Happy Birthday

Today, December 25th, is a very special day; it is the birthday of a great man. A man whose revolutionary thinking influenced the world more than any other person ever to have lived has. A man whose life should be celebrated more often than simply on his birthday. A man I look up to.

I am, of course, talking about Isaac Newton.

Isaac Newton is the smartest person ever to have lived. I don't think it really can be contested, if you're looking at results, anyway. He was a detective, figuring out how the universe really worked. It is hard to put into writing how important he was, but without the things he did, math would be deficient and physics would be non-existent. Since this is an AP Comp. blog, I should try to come up with a comparison for writing, but I don't think there is a single writer that was close to being as influential as Isaac Newton. The closest is probably Shakespeare, but if he'd never existed we would only miss out on bad comedy and lame tragedies written in boring non-rhyming verse.

Isaac Newton: much better than Shakespeare. Much better than Jesus, too.

How much longer?

How much longer until we do something about gun violence?

How much longer until we pay attention to the United States' handgun homicide rate, and how it is 50 times South Korea's, 100 times Great Britain's, and 150 times Japan's? How much longer until we acknowledge the influence of those countries' strict gun control? How much longer until we are willing to concede that the Second Amendment is defective?

How much longer until we realize that saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is simply ignorance of the difference between intent and enablement? How much longer until we admit that guns are devastatingly more effective at killing people than other methods? How much longer until we figure out that things designed specifically to kill people should be illegal?

How much longer until we recognize that the idea that guns are for self-defense is complete bullshit? How much longer until we remember that guns don't shield you, they kill others? How much longer until we rebut the idiotic notion that more guns would help, not hurt?

How much longer until we stop encouraging murderers? How much longer until we understand that by starting news reports with flashing sirens, showing pictures of the killer, having 24-7 coverage,  making the body count the lead story, and making the killer an "antihero" we can expect to see a repeat of the tragedy within a week?

How much longer until we actually provide proper mental health care, instead of insisting sick people have to take care of themselves? How much longer until we treat the mentally ill as human beings? How much longer until we can get psychiatric help easier than buying an assault rifle?

How much longer do we need to let people die before we can get it through our head? 

Or—if we continue to act like every tragedy is unavoidable,

How much longer until the next one?

Variations on a Theme of Stupidity

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." –Albert Einstein 

Disclaimer: The content in this blog post may at times stretch the truth, modify the truth, or be entirely fictional. It might be someone else's truth, stretched truth, or modified truth. It might not be anything at all.

Narration:

I was minding my own business, mindlessly browsing the internet, hoping my parents wouldn't mind that I was opting not to do the chores that I was assigned, when I happened across something that changed my entire worldview. It was a website that collected asinine and unintelligent things people write on facebook. I was shocked and addicted. I read it for hours. At the end of my journey of discovery, I was a different person. I had become someone who was cynical and angry, all because of what became very clear that night. Humans are fricking stupid. Like, really fricking stupid.

Description:

The teacher was a slightly overweight older man who was childish in the weirdest ways. He had an abnormal speaking cadence and had a hand puppet named "Mr. Hand" with which he had conversations while teaching. He decided that he was going to start the day with some new math problems for the class. He asked them "What is 5 times 2?" and was answered by unsure silence. He encouraged the children not to be shy and to give it their best shot. A kid in a red shirt named Clyde was suddenly enthusiastic, and was called upon. "Yes Clyde?" "Twelve?" Bonus points if you recognize where this is from.

Example:

I was calmly sitting in my US History class, in the front corner seat, closest to both the window and the teacher's desk. We were taking a test on the revolutionary war, or rather, some people were still taking the test, and others, including me, had already finished. I was working on homework when one of the people still taking the test went up to the teacher's desk to ask a question about the test. The question that she was asking about was the freebie question our teacher had put at the end of the test, asking who had won the revolutionary war. And this student didn't know. She was an American that had just sat through an entire unit on the revolutionary war and she didn't know whether or not we won.

Comparison/Contrast:

Don't be stupid about stupidity. That is, don't mistake things for stupidity that are not. Ignorance is not necessarily stupidity. Even for things that everyone knows by age 30, at the current U.S. birth rate 10,000 people learn these things every day. Don't ridicule someone for being one of today's 10,000. Apathy too is not necessarily stupidity. Whether or not you choose to care is independent of your intelligence. Stupidity is where ignorance and apathy meet. All of these things can appear to stupidity, but only judge true stupidity.

Process Analysis:

There are very few people that are beyond the point of no return regarding their stupidity; it is possible to improve. When trying to improve someone who has fallen into the pit of stupidity, there are two routes. You can fight their ignorance and hope their apathy is eliminated as a result, or fight their apathy and hope their ignorance is eliminated as a result. The latter seems to be the much better method, and it is used frequently by teachers. Show somebody why they should care, and they will then learn based on their own motivation.

Division of Analysis:

Stupidity is a broad term, comprising many different aspects. As elaborated on previously, stupidity is a combination of ignorance and apathy, that is, not knowing and not caring. Besides those elements, the main part of stupidity is a lack of intelligence. A lack of intelligence can have numerous effects worthy of ridicule, including but not limited to the complete inability to reason and/or the rejection of logic entirely, a dense mind impervious to all basic knowledge, and a tendency to make bad decisions.

Classification:

There are many different types of stupidity. There is quiet stupidity, where it is not obvious that a person is stupid. This stupidity is more excusable, and it is more sad than reprehensible. It begs for intervention and rehabilitation. There is also aggressive stupidity. This is when someone either knows they are stupid, and for some reason embraces it like it is positive and as a result shows it off to whoever is unfortunate enough to be near them, or when someone is so incredibly stupid that they think they are smart. The effect is the same as the other form of aggressive stupidity, but their observers have a little more pity and a little less hope.

Cause and Effect:

The stupidity that is seen in most humans is the unfortunate effect of a number of causes. One major cause is when kids learn it from their parents or other authority figures. When a culture of stupidity is the surroundings in which children grow up, many of these children are ruined intellectually. If a kid has parents that don't see education as a high priority and see reading as a waste of time, and then goes to school and has a biology teacher that says evolution is a liberal lie from Satan, they are unlikely to be an intelligent participant in society when they are an adult (But they still get to vote).

Definition:

Stupidity is not somebody holding a different opinion than you. Unless their opinion is stupid. Stupidity is not somebody simply being annoying. Stupidity is the lack of brainpower to be a positive contributor to society intellectually. It is almost always accompanied by a lack of understanding by the stupid person about the negative effects they have, which is  shown through their hostility when challenged by smarter people or a silly sense of pride about their lack of contributions.

Argument/Persuasion:

Due to our silly obligation to be polite, stupid people have been left to hurt our society unchallenged. This has to stop. Take a stand! When you see someone rattling off some bullshit that is obtrusively false, challenge them. When someone tries to berate you for displaying some intelligence ("lol u nerd, no1 carez if its 'technically correct' or not...") then make them recognize the absurd position they are taking. Anti-intellectualism is running rampant, and it's up to us to stop it. Good luck.

THIS BLOG POST TOOK SUCH A LONG TIME. IT WAS LONGER THAN THE GUIDED CRJ, EVEN. THAT'S LONG.

Round is a shape

I've never been particularly athletically inclined. 

Every day in middle school P.E. class, we would start by running. When we were outside, we ran outside and then ran around the track once. When we were inside, we ran around the gym to music until they told us to stop. After every class, we would do it again.

I hated it.

I hated everything about running. I hated how boring it was. I hated the feeling of getting tired and out of breath. I hated not being fast or having endurance. I hated how other people were naturally good at it. As a result, I never really tried.

I would still do it, of course, there really wasn't another option, but I didn't do it. Instead of focusing on the running, I was focused on being able to stop afterward. Instead of thinking about getting better, I just thought about being good enough to not embarrass myself. Instead of embracing the benefits of running, I dwelled on the pleasures of sitting on my ass.

I regret it to this day. I wish I had established a good habit of exercise, or at least gotten myself to a point where I was physically fit. Because I'm not now, and I'm not really in a position to start. If I had taken P.E. class seriously in middle school, I would have been able to continue on in high school on my own, as taking P.E. classes in high school is not a realistic option for the academically inclined.

So now if people ask if I'm in shape, instead of admitting, that no, I'm not, I try to play it off with a joke. "Yes, I'm in shape. Round is a shape".


I'm sorry this is so short. I had a very hard time thinking of what would fit the prompt, and just ended up going with a mediocre idea. I'm aware this is not up to snuff, but it's late, and I can't figure out what else to do. 

What's wrong with me

That's not a question.

I can't write well (still). I don't seem to be getting better, either. I don't know why I felt the need to take this class. If I had to decide again I definitely wouldn't put myself through this.

I can't handle doing things I'm bad at. I have this ingrained need to be good at things, and not in a healthy way. When I miss a point on a test, I hate myself. When someone does better than me at something I care about, I get insanely jealous. When I know I might fail at something I don't do it all. I keep myself sane by not caring. I'm no good at sports? Good, because I never cared about them anyway.

That's why I don't care about AP Comp. I can't afford to. I need to keep my sanity for more important things, like AP Physics, college applications, or anything else that will affect my life after January. If I cared, I would write my essays over a number of weeks, not a number of hours. But I can't. I can't invest that time for the B that would come regardless. It would kill me mentally. (Don't try to counter the grade speculation. I'm not and will never be a writer good enough for an A on an essay, not even If I wrote 12 hours a day. My brain does not work the way a good writer's does)

Not only can I not handle doing things I'm bad at, I can't not be the best at anything I care about. I need to feel that superiority. I know this isn't the way the world works, but it's the way I work. This is breaking me down mentally every day. It took me a couple days to get over the physics test I didn't ace. I had to stop doing math team, not because I couldn't stand that I didn't understand a few things, but because I couldn't stand that other people did understand those things. I am worried about going to a good college, because I don't know if my ego will be able to survive an environment of so many people smarter than me.

I'm also kind of an asshole. I'm bitter, aggressively sarcastic, offensive, and condescending. And I don't care. I don't like people anyway (to use vocab, I'm a misanthrope) People, overall, are overwhelmingly stupid. They're ignorant. They care about trivial things. They're overly sensitive. I'm not looking forward to having to share a country with them for the next 70 years. To be honest, 90% of them could just disappear and I'd be happier.

Maybe the last paragraph gave this away, but I'm also completely socially inept. I hate talking to people. I don't talk to new people at all if I can avoid it. I would prefer to do all the work on any project if only I could do it myself instead of in a group. I can't make phone calls. I put off sending emails because I can never think of what to say. I would much prefer to stay at home alone than to go somewhere with people.

To top it off, I have the worst work ethic there is. I try to just call myself a procrastinator, as that's a more acceptable thing to be, but it's not that I just put things off to the last moment (although I do). I'm just incredibly lazy in general. This hasn't affected me negatively until recently. I don't mean to sound cocky—wait, yes I do. Or at least I don't care if do—but I'm smart enough where I didn't have to do any hard work to be successful throughout the first 11 grades of school. Honors classes? What a joke. Easy A. 4X Math, the "hardest class in the school"? Really easy A. My GPA went over 12 with no struggle from me whatsoever. Now that's changed. I made the mistake of enrolling in this class, and made the mistake of joining National Honor Society. These two mistakes, combined with 2 other AP classes, college apps, and extensive extracurricular music activities have made my laziness bite me hard in the ass. I received my first A- in two years from this class first term, I'm probably in sketchy standing in NHS, and I'm close to a mental breakdown. Oh, and I don't have time to sleep anymore.

It's 2:00 am, but I still need to work more on more homework. Better read that essay and do the CRJ, even though they have never and will never help me on the quizzes, and even though I have never and will never be helped in any way by interrupting my reading every paragraph to write about sentence length.

Visual Essay on Religious Fundamentalism

Just to clear up any potential confusion: The three guys in the 3rd-5th pictures aren't just any preachers. The first is Pat Robertson, who said that the Haiti earthquake happened because Haitians made a pact with the devil. The second is Jerry Falwell, who blamed 9/11 on feminists, abortionists, homosexuals, and the ACLU. The third guy is Harold Camping, who predicted the Rapture on May 21st 2011 (the billboard in the next image was done by his organization). All three of these men are evil fundamentalists, which is why they were included.

Family Member Characterization REVISED BECAUSE I SUCK AT WRITING (It still sucks because I still suck, but it's better)

All four of my grandparents are awesome in their own ways, but with regard to overall strength my paternal grandmother takes the prize.

For her 80th birthday a few years ago, all of her children and their families came to celebrate. On the night of her birthday, we went out to a restaurant. Instead of enjoying some unhealthy food on her birthday, my grandma ate very healthy food, just like she usually does. Perhaps that type of commitment to a healthy diet is the reason she was just as healthy and mobile as all of her children 30 years younger than her. Or perhaps it was the fact that instead of eating donuts for breakfast with the rest of us she was down at the gym exercising. She doesn't look 80 years old, and I don't think she ever will.

I wish I had the same determination to be healthy as she does. That's one thing about her that hasn't been successful at influencing me, at least not yet. But it's not my fault. It's food's fault for being so damn tasty. And exercise's fault for being too hard. Ok, it is my fault. I'm a lazy bastard who is not in shape. Wait, I take that back, round is a shape.

When my grandma isn't exercising and takes the time to relax, it's usually in front of the TV keeping up with current events and politics. Every weeknight we visit the night is spent watching Rachel Maddow on MSNBC. My grandma loves her because she is a "strong, smart woman". This is a common theme with her political statements. All of the problems we have are because the country is run by men. I think this is borderline sexist, but I know better than to mouth off to her. Our political views are usually something we have in common, but we were in opposition in 2008 because of the gender issue—I liked Barack Obama because he was awesome, she liked Hillary Clinton because she is a woman. She has always been very politically involved. She even ran for office when she was younger. She didn't win, but this was in a time where women weren't really involved in politics, so it was a statement just to run in the first place. She has donated a lot of time and money over the years and every visit seemed to have at least one phone call from the DFL asking her for more. Some of the coolest things in my grandparents' house are all of the signed pictures of her with politicians. The list includes recognizable names such as Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, Jimmy Carter, and Hillary Clinton. Depending on your political persuasion, you might not think highly of those people, but it's noteworthy regardless.

I would have to guess I inherited my political views from her. Neither of my parents are especially outspoken with regard to politics, and none of my other grandparents are either. I love to form opinions, and I especially love to argue. My grandma's outspokenness about politics has inspired me to not be afraid about expressing my opinions, and to not worry about what other people think. I am really glad she was able to instill this quality in me, as it is one of the qualities that defines me as a person.

She's retired, but she still has to work hard every day. My grandpa has declined a bit mentally over the past couple of years, and she makes sure he takes his medications, drives him down to Hardee's to talk with his friends, and tries to limit him to two glasses of wine. Both of them have somewhat short tempers and every once in a while you overhear them having a bit of a heated discussion, but it never escalates. I think my grandma is really good at keeping things under control.

She has influenced me this way as well. Although I love to argue, I don't get angry. I get sarcastic, bitter, and condescending, but I don't get mad at people. She has enforced my ability to argue without it getting out of hand.

In general, she is a force to be reckoned with in influencing her grandchildren. When I forgot to send her a thank-you note, she let me know, she didn't ignore it. One of the first things she said to me on my next visit was asking me if my arm was injured. When I or any of my siblings or cousins did something wrong they were going to get a talking-to. Not an angry one, by any means, just one that makes sure we understand. She is able to be effective in discipline in a way parents can not.

Thanksgiving

Ah, Thanksgiving. It probably should instead be known as Foodeating or Footballwatching, considering that is done a lot more than giving thanks, but whatever. It's a five-day weekend, that's the part that matters to me.

My brother got home from college last weekend and Wednesday my family drove to the home of my maternal grandparents in Iowa. My mother's brother and his family were also there, including a Norwegian foreign exchange student that is living with them for the year.

Observations:

Everyone helped make the food. That was the fun part. The cleaning up was less fun, and it took a little more encouragement. The kids forced the grandparents out of the kitchen during cleanup, as they had worked the hardest in making the food.

My family and my mom's brother's family are very different. My whole family is definitely more introverted, whereas their entire family is very extroverted. This is evident with the foreign exchange student. My family is just not the type to host a foreign exchange student. We wouldn't be very good at it. Their family, however, has hosted three, and they seemed to have gotten along very well with all of them. They just become natural members of their family for a year.

Speaking of the foreign exchange student, he brought some interesting questions to my mind. What would it be like to experience the very family oriented holiday of Thanksgiving in a foreign country? You are in a house you had never been in before, with people you have never seen before. It takes a special type of personality to be able to handle that.

He also seemed very grateful to be accepted into my cousins' family, and comfortable being a part of it. He seemed really close to my cousins, as if they were actually biologically related. He hugged my aunt several times like one would hug a biological mom.

I observed a couple of things about myself. I can't be in a crowd for extended periods of time. On thursday for several hours 6 or 7 more people came over to my grandparents' house on top of the 12 that were already staying there. It created a big family socializing event, which I did not want to be a part of. I'm bad at socializing already, and the awkwardness of doing it with distant relatives you barely know made it even worse. I cherished my escapes into the basement to use the bathroom, just because I could be not with people for a couple minutes.

In general, I observed that even though I was away from home seeing family that I only see about once a year, I still spent a lot of time on my laptop, by myself. I guess I just can't adapt to the change in personality that is necessary to constantly socialize with family. I need something to be the same as at home. I know I should be able to be better when it's family, but I can't.

I might add more if this ends up not to be enough. I'm all blogged out for now.

Cartoon Analyzation Thingy

Mr. Smith felt sick at the end of class on Friday and had to leave so the blog post was never explained to first block. That's why this is going up on a monday.

This cartoon makes fun of the far right (You can tell cuz of the sign that says "FAR RIGHT" on the clown). It make the point that although the far right has been outspoken in their criticism of Obama for ruining the image of the United States through his interactions with foreign leaders, the ones truly hurting the image of the United States are the far right themselves through their baseless criticisms. The main visual attraction in this cartoon is the colorful cowboy clown. The rest is all black or neutral colors, so the red, white, blue, and yellow really stand out in comparison. This represents how the the far right's negative affect on the U.S. stands out in comparison to whatever affect Obama has had through his foreign policy. 

This cartoon makes fun of the Republican party, and how badly they lost the election among female voters and hispanics, two demographics they need to do better with if they want to win. It shows a old white male that represents the Republican party (as that is their only remaining demographic) reading a book called How to Pick Up Women Voters with another book called Spanish for Morons waiting to be read. All of this while he is drinking and smoking, which I don't blame him for after the drubbing the Repubs took on November 6th. The visual aspects of the cartoon paint an image of someone who is desperate and is not improving. This is conveyed through the context of the bar and by the ominous background.

Ahhh. Another two things I can't enjoy anymore after analyzing them.

The Dumbest Generation?

I apologize for any sarcasm that may or may not be present

In The Dumbest Generation, Bauerlein manages to attempt to try to make a somewhat effective argument. It was hidden throughout by a useless onslaught of redundant statistics, but I think I have been able to discern it:

• These kids have scored lower than other generations on some tests of knowledge
• A lack of knowledge in the areas these specific tests tested means that these kids are dumb
• They don't read as much as I did back before technology
• if they don't read as much as I did they are dumb
• They instead spend time on this newfangled compooter thing
• All new technology makes people dumb because I'm smart and I didn't use new technology 
• The statistics I am telling you show that technology is bad 
• See? Therefore anyone who uses it is dumb
• These kids don't respect smart people like me anymore
• Because all older people are smarter, kids should learn their place and not think their dumb opinions are valid.
• These kids aren't participating civically as much and when they do they don't do it the same way I do
• Because they don't do things my way they are dumb
• By combining the many ways these kids are dumb, it is clear that they are the dumbest generation that has ever existed in this country, and therefore they will affect the country negatively when they start to come into power.

I realize that was more than a little sarcastic. I'm not sure whether that tone is kosher, and considering this goes into the 85% category, I'll try to word that a bit more seriously.

Bauerlein thinks that the culture of the under-30 age group is one that has the effect of dumbing down to the point where they are the dumbest generation ever. They have no intellectual pursuits anymore, and are distracted by mindless technology that is hurting them. They, despite being dumber, act as though they are smarter than everyone else. Most importantly, they don't involve themselves civically, and those that do don't have the perspective required to do it properly. All of this is getting worse and people aren't realizing how dumb it makes them. Their dumbness will hurt the country.

Despite how much I hated the book, there were a few passages I agreed with. They are both from the only chapter I somewhat agreed with, chapter 6. 

"Democracy requires an informed electorate, and knowledge deficits equal civic decay"

This is one of the main themes of chapter 6, and it is one I agree with. Americans need to become smarter about politics. There are two aspects to this: Making sure everyone cares about their important civic duties, and making sure they can do those duties properly. This is one reason I think MoPro is one of the most important classes in the high school, despite its unpopularity among those who want to not give a shit.

"This knowledge principle forms part of the democratic faith, and it survives only as long as a fair potion of the American people embraces it, not just intellectuals and experts"

The reason that required knowledge for proper civic involvement is not known by a lot of people in America is because of a culture of anti-intellectualism in America. Being smart and actually knowing things and caring is seen as nerdy. We need to get it into people's heads that it's OK to be knowledgable, that you won't turn into a nerdy, geeky, dork.

The obstacle to this is that the people that really control the country won't allow people to become knowledgable, because an educated electorate goes against their interests.

There also were, of course, many passages that I didn't agree with.

"The Internet doesn't impart adult information; it crowds it out. Video games, cell phones, and blogs don't foster rightful citizenship. They hamper it."

This was a disgusting statement, because it proves that Bauerlein doesn't know what the hell he is talking about. He calls our generation dumb for embracing technology, but it is obvious that he knows nothing about it. If someone spent even 5 minutes on the internet they would figure out that it is the best resource in the WORLD for information, including adult information. you can learn everything on the internet, and just because it can also be used for other purposes doesn't negate the fact that it provides an availability of knowledge that cannot be compared to anything else that has ever existed.

The same thing can be said video games, cell phones and blogs. You cannot criticize these things outright, because the only "problem" with them is that they can appeal broadly enough  to have whatever affect the individual wants. It is ABSOLUTELY not the fault of these entities that some stupid things occur.

"Traditions must be there at hand"

This is something that Bauerlein got wrong over and over again. Just because this generation isn't the same as your generation doesn't mean that they are stupid. He needs to realize that sometimes thinking needs to evolve, and that doesn't happen by conforming to the same traditions over and over again. Traditions don't help us, they hold us back.

Overall, Bauerlein was not effective in arguing his point, at least not to me. I was not his audience. His audience were other people his age that were fed up with all the stupid teenagers that wouldn't listen to them. Perhaps his argument would have worked better for that age group, but it sure won't convince anybody who doesn't agree with him to start. He doesn't persuade, he just encourages the opinions of people who hate stupid young people by providing them with statistics. He appeals to their distrust of everything new, such as technology. To top it all off, we AREN'T the dumbest generation. Guess which generation is? HIS generation. 

Proof here

Yep. The guy writing the book "The Dumbest Generation" is actually from the real dumbest generation. Maybe that's why the book was so terrible.

Shocking, Spooky, Scary, ...Squash?

I feel like a bad stand-up comedian. 

"Ya know, what's the big deal with pumpkins?" *crickets*

But seriously. What the crap, America. We're carving up perfectly edible food so we can put fire in it for one night before it gets stolen and chucked at our mailbox. Did you know there are starving children in Africa? Eat your goddamn pumpkins. They're even delicious, if the word pie comes after. How did something this stupid even start?

The British, of course. 

Of course the British were even lamer. Instead of our huge, bad-ass pumpkins, they decided it would be fun to carve up turnips, mangelwurzel, or beets. I don't know why vegetables were thought to be the ultimate thing to carve lanterns from, but you can't expect the British to be logical.

When all the cool British people decided to get away and found 'MURICA, they also decided to ditch the lame vegetables. They found these huge orange things and immediately recognized the superiority of America over everywhere else. This inspiration is known by historians to be the sole cause of victory in the Revolutionary war. Not really.  

These big orange things were biggest during the harvest season, so we started carving them up as a celebration of getting enough food during the summer that only most of us would die during the winter.

Eventually, we started linking these pumpkins with folklore, specifically with the will o' the wisp. We also started linking the carving with All Hallow's Eve, the night before All Saint's Day.

That leads us to where we are now. Americans buy vegetables that they won't eat (they probably buy more of these than vegetables they DO eat) and then murder them, scoop our their innards, and then carve them up like a serial killer would their victims. We then put fire in them, because this is 'MURICA and in 'MURICA fire makes everything better (see July 4th).

And after all that, they still aren't scary. They're still just a lame art project like those macaroni sculptures that you made in preschool. Except with more 'MURICAN wastefulness.

Ruining Halloween with Rhetoric.

This video has a lot of rhetoric in many different forms.

The narration at the beginning has a very sinister quality to it. This is a result of the speaker's inflection and his word choice. But the main reason the narration is creepy is the creepy music in the background.
All of these aspects combine with the somewhat scary visuals to keep us frightened from the start. This narration has the effect of setting the tone and making anyone watching more likely to be scared later. The narration is very successful in accomplishing this purpose

Then the song starts. It's an awesome song, especially in comparison to the one you posted, Mrs. Cardona.

Again, the creepy effect is caused mainly by the music in the background. The minor key and almost industrial-sounding instrumentation create an unsettling mood. The lyrics are all about the town of Halloween, and all of the scary stuff that goes on there. To top it all off, these lyrics are sung by all kinds of frightening creatures, from ghosts to witches. This is to try to scare the audience, but not too much. It is still meant to be somewhat fun, which is why there is catchy singing music not creepy minimalist instrumental music (such as the theme from the movie "Halloween"). The video is very good in accomplishing this purpose because while it was a little scary in a fun way, the part that stuck with me was the catchiness of the song.

Overall this is a fun scary video, not a scary scary video, which is exactly what it is supposed to be.

Why I don't like this class

You should have been expecting a post like this, Mrs. Cardona...

The first thing I should do is clarify what I mean when I say that I don't like this class. I don't mean to say I do not like the people in the class. In fact, I quite enjoy the company of the people in our small class (since the candy binge holiday [a.k.a. halloween] is right around the corner I could call our class "fun-sized"). I don't mean to say I don't like you, Mrs. Cardona, because I do. The only thing you could do better would be to give me tons of extra credit points for no reason. Hint hint...

The reason I dislike this class is the content. I come to class every day waiting to see what thing we are going to do, hoping that it's going to be something interesting, but usually being disappointed. What is so bad about the content, you ask? Here's the truth: America is the greatest country on Earth.

Just kidding. I'm not a politician. If I was I might enjoy this class.

The problem with the content is that it's all doing with no learning. In physics, you learn a formula, and then you figure out how to apply the formula to a certain situation in order to arrive at a single correct answer. In AP Comp, you read or listen to something and then write or talk about it. But you don't really learn anything new. I could have told you when I was in elementary school that when someone says things the people who listen to him like, the people who listen to him will like the person more. The only difference in the analysis that is done in this class and analysis that is done by everybody without thinking is the amount of work and how long it takes.

When I do the work in this class, I don't feel like I'm doing anything. I feel that I'm BSing my way through everything. I used to feel bad about this, thinking there was some trick that I wasn't getting, but now I realize that there is no trick. I'm going through the process correctly, or as close to correctly is possible in this class, it's just that the process is simply busywork.

And what is the purpose of this time-consuming episode of BSing rhetorical analysis? Now we've figured out that an essay uses parallelism twice in the same paragraph. What does it mean? Absolutely nothing. Believe it or not, language is a natural process, and when someone says something a certain way, maybe, just maybe, that's just the way the idea came out of their head. Big deal.

Even if the author does put the effort in to write with a bunch of special rhetorical tricks for some special purpose, and we take the time to keep track of every one of these special tricks, and speculate what they are for, so what? I don't care that this random guy used inverse diction on a sentence in the middle of the 17th paragraph, and there's no reason I should. The author doesn't write so we can analyze the writing. The author has some other purpose in mind. When someone walks into a room and tells you something, you don't ask them how fast they walked to the room. The vehicle between the author's idea and the author's product is not relevant, only the product is. By getting caught up in analyzing the writing, the effect the author's idea has on you is diminished. For example, humor is truly lost once you try to explain why it's funny. I honestly no longer find that video I posted last week funny after having to analyze the humor.

So why am I in this class? I was bad at writing. Not bad bad, but bad in comparison to, say, math. I thought that through this AP class I could finally find the secret to writing. But there is no secret to writing. There is no right answer, and therefore no perfection towards which to work. And that's stupid.

Ruining humor by analyzing it

Apparently, simply laughing at humor isn't good enough. It needs to be analyzed until it is no longer funny, even if one doesn't have the desire or need to reproduce that kind of humor, in which case analyzing it might be slightly useful. But whatever. 

The dominant reason this and all other onion pieces are funny is the deadpan way in which the speech is delivered. Despite it being very funny, the actors act completely serious when speaking. 

Related to this, the setting in which the deadpan is delivered also adds to the humor. In all ways except for what is being said it is identical to a legitimate news show. The graphics, the music, and the way in which the speakers discuss the topic makes the differences even funnier.

The topic also is humorous because it is satire on a common topic: the expectations of our education system. Because most people watching the video know about how that issue is raised, the way the speakers approach the issue (in the same way the actual issue is discussed) becomes more humorous.

Finally, the addition of profanity adds a lot to the video, because it is so out of place, or would be on the type of show that they are imitating. When we hear people talk in the style that they talk, it is usually in a very professional context, a context in which profanity would not be.

Observations from a McDonalds table

The people might not be as interesting as at Ridgedale, but this was close and easy.

Person 1: An older woman, but not elderly, at McDonalds with a younger adult woman and several children. I assume that it is a grandmother/mother/grandchild outing.

Adjectives:
Doting–she offers to buy all of her grandchildren ice cream, without them begging for it first. It was quite a grandmotherly thing to do, slightly spoiling the grandkids.

Impatient–despite caring for her grandkids which is evident through her doting and this outing, she seems a little bit annoyed with the kids. The kids were just doing kid-like things, and she seemed a little unwilling to humor them.

This woman is unhappy with her increasingly boring life. She likes her children and grandchildren, but her life outside of them involves watching soap operas and fox news on TV. She has a college degree, but she has never entered a career where she uses her degree. Her favorite food is some sort of pastry. She drives a Chrysler PT Cruiser.


Person 2: A young man with his pregnant wife and two small children

Adjectives:

Professional–Is wearing a nice overcoat, nice shoes, and has a leather bag

Removed–Despite being there with his kids and wife, he looks at his phone the whole time, even while talking to them.

This man and his wife got pregnant unexpectedly, when they were young, but decided to keep the baby and start a family. He found a job that has potential to be a career, but is still stuck at a low level. He is getting increasingly unhappy with his marriage. He wishes he could hang out with his friends more. He hates politics and doesn't vote. He does not have a college degree, and wishes he had gotten one.


Person 3: An elderly man with his wife

Adjectives:

Old-fashioned–When he walked by the Red-box movie rental machine he looked at the people using it disapprovingly

Loving–even though he and his wife are getting old, he still goes places with her, even boring places like McDonalds

This man has led a happy, involved life, but as his physical and mental abilities are decreasing, he wishes he had kids. He loves his wife, but feels lonely. He has few friends anymore now that he is retired. He is a staunch Mitt Romney supporter and listens to Rush Limbaugh. He does not own an hdtv. The extent of his computer use is to play solitaire. He is a frequent writer of letters to the editor of newspapers.

(2) Proving that the Earth is, indeed, round

Sure, we all know the Earth is round, but could we prove it? I think I can re-prove it.

The most obvious reason is that one can see farther the higher up one goes. If the Earth was flat, any factors restricting your view would not change the higher up you go. However, with a round Earth, the "protruding" Earth would block out far away objects when one is at a low height.

Celestial bodies change positions in the sky depending on where one is on the Earth. Some stars that are visible closer to the equator disappear completely as one travels north. This would not happen in a flat earth.

When there is a lunar eclipse, the shadow of the Earth that appears on the moon is circular, indicating spherical Earth. Although the lunar eclipse happens at the same time for the whole Earth, it happens at different local times, also proving the roundness of Earth.

Circumnavigation of the Earth is possible, and people that circumnavigate experience the gain or loss of a day that other people don't, due to the roundness of Earth.

Finally, we can, have, and do put artificial satellites into space that orbit the Earth, some geostationarily, which would not be possible if the Earth was flat.

I am certain that everyone who reads this blog post believes in a round Earth after reading it. That means it must be infallible. 

(1) A Hypothetical debate between Peter Singer and Vicki Hearne in rage comic form

Learning to block out images

In the NPR story, The hosts talked about how the brain makes decisions based on the competing influences of the logical part of the brain and the emotional part of your brain. They talked about the results of studies that showed that vivid images cause your brain to go into emotional mode, while a lack of imagery forces the brain to think logically. 

The point they didn't make is how much better logical thinking is than emotional thinking. I cannot think of a single case in which emotional thinking would lead to a correct decision where logic would have led you to believe something else. 

What does this mean for reading and listening? It means that we need to be aware that imagery tricks our brain into making decisions incorrectly. We need to stop our brain from doing this by making a habit of using logic in all situations. We need to remove ourselves from the grip of the writer so we can make our own decisions, not have them made for us. 

What does this mean for our writing and speaking? It means that we have to be very careful how we use images. Images should only be a supplement to a logical argument, not an argument on their own. Images without logic are just propaganda, and are entirely unethical.

My Writing Process, i.e., Why I'm Not a Great Writer

Calvin and Hobbes says it best, as usual. 

I don't like to write. As a result, I don't write until I absolutely have to. As a result, my writing is noticeably unrefined. As a result, I am graded poorly on my writing. As a result, I associate bad grades with writing. As a result, I don't like to write. The circle of death, or at least the circle of bad grades* *not A's

You may wonder how I'm still stuck in this circle of death when I seem to be aware of the problem. I just spent the last couple of minutes thinking about that myself, instead of writing. Whoops.

Despite the general last-minute-ness of my writing, I don't just sloppily rush through it, throwing words everywhere like I'm searching through last year's mail looking for that suddenly vital document. I'm actually quite deliberate with how I say things.

This reasoned approach helps me in the way I think writing is important: pure communication. If you are trying to get a point across, a simple, to the point style is much better than one stuffed with literary devices. A simile here and there is fine, but if symbolism and allusion are frequent enough that your writing sounds like James Joyce's Ulysses, you need to chill out.

Unfortunately, this simplistic writing style doesn't always fly in classes. First you are made to write about something you are completely uninspired to write about *coughLITERACYNARRATIVEcough*, then you are expected to write artistically. Personally, I think having to fake "deeper" writing is damaging and the notion that unadorned writing is somehow inferior is false. I'm sorry, but I choose my sentence length based on what words need to be in the sentence, not to convey some BS deeper meaning. But it is the way it is. "Improving" your simple writing makes the writing process take a lot longer, and not in a good way. 

You first have to think of what to write. As you are writing about something you don't really care about, this takes a long time. There is nothing you want to write about, so that is removed as a criterion. The next thing you think about is what you are able to write about. You have to choose a topic that you can get an acceptable length essay out of. Finally, if you are lucky enough to think of multiple topics on which you could BS an essay, you can choose the one that will be least embarrassing for other people to read, as you know you are going to have to awkwardly peer-conference. 

Once you manage to decide on a topic, you then have to try to figure out how to write it so that it will be acceptably artistic. This is especially difficult, as any idea you come up with for something you are uninspired to do will be quite boring. You have to recognize when an opportunity to insert a literary device presents itself. Try to give the illusion that these devices enhance the personal feel that you are trying to fake.

Finally, you actually have to type it out—you have to figure out how to make the inauthentic artistry work in a sentence. Hopefully you can type quite fast, or this part will take almost as long as the other two.

There you go. You have your first sentence. Only pages upon pages of phony emotion to go. Don't worry, it's not due until tomorrow.  

Where the term "blag" comes from. Credit to xkcd. Published 8/25/2006

Test

Test