TOW #11: Run Like an Animal (Visual Text)

Pearl Izumi, a running gear company known for their controversial advertisements, has used the slogan “Run like an animal” to define a true runner. On one ad for their shoes, they stated in bold white font that a marathon is “a race to be run, not a box to be checked.” Though perhaps not as controversial as their previous “dead dog” ad, in which the man in their shoes apparently ran his dog to death, this one still employs powerful, inspiring rhetoric. 

The ad uses a black and white image of a road race as the background to their ad, displaying the blurred, fast-moving legs of competitors. The color scheme makes the photo appear old and the marathon appear as a timeless event that deserves the average runner’s ultimate respect. This pairs well with the small text on top of the image, which presents a certain group of people who run marathons as “finishers” as opposed to racers. Finishing, they say, is good, but racing is the purpose of a marathon. So “next time you’re toeing the line, respect the marathon.” For some viewers of the ad, this would command respect. Probably, for the dedicated running community they aim to reach, the words would be inspiring. Most coaches tell their runners that they are not there to run, but rather to race. Most dedicated runners know the difference between the terms. However, for some marathon “finishers,” the message could be offensive, as it undermines the achievement of merely completing the 26.2 miles. In this way, Pearl Izumi holds true to their typical style of advertising. A slight air of controversy perhaps makes the loyal customers all the more loyal through their pride, even if it alienates some others.

To stand boldly in front of the black and white background and primarily white text, the ad uses red as an accent. The shoes have red highlights, which, given their position before the racing legs, makes them appear to be the elite of the many other shoes seen racing by, just like the audience Pearl Izumi aims to reach. Additionally, their slogan, “Run like an animal” is written in bright red text at the end of their paragraph-long description of finishers versus racers. Combined with the rest of the text, this stands out as the primary message. To respect the marathon, one must race to their fullest capacity, delving into their animalistic instincts to make themselves more than human. The words command a certain power and inspire the true racing community, making them effective as a method to convince runners to buy Pearl Izumi running shoes.

TOW #10: Feminism and Murder (Written Text)

As a female, I hear feminism mentioned frequently in conversation with fellow females, some of whom have rather extreme views on the subject. Concerningly, it seems to have become, for some, less about equality and more about female superiority. The Onion recently published an article that, through hyperbole and juxtaposition, mocks the idea of feminist extremism and highlights the true meaning of being a feminist. A reader of The Onion would likely be looking for a comedic mockery, and this piece delivers while also bringing to light a very real issue in our society today.

The author of the piece, Katherine Adams, stated that she “simply cannot and will not support feminism if it means murdering all men” (paragraph 1). This statement exaggerates the extent to which extreme feminists take the issue. Though perhaps murder is not a typical suggestion for a solution, there was recently a video posted online of little girls swearing, saying such behavior is not tolerated, but the abuse of females is. A video like that twists the goals of feminism to attack all men, and allows for women to be rude, crude, or cruel under the umbrella cause of “feminism.” Where did the fight for equality go? What do potty-mouthed children have to do with equality in the workplace? How does crude language battle rape culture? The Onion’s article shows the ridiculousness of the extremist arguments by ironically presenting the apparently oppressed party (females) as the one ready to oppress another group.

Adams’s article also brings to light the true meaning of feminism, stating, “I agree with closing the pay gap, ensuring universal access to birth control, and ending the objectification of women” (paragraph 3), but to “hunt down all the world’s men and boys, load them onto trains bound for death camps, and systematically massacre them solely on the basis of their sex” (paragraph 3) is excessive. She juxtaposes the definition of feminism with a hyperbolic example of what extremists have made it, making the point that feminism as it used to be is much more reasonable than what it has become. She highlights the misuse of the word by associating it with extremism, in particular Nazi anti-Semitism. Again, this is an exaggeration, but it brings to light the danger of any type of extremism. While feminism at its root is a noble cause, the mass murder of all men is not. The world has condemned Germany for their actions under the Nazi regime, and by making a comparison of the two, Adams condemns extreme feminism.

This Onion article successfully promotes feminism as it is defined, while ridiculing feminism as some extremists have made it.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/i-dont-support-feminism-if-it-means-murdering-all,37301/

IRB Intro #2: The American Patriot's Handbook

The American Patriot's Handbook is a series of important documents in combination with profiles of American leaders who have shaped the country into what it is today. It was compiled and by George Grant, whose biography on the cover declares that he is a "proud patriot." I am not too concerned about the bias of someone with such strong feelings about the nation, as there are enough primary source documents that can speak for themselves. Even if Grant's patriotism leads him to present the American government in a strongly favorable light, it will be a good contrast for the writings of Howard Zinn, which we read in AP United States History. That said, the reason I am reading this book is to learn United States history through primary sources and prepare myself for an AP exam based largely on document-reading and analysis.

TOW #9: Berlin Wall Memoir (Written Text)

In recognition of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, I read a memoir by Mildred Raynolds Triver, a member of the occupying forces in the American sector of Berlin, in which she describes life in Berlin immediately before the wall went up in contrast with life thereafter. Triver published the piece in the Virginia Quarterly Review in 1981, about eight years before the Wall came down. Thus, she writes from the perspective of a person who could not believe it had gone up, and thereafter could not believe it would ever come down. Emotion permeates her well-organized piece as she expresses to fellow Americans the profundity of German division.

She begins her piece with an excerpt from her diary shortly after her arrival in Berlin in 1957. Triver writes of the Berliners:

“They share the same language, the same culture, the same church and, until recently, the same history. They have known together Berlin’s greatness when it was the capital of a world empire and they have suffered together the Allied bombing and the destruction and capture of the great city in the final days of Hitler’s War. They are Berliners, all, sharing a common pride in the past and sharing, each in its own way, in the suffering of a divided and unhappy present.” (¶2)

Trivers, thus, charges her piece emotionally from the beginning. Even before the wall was erected, she writes, the city was divided, one people in two worlds. The grief she transfers to her readers seeps from her pounding repetition of “the same.” The Berliners, East and West, are the same. Decades before the chant of “Wir sind ein Volk” or “Wir sind das Volk” would arise from the Monday Demonstrations, Triver expresses the common sentiment. It is profound that even an American citizen living in Berlin would feel so strongly that the Berliners are one, and having written of it so early on, Trivers is given credibility on the matter, despite not being a Berliner.

She continues on to describe East Berlin as “poor, neglected, row on row of bombed buildings that had neither been removed nor restored, and everywhere that gray, that sad anonymous look with which socialism manages to cover over what may once have had charm” (¶7). Again, pathos is her primary strategy to appeal. The haunting tone in enhanced by Triver’s choice of diction, in particular her description of the sad anonymity of the place. Trivers, in a few words, paints the picture of a depressing city, separated from its historical identity as the seat of great Prussian kings, and replaced with faceless socialism. Even as she writes in 1981, she does not seem to fear the Soviet threat, but rather to feel sympathy for those under its influence.

She ends the piece rather curiously, writing: “No one wanted war, certainly not the Berliners who kept saying at every crisis previous to the Wall, ‘Not war! For God’s sake, no war! Not for this city!’ And how could war have been avoided so long as soldiers barred the way?” (¶24). Such an ending can only spark in her readers a great sympathy for the Germans. They were done with fighting and wanted only peace, but peace gave them a wall. If Triver aimed to make her audience feel the presence of the Wall from America, she certainly achieved her goal.

http://www.vqronline.org/essay/berlin-wall-memoir

TOW #8 (The Anatomy of Revolution) (IRB 1 Part 2)

After now having read Crane Brinton’s The Anatomy of Revolution in its entirety, I feel rather more learned in the subject of revolutions than I was before picking it up. My goal in reading it was to be able to draw parallels amongst the revolutions Brinton discussed and others that we study in school, especially American conflicts that could be considered “revolutions,” as we cover those topics in AP United States History. I am now better prepared to do so.

It is rich in historical examples and primary source quotations, both of which help to establish Crane Brinton’s credibility, displaying extraordinary research. However, due to the many historical references, I felt almost as if I did not know enough to read the book. I have studied each of the revolutions he discussed in what I thought was great depth, aside from the Russian Revolution, which we covered only briefly in AP European History. Brinton quickly references, for example, the “knights’ fees, ship money, benevolences, Star Chamber, Court of High Commission…” (Brinton 240) in order to prove a further point. The terms are simply listed, not explained, and I spent the book rifling through my brain and my binder to assist my comprehension. Thus, it was a rather slow read for me, as I had to keep stopping. High school students were probably not an audience he sought to reach: he likely aimed to connect with fellow historians and professors through his work. In that he was successful, as I was delighted to see a section of the book I had recently read quoted in my AP United States History textbook.

Something I found interesting about the book was Brinton’s constant reference to the contemporary United States as he was writing it, and more so as he was revising it (the book was originally published in 1938 and revised in 1965). For example, he rather suddenly amidst an analysis of French philosophes brings up the assassination of Kennedy. He follows this, and most of his other interjections about present (for him) United States, with a reassurance: “Something that must exist in the social tensions, the class struggles of a society really on the eve of revolution, seems to be missing in the United States” (Brinton 59). It is almost as if he is trying to reassure contemporary readers that the United States will not have a revolution. Given the circumstances of the time, with the many student protests and race riots, it seems logical that he would write to reassure. It is interesting that this purpose, clearly not as much present in the original, was prominent in his second release of the book. While his purpose in publishing the original was to examine the similarities of revolutions, the second addition perhaps had this secondary agenda, an strange, yet logical idea to me.