TOW #13 - Visual

This political cartoon by Wasserman is clearly trying to make a statement about the current U.S. Congress. In the background, Washington D.C., and more specifically the Congress building, is shown while the foreground depicts two congressmen. The first aspect of this work that makes the overall message more effective is rather simple: each man is wearing a different color tie. Blue traditionally symbolizes the Democratic party, while red traditionally represents the Republican party. By representing both parties as in cahoots with one another the criticism is broadened to the entirety of congress rather than one party or the other. This also serves to broaden the audience of the visual text. If Wasserman were to target only Republicans, for example, he would risk offending readers who primarily agree with the Republican platform. It would also serve to weaken his argument that Congress as a whole is not invested in the concerns of the people, as representing one party would imply that only that group was at fault.

While this is a visual text, it is still reliant on words to make its overall purpose clear. The man in blue brings up an actual issue, a notice that all airbags nationwide must be recalled. In effect this scenario is rather absurd, but in context the entire nation is at risk. The second man simply reassures his startled friend by reminding him that they still have their jobs, and that there is nothing for them to personally worry about. The greater message is clear: Congress is out of touch with problems that affect everyday Americans. The first bubble serves to raise the stakes, and to make Congress's relative inaction seem dire. The issue presented could cause great harm to the nation if not fixed, but Congress does not feel a need to move as their jobs are not at risk.

The larger message of the text is not simply that Congress is content to mull about doing nothing. Instead it challenges the reader to force their elected officials into action by making it seem like their jobs are at risk. Changing out one party for the other will not change the issue either, Wasserman's image argues, as it is the people within the institution causing the problem not individual parties.

TOW #12 - IRB

For the second marking period, I chose to read Unbroken by Laura Hillenbrand. It is a non-fiction book based off of a true story about Louis Zamperini. He was a track star who was drafted into the United States Air Force during World War II. Unbroken narrates his life from his track achievements in his earlier years to his imprisonment at a Japanese execution camp. After crash landing in the Pacific Ocean because of a mechanical error in his bomber, he and only two other crew members, Russell Allen "Phil" Phillips and Francis "Mac" McNamara, survived to spend the next one and a half months on a life raft. Although Mac passed away on thirty-third day, Phil and Louis manage to survive two more weeks before being captured by a Japanese ship. Ironically, they were very well fed and treated on their transport to an concentration camp, Kwajarein, which was also known as "Execution Island". Although I only read about halfway through the book, there have been several rhetorical devices that Hillenbrand uses to narrate the story. She uses several symbols in order to foreshadow the events to come. At the beginning of the story in 1929, Louis sees a German dirigible named the Graf Zepplin. As it loomed over him, he stood in shock and awe, yet thought to himself that he never wanted to deal with planes, as they scared him. This is both foreshadowing and symbolizing the war that was to come: shocking and scary. Also, while Louis, Phil, and Mac were stranded in the ocean, they catch an albatross and uses its meat to catch fish. Having read "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner", a poem by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, last year in English class, I remembered that killing an albatross caused bad luck, which certainly happened in Unbroken. Louis and Phil were sent to a concentration camp where they were under the watch of "The Bird", a nickname given to the unforgiving warden. So far, I thoroughly enjoy reading Unbroken, and Hillenbrand does an excellent job at using symbols to foreshadow upcoming events.

TOW #11 - Text

In response to the recent shootings in San Bernardino, California on December 2, 2015, the New York Times' editorial board made a statement that the gun epidemic in America should be ended. Although there have been many shootings, both related to extremist groups and not, in the past few years, this event had been the largest and deadliest terrorist attack since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In their article, the board mentions these shootings to reason why gun control should be enforced more than it is now. They also allude to our politicians who "offer prayers for gun victims and then, callously and without fear of consequence, reject the most basic restrictions on weapons of mass killings." Though their purpose of writing this editorial is to argue for stricter gun control laws, they acknowledge the impracticality in allowing citizens to bear firearms while keeping them from criminals. That's why they justify their argument by stating that only "certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed from civilian ownership." I thought that their argument and use of relative events was convincing and effective because of their well-supported statements and I agree that change must be brought to the issue of gun control.