Comparing Army Data to Population

During our Iran simulation, we looked at a chart displaying a list of countries by number of active troops. I remember thinking, "Woah, China has 2,255,000 active troops! That's almost twice as many as the USA has!" However, when I read the data more closely I realized that China's population of 1,338,156,900 must be taken into consideration. The USA's population is 306,394,000. I found out these populations statistics using another chart displaying a list of countries by population. I believe that one cannot look at the first chart alone, they have to take the population data given by the second chart into consideration. Initally, readers like me will think China is crazy for having so many troops, but once they see it in proportion to the entire population, the number is not so massive. Comparing these two charts, I found out another very interesting fact. India's population is 1,163,060,000, significantly bigger than the USA's 306,394,000. However, the USA has more troops than India! I found this statistic to be quite interesting, and revealed that the USA is more engaged in war than India is. The US Army also engages in more recruiting than the Indian Army. Data can be a very useful visual argument, but it is important to consider factors influencing the data, like population.

Cuban Missile Crisis Cartoon

Recently, we read two articles about the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis. While I was doing some background research on these two events, a political cartoon caught my attention. This cartoon was drawn for the Washington Post on November 1, 1962 shortly after the Cuban Missile Crisis. It was drawn by a famous political cartoonist named Herblock (short for Herbert Block), who won three Pulitzer prizes. This cartoon depicts John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev trying to contain nuclear war, which is in the form of an angry beast trying to escape. Kennedy and Khrushchev are the protagonists, working together to stop the evils of nuclear war. The caption "lets get a lock for this thing" tells readers that neither the US nor the Soviet Union wanted to face the devastating consequences of nuclear war. Both men are sweating as they try to lock the box, implying that nuclear war is hard to "lock away," because nuclear weapons are becoming more present as science improves.
While this cartoon may be specifically about the Cuban Missile Crisis, I believe it sends a very important message that is applicable to all wars. Once the beast of nuclear war is unleashed, it is powerful and hard to contain.

Cinematic Portrayals of War

Today in class, we started watching the movie "Born on the Fourth of July," directed by Oliver Stone. I was curious to learn more about Oliver Stone, so I looked him up on IMDB. I found that he directed another movie about the Vietnam war called Platoon. The trailer for this movie gave a very different portrayal of war than the one in "Born on the Fourth of July." In "Platoon," the soldiers are drinking, smoking, dancing with women, and blowing things up with their powerful weapons. The lyrics of the music playing in the background are "people say I'm the life of the party because I tell a joke or two." This trailer is advertising war as an opportunity to be a tough guy and engage in risky activities. In contrast, "Born on the Fourth of July" portrays war as an honorable, "All-American" act of service. It was interesting to see how one director could make two movies about the Vietnam war and show two completely different portrayals of the war in his films.

Both of these films reflect how the US Army tried to convince young teenagers to fight in the Vietnam War. The US Marine Men in "Born on the Fourth of July" are appealing to one steryotype of teenagers; the "all american" boys like Ron who are convinced that fighting in the war is an honorable way to serve the country. The characters in "Platoon" are trying to convince another steryotype of teenage boys, the risk takers, to join the war so they can live on the edge. Oliver Stone's films reveal how the US army was able to convince a variety of people to enlist in the army by appealing to both their character and their desires.

Video Visual Arguments

I was very interested in visual arguments after this week's reading of "Everything's An Argument." The reading examines visuals being used in books, newspapers, and powerpoint presentations, but I was curious to see how it was used in video. I went on youtube and found a great video with a strong visual argument. The artist is arguing that nuclear weapons are dangerous and should not be used. The video starts with pictures of nuclear missles to familiarize the viewers with the subject matter. Then, there are various political cartoons employed for satire. The most shocking part of the video was when images of young children who had been hurt by nuclear weapons were shown. The artist of the video chose to include this to appeal to the pathos (emotion) of the viewer and make them start hating nuclear weapons for doing so much damage to these innocent little kids. Right after these images, two very simple, yet powerful symbols were shown. The first one was a picture of a nuclear missle with a circle around it and a slash through it. The second one was a peace sign. These two simple images represent the artist's thesis: nuclear warfare should be abolished in order to try and achieve peace. By using a variety of images and making a clear thesis statement at the end, this artist made a powerful visual argument.

Johnny Cupcakes: Luck or Hard Work?

This Tuesday, I heard Johnny Cupcakes speak at T.E.L.L. I walked into the auditorium having never heard of him, and walked out feeling inspired by his story of success. Johnny grew up in a family that struggled financially, so he sold prank toys, candy and had lemonade stands just to earn a few extra dollars. He had A.D.D. and had trouble focusing in college, so he dropped out and worked several jobs. One of these jobs was at a silk screening store. He thought it would be funny to print his nickname "Johnny Cupcakes" on a few shirts and wear them to work. The name stuck, and soon people began asking for the t-shirts. He took the t-shirt business to the next step by making creative cupcake designs and sold them out of the back of his car. The t-shirts began to become even more desirable, and through hard work, devotion, and business smarts he was able to create a million-dollar company.

Johnny Cupcakes' story reminds me of the article "The 10,000 Hour Rule." This article debates whether success is achieved through hard work and practice or through luck. Johnny Cupcakes' narrative supports both sides. He worked extremely hard to set up a business and gave up many aspects of his life for it. Johnny told us that he did not have time for a relationship because his business takes up so much time. Yet there is also a luck element; Johnny Cupcakes stumbled upon this business by chance when he was creating shirts with his nickname on them as a joke. Since he worked at a silk screening shop, one could argue that his environment shaped his luck. Johnny would not have been inclined to make these shirts if he had worked elsewhere.

After reading "The 10,000 Hour Rule" and listening to Johnny Cupcakes, I realized that we can rarely attribute one's success entirely to luck or entirely to hard work. It is typically a combination of both. In Johnny's case, the luck aspect initated his success, but he had to work hard to continue the business. If one wants to be successful, they cannot depend entirely on luck to get them there, they must be willing to put in the effort. Hearing Johnny Cupcakes speak was my favorite part of T.E.L.L. because he was so inspirational. "If I can do it [become successful] with cupcakes, you guys can do it with anything," he told us.

$ave, $ave, $ave!

In class, we read a New York Times article ,"Forced from Executive Pay to Hourly Wage." The article opened my eyes to the terrible struggles people are facing because of layoffs during the current economic recession. I was curious to see if people were making an effort to save money during the recession.

I did some research and found another article , "Save $50 a Day, how Three Super Savers Do It." The article studies three families: The Harrisons, The Silberts, and the Dunshees. Together, the three families collectively saved $17,860 annually! The parents of each family gave tips on how to save. Both the Harrisons and the Silberts observed that eating out less saved them significant amounts of money. Mrs. Harrison decided to take a lunch to work instead of paying for the expensive cafetiria food. Mrs. Dunshee, a pharmaceutical executive, noticed many layoffs in her business and proactively decided to start saving. She created a budget that cut her expenses, such as phone and electrical bills, by 10 to 20 percent. She saved $460 per year by dropping her land line and using only her cell phone, and $100 each month by using coupons for groceries. Mrs Dunshee reflects, "Given my frugality and that I've saved and invested well, the recession isn't causing me the same kind of anxiety others are feeling."

I was very impressed by Mrs. Dunshee's awareness to the recession and the proactive action she took towards saving for the future. This article taught me that the little things like bringing a bagged lunch or clipping coupons can really add up. People who are faced with money troubles should read this article because it offers many helpful tips on how to save.

What are they advertising?

Everyone is familiar with the Abercrombie and Fitch ads. As you walk past the store in the mall, you turn to see where the loud music is coming from. Right as you look in the store, you are greeted by giant pictures of beautiful girls and muscular boys. Clearly, Abercrombie and Fitch is trying to send a message: if you buy our clothes, you will be able to look just as good as the models. What’s extremely ironic is the fact that some of the models aren’t wearing any clothing! The two boys in this picture (bottom) are not wearing any clothing at all, yet they are advertising for a clothing store. As a consumer, I find this very off-putting. I like to know what the company’s clothes look like, not what their most attractive models look like. Assuming I had never heard of Abercrombie and Fitch, and had just seen this ad, I would choose not to shop there because I did not know what their clothes looked like.

Another Abercrombie and Fitch ad (top) portrays a young couple in love. This one is a slight improvement; at least the girl is wearing some clothing. Unfortunately, we cannot really tell what it looks like. This ad is clearly targeting young teens by sending the message “if you wear our clothing, you will be able to find true love with an attractive partner.”

These ads reminded me of the Verizon Wireless ad we discussed in class, with the message “you’re either in or out.” Both the Verizon ad and these Abercrombie and Fitch do not have pictures of their product in the ad. Instead, the entire ad focuses on the importance of being cool and looking good. The advertisers are trying to convince teens that if you have a Verizon phone, or wear clothing from Abercrombie and Fitch, you will be cool and liked by your peers. It is important for consumers to evaluate the quality and necessity of a product instead of being swayed by the advertiser’s subliminal message.

The Life of a Guard

I found an article that demonstrates modern-day parallel to the bad working conditions situations we have been discussing in class. Recently, a group of life guards in New York joined the Teacher's Union, seeking a voice, a better pay, and improved safety in their jobs. "New York State United Teachers announced today that state-employed lifeguards who protect pools, lakes and beaches from Lake Erie to Montauk are affiliating with the 600,000-member union. The NYSUT Board of Directors will formally vote to accept the new local union — known as the New York State Lifeguard Corps — on Saturday, ending a nearly six-year legal odyssey that started when lifeguards began seeking better pay, improved training and safety equipment, and a voice in their working conditions." After 6 years of petitioning, it is great that these lifeguards finally took action. Tom Donovan, leader of the new statewide lifeguards union, said, “After so many years, I’m thrilled to have a union that will work with NYSUT to improve conditions for all lifeguards across the state." This is truly a significant movement if it is able to improve working conditions for lifeguards in the entire state. Hopefully, it will be successful and able to spread to other states where lifeguards are faced with poor working conditions.

It is ironic that a lifeguard's job is to save other peoples' lives, but nobody considered the safety of their own working conditions. I consider a lifeguard to be a very important position, and it upsets me to hear that they have been mistreated for so long. NYSUT President Richard C. Iannuzzi believes lifeguards “deserve what all working people deserve — fair pay, a consistent discipline process, good working conditions and the right to sit down with management to discuss their concerns.” This reminds me of the many deaths caused by Triangle Factory Fire. Bad working conditions were ignored, and it ended up resulting in a catastrophe. Something similar could happen if the bad conditions lifeguards work in prevent them from saving lives.

Beverly Hills Recession

I came across an article on CNN titled "9021-Ouch: Recession Trickling up to Beverly Hills." It instantly reminded me of our new unit, Cultures of Priviledge and Poverty. I would consider Beverly Hills to be one of the most privilged cities in the US. Shows like The Hills and 90210 portray frivolous lifestyles of the rich buying expensive clothes, dining at pricy restaraunts and spending excessive amounts of money on parties. When I think of the economic recession, I picture poor cities getting hit, not lavish Beverly hills. This article mentions how the recession has affected sales; since people do not have the money to buy expensive items, stores are going out of business. "Fewer sales mean fewer tax dollars even for this well-funded city."

This article made me realize that "priviledge" and "poverty" are subjective terms. Someone might think "Everyone living in Beverly hills has the lavish lifestyle of the girls on The Hills," but this is not necessarily true. Small stores and boutiques are going out of business, and the people who work there have to find new jobs, just like the rest of the people in America affected by our economic recession.

Chris Brown and Rihanna?

Everyone has been talking about the grammys this year. The most popular topic of conversation seems to be how Chris Brown abused his girlfriend, Rihanna. The story started out that Brown was "investigated by the LAPD in an alleged assault on a female." People automatically assumed that the woman he assaulted was his girlfriend, Rihanna. Now that she was a part of the story, it had even more hype. But it didnt stop there. Singers Leona Lewis and Keisha Chante were added to the mix, accused of being involved in the fight too. Rumors got so out of control that Lewis' spokesman had to release a statement. "Leona was at the pre-Grammy party with her family and boyfriend and had nothing whatsoever to do with any argument that may have ensued between Chris and Rihanna. Any allegations that the pair had flirted are completely false," states her spokesman in an article.

It is clear from the first article that not a lot is known about this story. Most of the things people are talking about are rumors, and may not even be true. So why are we even talking about it that much? Its because these people are celebrities, and everything they do is automatically more interesting than regular people. What would the story be like if the people in the fight were completely average and not famous at all? Some might care, but the story certainly would not have been blown up this big. All this hype reminded me of our past unit on the common man. "Do we still glorify the common man?" was one of the questions we looked at in class. The whole Chris Brown-Rihanna-Leona Lewis drama supports the thesis that we do not support the common man, because we are only interested in what the celebrities are doing.

Romanticism...in 3D!

Recently, I saw a commercial for the upcoming "Jonas Brothers 3D concert experience." The title alone is romanticized. It claims that a concert movie, a mindless form of entertainment, can be considered an experience.

The commercial began dramatically, with the words "The concert that had you screaming...is burnin' up the big screen" in a bold, silver font, complete with suspenseful sound effects. The trailer also claims this movie is "an all new 3D experience...like you've never seen them before." Again, this commercial tries to convince viewers that their movie is so great, it cannot even be considered a movie, it is an experience. Usually, the term "experience" is used to describe personal aspects of ones life, like the experience of backpacking in the wilderness, or the experience of attending New Trier High School. I have never heard watching a movie about someone else described as an esperience.

The most overdramatic statement of all was that "this film will take you where no fan has gone before." I have seen other 3D concert movies, and they have been entertaining, but definitely not taken me to a place I have never gone before. It is comical how this commercial portrays the movie to be a life-changing experience. Nick Jonas even claims that "in this movie, we want to invite you into the family." I highly doubt that by watching the Jonas Brothers perform in 3D, I will feel like I am a new part of their family.

After watching this commercial, I just might see the movie, to see if it lives up to the romanticized expectations of an "experience that will take me where I have never gone before AND let me become part of the family." Who knows, it may change my life forever.

Hyperbolic Peanut Butter

Recently, the newspapers have reported a "peanut butter salmonella outbreak." When I was eating a peanut butter and jelly sandwich at lunch, my friend told me, "stop eating that right now! You could get salmonella!" I was curious how big this outbreak really was, so I did some research. One article said that the only types of peanut butter containing salmonella were King Nut and Parnell's pride brands. Even more specifically, the exact jars of peanut butter containing salmonella were "distributed only through food service providers in Ohio, Michigan, North Dakota, Minnesota, Arizona, Idaho, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Florida. The peanut butter was not sold directly to consumers." The article also says that the FDA ran tests and it is still unclear whether or not the salmonella cases came directly from peanut butter, because there is a possibility of cross-contamination from another source.

After doing my research, I realized that dramatic headlines like "Huge Salmonella Outbreak" are very hyperbolic. They are grossly exaggerating an issue that is actually very small. Six people died from peanut butter salmonella, which is sad, but certainly not enough to be considered an "outbreak." I think the news should not use such grossly exaggerated headlines, especially not when it comes to health issues, because it makes people overreact and panic. The contaminated peanut butter was not even distrubuted to Illinois, yet I heard numerous conversations at school about how people should avoid all brands of peanut butter.

The hyperbole is a good literary tool, but it must be used in the right context. Mark Twain used it very well to provide satire in "Huckleberry Finn." However, hyperboles should not be used in non-fiction works, like the news, because it can stir up innaccurate gossip. People rely on the news to provide them with facts about current issues. In this case, a hyperbole misinformed people about a current health issue and made them panic for no reason. The news should provide us with the important facts and not use hyperboles to try to make it seem more interesting or exciting.