Assignment 11

 

Assignment 11

Questions about Audience

What does the composer assume the audience knows or believes?

Stein assumes and expects us to know a little bit about a lot. She expects us to be familiar the founders of Apple, the Macintosh personal computer, Apple’s competition, George Orwell’s 1984 novel, an array of different movies, and a little about advertising.

“Titled ‘1984,’ the ad evokes the dystopic George Orwell novel of the same name, with its Big Brother figure ceaselly intoning the slogans of Newspeak.” (Stein 279)

This quote is proof that she expects us to be familiar with George Orwell’s novel, 1984. I know this because she never wrote about the book beforehand. She never wrote about Big Brother, or Winston, or Oceania, or anything. She just made a reference to it and expected us to know what she was pertaining to.

Questions about Purpose

Is the purpose clearly stated or easy to determine? If not, why might the composer have decided not to make the purpose obvious?

According to Stein, she wrote, “The, ‘1984’ Macintosh Ad: Cinematic Icons and Constitutive Rhetoric in the Launch of a New Machine,” to give her audience a better “understanding of the integral role ads play in contributing to and drawing on ideological and cultural discourse.” (Stein 280) She wants to examine how ads borrow from the underlying culture but also change that culture at the same time. That’s the most obvious purpose.

I think her purpose was unclear because she expects her audience to argue against her points and to maybe form new ideas. For all intents and purposes, this whole class revolves around interpreting text, and that’s why she wrote this article the way she did. She expects us to study and interpret her essay as we would any other critical examination academic essay.

Questions about Context

Is the composer respectful of the audience, treating them as intelligent, thoughtful people?

Stein is very respectful of us. She does treat us as intelligent and thoughtful people. If this wasn’t true, this essay would be easier to read. On that note, she wrote this essay, fully expecting us to read it thoroughly, to break it down into little pieces, and in the end, understand her resolve.  

Stein’s decisions to write to us specifically, to make her purpose unclear, and to treat us as thoughtful and intelligent individuals all affected my interpretation of the text. Put simply, all of these choices made reading her essay really difficult to read. And this goes back to the point I was trying to make before. She demands a lot out of us. She expects us to think critically about the subject, be thoughtful and to come to a deeper understanding of the role of advertisements play in today’s culture.

Assigment 11

Group Work Reflection

Paige and I worked really well together. Once we were assigned our topic for our one pager, which was, ‘The Rhetorical Context of the “1984” Ad, we immediately went to work and started brainstorming. Together, we decided to focus on technophobia, Stein’s comparisons between anti big government and anti-corporate supporters, and the Association of American Advertising Agencies’ attempt to reengage cynical viewers.

I don’t think Paige and I had any problems working together because our ideas were in sync or in tune with one another. Having said that, I think some people may find it difficult to work with another person because those two people do not have the same ideologies, morals, and rules to which they live their lives by. Additionally, two people can have the same goal in mind, but just have different opinions on what path to take to reach that goal. I see this a lot when I watch the show, “Celebrity Apprentice”. Sometimes, the contestants work really well together and sometimes they don’t.  

The recipe for a good working relationship is similar personalities, ideas, sense of humor, and patience. If two people do not share these commonalities, they probably need a little bit more patience.

With all that said, I think studying with another person is always a good idea. Studying with other people allows us to come up with new ideas as well as bounce ideas we have come up with, with others.

The group that focused on, ‘The Rhetorical History of the Macintosh,’ for their one pager intrigued me with the quotes they decided to use as well as the art that painted a picture of what those quotes said. I thought this group did an overall really good job. The quotes they used are the ones I would have chosen had I been assigned the same topic. I actually highlighted these quotes when I first read it. One of them reads, “Apple’s origins grew out of such a sensibility and reflected the early manufacturer of personal computers as a sort of cottage industry.” The picture they drew of Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak is a good representation of this quote.

Their question is, “Since Apple was a small company at the time, do you think this helped their revolution?” In my opinion, I don’t think the size of their company did all that much to help them with their revolution. I think it was a combination of things that helped them with their revolution. I think what really helped them more than anything was in fact the “1984” ad and their desire to create a personal computer that ultimately undermined IBM’s authority in the computer industry.

The group that focused on Stein’s, ‘Introduction,’ did a really good job of capturing the very essence that is Stein’s introduction. In their one pager, they included a quote from Stein’s essay that said, “In retrospect, it was a defining moment, not only for the heralded computer revolution but also of what has become our media landscape.” In addition, they described Stein’s reasons for writing the essay, which was to give society a better understanding of the important role ads play in ideological and cultural discourses.

 Stein’s use of comparable media examples to the “1984” Macintosh ad and her interpretation of the ad that limits itself to the constructs of Charland’s, Goldman’s, and Benjamin’s theoretical frameworks helped me to better understand the meaning and purpose of her essay. I will elaborate on this more in my interpretive essay, but this is my controlling purpose.

Assignment 10

Assignment 10

Questions

·        Why does she specifically use the theoretical frameworks of Maurice Charland, Robert Goldman, and Walter Benjamin to analyze the Macintosh Ad?

·        How does Stein explain the use of constitutive rhetoric in her analysis?

·        Why does Stein constantly write about extreme/advanced capitalism?

For example, on page 297, she wrote, “She equally represents a political figure, one aware of the repressive powers of advanced capitalism and willing to use revolutionary tactics in response.”

·        Is she relating the woman in the commercial to Winston in George Orwell’s 1984 novel?

Summary

               The “1984” Macintosh Ad: Cinematic Icons and Constitutive Rhetoric in the Launch of a New Machine by Sarah R. Stein is an extensive critical examination of the Macintosh Ad. In this extensive critical examination she gives a description of the commercial, writes about the theoretical frameworks that describes the content of the commercial more thoroughly, provides a rhetorical history of the Macintosh, describes the rhetorical context of the time the “1984” advertisement was released, and gives her final analysis and conclusion. The final analysis and conclusion sum up everything she already wrote about in her essay and gives an insight into her personal opinions.

Questions

1. Why do you think Stein might have wanted to research and write this essay?

Stein wrote this essay because the Macintosh Ad had never been subjected to such extensive critical examination before and she felt it needed to be.  Also, she was a great resource for academics like us to go to for information at the time this essay was written. Unlike now, the internet was not as great of a resource for researching as it is today. Additionally, she wanted to study the effects society and advertising have on each other. Stein wanted to know whether society was the independent variable or dependent variable.

2. What do you think she might have hoped readers would feel, think, or do while and after reading it?

I think Stein expects and hopes that anybody who reads her essay will be appreciative of the in depth analysis of the advertisement. The ad has been admired ever since it came out, but until Stein wrote this essay it was never criticized. Her criticism of the Mac ad allows for a better critical interpretation.

Personally, I really enjoyed her comparison between the Mac Ad and Blade Runner, the Wizard of Oz, the Terminator, Metropolis, and of course George Orwell’s 1984 novel. These comparisons gave me a better understanding of the Mac ad and her essay.

This excerpt from her essay led me to my answers for the previous questions: Although the “1984” ad has been the subject of ongoing popular media attention, it has not been subjected to extensive critical examination. It’s standing as a rhetorical text of enduring power and status warrants a closer look at its internal dynamics as well as its cultural impact, and criticism provides the means by which this may be accomplished. In examining this text for its complex interweaving of ideologies and cinematic icons that elevated the cold rationality of a machine into the realm of fantasy and the mythic, this essay contributes to an understanding of the integral role ads play in contributing to and drawing on ideological and cultural discourse.  

Assignment 9

Assignment 9

My target audiences for both of my interpretive essays are my peers and the professors who will be grading my final portfolio. It was their age, level of education, upbringing, gender, and knowledge of the topics that I had to keep in mind when writing these two papers. Thankfully, writing to this audience was not too difficult of a task because the group discussions gave me a sense of just how much everyone knew about the two different stories. And they allowed me to hear each and everyone’s individual response to Standing By and Lifelike. My own writing works to build relationships with these people because I took into account all this necessary information to write a productive essay. Also, my paper was not radical or reactionary in any way, so anyone can read my paper and understand the message I am trying to convey without being offended. Or they will not feel the need to dispute anything I have to say. The majority of my peers’ beliefs are consistent with what I believe in, so that made writing these two papers a lot more easy as well than it would have been had I been trying to build a relationship with a different audience. All of us are academics with the same goal in mind of achieving a degree, so I think we are better prepared to appreciate what another person has to say without being too argumentative.

               Here is an example of my efforts to build a relationship with my audience. This is my introduction for the first interpretive essay.

               Everywhere people go, people judge others based on their occupation, political party preference, ethnic heritage, appearance, race, religion, gender, creed, and even the clothes they decide to wear. People may not always be aware that they do it, and that’s because most people do it subconsciously. Without being completely aware of what they are doing, people tend to judge others based on their appearance, match that appearance with a certain stereotype, put that person in a certain group given the stereotype, and then compare that person to themself. It’s an innate, human habit that David Sedaris suggest all people may have and he unveils this idea in his story, “Standing By”. He also brings up the idea that, perhaps the airport is a forum that allows people to show their true hateful selves. This is the message I believe Sedaris was trying to get across to his readers. I believe he wants his readers to think twice before judging others. I believe he wants his readers to not judge others based on their appearance. He successfully conveys this message of his story by recreating an atmosphere that most people can relate to, using humor, using characters that most can relate to, as well as putting the reader in situations that are very familiar and hilariously so.              

               I am going to include more “I” statements to improve the quality of my paper. In both of my interpretive papers, I am very well removed from my writing. It is an interpretive essay, so therefore I need to give my readers a better sense of who I am and what I have experienced, so that my writing becomes more credible.  

Assignment 8

Assignment 8

I wasn’t actually all that surprised by my fellow students reactions to Lifelike. We all seemed to formulate the same ideas and opinions about the article. For example, many of us were very confused about her decision to integrate many disturbing quotes into her essay and at the same time, compliment many of the taxidermists for their skillfulness, hard work, and dedication. This made her whole article very difficult to understand. Nobody knew what to think after reading through it. We did not know whether she gained an appreciation for taxidermy or whether she added those disturbing quotes so that her readers’ beliefs would be reconfirmed.  Additionally, she made many other writerly choices that raised a lot of questions. For instance, why did she write about the history of taxidermy, why did she write about the taxidermy site, why did she write about all the different people who take up taxidermy, or why did she make a biblical reference at the end of her essay? All these different writerly choices raised a lot of questions. Her reasons for doing any of this did not seem clear. But once I read Lifelike many times over and over, it finally started to make since. She wrote this article to support and promote taxidermy.

She did include in her essay many quotes that seemed very disturbing, but she only did this because she wanted to give an accurate description of the environment she was in. She also did not want to lose her credibility as an author. The New Yorker audience would probably be a lot less inclined to read her article if they knew she was biased. If her audience wanted a more biased article they would have chosen to read something written by the PETA organization or the NRA organization. But because she seems so impartial, she does not lose her credibility as an author. Despite the fact that she included these quotes, which may at first make her seem impartial, I think she was not being impartial and that she was promoting taxidermy through her writing.

There is one more thing I would like to comment on and that is that she wrote this paper because she simply loves to write. I listened to a speech she once gave to a group of people that is viewable on You Tube and in that speech she said that she loves to write because she loves telling stories and providing her readers with a more in depth look at whatever it is that she is writing about. Although, the internet can provide us with all the information we need to learn about anything, she can offer so much more. She can give us a beautifully written story filled with emotion and feeling, and not just a list of facts.  

Assignment 7

 Assignment 7

Why did Susan Orlean cover the history of taxidermy in her essay?

At first, I was not exactly sure as to why she revealed the history of taxidermy in her essay. But after reading over the content of the essay a little bit more, it became apparent to me. Her reasons for doing this are actually quite simple. She writes about the history of taxidermy to give readers perspective. By knowing the history of taxidermy we can see what the profession was like when it first began, where it is now, and where it is going.

Like most trades, innovations, or original ideas, taxidermy started out small and then it got big. So, big in fact, that it has become a five hundred million dollar business. However, unlike most other professions, taxidermy has always been considered an abnormal profession. In her essay, Orlean writes, “In spite of its scientific value, it was usually regarded as almost a black art, a wholly owned subsidiary of witchcraft and voodoo”.  This isn’t surprising in the least. I’ve talked to a lot of different people about taxidermy and more often than not, people quiver at the thought of people bringing animals back to life, much in the same way kids make stuffed animals at build-a-bear workshops. Additionally, just the idea of stuffing a dead animal does not seem ethical.

On that note, it’s also not surprising that taxidermy was considered a black art when it first started because it was new. I am not that afflicted by taxidermy because I have seen taxidermist work on walls at bars, schools, and peoples’ homes all my life, but for the people that lived a hundred years ago, it was brand new and, because it was new, it was that much more disturbing and gross.

Taxidermy now, it seems, is still considered to be an unethical trade by many, but not all. Now there are magazines, sponsors, and competitions that support the longevity of this trade, which just goes to show how much more it is accepted and respected.

Another reason I believe she wrote about this history of taxidermy is to show readers just how much stitching animals back together has advanced over the ages. In Lifelike, she wrote, “The original taxidermists were upholsterers who tanned the hides of hunting trophies and then plumped them up with rags and cotton, so that they reassumed their original shape and size; those early poses were stiff and simple, and the expressions fairly expressionless.”

Then, she later wrote, “It used to be enough to do what taxidermists call "fish on a stick" displays; now a serious competitor worries about things like flow and negative space and originality.” These quotes from Orlean’s text go to show just how much more effort is put into bringing an animal back to life today than in the past.

One other reason I believe she wrote about this history, is to simply give her audience context. Her readership is more than likely comprised of residents of New York City, considering she writes for The New Yorker. The majority of these people might not know anything about hunting and taxidermy and that is why it was important for her to give some background information. People that have grown up in rural areas might not need the background information because they already know everything there is to know. But the citizens of New York may not.

Why does Susan Orlean not express her personal opinions about taxidermy?

I thought it was very interesting that she wrote her essay without expressing her own opinions. There could be any number of reasons why she did this. With a subject such as this, I expected her to be more biased, more prejudice, or more to the point. It’s really difficult with this essay, to figure out exactly what she expects of her readers or what is at stake for her. Then again, she is a professional. Because, she is a professional, there is a really good chance that she can influence her readers without noticeably coming right out with her personal opinions. That’s what writers do. They appeal to readers emotions and influence them one way or the other with their use of words. People that are smart already realize this and because of this they try not to get too invested in whatever it is that they’re reading. This could be good and bad or neither. It all depends on what the topic is. Sometimes it is good to keep an open mind, sometimes not.

What was really apparent was that Susan Orlean included in her essay a lot conflicting statements. At times, she was writing about how much skill it takes to be a taxidermist, and the next she included in her essay all the grotesque details of what the taxidermist do to make a final product. She was very wishy washy in her writing. I think readers really need to focus on what words she uses to describe taxidermy and the competition. From my perspective, it seems as though, she supports taxidermy. In the end, I think she has a better understand and respect for it.

Maybe that’s all she wants. Maybe all she wants is for her readers to have a better understanding and respect for some aspects of the trade, such as the fact that history can be preserved throughout time because of what one taxidermist has done.

Assignment 6: Choices

Assignment 6: Choices

               There are a number of writer choices that are really self-evident in this essay. For example, she decided that her essay would revolve around the 2003 World Taxidermy Competition; she decided to talk about the history of taxidermy, a taxidermy website, how taxidermy is another form of art that contestants in the competition take very seriously, as well as the diversity of people who take up this trade.

               I believe she decided that the competition would be the backdrop of her story because the competition allowed her to meet a wide variety of people from all different walks of life that take up taxidermy as a hobby or as a job. In addition, she was able to see the best of the best dead animals come to life at this every other year competition. The competition was really the best way for her to immerse herself into this culture and take advantage of all the resources that were at her disposal.

               Orleans also talked about the history of taxidermy. I believe this is essential to every piece of literature that is like this article. By giving her followers some background information, she is allowing the readers to see where the trade has been, where it is now, and where it may end up in the future. Knowing the history, allows us as the readers to see the progression of taxidermy throughout time. It allows us to see that taxidermy used to be considered a black art and now it is a widely accepted, multimillion dollar business, which many companies, museums, and hunters take advantage of.

               Talking about the website was also an essential writer choice that Susan Orleans decided to take advantage of. There are two reasons I think she decided to talk about the website. For starters, I think she quoted some of the post from the blog in her essay because those quotes show how the taxidermist think putting an animal’s skin over a mannequin is completely normal.  She also wanted to show her readers how taxidermists interact with one another.  Secondly, I think she brought up the website, so her readers will go and look it up themselves, which will hopefully aid her readers in making up their own opinions about how they feel about the trade.

               One other writer choice that I’d like to talk about is how Susan Orlean decided to include in her essay the desire every taxidermist has to make everything perfect.  In her essay, she writes, “The taxidermists take the competition very seriously.” Then she goes into detail listing all the different lengths taxidermists go through to make a complete master piece.

               Overall, I think immersing herself in this culture by going to the World competition was the best decision she could have made. She could have gone to any local taxidermists and wrote about his or her experiences, but instead she decided to go to this competition, which allowed her to learn what taxidermy is all about on a global level.