TOW #7 - Graven Images (Written)

This essay was written by Saul Bellow, who won the Nobel Prize for literature in 1976. He has won three National Book Awards and a Pulitzer Prize for his writing. The essay was written 1997, which is a fairly modern perspective. The essay was about photography and the modern media, and how that has influenced the behavior of people and the way the media can shape the public idea of someone. This is becoming especially relevant since our culture and society is becoming more public, with the Internet and smartphones and a lot of other modern technology. Throughout the essay, he frequently mentions "amour propre", which means "self love" and was created by Jean-Jacques Rousseau. It is a "self love" derived from the approval of others, and is something that people today often seek. He opens the essay by talking about President Truman, and how the photographers held a large amount of power, as they could create or destroy his public image, something that is still true for many public figures. He also does a good job of establishing ethos throughout the essay, by using his own past experiences as examples, like the TIME article with the terrible picture of him. But beyond talking about how photography has changed our ideas of self-consciousness and the idea of exposure that was mentioned many times, he talks about why people are so involved in maintaining a good image and may even create a public persona, the way he says he has, the way there are some things he doesn't reveal to the media. He says, "it is the (not always conscious) premise of the photographer that his is the art of penetrating your private defenses" as well as the belief that "your 'privacy' is to them a cover for the lies and manipulations of your amour propre". He is telling the reader that the job of the media and photographers is to reveal your inner life and the "layers of the story".

TOW #6 - "Two Ways of Belonging in America" (Written)

The author of this essay was Bharati Mukherjee, an Indian-born author. She is currently a professor at Berkeley. The essay describes her experiences as an immigrant and contrasts it with that of her sister. She explains the main differences between her and her sister as they lived in the United States, like how her sister chose not to become an American citizen. She talks about how her sister wanted to keep up the old traditions, while she almost seemed to reject them, not having an arranged marriage, as well as marrying someone who was not Indian. She goes on and describes her sister's stance on immigration and how legal immigrants are not treated as well as they should be. She talks about how this happened, and what the differences were that led to this happening. She also addresses immigration itself, from the view Americans have of immigrants, how they're believed to work in stereotypical immigrant jobs. She talks about her own similar experience in Canada, and how she understands her sister's sentiment about being an immigrant.  She is trying to tell the reader, who probably doesn't share these experiences, that North American countries need to rethink the way they treat immigrants, as they should not be treated as second class citizens and do not deserve the stereotypes they are given. She also describes how immigrants choose to approach living in a new culture, you can embrace it the way she did or you can try to cling on to your past, the way her sister did, and both of those things are perfectly fine. She achieves her purpose by appealing primarily to logos and ethos. She appeals to logos by making a logical argument about why her she and her sister share different immigration experiences. She builds her ethos almost immediately as an immigrant, and she is clearly credible to speak about the topic, since she talks about her own experiences as an immigrant as well as her sister's.

TOW #5 - WWF Ad (Visual)

This is an ad by the WWF (World Wildlife Fund) about the tsunami that occurred in Japan in 2011 and the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York in 2001. It makes an interesting comparison between the two and shows the twin towers with many planes heading towards them, rather than the two that actually hit the buildings in the attack. In the top right corner, the ad says that the tsunami killed 100 times more people than the 9/11 attack. I think the ad is pretty effective because it definitely attracts the viewer's attention with all the planes headed towards the towers, and it makes the viewer want to know what's going on, so they'll read the caption on the right, which explains the purpose of the ad and also the organization that created it. The ad is telling the viewer that they need to preserve the environment, and from this ad, because of its power. But while I do think the ad grabs the viewer's attention, it might be going a little too far, because I don't think comparing the tsunami to terrorist attacks is entirely necessary or appropriate, and definitely is not necessary for the purpose of promoting wildlife and preservation of nature. The ad attempts to appeal to the audience's pathos with the reference to the attacks and all the people who died. Some people might find this ad offensive, because it could be considered almost disrespectful to those who died in the attack, especially when it has more planes pointing towards the towers, as if the actual attack was not bad enough. The tsunami and the attacks were both tragedies, and there is no purpose in juxtaposing them together in this way. The ad could also be considered as appealing to logos with the statistic that was used in order to emphasize the power of nature, and that the natural world must be protected. It does seem slightly counterintuitive however, seeing as if natural phenomena like tsunamis can cause this much damage, it doesn't necessarily seem like nature is something that needs to be defended.