Final TOW- Letter to the future of APELC

To the future of APELC,

Welcome to a class of ups and downs, of happy and sad, of ridiculously eye opening readings. Now that I am groomed and honed from the past year, I am able to impart wisdom unto you. Your year is bound to be interesting and this is what I wish I'd been told/things to look out for.

      1.  You are not a bad writer

Just because someone is going to help you improve, does not mean that you aren’t good at writing. The entirety of the year gives you tools that can help you clarify and better your essays. The potential grade- shock on the summer essay may sting, but if you look back at it at the end of the year, you will completely agree with it. Don't let your ego get in the way of improving your writing, and don't forget: you are not a terrible writer but you are not perfect.

2. People have different tastes

Throughout the course of the year, different people will read and grade your papers and projects. At the end of the day, the only opinion that truly matters is your own. While you are learning you should take advice, but don’t forget to question it if you don’t understand.

           3. Take advantage of the readings

I have shaped my views and opinions of the world throughout the course of this year. When you are exposed to Plato, This is Water, and Thoreau; it exposes you to different ways of thinking.  Being a good thinker leads to being a good writer, which leads to a good AP and report card score (if that’s important to you). Plus, it’s not in every class where you get to wear a toga to school and debate intelligently about philosophy.

4.   Ask for help from Yost or Pronko-> two teachers = double the ideas

If you’re down or troubled and need some love and care and nothing, nothing is going right, the best thing you can do is try and adjust your approach to what you are doing. APELC is special because there are two teachers who have different ways of thinking. One of their methods is bound to work for you. Don’t be afraid to ask both for assistance if you feel stuck, or to talk to me. Any student who went through this course had to figure some stuff out, and we love to talk about how we did it. So ask. That first line was Carole King, by the way.

Much love,

Chloe Becker

TOW 28

My TOWS from September into March have become completely different in focus, style, and approach. In August, prior to entering the course, my TOWs were simple observations. They took tons of time and required much thought. I attempted to match the fanciful words on my rhetorical strategy list with patterns I found in the texts. There was little to no analysis of the effects of the devices used and as I reread my words, I had no recollection of what some of my "analyzed" rhetorical devices did. Moving through the year, I focused more on  the strategies' effects. I still was spending a lot of time trying to figure it all out, it didn't come easily yet. However by the end of the year, completing a TOW took little time and the piece I would create was much better than anything I'd had written in September. Eventually, I even moved away from rhetorical analysis and used TOWs to practice writing argumentatively.

Given my newfound comfort level and ease with rhetorical analysis, it feels like a mastered skill. Of course, there is always room for improvement. But the ability to closely read a piece of work and determine what the author wants us to know; how they get us to know it, is something I feel very comfortable with.

What is not entirely sufficient isn't exactly a traditional TOW. When I began working with the argument unit, and was finding it difficult to finagle my approach to success, I used a couple of TOWs to hone my skills. The argumentative side of writing isn't necessarily a huge issue for me, but comes with less comfort.

The TOW assignments helped me become proficient in rhetorical analysis. By midyear, I was learning less from each article I analyzed as I had found my groove and didn't need to work as much at the skill. Once the assignment was amended so I could work on something I was struggling with (argumentation), I began benefiting from the assignment again. The TOWs achieve their purpose, especially towards the beginning of the year, as they give time for you to practice the new techniques. My rhetorical essays and ways of thinking were improved due to the early TOWs, and my argumentation improved by the end.

TOW 26 (written)

In 1905 Henry Adams wrote, The Education of Henry Adams. This eventually won a Pulitzer Prize and an excerpt titled, "A Law of Acceleration" was printed in the Best American Essays of the Century. This essay captures the idea of progress through time and what the future may hold as seen by the past. I struggled through this read a little bit. It is heavier than previous texts and organized in a strange way. The first time I read through all I really was able to catch was Adam's purpose in writing it, to convince that motion continues and America accelerates in growth. After some research I discovered Henry Adams is the descendant of 2 United States presidents and that contributes to creating a broad audience for his work. He is looking to motivate the educated "New American".
Adams applies rhetorical strategies to support his argument. Extended metaphor is the most prominent technique. The Law of acceleration states, "The acceleration of an object as produced by a net force is directly proportional to the magnitude of the net force." In simple terms, the more force applied the greater the acceleration. This idea is applied to Adams' observation of coal-output growth, and the growth of his nation overall. By using an extended metaphor is keeps a consistent thread for the entire piece and allows the reader to piece all Adam's ideas.
Adams establishes ethos by being who he is. Like how the Language of Composition explained that a king has built in ethos, Adam's does as well with his familial connections.  But Adams also appeals to ethos when he explains his ideas in scientific fact. Many believe that science and fact are equal, so by taking a scientific approach, his thoughts appear to be fact. 

TOW 26- Why We Need Geography (Written/Argument)

To what extent do you agree with the main argument?

In Gil Grosvenor's "Why We Need Geography", he argues geography is an essential component of most issues and jobs. He believes the subject should infiltrate more schools and deserves , at least, "one tenth the amount of money history has." Providing many excellent points, Grosvenor's assertions are hard to disagree with, and geoliteracy should be emphasized in schooling as well as in international issues.

As a student of public schooling, I'm embarrassed by my own limited knowledge in geography. In my history class, my lack of knowledge of locations has impeded on successful understanding of some important events (where was the land bridge again?). While this is on a small scale, Grosvenor is able to connect geoliteracy with skillfullness in a multitude of jobs. It helps bankers decide the best loans to give, helps workers in real estate understand the patterns of the industry, and even farmers grow the best crops. While some students see geographical knowledge as a waste of time, given that Google is always there to direct you, the fact is that where things are has a huge effect on what they are. Especially in world wide problems.

When discussing geography in current events, Grosvenor focuses on the Obama administration's "what should we do in Afghanistan" poll. He sees it as good in concept, but because of the nation geographical illiteracy, ineffective. The nation was split half way in opposing decisions because many do not fully comprehend the issue.  Grosvenor argues that because the majority of Americans do not know about where Afghanistan is, and what exists there, they are unable to properly make a decision. Grosvenor believes the foundation of most misunderstanding is the lack of geographical knowledge. Despite his expertise, this is difficult to prove. Perhaps the way to find out is to do what he says, and better equip today's students with geographical understanding.

Tow 25- Getting Started (Visual)

Today, April 12th 2015, Hilary Clinton announced her anticipated candidacy for the presidential election of 2016. As someone who everyone knew was going to run, the video that was released works to excite the American public as well as subtly give a clue as to the kind of politician Clinton is.

In order to effectively convey a basic premise of her ambitions, Clinton uses a specific arrangement and repetition of examples of people "getting ready to..." and

The arrangement of the video is effective for achieving its purpose. The audience does not even see Clinton until the final moments. Instead, a variety of families are explaining what they are embarking on, families of different ages and ethnicities. Before viewing the candidate, viewers are likely to identify with somebody in the video. By forming this connection with the audience, the announcement is well perceived by many.

Not only are the people in the video diverse in what they look like, but what they are saying are shaping the stances Clinton hopes to deliver. When you leave the video, you know Clinton is in support of: gay marriage, successful businesses, support of senior citizens, strong education and aiding the job industry.  And she didn't say a thing about it.

TOW #22 - 'Foxcatcher" A quietly devastating drama

This review of a heavily nominated film is able to capture the essence of the movie as well as voice some criticisms in a subtle fashion through its arrangement. The piece begins with a look into the history that the film is based upon. While perhaps giving away some spoilers (only to those unfamiliar with the true event) this opens the article to those who have not seen the movie and are looking for some insight. 

Directly following the historical background is a paragraph dedicated to praising the director, Bennett Miller. As someone who has seen the movie, the review's author Ty Burr beautifully describing how Foxcatcher "could have made a three-ring circus of this story, pushing the weirdness and driving home his points about the evil, idle rich. Instead, “Foxcatcher” is measured and mournful sometimes to a fault." Burr is able to describe what you should expect going into the theater to see this movie, as it isn't action filled but rather tediously developed and possibly uncomfortable.  

Following praise of the director is praise of the actors. Truly a film that is victorious because of its well-developed characters, Burr is able to emphasize the quality of the three male leads while continuing to explain a  little more about the plot of the movie itself. 

The review concludes with a repeated stance on the overall movie as "terribly sad". Which trust me, it was. Once again Burr peers at what some other critics say this time about the movie being a little far from the actuality of the event, but in his last effort to defend the film, explains why it may not matter. 

TOW #19- Why Children's Theater Matters (Written)

Why Children's theater matters is a transcript of a speech given by Lyn Gardner. The audience is stated to be those in attendance that the Unicorn Theater in London. Her speech followed that acceptance of an award for outstanding contribution to children's arts. Gardner develops an effective argument for more recognition needed to the performances done for children. She has excellent arrangement as she begins by establishing ethos through her analogy, explaining why this issue needs change, developing the issue in a greater context, and finally point-blankly stating how she believes theater should be viewed.

While clearly being viewed as one with upstanding credibility, given she was being recognized for it, Gardner still begins by giving reason for her opinion to be valued. She casually reflects into some of her past work, but in the field of children's novels. She equates the questioning of why children's books are seen as less to why theater is seen as less. This analogy is effective as it is not too far from the actual ideas Gardner plans to propose and easy to connect to. Even if you do not like theater, nearly every child of the parents in her audience is in love with a book, making it simple to establish a connection between her ideas and the audience.

Following suit, Gardner explains why there should be change. She defends art as a whole, but keeps her focus on why it is beneficial for children. She does not diminish the other forms of theater, but explains how even Shakespeare teaches us to cherish art for young people. She continues to explain why art should be fostered in schools, providing examples of when misconceptions arose of math and science being of far more importance. The entire body of her speech works to spark a new thought, or a different perspective, for her audience, and is effective in her overall goal of arguing that children's theater matters.

Gardner ends her speech with a simple two sentence paragraph that articulates what she has implicitly argued the entire speech. She takes the broad ideas she has developed and comes back to her original, pointed thought. By the end of her speech, Gardner develops a provocative argument that works to leave the audience questioning and pondering how children's theater is viewed.

TOW #18 - Gillette Razor (Visual)

In immediacy this advertisement strikes me as old-fashioned, heart warming, and to the point. These qualities help in making it effective in its goal to sell the product.

The baby in the photo is wearing a bonnet. He is surrounded by simple tile and in a vignette style framing. The font is straightforward and the colors are a little faded. This aged feeling brings the brand being sold a sense of wisdom. It is not a new brand, it is what has always been around. the brand is established as trustworthy and accountable, striving to connect the audience to  the family brand, something that will not let you down.

The tone of the image is warming and inviting to a viewer. The prime focus of the piece is the laughing child, doing something a baby should not do, shave its face. Just like in commercials with the babies who speak in deep voices intellectually, this brings a similar humor. Not only that, razors are sharp and can cause damage. This ad proposes the idea that if a baby is able to use the razor without hazard, than a grown adult can as well. Perhaps they can even find skin as soft as a baby's.

Finally, the image is not too crowded and has a very clear message: this is a good razor. The brand name and company is prominent and emphasized, with a few catchy slogans around it that may stick in the viewer's mind. The word safety is included in the name of the product, articulating the very idea of the image as a whole. Overall, the advertisement is very effective and utilizes rhetorical strategies in order to create a clear vision of a product.

Intro IRB #3 - The Unkindest Cut

For the third marking period I will be reading The Unkindest Cut by Joe Queenan. As the cover describes it, Queenan;s work is about "how a hatchet-man critic made his own $7,000 movie and put it all on his credit card". The book was recommended to me by fellow APELC student, Max Benowitz, and I look forward to reading it.

TOW #17 - "Still Alice" (Written)

Typically, reviews of films will give context of a film while providing a clear position on the effectiveness and likability of the movie itself. The review of "Still Alice" written by Peter Debruge fails to establish a clear claim, hardly discussing anything but the plot. While he has implicitly suggested he enjoyed the film, because of his syntax and points chosen to discuss, the reader is left still curious to the question of whether or not to see the movie, which is usually the reason they turned to the article in the first place.

Debruge opens his article by explaining that Still Alice is not like other movies dealing with Alzheimer's, as it is organized through the victim's point of view and not that of family members/friends. While Debruge does explain how this allows the audience to connect better with someone suffering from the disease, he does so so casually that it is almost missed. His diction is weak and undirected, leading to the reader feeling only semi-satisfied.

That being said, Debruge does make it clear that the lead of the movie, Julianne Moore, is impeccable. Her performance is praised, but in a somewhat confusing manner. Debruge utilizes words like "underplaying" which carries a negative connotation, as a way to support his claim that she was powerful and accomplished. Once again, the reader is left with a sense of confusion, unsure whether or not what took place in the film was bad, good, or neither.

Debruge also takes a lot of time to discuss the lives of the directors, without ever mentioning that the names given were the directors at all! While their lives are indeed fascinating, clearly paralleling the essence of the movie, the amount of time and detail attending to their story is inappropriate for the context of the review. DEbruge really missed the mark when it came to providing evidence to support his claim, which is unsurprising as his claim hardly exists.

TOW #16 - The Fervent Years (IRB Post 2)

The Fervent Years is different. It appeals to those who care about the subject matter, but if you are not looking for the information, you don't want it. The book second half delves into the details of the work with group theater. How it operated, how the people worked, and eventually, its end. 

Clurman continues to be wordy in the latter parts of his book. Although at times it is appreciated. When writing, Clurman will never let you feel as though you've missed something. This very strategy parallels the ideas that follow his subject and it does not go unnoticed. As the book went on the seemingly unneeded word on a page turned into stories, and the novel-esque personality that Clurman's writing takes on is appreciated. 

Previously I discussed how the confusion may have been because of Clurman's mixture between the facts and personal anecdotes. However, the two-wonge approach proved to be important by the end. He was discussing more than just an element of theater history, he was revealing history itself in the 1930s. His end purpose, to explain the importance of group theater's rise and fall, was achieved because of his intertwining of his personal growths, as well as those in the field. 

Clurman uses an abundance of examples to support his ideas. While not totally necessary, as he has built in credibility, the use of evidentiary support really adds to his ideas. He constantly name drops, though maybe they are just his friends and colleagues, at times it clear the Clurman uses their credentials to support what he wants the reader to understand. Clurman also references plenty of journals that reviewed shows and plays themselves in order to effectively communicate his message. 

An important part of how Clurman explains his process is how he lays out the entire book. It is written in six parts, each capturing an element of what Clurman wishes the reader to leave with. One pivotal piece was the "Farewell to the Thirties". This portion acted as the "fall" of the plot, as many fictional readers would describe what follows the main ideas. Clurman is sure to cover the time period from start to finish as a way to make his book the one to go to if you are curious about the thirties. 

TOW #15 (Written) I am Not Charlie

Following the shooting in France against the journalists at Charlie Hebdo, the phrase "Je suis Charlie" has been circulating. In english this translates to, "I am Charlie". However, David Brooks, writer for the New York Times, delves into why people should be careful not to utilize the trending saying. Through his arrangement and word choice, Brooks creates an effective argument and voices his unpopular opinion.

Brooks begins with a succinct current state of the situation writing how the journalists, "are now rightly being celebrated as martyrs on behalf of freedom of expression". He is able to separate his opinion from something positive that is seen in the situation. He also recognizes his audience and doesn't go into detail about the current event, he just assumes his reader is aware. Brooks continues to explain that while the journalists were free to speak as they did, it never would've flown in America. Following such a grand claim, Brooks gives countless evidentiary support to the idea that just because someone is in favor of free speech, doesn't mean what they are saying is right. 

Brooks continues very casually writing, "So, this may be a teachable moment." He beings to propose his idea of what needs change, as he has already established that he is indeed in favor of free speech. His casual tone dies, however, when he writes, "When you are 13, it seems daring and provocative to “épater la bourgeoisie,” to stick a finger in the eye of authority, to ridicule other people’s religious beliefs." The indirect comparison between the writers at Charlie Hedbo and young teenagers is not a very kind one. He uses this newly proposed idea to explain that everything has a place and to not simply lionize something simply because it has been attacked. 

Brooks concludes his piece with a  very clear message, "The massacre at Charlie Hebdo should be an occasion to end speech codes. And it should remind us to be legally tolerant toward offensive voices, even as we are socially discriminating." Brooks has made it very clear that he is most definitely not Charlie.