Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Personal Essay: Opening
Every Canadian needs to be aware of our contributions to our planet. Most contributions further humankind, but leave drastic effects on our earth. The matter at hand is about our environment. We as a society contribute vast damage to our surroundings. With a low population, one would think that we could control ourselves. Evidence of our control proves otherwise, as each generation of Canadians is worse than the previous. Environmental conditions need to be forced more severely onto our shoulders. We as Canadians are rich in luxuries, and because of this we feel the need to do whatever we want, without caring about the consequences of our actions.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Informal Essay: Opening Paragraph
As Canadians, our personal safety should be considered one of the most important issues to our government. We as a society believe that we are being protected. We may be entitled to security of person, but what about knowledge? Canadians should have the right to be aware of the dangerous offenders in our community. Sadly, we are not given the whole truth or even granted our rights, or even access to some of the most crucial information that could protect my family and yours. The right we are being denied is the right to be aware of registered sex offenders in Canada, and even in our community. I believe that the registered sex offenders act should be passed and ratified in the House of Commmons.
Methods of Development in "Television News"
One method of development used in John Haslett Cuff’s essay “Television News” is example. Throughout the essay, Cuff gives many examples of ways in which television is, “[serving] both the corporate and political elites.” In paragraph two of “Television News,” the author makes note of the “planned and staged event” and its contribution to the sameness of all news sources. Cuff immediately relates this example back to the thesis by using parallel ‘manufacturing’ language, and connecting it to politicians. To further develop his thesis, the author cites a television journalist who conforms to his idea, summing it up by stating that news “is bureaucratic.” Supplementing this idea, Cuff explores the manufacturing of news through the example of political news conferences. When the essay flows into the second section, the author begins to focus on examples pertaining specifically to the medium of television, as opposed to media in general. Cuff notes how “numbingly similar” images are every night, and further enforces his thesis by elaborating on the “reduction of information” through the running of the same story on every newscast. The use of example in “Television News” is significant to the development of the thesis as it allows Cuff to not only establish television’s “technical superiority and popular ascendance” but also to fully explain, in a context that all television viewers could relate to, how this medium is wasting its potential, and instead “preshrinking news.” In the context of “Television News”, the use of example is necessary as a reader would not feel the thesis was adequately proven without specific reference to ways in which the news is a “slave of format.”
As well as example, Cuff also makes use of persuasion in “Television News.” The essay is written in a way that the reader slowly conforms to the ideas presented, which is done through many types of claims, as well as logos, ethos, and pathos. In the first paragraph, Cuff plays to ethos by referring to television as a “slave.” This terminology also appears as a claim of values, bringing about humanity’s adverse opinions on slavery. Logos appears in tandem with the example method of development, as Cuff presents numerous facts and evidence relating to television’s “preshrinking of news.” He notes the sameness of television, the “newshound” reporters, the numbingly similar images, as well as specific news examples in the forms of The New Yorker and W5. This immediately establishes a credibility and knowledge of the topic, which makes the reader trust in the authors authority on the matter. Cuff makes claims of policy, but presents them in a cynical context, which gives the reader a negative view of the policy of news. By stating the preparedness of most conferences, the reader is forced to doubt the truth behind their information, and makes the ache for television news “to escape the tyranny of its hidebound formulas.” Finally, Cuff adds to his persuasion by employing pathos. By relating his topic and thesis back to the lives of humans, the reader instantly wishes for change. Posing the idea that news “rule[s] and homogenize[s] our lives” appeals to the human side of the thesis, and allows the reader to combine the emotional argument with the logical one to fully persuade them to conforming to Cuff’s own ideas. It is evident that persuasion is highly effective in proving his thesis, as Cuff feels so confident that he has done so, he spends the entire last paragraph posing rhetorical questions whose answers require either accepting or rejecting the thesis. Having been unsure if his essay was persuasive enough to convince an audience his ideas are true, one would highly doubt he would include such a personal ending.
As well as example, Cuff also makes use of persuasion in “Television News.” The essay is written in a way that the reader slowly conforms to the ideas presented, which is done through many types of claims, as well as logos, ethos, and pathos. In the first paragraph, Cuff plays to ethos by referring to television as a “slave.” This terminology also appears as a claim of values, bringing about humanity’s adverse opinions on slavery. Logos appears in tandem with the example method of development, as Cuff presents numerous facts and evidence relating to television’s “preshrinking of news.” He notes the sameness of television, the “newshound” reporters, the numbingly similar images, as well as specific news examples in the forms of The New Yorker and W5. This immediately establishes a credibility and knowledge of the topic, which makes the reader trust in the authors authority on the matter. Cuff makes claims of policy, but presents them in a cynical context, which gives the reader a negative view of the policy of news. By stating the preparedness of most conferences, the reader is forced to doubt the truth behind their information, and makes the ache for television news “to escape the tyranny of its hidebound formulas.” Finally, Cuff adds to his persuasion by employing pathos. By relating his topic and thesis back to the lives of humans, the reader instantly wishes for change. Posing the idea that news “rule[s] and homogenize[s] our lives” appeals to the human side of the thesis, and allows the reader to combine the emotional argument with the logical one to fully persuade them to conforming to Cuff’s own ideas. It is evident that persuasion is highly effective in proving his thesis, as Cuff feels so confident that he has done so, he spends the entire last paragraph posing rhetorical questions whose answers require either accepting or rejecting the thesis. Having been unsure if his essay was persuasive enough to convince an audience his ideas are true, one would highly doubt he would include such a personal ending.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Television News
The first method of development I came across was Classification. The author separated ideas into different groups, which all related back and enforced his thesis. The use of this method was excellent as it separated ideas such as news conference and competition in paragraphs 3 to 5 from “pictures” in 6-8. The news conference and competition further develops his thesis by proving that each holds a specific characteristic. For News Conference it depicts that it’s the biggest staple, because there are prepared statements and arguments. “And whether it is called by a prime minister or president, an eco-activist or native dissident, it almost always consists of a prepared statement, followed by prepared answers to prepared questions”. This directly relates back to his thesis, by proving that television has technological superiority. The second part is Competition. This section proves that all that are competing, including newspapers, radio, and television. “All of the players are competing, yet are largely content to have the same story, the same information and, in the case of TV, the same pictures.” This relates back and furthers proves his thesis that the technological superiority and popular ascendance over print is the reduction of information. When looking at “pictures”, it proves that they are similar. “The pictures are numbingly similar night after night: a head of state getting in and out of a car, surrounded by reporters, besieged on the steps of some official building or posed at a lectern in front of an obedient, orderly group of newshounds.” This further develops Cuff’s thesis by again, proving that there is preshrinking of news to serve both the corporate and political elites.
The second method of development is Argument. Throughout the essay there is a vast amount of details that convinces the reader. These details can all be directly related back to what was previously stated for classification. Throughout: News Conference, Competition and “pictures” each brings its own form of persuasion. For News Conference there was the phrase “And whether it is called by a prime minister or president, an eco-activist or native dissident, it almost always consists of a prepared statement, followed by prepared answers to prepared questions”. For Competition, “All of the players are competing, yet are largely content to have the same story, the same information and, in the case of TV, the same pictures.” Lastly for “pictures” there was “The pictures are numbingly similar night after night: a head of state getting in and out of a car, surrounded by reporters, besieged on the steps of some official building or posed at a lectern in front of an obedient, orderly group of newshounds.” All of these quotes make direct development of Cuff’s Thesis. They provide supporting details, and further advance the essay.
The first method of development I came across was Classification. The author separated ideas into different groups, which all related back and enforced his thesis. The use of this method was excellent as it separated ideas such as news conference and competition in paragraphs 3 to 5 from “pictures” in 6-8. The news conference and competition further develops his thesis by proving that each holds a specific characteristic. For News Conference it depicts that it’s the biggest staple, because there are prepared statements and arguments. “And whether it is called by a prime minister or president, an eco-activist or native dissident, it almost always consists of a prepared statement, followed by prepared answers to prepared questions”. This directly relates back to his thesis, by proving that television has technological superiority. The second part is Competition. This section proves that all that are competing, including newspapers, radio, and television. “All of the players are competing, yet are largely content to have the same story, the same information and, in the case of TV, the same pictures.” This relates back and furthers proves his thesis that the technological superiority and popular ascendance over print is the reduction of information. When looking at “pictures”, it proves that they are similar. “The pictures are numbingly similar night after night: a head of state getting in and out of a car, surrounded by reporters, besieged on the steps of some official building or posed at a lectern in front of an obedient, orderly group of newshounds.” This further develops Cuff’s thesis by again, proving that there is preshrinking of news to serve both the corporate and political elites.
The second method of development is Argument. Throughout the essay there is a vast amount of details that convinces the reader. These details can all be directly related back to what was previously stated for classification. Throughout: News Conference, Competition and “pictures” each brings its own form of persuasion. For News Conference there was the phrase “And whether it is called by a prime minister or president, an eco-activist or native dissident, it almost always consists of a prepared statement, followed by prepared answers to prepared questions”. For Competition, “All of the players are competing, yet are largely content to have the same story, the same information and, in the case of TV, the same pictures.” Lastly for “pictures” there was “The pictures are numbingly similar night after night: a head of state getting in and out of a car, surrounded by reporters, besieged on the steps of some official building or posed at a lectern in front of an obedient, orderly group of newshounds.” All of these quotes make direct development of Cuff’s Thesis. They provide supporting details, and further advance the essay.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Observations from on High
Mike LeSouder and Rob Lamond? Where are you? Where are your posts? Heellllooo? The remaining three are doing a good job. You should be commenting on each other's posts with more vigour. Keep up with all the recent topics. No one's posted about Freud yet. Continue to develop your writing voices.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Three Poems
Personally, I believe that the three poems are all written by different authors. In every facet, including form, diction, mood, tone, point of view and choice of figurative devices, all of the poems are distinctly unique.
In terms of scansion, the first poem is primarily iambic pentameter, with the occasional use of iambic tetrameter. However, the second poem has no clear meter. All of the lines are seemingly random in syllable count, and have a mix of accented and unaccented syllables. Each stanza in the last poem consists of five, seven syllable lines, finishing with a four syllable line. Also, poem number two has no rhyme scheme, while poem one is ABABCDDCB (for each stanza) and poem three is ABACBD, which the last word of each stanza rhyming. No stanzas between poems are similar in line count either. By analyzing the form of each of the poems, they are all distinct. There is nothing that makes any poem similar to another, which immediately leaves me to believe they are written by different authors.
The first poem is very objective. There is no clear speaker, and not once does it use the word ‘I.’ However, the other two poems do make use of the word ‘I,’ and are clearly written in first person. An observer is speaking from their account, which leads to a subjective perspective. These differences in point of view further support my hypothesis of three authors.
Each poem makes different use of diction, mood, and tone. The first poem has a very negative feel. It begins by using beautiful imagery and metaphor (its two prime figurative devices) to establish a wondrous fantasy environment, but then destroys this view with a description of destruction. The words chosen are very violent and destructive, which aids in creating the pessimistic vibe. Poem two also has a negative tone, however, it is much more emotional. It does not rely on using bluntly negative language. Instead, repetition is used to enforce the mood of the piece. The final poem, though they are all about nature, is the only one to use apostrophe. It also includes much more spiritual references, unlike the pervious poems. This creates a more positive tone, which again is different from the other poems.
Ultimately, the poems contain very little similarities other than the topic of nature. They all make use of different figurative devices, have varying tones/moods, drastically divergent in diction and have totally unlike forms. All of these factors lead me to believe that each poem has a different author.
In terms of scansion, the first poem is primarily iambic pentameter, with the occasional use of iambic tetrameter. However, the second poem has no clear meter. All of the lines are seemingly random in syllable count, and have a mix of accented and unaccented syllables. Each stanza in the last poem consists of five, seven syllable lines, finishing with a four syllable line. Also, poem number two has no rhyme scheme, while poem one is ABABCDDCB (for each stanza) and poem three is ABACBD, which the last word of each stanza rhyming. No stanzas between poems are similar in line count either. By analyzing the form of each of the poems, they are all distinct. There is nothing that makes any poem similar to another, which immediately leaves me to believe they are written by different authors.
The first poem is very objective. There is no clear speaker, and not once does it use the word ‘I.’ However, the other two poems do make use of the word ‘I,’ and are clearly written in first person. An observer is speaking from their account, which leads to a subjective perspective. These differences in point of view further support my hypothesis of three authors.
Each poem makes different use of diction, mood, and tone. The first poem has a very negative feel. It begins by using beautiful imagery and metaphor (its two prime figurative devices) to establish a wondrous fantasy environment, but then destroys this view with a description of destruction. The words chosen are very violent and destructive, which aids in creating the pessimistic vibe. Poem two also has a negative tone, however, it is much more emotional. It does not rely on using bluntly negative language. Instead, repetition is used to enforce the mood of the piece. The final poem, though they are all about nature, is the only one to use apostrophe. It also includes much more spiritual references, unlike the pervious poems. This creates a more positive tone, which again is different from the other poems.
Ultimately, the poems contain very little similarities other than the topic of nature. They all make use of different figurative devices, have varying tones/moods, drastically divergent in diction and have totally unlike forms. All of these factors lead me to believe that each poem has a different author.
Examples of Good and Bad writting
Bad Writing
The first two opening statements are truisms. Obviously, there are individuals in our society with thoughts and feelings. Just by reading the first few lines, any educated reader can determine that this paragraph does not begin with a strong message, or any message at all. This passage violates rules, two, five, six and seven, to the up most extreme. First, the passage could use some serious re-wording throughout the entire paragraph. The use rhetorical questions are ineffective and unnecessary. The passage is so confusing to read, i could hardly follow the thought process at all. It seemed as though there were just random sentence pieced together with no real though for the readers. Also, it appears the writer enjoyed using his thesaurus throughout the passage...
This passage is basically all hype. It takes no logical direction and uses large words to seem intelligent. It's one large run-on-sentence with no real subject matter.
Once again, the use of rhetorical questions have no effect on the reader what-so-ever. Personally, i am not a science orientated person at all. Thus his question about science experiments creating emotions in people goes right over my head, and i'm sure i am not alone. In the beginning the writer mentions a science experiment, near the end, he relates god filling the gap for a lost parent. Also, there is no source for any of his facts about Freud. Both Topics are completely separate and the middle of the passage does not effectively connect the two ideas together.
Good Writing
This passage is a considered good writing because it explains a topic with effect use of language and doesn't attempt to seem overly intelligent. Its very straight forward, sweet and simple. The topic sentence, the middle and the conclusion all relate to one and other and make perfect sense. The author also avoids using long sentences to explain himself.
Though the passage is short and sweet, it gives you some good insight and some information that you may not have known. The writer also avoids using complex words in order to appear intelligent. I've noticed the that there is a common theme between all the examples of good writing, they all have the exact same characteristics, they all use affective word choices. Also, each sentence compliments one and another.
The first two opening statements are truisms. Obviously, there are individuals in our society with thoughts and feelings. Just by reading the first few lines, any educated reader can determine that this paragraph does not begin with a strong message, or any message at all. This passage violates rules, two, five, six and seven, to the up most extreme. First, the passage could use some serious re-wording throughout the entire paragraph. The use rhetorical questions are ineffective and unnecessary. The passage is so confusing to read, i could hardly follow the thought process at all. It seemed as though there were just random sentence pieced together with no real though for the readers. Also, it appears the writer enjoyed using his thesaurus throughout the passage...
This passage is basically all hype. It takes no logical direction and uses large words to seem intelligent. It's one large run-on-sentence with no real subject matter.
Once again, the use of rhetorical questions have no effect on the reader what-so-ever. Personally, i am not a science orientated person at all. Thus his question about science experiments creating emotions in people goes right over my head, and i'm sure i am not alone. In the beginning the writer mentions a science experiment, near the end, he relates god filling the gap for a lost parent. Also, there is no source for any of his facts about Freud. Both Topics are completely separate and the middle of the passage does not effectively connect the two ideas together.
Good Writing
This passage is a considered good writing because it explains a topic with effect use of language and doesn't attempt to seem overly intelligent. Its very straight forward, sweet and simple. The topic sentence, the middle and the conclusion all relate to one and other and make perfect sense. The author also avoids using long sentences to explain himself.
Though the passage is short and sweet, it gives you some good insight and some information that you may not have known. The writer also avoids using complex words in order to appear intelligent. I've noticed the that there is a common theme between all the examples of good writing, they all have the exact same characteristics, they all use affective word choices. Also, each sentence compliments one and another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)