ draws a line on a canvas and calls it ‘art’. That seems so mediocre to me. I like to look at art that appears to take some talent to create. Most of the artwork at Woods Hall appealed to me. I enjoyed looking at the art created by people in my community.

Friday, December 7, 2007

Hearing vs. Listening (revised)

What is the difference between hearing and listening? According to Webster’s dictionary hearing is defined as, “the process, function, or power of perceiving sound.” It is a verb that requires your brain to process the sound waves that enter your ear canal. However, Webster’s defines listening as, “paying attention in order to hear.” Listening is more that just hearing something. It is actually paying attention to the message in order to get the full meaning. You have to hear to listen but you don’t have to listen to hear.

In the case of music, have we ever really listened to a song? Have we ever actually listened to more than the beat, musical scores, or tone of voice? It is a strange idea to think that we can hear music without actually listening to it. It is easy to write off a song as a “good” song because of the way it sounds. But to actually think about the message being sent, the argument being delivered, and what the speaker actually wants from the song requires more that just hearing; it requires intent listening.

In examining Tim McGraw’s song ,“Live Like You Were Dying,” I did just that: I listened. In doing so I was able to comprehend and grasp the full meaning of the song and the rather serious message that it presents. I could not have done this with simply hearing the music. I had to dissect every word and look at the lyrics in text form. Understanding what methods he used to achieve his purpose required close reading. What I found is a desperate man encouraging us to live as if we were dying.

“He said I was in my early forties,
With a lot of life before me,
And a moment came that stopped me on a dime.
I spent most of the next days,
lookin' at the x-rays,
Talkin' 'bout the options
and talkin' 'bout sweet time.
Asked him when it sank in,
and this might really be the real end.
How's it hit ya,
when you get that kind of news.
Man what ya do.
And he says”

The speaker in the song is not necessarily the artist. However, the speaker is either a man or woman (the song dose not specify) who is telling the audience about a man. The man is in his early forties, married, and religious. The man goes on to explain a serious event in his life and how he has dealt with it. But closely examining the text I was able to decipher the story and understand his message.

In explaining his illness, he tells that he was diagnosed with some unknown illness and it dose not leave him much time. By understanding this, it finally sinks into him that the illness he has risks his life and will eventually kill him. Then the original speaker asks the man how it felt to hear the news and what he did about it.

“I went sky divin',
I went rocky mountain climbin',
I went 2.7 seconds on a bull name Fu Manchu.
And I loved deeper,
And I spoke sweeter,
And I gave forgiveness I've been denying,
And he said someday I hope you get the chance,
To live like you were dyin'.”

The man explains all the things he did when he found out that he did not have much time left to live. In the chorus, the man goes on to explain that he lived life on the dangerous side. He explains that he went sky diving, rocky mountain climbing, and went 2.7 seconds on a bull named Fumancho. He became a more tender soul when he “loved deeper and [he] spoke sweeter.” He gave forgiveness. Then he goes on to tell the speaker that he hopes the speaker will one day have the chance to “live like [he was] dying.” Since this advice is in the chorus, and it is repeated three times, it can be viewed as the most important advice throughout the whole song.

“He said I was finally the husband,
That most the time I wasn't.
And I became a friend a friend would like to have.
And all the sudden goin' fishing,
Wasn't such an imposition.
And I went three times that year I lost my dad.
Well I finally read the good book,
And I took a good long hard look at what I'd do
If I could do it all again.
And then.”

In the second verse the ill man explains how he started valuing his relationships with his marriage, friendship, and religion. He shows that he is married and finally started acting like the husband he should have been all along. Also, be became the friend he should have been along. He no longer saw fishing as “such an imposition” and he goes on to explain that he went three time the year that he lost his dad. He valued his spiritual relationship by finally reading the Bible. Finally, he examined his life as a whole and wondered what he would do if he had a second change at life.

“Like tomorrow was a gift and you've got eternity
To think about what you do with it,
What could you do with it,
what canI do with with it,
what would I do with it.”

In the bridge he gives more advice to the speaker and audience. He says to live like the old cliché, “tomorrow is a gift.” Then he asks three questions, one to the speaker and two to himself. First he asks what the speaker he would do with a second chance. Then he asks himself, what did he do, and what would he do with a second change at life. Finally at the end he repeats three times, “live like you were dying.”

The song presents its argument in a very straight-forward way. By relying on ethos and pathos, the author tries to persuade the audience to live their life as if they were dying. Ethos is a form of persuasion that relies on the speaker or the persona he/she gives. In the song, the author tries to gain credibility because he is dying. It is very easy to believe that the author is credible simply because he is dying. But I ask, is that enough? Should we, as a society, believe anyone who is dying? I think his illness he has does make him credible for the most part. I find it easy to believe the advice he is promoting because is in the that situation.

Pathos, on the other hand, is another form of persuasion but it deals with the audience rater than the speaker. The song relies almost solely on pathos. The fact that a man is dying, hits the audience emotionally. Its easy to feel sorry for the man, because he is so young. I know that I think about my father when I hear this song and I’m sure others do as well. Even though pathos can be found in almost every line of the song, its not overly sentimental. The man never asks the audience to be sorry for him. He instead advises them on how to live their lives to the fullest.

As you can see, simply hearing this song would not have yielded such and understanding for the meaning of the song. Quite possibly it could have missed the meaning all together. I challenge you to listen to the music, understand what the artist is saying, and evaluate the music you listen to. You have a choice to listen to what your hearing or just hear. What will you do?

The Pretender

Essay 4 revision

Every day people have to deal with inner emotions, which can cause great strain on an individual. They stare at themselves in mirrors forced to face their own judgment. They are their worst critics. Some people cannot handle their own criticism and choose instead to hide behind a facade. They mold themselves into the person they want to be, not the person they truly are. When people transform, it affects their demeanor immensely. They feel alone and feel they are always hiding a secret. The lyrics of “The Pretender”, by Foo Fighters, present an individual who experiences these inner emotions. The effectiveness of this song is shown through ethos and the determination of the speaker to find his true identity.
“The Pretender” uses bold words like “skeletons”, “bones”, “dark”, and “enemy” to tell a story of a man who goes through life every day wearing a facade; the type of facade that pleases everyone. He is sick of hiding behind this mask, and finally wants to reveal his true self. He wants to be defined as a genuine individual. The lyrics read as a motivational speech. The speaker’s goal is to encourage himself to stop pretending to be something he is not. He does not want to hide any more secrets. He cannot emotionally deal with the fact that he is living a lie. By thinking in a positive light, he motivates himself to inspire himself to be that genuine individual he dreams to be.

In “The Pretender”, the man is speaking to himself in an annoyed way. The lyrics read, “Send in your skeletons/…The secrets that you keep are at the ready/ Are you ready?/ I’m finished making sense/ Done pleading ignorance/ That whole defense” (ll. 5-12). He is admitting that he is finished with his façade and is tired of hiding behind secrets. He does not want to pretend anymore. This internal conflict he is dealing with can also be seen in lines 39 through 42. It reads, “I’m the voice inside your head/ You refuse to hear/ I’m the face that you have to face/ Mirrored in your stare.” These lines reveal that the character is experiencing emotional hardships. He is explaining to himself how he is the only person he has to deal with every day. When he looks into the mirror, he is the one starring back; the one who stares back and judges. He is his own enemy. The one person that can destroy his soul and bring him to his knees is himself. He wants all his internal problems to settle, so he can actually look in the mirror and not experience a feeling of judgment. The chorus reads, “What if I say I’m not like the others?/ What if I say I’m not just another one of your plays/ You’re the pretender/ What if I say that I’ll never surrender?” These words create a picture of a man looking in the mirror talking as if he were two people. He proclaims he will never surrender to the pretender. The pretender is the man’s fake self; the mask he has worn all his life. The man wants to get rid of this mask and will destroy the mask until he reaches his true identity.

“The Pretender” uses the technique of ethos. This is displayed in the lyrics by the male character constantly refering to his own credibility and who he is as an individual. The speaker continually says “What if I say I’m not like the others?/ What if I say I’m not just another one of your plays”. These are strong lines directed to his double self; the one hiding behind the mask and the one searching to find his true identity. The man tries to prove his credibility by describing his determination to his audience, which is himself. He says he is a strong person who will never surrender to the facade he used to hide behind. In lines 25 through 27, it says, “In time our soul untold/ I’m just another soul for sale… oh, well/ The page is out of print.” These lines justify the man’s annoyance of being a “soul for sale,” referencing that he was not living the life he wanted. He is done going through life pleasing everyone around him. He is done with his mask. His pages can no longer be written by anyone else. He is now in control of his own life. The man continues to motivate himself, so he does not get thrown off the course of finding his true identity. He repeatedly says, “So who are you?/ Yeah, who are you?” This is the question that lingers on his mind. He wants to be able to answer that question, and he will not stop searching until it is answered. All these intricate details and key phrases add to the effectiveness of ethos in “The Pretender”. The man continually proves to himself that he is capable of growing as a person by the strong motivation he provides for himself. The strength in him proves that he can be his own person and not a character hiding behind a facade. He is no longer the pretender.

“The Pretender” presents an interesting story of a man’s inner struggle with himself. The song uses ethos to add to the credibility of its main character. This is shown through the lines, which portray the man looking into a mirror fighting to find his true identity. He does not want to hide behind his façade any more. He wants to stop pretending.

Thursday, December 6, 2007

paper #3 revised!!

Paper # 3: The Invasion of the Body Snatchers

Movies are a funny thing. The setting can show different time periods throughout history. But no matter what the setting is, the movie will always reflect the time period and culture that is was made in. The Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), directed by Don Siegel, is just that, a mirror of its time. The movie is a political allegory that reflects the communistic scare of the nineteen-fifties and our countries struggle to deal with the opposing threat of communism taking over. In the movie, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the characters depict, a town that is enveloped in a “mass hysteria,” which correlates to the communist threat of the 1950’s and the terrorist threats of today.

The movie begins with Doctor Miles Bennell, the hero of the movie, returning from a business trip back to his hometown of Santa Mira. His nurse, Sally, greets the doctor at the train station and claims that she has had a busy week because of all the patients who wanted to see Dr. Bennell. This would have been normal but when they return to the office, there is nobody there. Everyone has canceled their appointments claiming that they are cured. Suddenly, a boy by the name of Jimmy Grimauldi bursts screaming onto the scene claiming that his mother is not his mother. The Doctor, however, dismisses the hysterical boy for having a childish tantrum and drugs him. This is the first sign that something is amiss with in the town of Santa Mira.

Our hero later meets up with his love interest, Becky Driscoll. Their dinner is interrupted with a phone call from Miles Bennell’s good friend Jack. Becky and Miles head over to Jack’s house where they discover a body of a man. The man is lying on the pool table and looked just like Jack! Everyone returns to Doctor Bennell’s house scared and worried to find strange green pods planted in the green house. The pods burst open, and spew foam and ooze a milky substance. Inside the pods are bodies formed in the likeness of the quartet. Miles tries to phone for help when he discovers what has become of the town; the pod people are taking over. The strange beings are in the police, they are your parents, brother, sisters, and they are everywhere and everyone! The pod people have no emotions, they do not laugh or cry, and they want everyone to be just like them.

This is the allegory the Director, Don Siegel, tries to depict throughout the movie, the spread of communism, its threat to the United States. The director illustrates this allegory through the use of the pod people. The pod people in the movie are a representation of socialistic Communism; the desire for everyone to be the same.

Communism started out as a socialistic party at the beginning of the Russian revolution. Its goal was to distribute the wealth among the classes but it only succeeded in suppressing the Russian people and their culture (Wikipedia).Can one imagine living where your job is predetermined for you at birth? Or people have to wait in ration lines for food and if the government, the provider, runs out of bread, the families do not eat for the week. During the late 1940’s and early 1950’s our country was faced with the dehumanizing threat of communism. Nobody knew whom to trust. People were disappearing and being Blacklisted left and right. Families were separated. People were petrified with fear. The United States of America is built on hard work and perseverance; our whole way of life was hanging by a string as people were turned onto the "idea" of equality. I highly doubt Lenin, Stalin, or any other socialist-communist leader had to wait in a food line. There is nothing equal about that. The pod people are depicting the communists with in the movie. The conspiracies, the pressure to make others become “one of them”, the emotionless attitudes, all of the pod people are the exact same.

In the United States during the time period in which the movie was written, there occurred a massive anti-socialistic movement. A man by the name of Joseph McCarthy was a senator in the United States. Senator McCarthy initiated what is now known as the Red Scare. The Red Scare is relevant to the movie because it is similar to the movement of mass hysteria with in the town of Santa Mira. The people of Santa Mira became scared because their loved ones were taken over by the pod people. This would not have been a problem if the pod people were not emotionless empty vessels of the once precious viable lives that were overcome by the “sameness.”

To conclude I do believe that the movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers is relevant today. Another theme of the movie is McCarthyism. Senator Joseph McCarthy was a senator who convinced the United States that it was under communist attack. Dr. Bennell was in a way the saner version of Joseph McCarthy. The Dr. was trying to save his town from the monster pods that left people emotionless and in the same likeness, which is the allegory to communism.

The problem today, however, is not communism but terrorism. After 9/11 the U.S. was left scared and vulnerable, President Bush passed an act of legislation that allowed to U.S. to monitor anyone who is suspected of being a terrorist. The Patriot Act is like many of the things that Senator McCarthy tried to accomplish in his reign as senator. McCarthy wanted to protect his country from the imposing threat of communism, and in doing so blacklisted many of the suspecting communists of the decade. Senator McCarthy showed no remorse for suspected communists; almost like President Bush’s zero tolerance on terrorism. The War on terrorism also is prevalent to the movie; because like the pod people are a threat to Santa Mira so is terrorism a threat to the United States way of life.

In closing, I would definitely recommend this movie to others, not for the allegories and allusions, but just because it is a horribly corny movie with great special affects. Watch on.

Works Cited

Dirks, Tim. “General Review for Invasion of the Body Snatchers.” 1996. 27 September 2007. http://www.filmsite.org/inva.html.

Siegel, Don. Invasion of the Body Snatchers. 1956.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

B.Y.O.B (Bring your own bombs) Revised

System of a Down’s, B.Y.O.B, is an anti-war song filled with shots at the government. The song is broken into two different arguments both covering the war. It questions our motive for fighting and uses various subtle and complicated allusions to make its point. These allusion are sometimes so complicated that it hurts the argument because the average listener might not understand them. The band also points out that the upper class never participates in the violence; they leave the lower class to do all the dirty work for a cause that they either do not know or understand. The title, B.Y.O.B, is a play on words. Instead of bring your own beer, it stands for bring your own bombs. This states that the people who benefit from the war should help in fighting the war. Hence the point bring your own bombs. The band’s persona believes no one should get a free pass from war no matter how famous the individual. They are also very angry, shown in their sarcastic and stinging lyrics, and use that anger to help further develop their argument.
Beginning with a thunderous guitar solo and a slight growl, the singer screams “Why do they always send the poor?” The text demonstrates this emotional outburst by having it capitalized. This is the audience’s first impression of the artist’s persona of a very upset American citizen. It also plays into the ethos because his anger is helping fuel the audience. The singer then questions why President Bush and the United States government do not fight in the war. After the screaming question, the first stanza forms a complicated metaphor comparing that is comparing President Bush to a barbarian. “Barbarisms by Barbaras/ with pointed heels” is referring to Dofia Barbara’s a ruthless Latin American barbarian. While a good use of logos, the common listener might not necessarily understand this reference. “Victorious victories kneel/For brand new spankin' deals” creates an illusion to a king giving away property after receiving land in a great battle. Again the band is using a complicated metaphor that might not be understood by your average Joe. It is a combination of both logos and pathos. Historically, knights would kneel to the king and receive their reward. By comparing President Bush to a king giving away gifts, it furthers the audience’s anger at the President for giving gifts that is understood to be oil filled land; it is questioning our motives. “Marching forward hypocritic and/Hypnotic computers”, the reader now refers the to poor soldiers as brain washed computers. As proven in the line “You depend on our protection/Yet you feed us lies from the tablecloth”, the poor people are mislead into believing they are protecting our freedom, but they are only being told lies from the government. The first stanza is one giant metaphor that uses logos and pathos to persuade the audience to the artist’s anti-war persona.
Following the first stanza, the chorus begins. The chorus fills in a lot of blanks in the song and sets a definite setting when it refers to “Dancing in the desert, Iraq. “Everybody's going to the party have a real good time” implies that the war is the party and it will be safe and fun. A testament to the artist’s sarcastic persona. This is a complete contradiction to the actual experience. The “blowing up the sunshine” are the bombs that we are dropping in Iraq. “Kneeling roses disappearing into/Moses' dry mouth/Breaking into Fort Knox stealing/Our intentions”. The first part is another logos based complicated metaphor that even I could not decipher. “Breaking into Fort Knox to steal our plans” is a great allusion to finding the real reason we are fighting this war. The artist again questions our motives by stating that we are using freedom as our excuse to get a bunch of oil. This is proven by mentioning the “Hangers sitting dripped in oil/Crying freedom”. The chorus elaborates on questioning the motives for war that began to form in the first stanza and helps focus it more on the fact that we are going to war for oil.
The next part of the song repeats phrases several times. One example is “Blast off/It's party time/And we don't live in a fascist nation”. Fascism is the ideal that the interests of the state outweighs the interest of the individual and are ruled by dictator. Another example of logos. So, living in a fascist nation perfectly fits his argument because throughout the song he has been explaining that President Bush is trying to gain land and oil. “Blast off its party time” alludes to the blowing up Iraqi buildings. Another example of repetition to help prove there point is “And where the f*** are you?” This demonstrates not only there angry persona, but also it wonders why the poor fight. As proven in there next two lines where they ask, “Why don't presidents fight the war?/Why do they always send the poor?” System of a Down is sending a clear message by sending the poor uneducated men and women over to Iraq to fight in the war; they will not ask as many questions.
This essay has various positive and negative qualities. The persona of an angry, subtle and sarcastic American citizen fits the topic perfectly. The complicated metaphors, on the other hand, serve as both positive and negative. From a negative standpoint, the average reader might not comprehend some of the complicated metaphors that are not common knowledge. It takes a lot more time and even research to appreciate the song and its full potential. However, it also can be a positive and intrigue an audience that enjoys more thought provoking lyrics. Its use of pathos to anger the audience and persuade them is another positive method of rhetoric. Yet on a broader scale, I would have to say that this essay is not effective due to the complicated poetic language it incorporates. It detracts too much from making a thorough point; the metaphors hurts the song’s mass appeal. To the appropriate audience, the song would be a perfect fit, but this audience would have to be very knowledgeable or inspired enough to put in a little extra effort. For a majority, that extra effort would not be put in and the purpose of the song would only be partial attained.

Angry All the Time- Revised

In Tim McGraw’s song, Angry All the Time, there is a conflict between a husband’s feelings and his job as a husband. Throughout the song the husband is forcefully speaking to his wife about their relationship. The husband is torn between staying with her, and his feelings about doing what is best for him. The husband is tired of the difficulty of their relationship. He is feeling as though he must get out of the marriage in order to carry on. However, the conflict that is stopping the husband from leaving his wife is that he had always promised his wife he would never leave. This song demonstrates the importance of logos because the speaker is the one trying to demonstrate the best reasoning for leaving to his wife and his audience.


The husband demonstrates his reasoning by stating that the surrounding situations in their lives are changing as their sons have grown up, they have entered midlife, and the husband is now feeling as if he has lost the woman he feel in love with. The husband believes that his wife has been taken over by the difficulties in their life and their marriage. Those difficulties are based on her feelings of losing control of her life, and have turned her into an unhappy woman, who is angry all the time, and she is not the only one with problems surrounding her.


The speaker of the song is the husband, who is speaking to his wife in the song. This is where the pathos part of the lyrics comes in, as the speaker starts giving his reasoning of what she has done to make him leave her. In the song, the speaker says in the chorus of the song, “You ain't the only one who feels like this world left you far behind/ I don't know why you gotta be Angry All The Time”. Through these lyrics, he is explaining how she is not the only one losing control of their lives. Through his wife’s changes in her personality, he chooses his feelings over his job, as a husband, to stand by his wife, as he decides to leave her. Through the author’s lyrical demonstration of her change in personality, the listener is able to see that this divorce was uncontrollable.


The author of this song, Bruce Robinson, portrays a common message of a breakup in a clear way. In the lines, “I got to get away” and then again, “Twenty years have came and went since I walked out of your door”, it is known by the listener that the husband leaves his wife. Although the message is not an uplifting one, it’s a situation that a lot of Americans deal with and can relate to. It is a situation of when divorce occurs due to outside powers beyond the love bond.


Robinson uses a unique method of a timeline of the speaker’s life, to explain the opinion about divorce in the song. The author speaks of times from their current relationship, to their past, and then their future. Through Robinson’s method, it first allows the audience to know his reasoning for leaving in the lines, “I don’t know why you gotta be Angry All the Time”. Next, it speaks of the past when he says, “What I can't live with is memories of the way you used to be”. These lines tell us of how remembering the past, when she wasn’t angry, makes it more difficult for him to live in their current lifestyle. Finally, the author goes into their future, after they have gone their separate ways. In the lines about their future, it is discovered that the husband still has feelings for his wife but had to leave her to help himself become happier than their current lifestyle. It is found by the lines, “I never quite made it back to the one I was before”.


“Angry All the Time” is a song that many listeners can relate to because the author, Robinson, does an effective job of displaying his message about divorce. Other people, besides divorced couples, can also relate to this song over broken relationships because it is about the world dividing a couples bond; which can be current in any time of relationship. The people going through the heartbreak of divorce or broken relationships know that people tend to grow apart and divorce can be unavoidable. Robinson does an effective job of displaying his message about divorce being unavoidable at points in the song by having the lines, “The reasons that I can't stay don't have a thing to do with being in love”. He also does a great job of connecting to the listeners of the song by saying the lines, “I remember every time I said I'd never leave/ What I can't live with is memories of the way you used to be”. These two lines connect to listeners because no one ever hopes for divorce. There have always been promises made between couples, that end up splitting up, that stated about always staying together and being there for each other through the hardest parts in life. The main message of this song is that divorce can come because of outside factors. That it can become uncontrollable at times but it does not always have to be viewed as a bad thing if it is helping a person became a better person.

Lyric essay revised

It is often said that rap lyrics contain no meaning and are just ramblings of cuss words and vulgar references but that is not always the case. Some artists have a true message in their lyrics, one such examples is Tupac Shakur’s song “Changes.” This song delivers a pretty direct message about the need for a change in the world. The title alone gives that away, but the lyrics expose the speaker’s feelings as well as the problem that needs to be changed. This artist effectively makes his argument using two types of reasoning, pathos and ethos.
In order to clearly understand the song who the speaker is must be determined. The speaker says “I'm tired of bein' poor and even worse I'm black.” So we learn that the speaker is poor and black the speaker identifies his sex when he refers to himself as a “brother.” The vernacular used in the song, such as dropping g’s and replacing –er with –a, leads us to believe he is a younger man. This song does not leave much room to wonder what it is about. Tupac directly talks about the problems with drugs and violence in our society. He addresses the factors of race and economic status in the song. Though these lyrics could be read as an offensive it is hard to ignore them and since the speaker is a black man he has effectively removed most of the racist problem with the song.
The artist effectively uses pathos by appealing directly to the listeners feelings. His Use of disturbing images provokes the listener to actually pay attention to the song. HE uses images such as, “Give the crack to the kids who the hell cares? One less hungry mouth on the welfare.” No human with any sense of morals could read or hear this line of the song and not be affected. By using a horrid image involving children he will provoke a feeling of sympathy. Most people are sensitive to the needs of kids before adults; that is not to say that the other lines involving adults are not effective. The numerous images the artist uses containing murder and death would obviously shock most people; and relate to the few who live it. As people we are attracted to what shocks us, like the popularity of horror movies. The artist effectively catches the audience attention and uses the basic set of morals most of his listeners would likely follow to make them understand how hurtful the problem he is addressing is. This almost makes a parallel between ethos and pathos.
What makes his argument even more believable and touching is that he puts the speaker in as a victim of this problem. This is an effective use of logos. The song is well organized in that the artist first establishes the speaker as a knowledgeable member of the problem. The speaker even puts himself directly into some of the situations being discussed; he refers to himself as a “brother” and to the people whom the stories are about as “brothers”. Though this method of argument is less affective than the previous two it further supports those arguments. People are more likely to trust some one inside of a situation. It also makes the audience stop and think if someone involved in a situation can notice how horrible it is then how have us on the outside not seen what is going on. Since it is often harder to see a problem on the inside it makes the reader realize how big of a mistake they have made by not noticing the problem.
Since often people do not want to admit when there is a problem the artist tasks of making an effective argument even harder. Not only must the artist to attract the attention of the audience of outsiders but has to provoke a want to change a problem they seem to have been ignoring. If he does not carefully present the problem the audience could become offended and close up before he is able to make the argument. The artist easily overcomes this problem by just putting the problem in the audience’s face. He even seems to address the hypocrites that he could be actually aiming this argument towards. He pokes directly at those members of the audience saying “all I see is racist faces,” which could be taken offensively by the audience. The manner though it which he states the previous quote does not seem to be directed at one specific races. Though that runs the risk of pushing the audience away he takes the risks and through use of heart wrenching imagery is able to present a sound argument. This song, though aimed at a younger audience, can be retrieved by any age group and the problems which the song addresses should not be ignored by any age group.

http://www.lyrics007.com/2Pac%20(Tupac%20Shakur)%20Lyrics/Changes%20Lyrics.html

"Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue" Revised

After 9/11, patriotism in America exploded. Patriotism came to the forefront in all aspects of life including the media, movies, school, church, fashion, bumper stickers and yard decorations, music and politics. Our country united very strongly for a common cause. Differences in race, economics and politics were quickly put aside as our nation banded together to chase the anti-American demons from our doorsteps. Muslims were branded as enemy number one.



As a result of this earth shattering event, many American entertainers grabbed on to the patriotic spirit of the American people and used it as material for their work. Toby Keith emerged as one of the vocal leaders of the patriotic movement. The macho man gave his efforts to show everyone that listened to his lyrics just what Old Glory stood for. His song, “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue”, immediately made it to the top of the country music charts. Listening to this song pumped up the listener and made him/her proud to be an American. It reassured us and told us not to fear—we would put a boot in the enemy’s posterior and kick him into eternity, just like America has always done to her enemies (lines 39, 40 of the song). America has been the champion of freedom and considered the leader of the world. Then, a group of extremists came charging into our world, unafraid, and gave us a “sucker punch from the back” (line 17 and 18 of the song). How dare them!!! These extremists made every effort to dim the lights of freedom that had been paid for many times with the blood of our friends and families before us. Keith’s own father lost his right eye in the army but his loyalty to the flag never faltered (lines 8, 9, 10 of the song).



Toby Keith reached his goal of fostering patriotism in a society reeling from the devastation of the first foreign attack on our soil. “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue,” is pathos laden song. It appeals to the emotions of the majority of the American public—a public still in shock from the attack. Keith sings about time-enduring icons that are symbols of American life. The tone of his voice makes it easy for me to visualize the Statue of Liberty shaking her fist, Uncle Sam writing terrorist at the top of his list, a soaring eagle, and Mother Freedom, in a Puritan style dress, ringing the Liberty Bell. Toby Keith makes a convincing argument that if you push the button too hard, America will fight and will win (Justice will be served…from the fifth verse of the song). This is the same image that Toby Keith wants his audience to have of him. Through his size and physical appearance, Keith betrays a strength that others look up to. Using ethos as a rhetorical strategy, Toby Keith becomes an iconic image of America in much the same way as the Statue of Liberty. As he performs this song, he is the epitome of American strength. When Toby entertains his audience, he wears a beard, hat, jeans and boots. The rugged look demonstrates that he is not afraid to face those that question his physical toughness. From my point of view, I believe he would defend my freedom to the bitter end, but he would gladly kick my posterior if I questioned what our ancestors had sacrificed for all of us to be happy. Protestors against our flag would not go very far with Toby Keith. If you are not willing to be an asset when times are troubled, then you have no place in the America that Toby Keith knows.



Politically, Toby Keith is rallying the masses to stand up for the troops as they are willing to risk their lives without reservation. The dastardly deeds of the extremists must not go unpunished. Terrorist felt the wrath of the whole world raining down on them just as Toby’s song had predicted (see lines 31 and 32).



Toby Keith’s message has enthusiastically rallied most Americans, particularly the country music listener. From my experience, the country music listener tends to be very patriotic. Even though many possess a redneck image, the fact that they are willing to defend our country makes them an invaluable member of society. The rhetoric of “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue” encouraged many young men and women to join the U.S military forces. I personally know several teenagers from my rural hometown who were inspired to join the National Guard partly as a result of Toby Keith’s “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue”. The timing, topic and his ability to use effective forms of rhetoric has made Toby Keith millions of dollars with this song.


Toby Keith has done a masterful job at rallying the patriotism spirit of the American people and no matter what side of the political fence you are on, all true Americans would have to agree with every word in “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue”. This song is a classic because it will stand the test of time. Most importantly, it makes us proud and confident that we are Americans. Since 9/11 and the relief of “Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue” in 2002, patriotism has decline and American citizens are even now questioning our involvement in the Iraq war. Toby Keith should revive the patriotic spirit of Americans with another outstanding, rhetorical song about the Red, White and Blue.

Holiday!- revised

The song “Holiday” by Green Day is a song that cries out about the American government. It talks about the modern-day problems dealing with Bush, the Iraq War, oil, and environmental issues. It is easy to tell it is a political song because it includes words such as, “Armageddon”, “company”, “war”, “protester”, “flag”, “monument”, “bombs”, “kill”, “government”, “Eiffel towers”, and “trials”. Green Day is singing about how they are “outlaws”, and they are trying to gain support and get the rest of the American people to join them in the fight against the government. This song has been the center of much conversation regarding the war and the feelings of the American people. Green Day is effective in getting people to think about the issues that are important to them, especially through the use of pathos.

Green Day is speaking to the young and middle-age voting American public. They want the people who are making the decisions to be informed of all the things they believe the American government is doing wrong since September 11. They are hoping to change the minds of the American people so they will become outraged like them, and want to do something to change things. They use the word, “Hey!” at the end of some of the lines and say “Can I get another Amen? (Amen!)”, as a way to get people pumped up and show that people agree with their opinions against the government.

One of the themes the song speaks about is everything bad since September 11th and the war that has been an outcome. They disagree with the war and the fact that so many people have lost their lives for a war that may not even be necessary. This theme is seen when they says things like, “And bleed, the company lost the war today,” and:

Hear the sound of the falling rain
Coming down like an Armageddon flame (Hey!)
The shame
The ones who died without a name

Another theme in this song is their disapproval of the American government. They are taking a stand against all the empty lies the government is telling the American people, and all the control they have. In the lines that say, “Another protester has crossed the line (Hey!) To find, the money's on the other side” Green Day is saying that the people who are trying to make a difference just find that the government and people with money control everything, so all their efforts are pointless. The government is going to, “Kill all the fags that don’t agree!”, which means that the government does not really care about the opinions of the American people, and they will do whatever they want to anyone who doesn’t agree with what they have to say. They want to stand up against it because if something isn’t done now, then nothing will ever change; things will just get worse. This is seen in the chorus:

I beg to dream and differ from the hollow lies
This is the dawning of the rest of our lives
On holiday

“Holiday” by Green Day is a song that represents all three of the ideas of pathos, ethos, and logos. Pathos is the idea that is most present in this song. The idea of pathos is represented in this song because they use examples that are intended to produce a reaction or shock out of the people they are singing this song to. This is seen in examples such as, “The shame, the ones who died without a name”, “And bleed, the company lost the war today”, “There's a flag wrapped around a score of men”, “A gag, A plastic bag on a monument”, “Bombs away is your punishment!”, and “Kill all the fags that don't agree!”. All of these phrases are meant shock people and spark a reaction so that something will be done to stop what the government is doing with the war. Green Day was very effective in portraying the idea of pathos. Many of the lines they sing are meant to get people fired up about supporting their case. They scream the word, “Hey!” and “Amen” to get people pumped. These phrases show emotion, and the examples can be personal to the audience, but they are definitely not over the top.

The singers of Green Day also portray the idea of ethos and logos, just not as strongly as pathos. This is seen because when they say, “The representative from California now has the floor…”, it makes it sound like it is a credible source who is talking about all the concrete details. Even though ethos is present in the song, I don’t think it is very effective. They sound like they know what they are talking about, but the only real credible source in the song would be the representative from California. The fact that the band is singing things like, “And bleed, the company lost the war today”, “Another protester has crossed the line (Hey!)To find, the money's on the other side”, and “There's a flag wrapped around a score of men (Hey!) A gag, a plastic bag on a monument”, gives concrete details about why they are mad about what is going on, which are examples of logos. Logos isn’t a real effective part of the song either because they gave examples of why they are rebelling, but they never use real numbers or facts.

Overall, “Holiday” is very effective in sounding like a credible political song by the use of pathos, ethos, and logos. Green Day does a good job clearly stating their thoughts and opinions. They also do a good job getting people pumped up and excited about the song and what they are talking about by adding the “Hey!” and “Amen” phrases throughout the song.

Tuesday, December 4, 2007

invasion of the body snatchers

Paper # 3: The Invasion of the Body Snatchers

Movies are a funny thing. The setting can show different time periods throughout history. But no matter what the setting is, the movie will always reflect the time period and culture that is was made in. The Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), directed by Don Siegel, is just that a mirror of its time. The movie is a political allegory that reflects the communistic times and our struggle to deal with the opposing threat of communism taking over. In the movie, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the characters depict, a town that is enveloped in a “mass hysteria,” which correlates to the communist threat of the 1950’s and the terrorist threats of today.
The movie begins with Doctor Miles Bennell, the hero of the movie, returning from a business trip back to his hometown of Santa Mira. His nurse, Sally, greets the doctor at the train station and claims that she has had a busy week because of all the patients who wanted to see Dr. Bennell. This would have been normal but when they return to the office, there is nobody there. Everyone has canceled their appointments claiming that they are cured. Suddenly, a boy by the name of Jimmy Grimauldi bursts screaming onto the scene claiming that his mother is not his mother. The Doctor, however, dismisses the hysterical boy for having a childish tantrum and drugs him. This is the first sign that something is amiss with in the town of Santa Mira.
Our hero later meets up with his love interest, Becky Driscoll. Their dinner is interrupted with a phone call from Miles Bennell’s good friend Jack. Becky and Miles head over to Jack’s house where they discover a body of a man. The man is lying on the pool table and looked just like Jack! Everyone returns to Doctor Bennell’s house scared and worried to find strange green pods planted in the green house. The pods burst open, and spew foam and ooze a milky substance. Inside the pods are bodies formed in the likeness of the quartet. Miles tries to phone for help when he discovers what has become of the town; the pod people are taking over. They are in the police, they are your parents, brother, sisters, and they are everywhere and everyone! They have no emotions, they do not laugh or cry, and they want everyone to be just like them.
This is the allegory the Director, Don Siegel, tries to depict throughout the movie, the spread of communism, its threat to our country and our way of life. Communism started out as a socialistic party at the beginning of the Russian revolution. Its goal was to distribute the wealth among the classes but it only succeeded in suppressing the Russian people and their culture (Wikipedia). Imagine living in where you job is predetermined for you at birth. People have to wait in ration lines for food and if they run out of bread guess you are screwed for the week. During the late 1940’s and early1950’s our country was faced with the dehumanizing threat of communism. Nobody knew whom to trust. People were disappearing and being Blacklisted left and right. Families were separated and people were petrified with fear. The United States of America is built on hard work and perseverance; our whole way of life was hanging by a string as people were turned onto the "idea" of equality. I highly doubt Lenin, Stalin, or any other socialist-communist leader had to wait in a food line. There is nothing equal about that. The pod people are depicting the communists with in the movie. The conspiracies, the pressure to make others become “one of them”, the emotionless attitudes, all the pod people are the exact same
To conclude I do believe that the movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers is relevant today. Another them of the movie is McCarthyism. Senator Joseph McCarthy was a senator who convinced the United States that it was under communist attack. Dr. Bennell was in a way the saner version of Joseph McCarthy. The Dr. was trying to save his town from the monster pods that left people emotionless and in the same likeness, which is the allegory to communism. The problem today, however, is not communism but terrorism. After 9/11 the U.S. was left scared and vulnerable, President Bush passed an act of legislation that allowed to U.S. to monitor anyone who is suspected of Being a terrorist. The Patriot Act is like many of the things that Senator McCarthy tried to accomplish in his reign as senator. McCarthy wanted to protect his country from the imposing threat of communism, as Dr. Bennell wanted to protect Santa Mira. In closing, I would definitely recommend this movie to others, not for the allegories and allusions, but just because it is a horribly corny movie with great special affects. Watch on.

Works Cited
Dirks, Tim. “General Review for Invasion of the Body Snatchers.” 1996. 27 September 2007. http://www.filmsite.org/inva.html.
Siegel, Don. Invasion of the Body Snatchers. 1956.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism