Blog Post #1 - Martin Luther King's Speech I Have A Dream
Martin Luther King's speech still sounds so powerful to me, as a non-American, in the 21st century.
The language he used is very persuasive to me in the following aspects:
First of all, he used certain words to resemble Abraham Lincoln. For example, instead of saying "one hundred years ago", he used "five score years ago". Similarly, Lincoln used "four score and seven years ago" in his speech. As we all know, Lincoln is a significant figure in American history who led the Civil War.
Also, the content is very strong and powerful in a way that it shows that the whole America urges a change of the civil rights. Jr. Martin Luther King talked about many famous and popular places to stress this. From Georgia, Mississippi to New York and Alabama. We can also tell that MLK was trying to be inclusive because he used "we" many many times in his speech. Instead of "you", "we" is a very powerful word because it shows that every one should unite together. With the repetition, he was being nationalistic and not rejecting America. In order to make more of the audience listen and trust him, he used ethos and quoted from the Bible to add more credibility to his speech. All of these tactics that he used make his speech powerful and persuasive and make more people want to join this movement.
Last but not least, the way he conveyed his ideas is very intriguing. In order to do so, he used parallelism many times throughout his whole speech. He also used certain words and phrases repetitively to emphasize his topic. For example, he said "I have a dream today" many many times and I believe it strengthens his thesis. The words are very powerful to me.
The speech as a whole uses a lot of tactics. After reading the whole speech, I learned that ethos, pathos, parallelism and repetition can all make our arguments stronger and more persuasive, and I can use them in my papers too.
The language he used is very persuasive to me in the following aspects:
First of all, he used certain words to resemble Abraham Lincoln. For example, instead of saying "one hundred years ago", he used "five score years ago". Similarly, Lincoln used "four score and seven years ago" in his speech. As we all know, Lincoln is a significant figure in American history who led the Civil War.
Also, the content is very strong and powerful in a way that it shows that the whole America urges a change of the civil rights. Jr. Martin Luther King talked about many famous and popular places to stress this. From Georgia, Mississippi to New York and Alabama. We can also tell that MLK was trying to be inclusive because he used "we" many many times in his speech. Instead of "you", "we" is a very powerful word because it shows that every one should unite together. With the repetition, he was being nationalistic and not rejecting America. In order to make more of the audience listen and trust him, he used ethos and quoted from the Bible to add more credibility to his speech. All of these tactics that he used make his speech powerful and persuasive and make more people want to join this movement.
Last but not least, the way he conveyed his ideas is very intriguing. In order to do so, he used parallelism many times throughout his whole speech. He also used certain words and phrases repetitively to emphasize his topic. For example, he said "I have a dream today" many many times and I believe it strengthens his thesis. The words are very powerful to me.
The speech as a whole uses a lot of tactics. After reading the whole speech, I learned that ethos, pathos, parallelism and repetition can all make our arguments stronger and more persuasive, and I can use them in my papers too.
Blog Post #2 - Excerpt 1 (In Class Collaborative Post)
Obama’s “A More Perfect Union” speech and MLK’s “I Have a Dream” speech have many similarities. Both of these speeches represent a milestone in American history. The fact that Obama and MLK share the same color of skin makes their speeches share a common theme, which is the fight for equality.
Both speeches begin with a flashback in which they describe a turning point in history. Although these two speeches are from different times, they both use the past to prove a point that change is necessary. After these flashbacks both speakers back up their initial argument by referring to the constitution and the Declaration of Independence. For example, Obama said in his speech “…the ideals of equal citizenship and freedom expressed in the Constitution and America's history of slavery…” and related it to his own presidential campaign. In terms of structure and tone we can see that both speakers use parallelism frequently to emphasize the need for equality. Obama described his vision of a more perfect union as “a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America.” Just as MLK did in his “I Have a Dream” speech.
These two texts indeed have many similarities but they do share important differences. The main difference is the purpose. It is very clear that Martin Luther King was trying to solve the current racial issues while Obama delivered this speech mainly for his presidential campaign.
Both speeches begin with a flashback in which they describe a turning point in history. Although these two speeches are from different times, they both use the past to prove a point that change is necessary. After these flashbacks both speakers back up their initial argument by referring to the constitution and the Declaration of Independence. For example, Obama said in his speech “…the ideals of equal citizenship and freedom expressed in the Constitution and America's history of slavery…” and related it to his own presidential campaign. In terms of structure and tone we can see that both speakers use parallelism frequently to emphasize the need for equality. Obama described his vision of a more perfect union as “a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America.” Just as MLK did in his “I Have a Dream” speech.
These two texts indeed have many similarities but they do share important differences. The main difference is the purpose. It is very clear that Martin Luther King was trying to solve the current racial issues while Obama delivered this speech mainly for his presidential campaign.
Blog Post #3 - Obama On Trayvon Martin
I believe that, overall speaking, President Barack Obama's speech on Trayvon Martin was very powerful and persuasive because he used pathos in his speech.
In Obama’s speech on Trayvon Martin, he said that Trayvon Martin “could have been me 35 years ago....” and "this could have been my son." I believe that Obama was trying to relate himself to Trayvon Martin. He was trying to tell people that Trayvon Martin’s death was a tragedy. Also, an incident like this could have happened to not only him, but also President Obama and every one. He made this argument to show that it is an issue that every one should care about, not just Trayvon Martin's family and friends. I personally think that it was reasonable and acceptable for Obama to make this statement, since he was able to relate to being an African American, people would find it more persuasive if he made that statement. With the effective use of pathos, Obama made an appeal to our emotions. As a member of the minorities, his speech made me think about myself too. I can relate myself to President's Obama's speech.
Also, he acknowledged in the talk that, statistically speaking, Black kids are more violent. This is one of the inescapable racial biases that people talk about. But, instead of simply focusing on the incident itself, Obama was more concerned about the lesson that people learned from this incident and how they could move toward a positive direction. By doing so, he questioned: "Where do we take this? How do we learn some lessons from this and move in a positive direction?" I think the use of questioning is always helpful to make one's arguments strong, because questions attract people's attention and evoke them to think.
At the end of his speech, he continued to expand on his thoughts on the racial disparities and biases and pushed the audience to think about these issues as well.
Therefore, it was a very great speech due to some of the strategies President Obama used.
In Obama’s speech on Trayvon Martin, he said that Trayvon Martin “could have been me 35 years ago....” and "this could have been my son." I believe that Obama was trying to relate himself to Trayvon Martin. He was trying to tell people that Trayvon Martin’s death was a tragedy. Also, an incident like this could have happened to not only him, but also President Obama and every one. He made this argument to show that it is an issue that every one should care about, not just Trayvon Martin's family and friends. I personally think that it was reasonable and acceptable for Obama to make this statement, since he was able to relate to being an African American, people would find it more persuasive if he made that statement. With the effective use of pathos, Obama made an appeal to our emotions. As a member of the minorities, his speech made me think about myself too. I can relate myself to President's Obama's speech.
Also, he acknowledged in the talk that, statistically speaking, Black kids are more violent. This is one of the inescapable racial biases that people talk about. But, instead of simply focusing on the incident itself, Obama was more concerned about the lesson that people learned from this incident and how they could move toward a positive direction. By doing so, he questioned: "Where do we take this? How do we learn some lessons from this and move in a positive direction?" I think the use of questioning is always helpful to make one's arguments strong, because questions attract people's attention and evoke them to think.
At the end of his speech, he continued to expand on his thoughts on the racial disparities and biases and pushed the audience to think about these issues as well.
Therefore, it was a very great speech due to some of the strategies President Obama used.
Blog Post #4 - The Videos And John Lewis' Books
For the videos, I watched Danny Glover Reads John Lewis. The video did help me better understand the book March for mainly the following reasons:
First off, it indicates the urgency to make the world a more equal place for everyone, as said in the video: “Patience is a dirty and nasty word. We want our freedom and we want it NOW.” And he hopes that the president could “take the revolution out on the streets and put into the courts”.
Secondly, it shows us the reason why it is important to create equality for colored people. Declaration of Independence is supposed to be the nation’s tenet, but some people betrayed those principles.
In addition to the inspiring facial expressions, the way Danny Glover reads also inspired me to some extent. In order for the audience to better understand the speech, emphasis and stress on certain words can be very helpful. Also, changing the pace of his speech makes it sound strong and powerful as well.
In John Lewis’ graphic novel March One, he suggests that love and nonviolence is the only key to change people, policies and laws. To implement this, however, is not easy. He then supports his idea through using a few examples and a great many details.
A perfect example to illustrate this idea would be the graphics on page 82. The all-black panel, with only a few words in parallelism and close-up details on the face, is very noticeable for us readers. Short, but striking. “Do not let them shake your faith in nonviolence – LOVE them.”
Moreover, on page 97, there’s a list of do’s and don’t’s. Rather than striking back and cursing, laughing out and blocking the entrance, the activists were told to show friendliness and courtesy at all times, refer information in a polite manner, and remember the teachings of Jesus Christ, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Even though they were mistreated by the waiters and waitresses at the store, who refused to serve colored people, they still showed respect and courtesy.
Besides, for the very first time in this book, John Lewis reveals what the book title March truly means. On page 96, it says “we marched again.” It turns out that the people were marching and striving to create a more equal society for people of all colors.
First off, it indicates the urgency to make the world a more equal place for everyone, as said in the video: “Patience is a dirty and nasty word. We want our freedom and we want it NOW.” And he hopes that the president could “take the revolution out on the streets and put into the courts”.
Secondly, it shows us the reason why it is important to create equality for colored people. Declaration of Independence is supposed to be the nation’s tenet, but some people betrayed those principles.
In addition to the inspiring facial expressions, the way Danny Glover reads also inspired me to some extent. In order for the audience to better understand the speech, emphasis and stress on certain words can be very helpful. Also, changing the pace of his speech makes it sound strong and powerful as well.
In John Lewis’ graphic novel March One, he suggests that love and nonviolence is the only key to change people, policies and laws. To implement this, however, is not easy. He then supports his idea through using a few examples and a great many details.
A perfect example to illustrate this idea would be the graphics on page 82. The all-black panel, with only a few words in parallelism and close-up details on the face, is very noticeable for us readers. Short, but striking. “Do not let them shake your faith in nonviolence – LOVE them.”
Moreover, on page 97, there’s a list of do’s and don’t’s. Rather than striking back and cursing, laughing out and blocking the entrance, the activists were told to show friendliness and courtesy at all times, refer information in a polite manner, and remember the teachings of Jesus Christ, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Even though they were mistreated by the waiters and waitresses at the store, who refused to serve colored people, they still showed respect and courtesy.
Besides, for the very first time in this book, John Lewis reveals what the book title March truly means. On page 96, it says “we marched again.” It turns out that the people were marching and striving to create a more equal society for people of all colors.
Blog Post #5 - Some Insights On March And John Lewis
If I had a chance to meet with John Lewis, I would ask him the following questions based on the reading:
Why did you spend a lot of the time in Book One talking about your relationship and experience with the chickens? How does it shape who you are today and how is that related to the civil right movements? My guess to the first question is that, as I have indicated in the first assignment, people always tend to fight for their own rights. John Lewis used the chickens as a perfect example to illustrate this idea. He had a lot of difficulty accepting the fact that his family cooked his chicken friends because he knew every one of them and they were like his family. As an African American, he understood well how the other African Americans struggled and suffered a lot from the racial issues, so he was more than eager to change the nation. But he didn’t have much trouble devouring the chickens he didn’t “know”. Likewise, the White people couldn’t really understand how hard the times were for African Americans and it therefore makes some sense that they refused to change or join the campaign. So, I would like to know whether my interpretation of his story is right and what his other reasoning might be.
The graphic novels, as far as I believe, are much easier to read than text-only novels since it contains a great number of graphics. Some panels even don’t need to include texts but they can still convey their meanings to the readers perfectly well. Also, through some specific details, the graphics can better help understand what the characters are thinking and how they are feeling. For example, in Book One, when John Lewis and his uncle were driving all the way up north. It uses a lot of close ups to show that they’re sweating and thus nervous. And we can tell they became relaxed as soon as they arrived in Ohio. But I don’t see many strengths with graphic novels when it’s compared to documentaries and movies. I always believe that we need not only to visualize but also to listen. The sounds and music are definitely something the graphic novels can’t provide us with.
I believe that there are a few scenes that would be a little difficult to read through if we don’t have any prior knowledge. For example, Page 57 of Book One. Since I have never received any education about US history, I don’t know a lot of the public figures or events that might be familiar to American students. Therefore, it’s kind of hard to know from the book about the whole Emmett Till event, although it was briefly discussed. Not only did I do some background research on his story, but I also read some comments on the Internet because I believe that we shouldn’t just trust everything the book has, including the side it stands on.
Why did you spend a lot of the time in Book One talking about your relationship and experience with the chickens? How does it shape who you are today and how is that related to the civil right movements? My guess to the first question is that, as I have indicated in the first assignment, people always tend to fight for their own rights. John Lewis used the chickens as a perfect example to illustrate this idea. He had a lot of difficulty accepting the fact that his family cooked his chicken friends because he knew every one of them and they were like his family. As an African American, he understood well how the other African Americans struggled and suffered a lot from the racial issues, so he was more than eager to change the nation. But he didn’t have much trouble devouring the chickens he didn’t “know”. Likewise, the White people couldn’t really understand how hard the times were for African Americans and it therefore makes some sense that they refused to change or join the campaign. So, I would like to know whether my interpretation of his story is right and what his other reasoning might be.
The graphic novels, as far as I believe, are much easier to read than text-only novels since it contains a great number of graphics. Some panels even don’t need to include texts but they can still convey their meanings to the readers perfectly well. Also, through some specific details, the graphics can better help understand what the characters are thinking and how they are feeling. For example, in Book One, when John Lewis and his uncle were driving all the way up north. It uses a lot of close ups to show that they’re sweating and thus nervous. And we can tell they became relaxed as soon as they arrived in Ohio. But I don’t see many strengths with graphic novels when it’s compared to documentaries and movies. I always believe that we need not only to visualize but also to listen. The sounds and music are definitely something the graphic novels can’t provide us with.
I believe that there are a few scenes that would be a little difficult to read through if we don’t have any prior knowledge. For example, Page 57 of Book One. Since I have never received any education about US history, I don’t know a lot of the public figures or events that might be familiar to American students. Therefore, it’s kind of hard to know from the book about the whole Emmett Till event, although it was briefly discussed. Not only did I do some background research on his story, but I also read some comments on the Internet because I believe that we shouldn’t just trust everything the book has, including the side it stands on.
Blog Post #6 - Gasland (Collaborative Blog Post)
Interviews are conducted in the documentary to make it more understandable for the audience.
In Gasland, the interviewees talk about their own experiences and feelings to illustrate their points. In some of the interviews, the interviewees are asked a few questions. With these questions clearly asked in the documentary, we can have an idea of what the speakers are going to mainly talk about, which helps us to focus on their opinions and ideas. From residents to EPA employees and couples, the interviewees are selected from a large pool of relevant people. Plus, there are even talkings and interactions between the interviewees, which makes the interviews more vivid to the audience.
However, while there are so many advantages to include interviews in a documentary, there are some limitations too. For example, when the audience are not very familiar with the topic, interviews would play an essential role. Therefore, the producers and directors can easily "deceive" the audience by simply showing what they want the audience to see. In Gasland, for instance, the producers want to show us the communities are affected by natural gas drilling. In order to show us how bad gas drilling could be, the interviewees are selected from those who have a negative opinion. This may mislead the audience and make them opinionated about the topic.
Overall speaking, interviews are necessary in documentaries, but they could also make the audience narrow minded.
In Gasland, the interviewees talk about their own experiences and feelings to illustrate their points. In some of the interviews, the interviewees are asked a few questions. With these questions clearly asked in the documentary, we can have an idea of what the speakers are going to mainly talk about, which helps us to focus on their opinions and ideas. From residents to EPA employees and couples, the interviewees are selected from a large pool of relevant people. Plus, there are even talkings and interactions between the interviewees, which makes the interviews more vivid to the audience.
However, while there are so many advantages to include interviews in a documentary, there are some limitations too. For example, when the audience are not very familiar with the topic, interviews would play an essential role. Therefore, the producers and directors can easily "deceive" the audience by simply showing what they want the audience to see. In Gasland, for instance, the producers want to show us the communities are affected by natural gas drilling. In order to show us how bad gas drilling could be, the interviewees are selected from those who have a negative opinion. This may mislead the audience and make them opinionated about the topic.
Overall speaking, interviews are necessary in documentaries, but they could also make the audience narrow minded.
Blog Post #7 - As the World Burns (In Class Blog Post)
When reading the book, I enjoyed the way it presents its content through both texts and graphics.
The characters are drawn either cute, ugly or neutral to represent their characteristics. For example, the US president, depicted as a greeding man who only cares about gold, is drawn very ugly, while the heroes Bananabelle and Kranti are super cute. I find this a great advantage of graphic novels because it makes the readers feel easier to catch ideas expressed in the book.
Besides, each character represents a group of people in the real world. For example, the two girls, with totally different opinions regarding environmental issues, are differentiated by their color. Bananabelle tends to be an idealist who believes that doing little things in our daily life will save the planet (7-17). On the contrary, Kranti is more realistic and thinks that our problem are not so easily solvable and, instead, the real problem is the industries and politicians (36). In addition to the drawings, there is no narration in the book and the language used is very colloquial, making it more readable for the audience. The book looks seemingly simple, yet it pushes us to think.
One of the most impressive ideas that I learned from the book As the World Burns is that personal lifestyle changes, although they may seem insignificant and trivial, can actually have an enormous effect on the planet as a whole. For example, in the book, Bananabelle questions Kranti: " If you think lifestyle changes won't make a difference, why are you a vegetarian? Why do you base your garden on the principles of permaculture? Why do you bother having a composting toilet if there's no point?" The parallelism used in her words pushes me to think about the issue of whether the changes that I've made on my own would impose any influence on the world. They definitely do. There are billions of people on this planet. If everyone, as a single person, does a little to save energy, recycle the trash, and plant trees, the world will benefit a lot from all of these and eventually will move toward a better environment and home for everyone.
The characters are drawn either cute, ugly or neutral to represent their characteristics. For example, the US president, depicted as a greeding man who only cares about gold, is drawn very ugly, while the heroes Bananabelle and Kranti are super cute. I find this a great advantage of graphic novels because it makes the readers feel easier to catch ideas expressed in the book.
Besides, each character represents a group of people in the real world. For example, the two girls, with totally different opinions regarding environmental issues, are differentiated by their color. Bananabelle tends to be an idealist who believes that doing little things in our daily life will save the planet (7-17). On the contrary, Kranti is more realistic and thinks that our problem are not so easily solvable and, instead, the real problem is the industries and politicians (36). In addition to the drawings, there is no narration in the book and the language used is very colloquial, making it more readable for the audience. The book looks seemingly simple, yet it pushes us to think.
One of the most impressive ideas that I learned from the book As the World Burns is that personal lifestyle changes, although they may seem insignificant and trivial, can actually have an enormous effect on the planet as a whole. For example, in the book, Bananabelle questions Kranti: " If you think lifestyle changes won't make a difference, why are you a vegetarian? Why do you base your garden on the principles of permaculture? Why do you bother having a composting toilet if there's no point?" The parallelism used in her words pushes me to think about the issue of whether the changes that I've made on my own would impose any influence on the world. They definitely do. There are billions of people on this planet. If everyone, as a single person, does a little to save energy, recycle the trash, and plant trees, the world will benefit a lot from all of these and eventually will move toward a better environment and home for everyone.
Blog Post #8 - Reflection On Writing Skills
Throughout this semester, I have definitely become more confident in writing an essay and a thesis on a certain topic.
After I finished writing and revising the first two assignments, I think one of the greatest challenges I met was the coherence of the whole essay. For example, when I just started the first assignment, I failed to use effective transitions between connected paragraphs. This was not only because I didn't learn much about how to relate and connect the paragraphs together when I was in high school, but also because I simply didn't know how to connect my answers to the prompt questions well. At first, my essay was divided into parts since they were just short answers, and I started the first paragraph the way I wanted to. However, when I was working with the ESL tutors, they asked me: "what is your thesis of your essay?" immediately after they read the first paragraph. Then, I learned that in American writing, I need to tell my readers about my thesis in the first paragraph. I'm telling our opinion with arguments and details to support it, and shouldn't just start any way I want.
Besides, I found that I tended to forget to mention the genres of the works I used in my papers, and I didn't even have a title for the first assignment. When working with Will Russo on the last assignment, I learned how to appropriately include the genres. When talking about a TV show, we could say "the episode of the show entitled ... ". When it comes to other types of works such as books or documentaries, it is also necessary to inform the readers about the genres of the works. Therefore, not only did I correct the format, but I also learned something after meeting with the ESL tutors. I can proudly say that I have learned to incorporate genres and important details in my paper because they are necessary. Without these details, the readers would be very confused.
In addition, when reading the comments and talking to ESL tutors, I also found that some expressions I used in my papers are unclear sometimes. For example, in Assignment 3, I mentioned "effect" and "issue", but they might have confused the readers because I failed to make them clear. What exactly is the "effect" that the background music is enhancing? And what exactly is the "issue" that the documentary Food, Inc. is discussing? Therefore, I paid close attention to make sure my paper is clear to my readers.
After I finished writing and revising the first two assignments, I think one of the greatest challenges I met was the coherence of the whole essay. For example, when I just started the first assignment, I failed to use effective transitions between connected paragraphs. This was not only because I didn't learn much about how to relate and connect the paragraphs together when I was in high school, but also because I simply didn't know how to connect my answers to the prompt questions well. At first, my essay was divided into parts since they were just short answers, and I started the first paragraph the way I wanted to. However, when I was working with the ESL tutors, they asked me: "what is your thesis of your essay?" immediately after they read the first paragraph. Then, I learned that in American writing, I need to tell my readers about my thesis in the first paragraph. I'm telling our opinion with arguments and details to support it, and shouldn't just start any way I want.
Besides, I found that I tended to forget to mention the genres of the works I used in my papers, and I didn't even have a title for the first assignment. When working with Will Russo on the last assignment, I learned how to appropriately include the genres. When talking about a TV show, we could say "the episode of the show entitled ... ". When it comes to other types of works such as books or documentaries, it is also necessary to inform the readers about the genres of the works. Therefore, not only did I correct the format, but I also learned something after meeting with the ESL tutors. I can proudly say that I have learned to incorporate genres and important details in my paper because they are necessary. Without these details, the readers would be very confused.
In addition, when reading the comments and talking to ESL tutors, I also found that some expressions I used in my papers are unclear sometimes. For example, in Assignment 3, I mentioned "effect" and "issue", but they might have confused the readers because I failed to make them clear. What exactly is the "effect" that the background music is enhancing? And what exactly is the "issue" that the documentary Food, Inc. is discussing? Therefore, I paid close attention to make sure my paper is clear to my readers.
Blog Post #9 - Should We Be Told What To Eat?
It might be a controversial topic regarding whether we should be told what to eat or not.
I believe that, yes, of course we should be told what to eat because it would take us less time to think about our food, or to choose from a wide range of food. If people just keep telling us how we should eat but no one actually tells us what to eat, we still won't know what kind of food is good.
For example, in the book In Defense of Food, the author tells us a lot of tips that can be applied when we are dining. Indeed, these tips are helpful in making our eating habits healthier. For example, he asks us not to eat during our car is being fueled, because the convenience stores next to the gas stations always sell high-calorie and unhealthy food. However, when I read this, I wondered to myself: "what should I eat then...?" I only learned that I shouldn't eat at gas stations but what kind of food should I buy and eat?
It is also true that since there is a great variety of food, dishes and cuisines from so many cultures and countries, it's hard for him to simply pick a few kinds of food and ask us to eat them. We can choose from a lot of the healthy food. However, just because there are so many different kinds of food in the world, it becomes harder and harder for us consumers and readers to choose the right ones from them. What if we choose to eat the wrong and unhealthy food?
Therefore, I believe that, we should be told what to eat, which will make the case a lot simpler.
I believe that, yes, of course we should be told what to eat because it would take us less time to think about our food, or to choose from a wide range of food. If people just keep telling us how we should eat but no one actually tells us what to eat, we still won't know what kind of food is good.
For example, in the book In Defense of Food, the author tells us a lot of tips that can be applied when we are dining. Indeed, these tips are helpful in making our eating habits healthier. For example, he asks us not to eat during our car is being fueled, because the convenience stores next to the gas stations always sell high-calorie and unhealthy food. However, when I read this, I wondered to myself: "what should I eat then...?" I only learned that I shouldn't eat at gas stations but what kind of food should I buy and eat?
It is also true that since there is a great variety of food, dishes and cuisines from so many cultures and countries, it's hard for him to simply pick a few kinds of food and ask us to eat them. We can choose from a lot of the healthy food. However, just because there are so many different kinds of food in the world, it becomes harder and harder for us consumers and readers to choose the right ones from them. What if we choose to eat the wrong and unhealthy food?
Therefore, I believe that, we should be told what to eat, which will make the case a lot simpler.
Blog Post #10 - Significance of Stories In Eating Animals
The significance of storytelling in Jonanthan Safran Foer's Eating Animals is very obvious because storytelling makes the start of a book very interesting and impressive, and let the readers know why we should care about the issue of eating animals.
In the first 35 pages, Foer gave his idea of eating animals through his stories and interactions with his wife and his dog George. His opinion of whether people should eat animals or not changed back and forth over the years when these stories happened. For example, he disliked animals at a very young age. Yet when he had a dog himself, his opinion of animals changed. Moreover, it is exactly the stories that happened between his companions (i.e. his wife, his son and his dog George etc. ) that eventually shaped his view on this topic. Hence, he uses his personal stories to show how he changed between a vegetarian and an animal eater and why he believes that why going vegetarian is a wise decision for us. It is for our own health. Also, if he was not a vegetarian himself, why should we go vegetarian? By relating to himself, he suggests that it is good for ourselves to become vegetarian and thus everyone should follow.
The stories also suggest why he cares about the issue and why we should care about it too. For example, he talks about how inhumanely the cattle are treated on the way to the slaughterhouses. With a large number of details, he shows us that animals should be treated well as well.
I believe that if Foer hadn't presented all these stories, he probabily wouldn't have found another way to start the book in such an interesting way. For me, when I first started reading this book, the stories immediately attracted my attention. Therefore, although in the later half of the book, he didn't just use his personal stories, I still believe that storytelling is a great way to start a book.
In the first 35 pages, Foer gave his idea of eating animals through his stories and interactions with his wife and his dog George. His opinion of whether people should eat animals or not changed back and forth over the years when these stories happened. For example, he disliked animals at a very young age. Yet when he had a dog himself, his opinion of animals changed. Moreover, it is exactly the stories that happened between his companions (i.e. his wife, his son and his dog George etc. ) that eventually shaped his view on this topic. Hence, he uses his personal stories to show how he changed between a vegetarian and an animal eater and why he believes that why going vegetarian is a wise decision for us. It is for our own health. Also, if he was not a vegetarian himself, why should we go vegetarian? By relating to himself, he suggests that it is good for ourselves to become vegetarian and thus everyone should follow.
The stories also suggest why he cares about the issue and why we should care about it too. For example, he talks about how inhumanely the cattle are treated on the way to the slaughterhouses. With a large number of details, he shows us that animals should be treated well as well.
I believe that if Foer hadn't presented all these stories, he probabily wouldn't have found another way to start the book in such an interesting way. For me, when I first started reading this book, the stories immediately attracted my attention. Therefore, although in the later half of the book, he didn't just use his personal stories, I still believe that storytelling is a great way to start a book.
Bonus Blog Post #1 - A Visit To the MLK's Center
I visited the Martin Luther King Center, the Center for Civil Rights Movement and the Martin Luther King historic site with Jinger Li. Photos will be sent to Dr. Arnsperger's email box directly (instead of showing them here).
During my visit to the Martin Luther King Center, the most memorable exhibits rooms I visited were the Rosa Parks Room, the Gandhi Room and the Dr. and Mrs. Martin Luther King Room. I learned a great amount of information by reading the explanations and facts and watching the exhibits and artifacts when I was at the Center.
I did learn something unique during my visit, especially when I was visiting the Gandhi Room. With a few of Gandhi's portraits, the room presents the visitors with a large number of historical facts regarding Gandhi and his philosophy of nonviolence. The idea of nonviolence was not created and introduced by Gandhi, yet he was the first one to implement this tactic in politics.
The connection between Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi is the influence of nonviolence used in politics. While Martin Luther King was engaged in the American Civil Rights Movement, he referred Gandhi as "the little brown saint" to show his respect to Gandhi.
The most unforgettable artifact at the Martin Luther King Center to me is a sculpture in Dr. Martin Luther King and his wife's room. It depicts two hands, one firmly held with a chain, the other one released with a broken chain. On the description of the sculpture, there was a quote from Martin Luther King about freedom. I believe that the hands stand for the eagerness for freedom, while the chains "stop" them from the freedom. In the room, there are also a lot of clothes he wore.
Another impressive artifact to me is the painting in the Center for Civil Rights Movement. On the painting is a hand, with emitting lines around it. The lines divide the painting into several regions. But each region of the painting expresses the same thing: justice and freedom.
During my visit to the Martin Luther King Center, the most memorable exhibits rooms I visited were the Rosa Parks Room, the Gandhi Room and the Dr. and Mrs. Martin Luther King Room. I learned a great amount of information by reading the explanations and facts and watching the exhibits and artifacts when I was at the Center.
I did learn something unique during my visit, especially when I was visiting the Gandhi Room. With a few of Gandhi's portraits, the room presents the visitors with a large number of historical facts regarding Gandhi and his philosophy of nonviolence. The idea of nonviolence was not created and introduced by Gandhi, yet he was the first one to implement this tactic in politics.
The connection between Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi is the influence of nonviolence used in politics. While Martin Luther King was engaged in the American Civil Rights Movement, he referred Gandhi as "the little brown saint" to show his respect to Gandhi.
The most unforgettable artifact at the Martin Luther King Center to me is a sculpture in Dr. Martin Luther King and his wife's room. It depicts two hands, one firmly held with a chain, the other one released with a broken chain. On the description of the sculpture, there was a quote from Martin Luther King about freedom. I believe that the hands stand for the eagerness for freedom, while the chains "stop" them from the freedom. In the room, there are also a lot of clothes he wore.
Another impressive artifact to me is the painting in the Center for Civil Rights Movement. On the painting is a hand, with emitting lines around it. The lines divide the painting into several regions. But each region of the painting expresses the same thing: justice and freedom.
Bonus Blog Post #2 - Food, INC.
A Cornucopia of Choices
"Corn has conquered the world in a lot of ways, meaning it is a remarkable plant."
Could there be any gene mutations in corn so that it is actually no long safe for humans to eat corn and its related products? (17-27)
Unintended Consequences
"The industrial food system is always looking for greater efficiency, but each step in efficiency leads to problems."
Why do the industries always look for better high-tech to fix problems instead of simply letting the cattle eat grass? (27-37)
Is fast food causing more and more children to have diabetes? (37-47)
In the Grass
"We have allowed ourselves to become so disconnected and ignorant about something that is as intimate as the food that we eat."
Should we raise meatpacking workers' wages in order to enhance the quality of the meat that we eat every day? (47-57)
Hidden Costs
"The changes down on the farm have been momentus and radical but invisible to all of us 'cause who knows a farmer anymore?"
What are the ways that business is destroying the world? (57-67)
From Seed To the Supermarket
"In the case of Monsanto, their control is so dominant. If you want to be in production agriculture, you're gonna be in bed with Monsanto."
Should the farmers just comprimise with Monsanto? (67-77)
The Veil
"There has been this revolving door between Monsanto's corporate offices and the various regulatory and judicial bodies that have made the key decisions."
What do people think of labeling? (77-87)
Shocks to the system
"We've had a food system that's been dedicated to the single virtue of efficiency, so we grow a very small number of crops, a very small number of varieties and a very small number of companies, and even though you achieve efficiencies, the system gets more and more precarious."
If the consumers all watch this documentary, would they take some actions to make the food they eat healthier? What would they do? Would people spend more money on the food they eat? (87-93)
"Corn has conquered the world in a lot of ways, meaning it is a remarkable plant."
Could there be any gene mutations in corn so that it is actually no long safe for humans to eat corn and its related products? (17-27)
Unintended Consequences
"The industrial food system is always looking for greater efficiency, but each step in efficiency leads to problems."
Why do the industries always look for better high-tech to fix problems instead of simply letting the cattle eat grass? (27-37)
Is fast food causing more and more children to have diabetes? (37-47)
In the Grass
"We have allowed ourselves to become so disconnected and ignorant about something that is as intimate as the food that we eat."
Should we raise meatpacking workers' wages in order to enhance the quality of the meat that we eat every day? (47-57)
Hidden Costs
"The changes down on the farm have been momentus and radical but invisible to all of us 'cause who knows a farmer anymore?"
What are the ways that business is destroying the world? (57-67)
From Seed To the Supermarket
"In the case of Monsanto, their control is so dominant. If you want to be in production agriculture, you're gonna be in bed with Monsanto."
Should the farmers just comprimise with Monsanto? (67-77)
The Veil
"There has been this revolving door between Monsanto's corporate offices and the various regulatory and judicial bodies that have made the key decisions."
What do people think of labeling? (77-87)
Shocks to the system
"We've had a food system that's been dedicated to the single virtue of efficiency, so we grow a very small number of crops, a very small number of varieties and a very small number of companies, and even though you achieve efficiencies, the system gets more and more precarious."
If the consumers all watch this documentary, would they take some actions to make the food they eat healthier? What would they do? Would people spend more money on the food they eat? (87-93)