Tow #23 - Article

In “Big Score”, an essay written by Elizabeth Kolbert in The New Yorker, the audience learns that the acronym "SAT" speak for themselves and no longer have meaning. The reader learns this through the retelling of a mother’s journey to retake the SATs as an adult, and the process that she goes through while completing the task. Kolbert uses anecdotes and metaphors to show through a mother’s experience how the SATs are much more difficult today than they were in the past.

            Kolbert uses many anecdotes to retell the history of the SATs while she explains the task to prepare for them. Kolbert adds an anecdote about the founder of the SATs, “Brigham intended the test to be administered to students who had already been admitted to college, for the purposes of guidance and counseling. Later, he argued that it was foolish to believe, as he once had, that the test measured “native intelligence.” Rather, he wrote, scores were an index of a person’s “schooling, family background, familiarity with English, and everything else.” Kolbert shares this to show how the more that the SAT is evolving, the more stressful it is becoming for students. Since the SAT has a different intent than was originally thought to have by the founder, than it may not be the best test for determining whether or not a student is smart enough to get into college. This anecdote allows the reader to understand the stress that is put on people preparing for the SATs because it tests more than just one’s intelligence.

            Kolbert also uses metaphors to help the reader understand the mother’s experience. She starts off by telling how when she took the SATs in high school, she was not successful. Despite, her unsuccessfulness, she managed to become a successful publisher. She uses a metaphor to explain how times are not the same for her son now, as they were for her when she was in high school. “The land I would be sending my little tadpole into was a different place.” This metaphor shows the pain that parents feel for their children who are taking the SATs. The SATs are not only more difficult than they were in the past, but there is also a lot more competition out there. Students can no longer rely on getting a good job out of college. This is why it is important for students to do well on the SATs so they get into the best college, and have the best opportunity to get a good job following college. Today’s competiveness only adds to the stress of students, and makes the current SATs more difficult than they have ever been.

            It is hard for parents to understand the stress that students have when taking the SATs. The test is much different than it was in the past, and that is why Kolbert retells the story of a mother trying to retake the SATs as an adult to help other parents understand the difficulty of the current SATs. Kolbert uses anecdotes and metaphors to prove how today’s SATs are more difficult than they have ever been.

Tow #22 - "Uncle Sam's Sweatshops"

 In today’s economy, the "best" way to manufacture a product is to find cheapest way to do it.  Outsourcing manufacturing has sky rocketed for many large retailers, as the labor is much cheaper.  However, because the job is being outsourced to developing nations, the conditions that workers labor under are often pitiful and unfair.  While the US government has called on retailers to improve these conditions, it seems that the government itself has not been following their own orders.  In the New York Times editorial, “Uncle Sam’s Sweatshops,” the editorial board at the New York Times uses examples and possible solutions to address the poor conditions of those who work to manufacture governmental merchandise and calls on the government to make a change.

In the second paragraph, the author immediately draws the reader to occurrences that happened in several different instances.  The author states that, “A factory in Bangladesh that makes uniforms for the General Services Administration beats workers to keep them in line.”  The use of these horrible instances help to perfectly exemplify the injustices that are occurring, and how the government is going against their own ideas.  By using these examples, the author is tugging at the emotions of the audience as they feel sympathetic for the laborers, thus more inclined to agree with the author and agree that the government must make a change. 

In the closing paragraph, the author directly calls on the government to “do better.”  The author then lists an array of possible solutions that the government can use to correct their wrongdoings.  In addition to providing the audience with solutions, the author shows that there are definite solutions that the government could have created to make the working conditions better, but they did not act upon it.  This helps to display the government more as the villain that has the abilities to change, but decides not to.  Because there are a plethora of solutions the government can take, the audience is inclined to feel that the audience must make a change. 

 Through real world occurrences of unfair treatment of laborers and possible solutions, the editorial board of the New York Times is able to effectively call the government to make a change in their outsourcing jobs, because the conditions these workers must labor over are unjust and unfair.  

Tow #21 - "Join Or Die" - Political Cartoon

            One of America’s first political cartoons was the “Join or Die” cartoon, which depicts a snake cut into several pieces. This cartoon was put into newspapers all around the English Colonies in order to heighten a sense of unity amongst the culturally diverse colonies at the time. Using the hyperbole “Join or Die,” and the metaphor of the separated snake, author Benjamin Franklin stresses the importance of Colonial Unity during the French and Indian War in the cartoon.

            “Join or Die” is an extreme measure, but was necessary for Franklin to stress colonial unity in the colonies because unity would have meant a victory for England in the war, and essentially a victory for the colonies to remain where they were. Franklin uses this three-word phrase as a call to action for all of the colonies in the mid 1700’s. Franklin urged them to unite under one common goal to ensure the survival of the colonies. If unity was never achieved the course of history would have taken a whole other route, and like people say, if England never one the French and Indian War, we would be speaking French right now. In the cartoon Franklin wants the colonies to unite like parts of a snake to help win the war.

            The metaphor of the colonies uniting like the body parts of a snake helps get the message across that Franklin wants unity, in order to win the war happening in the North America at the time. The analogy is that like a snake, the colonies can be a deadly force if unified. However, also like a snake, if it is cut up into pieces, it can be divided and conquered. This message was essential to an English victory because England had to fight wars in other places and needed the colonies to rise up and fight for their land.

            This cartoon is one of the first examples of colonial unity seen in colonial America. Using hyperbole and metaphor, the figurative language helped send out a message for colonial unity, ultimately leading to a victory in the war.

             

Tow #20 - Advirtisement - Superman "Got Milk?" Ad

This famous advertisement depicts Superman having a milk mustache has been deemed one of the most famous children’s health advertisement of its kind. This poster can be seen through numerous elementary schools throughout the nation. In the advisement, the author uses hyperbole, and an appeal to the children’s emotions, to advertise that drinking milk in healthy and helps you grow strong.

            The first thing that the view of this ad or poster realizes is that it depicts superman having a milk mustache, to teach kids, if superman drinks milk, than I must drink milk to grow big and strong like superman, a major premise to the conclusion that drinking milk is good for kids to help them grow strong. Obviously superman isn’t real, and drinking milk probably will not give you superpowers, it is a good hyperbole for children because children will automatically associate milk, with superman. Having superman be the spokes person for milk will allow children to recognize the connection between milk and strength. It also helps that superman is included because children look up to superheroes, and that is where the appeal to emotion comes into play.

            Children love superman and superheroes of the nature, so having superman in the advertisement will play on the children’s emotions of loving superheroes, which helps get the message across that milk makes you grow strong and it is ultimately healthy for you. Children are taught to always listen to adults, but through cartoons and comic books, the children are also subconsciously taught that fictional characters, such as superheroes are always the good guys, and always know right from wrong. The ad plays on that, including superman will grab the kids’ attentions. If the author chose to have a regular adult on the ad, maybe it would have grabbed some kids’ attention, but choosing superman will be sure to grab multiple kids attentions, making these a good strategy to help get the author’s purpose into action.

            Superman is best strategy for teaching kids health because superman is viewed to be big and strong, and is always view and being the good guy, and always knowing right from wrong.