TOW #7 - Text

     Nadya Tolokonnikova, a Russian political activist, spoke at the Wired 2015 event just two weeks ago. Her speech, found on the Huffington Post, was based upon the idea of physical borders and its restrictions. She spoke about the concept of globalization and how we should not be citizens of the United States, of the United Kingdom, of Russia, but of the world. Tolokonnikova was sentenced to two years' imprisonment in August 2012 because of an anti-Putin performance with her band, but ever since her release, she has appeared on stage with several world leaders, including Bill Clinton.

Nadya Tolokonnikova

     Since her purpose is to convince the people of the world to live without borders, she depends greatly on the appeal to emotions. Because of this, Tolokonnikova uses first-person plural personal pronouns, like "we" and "our". The effect of her use of these pronouns is very strong because the audience feels as if she is part of them, and this effect is exactly what she is aiming for. Knowing that she cannot work alone, Tolokonnikova depends on working together with her audience. Therefore, I found her speech to be very effective because she successfully became one with her audience.

TOW #6 - Visual

Considered one of the most famous political cartoons in American history--if it even can be called American history--is this cartoon drawn by Benjamin Franklin. It was presented by him on May 9th, 1754, in the Pennsylvania Gazette. This was just prior to the Albany Congress, the first time when the British colonies were united before the French and Indian War. The meeting called for representatives from eight colonies to decide on a plan for united defense against the enemy force: the French. Benjamin Franklin was very well-known and influential, easily establishing his credibility, and this political cartoon of his played a big part in his attempts to unify the American colonies so that it was no longer Virginians, Pennsylvanians, and New Yorkers, but Americans who were fighting the war.
One very big rhetorical strategy that Benjamin Franklin is using is symbolism. Very obviously, a cut-up snake is portrayed, with each of its segments labeled by a colony or group of colonies: New England, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Ever since the times of the Bible, the snake has generally represented death. Franklin uses this symbol to represent the death of the French. Also, a common myth in colonial America told that a chopped up snake could revive itself if its body parts were joined. Franklin wants the colonies, represented by the segments, to come together so that the French may be destroyed. Otherwise, as the caption states, the individual parts will die. I believe Franklin's political cartoon was very effective in persuading the colonists to join together. Even though it solely relies on an appeal to pathos, the colonists at the time were afraid of the French and an impending death, which are supposedly apprehended by the plans of Franklin.

TOW #5 - Text

In light of recent events that have taken place all over the United States of America, I read an article that addressed gun violence: specifically, if citizens with a concealed carry license do anything to stop mass shootings if they are present. This article by Eugene Volokh, found on The Washington Post, was posted just over a week ago. Volokh is a professor of law at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law. He addresses the recent mass shootings in America and questions if there are citizens, not police officers, who stop the shooters with their own concealed carry. He then provides several examples over the past two decades in which a citizen pulled their licensed weapon on the shooter and successfully stopped them before any more harm could be done to the public, one of which describes an event in Philadelphia: "In a Philadelphia barber shop earlier this year, Warren Edwards 'opened fire on customers and barbers' after an argument. Another man with a concealed-carry permit then shot the shooter; of course it's impossible to tell whether the shooter would have kept killing if he hadn't been stopped, but a police captain was quoted as saying that, 'I guess he [the man who shot the shooter] saved a lot of people in there'" (Volokh 1). Volokh, in this case, uses these logical examples very well. He provides the information that the audience desires as proof of his point: that ordinary civilians do step up against crime and have successfully stopped it. He also uses the repetition of the phrase "In what fraction" while questioning the usefulness of the preceding examples. This makes his point less effective, but also shows the audience that there are more events that happen outside of what he showed. Overall, I believe Volokh accomplished his purpose in informing the audience of how normal citizens help the public by taking the matters of justice into their own hands.

TOW #4 - IRB

Into Thin Air, a personal account of disaster on Mt. Everest, was written by Jon Krakauer. It is a true story based off of his climb to the summit of the tallest mountain in the world. However, the expedition turns out to be less than pleasant during the descent when trouble sets in. During the first few chapters, Krakauer recounts the beginning stages of the expedition: arrival at the base of the mountain, the climb to Base Camp, acclimatization--the process that is undertaken to adjust to the change in the environment, which in this case is the altitude. Krakauer recalls his efforts to get used to the altitude through several fits of wheezing and coughing. He narrates his expedition with a young adult audience in mind because his purpose is to inform and encourage that goals should be pursued in life, even though risks must be taken, as long as it is important to you. Krakauer enforces his purpose through the use of narration. Almost the entire book is based off of his narration of his climb of Mt. Everest. His use of narration establishes his ethos. Not only is he proving his summit of the highest mountain in the world, Mt. Everest, but he also proves his own pursuing of his goals. He risks his life by going on such a dangerous climb and putting his trust in inexperienced strangers. However, he does so because of he strives to conquer the top of the world by his own will. Krakauer also achieves his purpose of encourage the pursuit of one's goals by writing with a first-person point-of-view. Even though it is his personal account of his climb, the first-person point-of-view helps the audience to be in the moment and know the thrill of taking risks to pursue a goal. I believe Krakauer was successful in achieving his purpose because he was able to prove his own account of pursuing a goal and through that, it encourages others to do so as well.