After I have finished the book, Whistling Vivaldi, my outlook, on the stereotype threat in the United States, is broadened. Although the book, itself, is quite repetitive, each experiment depicts the clearer understanding of what Steele desires to convey to the readers. There is a significant point made that I, honestly, have never paid close attention to before. Steele (2011) remarks that “if we don’t take that part of the journey, we won’t get there at all” (217).
Kozol’s audience seems to be toward the liberate American during the 1980’s. At the beginning of his essay he mentioned about one of the Founding Father and the president during those times and other things that were happening at that time. Making most of the modern reader like I am feel a little left out since we are not from that time period and understand less of the political references that he seem to be making throughout his writing. Also, the fact that he is trying to inform his audience it seem like the audience that he is aiming toward to is people that did not know about the illiteracy issues. In fact, it will explain his reason of using quotes and stories from the illiterate people as his only evidence of his essay to evoke the reader’s
Prologue The book Ten Days That Unexpectedly Changed America, contains specific days and events that have not been actually considered a “big deal”, but has significantly contributed to the present situation in America. It explores themes such as; National Identity, American Democracy, American Creed, and Democratic Revolution. It also sheds light on the ideology of being born equal, or being made equal. It places emphasizes on the fact that history is often a result of a great impersonal forces and that change can be extremely slow.
The goal of the usage of this fact is to show readers this common term does not reflect real traits of smart people and can be treated as an insult because of that. It is one of the few examples of Fridman’s appeals to readers’ logic. The essay is based on general data; the author mentioned schools and universities promote negative attitude to smart students: “Nerds are ostracized while athletes are idolized” (Fridman). But he did not use any statistical or science data to support his position. For example, Fridman could provide data about scholarships and other types of funding for sports and other activities.
In the work by Howard Zinn, “Columbus, The Indians, and Human Progress”; and, Dinesh D’Souza’s, “Two Cheers for Colonialism”, there is a difference between the two authors perspectives of the subject. The subject being, how far is too far when it comes to the progress of the human race; and, what justifies it. Bother differing in intended audience, though with the purpose of educating. While, both pieces were written around the same time, in the late 20th century. Howard Zinn’s work is directed towards a more conservative audience; at the time, his work was very controversial for its content around the arrival of Columbus in America.
The people witnessing the norm did not really have a reaction. Some of them saw me breaking the norm and didn’t say anything, and some acted like it was normal. I felt that the people were more comfortable with my partner. When Ali did it, I saw an old lady look at him and, her family didn’t really react to him breaking the norm, they probably thought we were some stupid kids playing around or maybe they felt comfortable with him doing it because his Hispanic. There was one man that asked us what floor we were going to, and then he said it doesn’t matter your just going to go up and then go down again.
Conclusion The topic of polygamist marriage is becoming more mainstream. Society has witnessed the most horrendous abuses of polygamy and is quick to discount the possible advantages to legalizing this type of union. The mere fact that the discussion taking place is a sign that society is changing its thinking about how marriage is defined. The scholarly journal represented the oldest article, but the rational behind it was the same as the opinionated articles on the website and magazine that were written this year.
Since the dawn of the scientific revolution, historical advances has been made for the pursuit of a finer and a stronger understanding of life. But, not all advancements has benefited our society. Former President Dwight D. Eisenhower addressed concerns regarding these developments in his “Farewell Address” speech. As his final speech as president, he leaves his audience with a message that may have shocked some listeners. Not to mention he also gave his thoughts on how we should go about solving our issues as a nation.
The approach of Irving to the creation of national literary icons which will be accepted and read by every new generation could not be estimated. The activity of Irving in this direction almost always makes him different from the other authors. In “Rip Van Winkle” among the features which could be able to attract the attention of the reader we can point out the tone of the story. Indicating
If you had a chance to save people, and didn’t take it, are you as guilty as the person who put them into that position? Some people argue that if it doesn’t affect them it isn’t their problem, but isn’t it? The rights of people are ours to protect. So if you choose not to speak, you are helping the oppressor and end up letting people stomp all over you. Elie Wiesel, a holocaust survivor, believed that speaking out was the only way to end the problems in our world.
In the article, “Angel in America” (New York Times in April 2006) the writer, John M. Tierney, illustrates that the United States immigrants law is so strict, and it causing many immigrants came illegally. Tierney refers his own grandfather and Espinoza for example. His grandfather and Espinoza came to this country illegally. They work hard and pay taxes and social security, and they both married to US citizen women. Tierney is grandfather got the permanent resident, but Espinoza did not get the permanent resident because he violated the immigration law.
During the late 1950s and early 1960s, the people of America were changing. John Steinbeck knew this and figured out that it was finally time to go on the journey of a lifetime. In his novel Travels With Charley: In Search of America Steinbeck sets out on a journey across America, with his poodle Charley, in search of the true spirit of America and the people living in America. Steinbeck felt as if he had not known if what he was writing about was entirely truthful. Steinbeck felt like he needed to rediscover America because he felt like Americans themselves were changing.
The “Nothing-to-Hide Argument” Analyzed: In this rhetorical analysis, I will be taking a look at Daniel J. Solove’s essay “The Nothing-to-Hide Argument,” which is about privacy in the context of personal information and government data collection (Solove 734). Solove’s main argument in his essay is that the general public has a narrow perception of what privacy really is. The purpose behind his main argument is to expose the problems with the nothing-to-hide argument while presenting a way to challenge it for his target audience, government officials. Solove’s argument to his target audience is effective through his exemplary use of substance, organization, and style in his essay.