One Man's Treasure...

"One man's trash is another man's treasure".  This idiom perfectly encapsulates the idea that every living human being is capable of having their own unique perspective.  In this case, the quote is implying that one person can view something as completely useless and worthless; whereas, another person can view that exact same object and priceless.  In the piece, "The Death of the Moth" Virginia Woolf expresses her perspective and stream of consciousness while watching a moth flutter to no prevail.  Woolf describes the moth as a "tiny bead of pure life".  And as one delves further into her anecdote, they will uncover a world of hidden metaphors such as the window sill, and the corners representing the limits of life.  Woolf even makes a pun coinciding with the sorrowful tone of the story being "window pane[/pain]".  However, this is only one point of view depicting the moth.  Anyone else would most likely see something completely different.  I for one, when I read this text, was reminded of the novel "In the Time of the Butterflies" by Julia Alvarez.  All of the Marisposas never ceased in their fight against Trujillo and the government he stood by.  While the government eventually did fall, along with the oppressive Trujillo, the heroic sisters never truly won.  All but one remained alive, and the last was surrounded by sorrow remaining in the home of their ghosts.  The moth described in Woolf's piece "knew death" as eventually did all of the sisters, even the survivor.  Both the moth and the sisters faced "a power of such magnitude" that it was eventually imminent that none "stood [a] chance against death".  All that participated in the fight put up a tremendous struggle but were ultimately trapped, only able to zigzag in their respective corners.  Perspective plays a part in everyone's life, but no two perspectives will ever truly be the same.

You're Robbing Yourself

Business Insider:

"Game of Thrones"                                            7.2 Million

"The Walking Dead"                                          4.7 Million

"Pretty Little Liars"                                            3.8 Million

"The Flash"                                                         3.1 Million

"The Big Bang Theory"                                      2.9 Million

"Stranger Things"                                               2.5 Million

"Quantico"                                                          2.1 Million

These incredibly famous tv shows were dubbed most popular in 2016, according to "Business Insider".   This chart shows that the average person (12-17) spends 15.29 hours weekly making those tv shows "most popular".   

                                      

                                                              (recode.net)

The youth of today are completely disregarding nature due to technology; the never ending distraction.  The burning question is "why do so many people no longer consider the physical world worth watching?" (Louv).  Henry David Thoreau wrote an entire piece dedicated to nature, but that was in 1836.  Times have indeed changed.  I remember when I was a kid every Christmas my family and I would drive up to Grand Rapids to visit family.  It's a good 2-hour trip that was always full of   "I-Spy" and "The License Plate Game".  When those games were done I remember looking out of the window and being in utter awe of the winter wonderland surrounding me.  When we arrived we would go out on my father's uncle's Four-Wheeler and ride it out into the brisk air down to the dirt track.  Even now I can just stare out of the window thinking of nothing in particular, just admiring nature for what it truly is; beautiful.  The youth now is being robbed by themselves of this priceless treasure.  Sure, every once in a while they might glance up from their show and see a passing tree for a split second, but then it's gone and the next episode has started.  As humans occupying nature as our home we have an obligation to at least "consider the past and dream of the future, and" through the glass window separating us "watch it all go by un the blink of an eye" (Louv).  

Big Foot Left that Footprint

This isn't about me.  It's about you.  Because everything is always about you.  You are never fully satisfied.  Whatever it is you want is "always over the next ridge or at the end of the trail, never under [your] feet” (Sanders).  You don't even pay attention to what is around you; decaying trees and dying plants.  All you see is more paper for your A.P English essays and a nice place to put the new house your moving into.  Because there's always a need to move.  Forget about the environment, who needs it anyways?  Right?  Wrong.  You can't just decide "not to attend this particular party" (Williams).  Nature needs you.  I watched a video in my eight grade science class titled "The Human Footprint" This is just one of the many, many footprints we leave on the environment:

"As a nation we through away 60 million plastic bottles everyday".  

The amount of trash we through away, products we use is going to kill the environment one English essay at a time.  But don't worry it's not your problem.  Just wait another twenty years and let your kids deal with the problem while they choke on car exhaust.  Don't view life through a camera lens, look at the reality around you.  Focus your eyes so they're not "glazed as you travel life's highway past all the crushed animals".  Do something about it now, not later.  Later is too late.

The link to the human footprint video: http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/human_footprint.

Marked by Life

Too much makeup= you're trying too hard
Not enough makeup= you're straight up lazy

So how can you win?  According to Deborah Tannen, if you are a woman, you can't.  EVERYTHING about a women is marked; "hair, clothing, makeup, and accessories"  (Tannen).  But for men "they ha[ve] the option of being unmarked".  This is not fair.  This is also not true.  Men are not judged by their choices of appearance, but by what they can't control.  In the last piece we read, "Just walk on by" by Brent Staples, he talked about how he and the people who were scared of him were the victims of their own stereotypes.  Due to his "inheritance"  people were naturally scared of him the second they laid eyes on him.  He didn't choose to be marked as a threatening person, yet because of how he looks, he is.




Too buff= Intimidating, threatening
Not enough muscle= Nerdy, scrawny

Men can't win either.  Tannen claims that men can determine if they wish to be marked or unmarked.  Both men and women alike are being judged no matter what they do.  Some may argue that women have it better because they can choose how they want to be marked.  Maybe one day a women decides she wants to be perceived as lazy so she wheres sweat pants and a t-shirt.  Men, on the other hand, can't wake up one day and decide they want to be perceived as nerdy and scrawny when they are built like "The Rock".
Men aren't automatically marked by what appearance they choose.  However, they are marked by the appearance they can't choose.  Women are marked no matter how they dress or act.  Neither fact is fair.  But, unfortunately, I don't see either changing anytime soon.

Bath, Body, and Buffalo. Works, Wild, and Wings.

This week I went to two different places that each catered to a specific gender.  

Bath and Body Works

While this store never says specifically that it is "just for women", it definitely advertises to please women.  For instance, while I was there I saw a lot of things that are usually associated with the female gender.  Lots of pink, fruity scents, sunshine and happiness, "girly" font, and heart-shaped candle holders were just a few of the many female items I saw.  The most alarming thing I saw was a stand that said "Sparkling, girly, and full of fun!"  Next to it there was a sign that read "The head-to-toe best for him!"  All of these things scream female, even the male section.  It clearly states "for him".  This is implying that a female is buying a gift for her male companion, not that the male would be shopping there.  My cousin used to work at a Bath and Body Works and when asked about how the male gender was involved in the store she responded with "I think I only ever worked with two or three guys (only one of which worked mainly in the floor).  The other two worked more behind the scenes stocking and organizing the back room.  We really didn't get too many guys coming in to shop for themselves, even though we did have a men's section.  Most of the time they were coming in with their family members or significant others, or they were alone, but shopping for that family member or significant other."  All of these facts lead to one conclusion, Bath and Body Works is a store for females.  They do little to cater to men, but try very hard to please women.  

Buffalo Wild Wings

Again this store does not out right say that it's meant for one gender, yet, everything about them points to the male gender.  Beer, bold font, sports, and ironically women are all things that are associated with men an can be found everywhere in Bdubs.  They even have a cool nickname!  Although they mainly advertise their abundance of flat screen tvs for customers to watch sports on, they are attempting to appeal males rather than females.  The things shown on the tvs were primarily displaying men.  Not just male sports, but men in  commercials and commentating on the male sports.  This reminds me of "About Men" by Gretel Ehrlich because she describes the cowboys falsely being portrayed as "macho men".  Bdubs portrays men as sporty and overall "manly".  When I went there I saw only female workers.  They weren't wearing any scandalous uniforms like they do at Hooters, instead they were wearing sports jerseys.  I have to admit that Bdubs is slightly more gender neutral than Bath and Body Works in that the customers I saw there were a decent mix of both genders.  Which was very surprising considering the shear amount of male items designed to bring them into the store.  Everything about Buffalo Wild Wings was set up to cater to the male gender.  

I feel that each business is great and very successful.  It is obvious who their target customer is by the subtle and not so subtle choices they make.  Personally I don't mind that they try to please a specific gender.  However, I strongly believe that it should be acceptable and even normal for the opposite gender to shop at those type of stores.  Men shopping at Bath and Body works should not have to feel uncomfortable in any way, shape, or form.  And for that matter, women should not feel awkward displaying their love for football while at Buffalo Wild Wings.  In addition, some people could feel insulted that businesses are in a way stereotyping.  Not all girls like "girly font"  or sunshine and fruit.  Not all men enjoy watching sports or big bold letters.  Making each gender comfortable going to each type of store is the main priority.  

OH MY GOODNESS AN ATTENTION GETTER!!!!

Eating babies.  It's absolutely absurd but it gets your attention.  So why not just use an onomatopoeia?  For Jonathan Swift, that wasn't enough. 

”I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled ..."

This is certainly not a modest proposal.  Yet, the exaggeration certainly captivates the readers of this piece.  The description is revolting, but it makes the audience keep reading in wonder of what more is to come.  The satirical tone is somewhat hidden but is expressed in Swift's exaggeration.  Of course, there are better ways to get people's attention or interest in something.  Joan Didion took a completely different approach to a piece that is just as satirical.  How she captivated her audience was through an anecdote.  She talks about a priest rapidly marrying a bunch of people in Las Vegas.  

 “I got it down from five to three

minutes,” Mr. Brennan said later of his feat. “I could’ve married them en mass, but they’re people, not cattle. People expect more when they get married.”

Didion is just as effective in conveying her satirical tone and even some irony in the fact that the priest is actually marrying people "en masse" just like cattle.  Didion and Swift grab people's attention in very unique ways and are both successful in conveying their true meaning and purpose of the pieces.  There are countless of other ways to get an audience's attention from abandoned animals to insanely cool Hot Wheels.  Every commercial or add has an attention getter and so does every essay we write Monday mornings at an ungodly hour.  But which way is the most effective?  Sara Bareilles begging you to donate money to abused and abandoned dogs or the new "Criss Cross Crash" track?  Or how about the Advil commercial claiming it's the world's number one choice.  Or the Snuggie commercial stating it's the financially sound option, opposed to raising the heater.  Each business is extremely successful but what is the most effective attention getter?  

What do you respond most to?  Ethos, Pathos, Logos, or just plain absurdness?    Comment your answer below!

(Personally Swift's tactics got my attention very quickly but because his product/proposal was so awful it lost my attention as soon as it came.  So I would have to say that pathos would be the most effective on me.  The second an abandoned puppy comes on the tv I'm a goner!) 

Nacirema

Even though this wasn't my cold read, this piece really struck me.  It's amazing to see ourselves from a completely different perspective.  This is basically how we think of the Native Americans hundreds of years ago.  We harshly label the things they do as "savage" (not in a good way!) and "barbaric".  Yet, if they could see us now, the Native Americans from hundreds of years ago, and others may think that we are "barbaric" and "savage".  There is one part of the passage that stood out to me in particular.  "It was reported to me that the ritual consists of inserting a small bundle of hog hairs into the mouth, along with certain magical powders, and then moving the bundle in a highly formalized series of gestures"  (Miner).  At first glance, this was highly disturbing.  Who on earth would put hog hairs in their mouth with some random powder that nobody knows what it is?!  But on further analysis I realized that WE do. Hog hairs are really a toothbrush and the "magical powder"?  That's toothpaste.  It also disturbed me that the characters seemed to not know what they were consuming.  However, that's still describing us.  The author was simply mocking Americans for blindly taking medication and other things.  For example, toothpaste.  How many of us could really list a single ingredient in toothpaste?  I know I can't!  That leads to more questions, like what's in the drugs we consume for a cold or a cough?  We just blindly accept whatever the doctor gives us.  Maybe they have too much ethos!
   
   This piece strongly reminds me of a movie I saw, "Now You See Me".  It's about these new, contemporary, magicians that basically attempt to start a revolution of sorts.  But in the end (don't worry no spoilers!) there is a major plot twist that makes you rethink the ENTIRE movie.  It's one of those mind-bending moments that I love.  "Body Ritual Among the Nacirema" by Horace Miner is the exact same thing.  (Although, it doesn't have a specific part that identifies as the realization, that must be identified by the reader.)  Throughout the piece, the reader is being grossed out and probably thinking of some odd Native American ritual, but in reality it is describing the reader.  Personally, I had to reread the whole piece to fully understand the author's work.    The real turning point for me was when the title was identified as "American" backwards! Suddenly everything became clear, the toothbrush, the doctors, and most importantly, the extreme satire!