third close reading

Lies My History Teacher Told Me About the War on Terror

a little bit of context: this article is a sort of addendum to this article, focusing on one particular excerpt of the textbook quoted in the latter (actually about the patriot act and less the war on terror).


Julian Sanchez, in his article "Lies My History Teacher Told Me About the War on Terror", mocks the textbook examined, but also the legislation it's writing about. The details he includes to contradict the book show a distaste for the Patriot Act as well. His colloquial diction creates a laid-back, indifferent tone that belittles the book, and the Patriot Act, to little more than jokes in the reader's mind; things to be mocked. Syntax elements also emphasize the problems Sanchez sees in the Patriot Act.

Sanchez begins the article describing the textbook as a "disturbing catalog of hilarious propaganda," suggesting to the reader that the topic is almost not worth serious consideration. Serving the same purpose is the obvious sarcasm used when he says that the section on the Patriot Act "manages to get a truly impressive number of things wrong in a short space."

 

Sanchez, while writing this article

Instead of simply saying that the book is poorly worded or incorrect, Sanchez turns his criticisms into vehicles for comical jabs. A prime example of this is the first sentence after the first quote: "I suppose in some strict sense all events “take time,” but this is a very strange way to describe a 342-page piece of legislation amending more than 15 complex federal statutes, the first version of which was introduced on October 2, and which had been signed into law by October 26." This is a very strange way to point out fault in a textbook. Unfortunately it's one of those things where I know I don't like it but can't explain why. This is not the only example; the mockery throughout the piece is almost tangible. Sanchez also says that instead of asking for approval, the administration "decided to simply ignore the law and order the National Security Agency to launch its now-infamous program of warrantless wiretaps." The word "simply" is included sarcastically; it's comparable to saying "Duh!" when somebody makes an obviously stupid suggestion.

Sanchez's details not only show flaws in the textbook but also in the American government. He says that legislators probably didn't even read the bill before it was passed, that most prosecutions through the provisions granted in the Patriot Act weren't even for terrorism, and also that the government "simply ignored the law" with its warrentless wiretapping program.

Finally, some syntax elements are used to convey Sanchez's distaste for the Patriot Act. Well, they probably are. I can name one particularly strong example: In the penultimate paragraph, Sanchez lists controversial points the textbook overlooks in separate sentence fragmens, each beginning with the word "nothing." These sentence fragments are emphasized in that they are short and they share their beginnings. Beginning each sentence fragment with "Nothing about..." groups them together in the readers' minds and increases the idea cluster's sticking power.

third prompt essay

1970. Choose a character from a novel or play of recognized literary merit and write an essay in which you (a) briefly describe the standards of the fictional society in which the character exists and (b) show how the character is affected by and responds to those standards. In your essay do not merely summarize the plot.

author's note: I hope it's not bad practice to include these every time I write a paper. I feel like I could explicitly connect my evidence more with my claims and also elaborate on the idea a bit more, I just don't know how right now.

The America in which Willy Loman lives in Death of a Salesman is one that prizes respect and success over all else. It is a society that believes a man is nothing if he is not well liked, a belief Willy holds strongly, and one that has caused Willy and those close to him a great deal of dispair. Having seen the great successes of his brother and Charley, Willy is in denial, avoiding the fact that he is not particularly successful, and he overexerts himself in an attempt to achieve all-star status. His internalization of society's measure of a man's worth takes a toll on his mental stability, and drives him to lash out at his son for not striving to conquer the business world.

Though mostly proud and boisterous, Willy shows his feelings of inadequacy a few times throughout the play. In Act One, for example, he confides in Linda: "I'm very well liked in Hartford. You know, the trouble is, Linda, people don't seem to take to me... I know it when I walk in. They seem to laugh at me." (23). Earlier, when announcing his sales, he stated a very exaggerated result and meekly decremented it down to his real numbers: "I did five hundred gross in Providence and seven hundred gross in Boston... Well, I - I did - about a hundred and eighty gross in Providence. Well, no - it came to - roughly two hundred gross on the whole trip... The trouble was that three of the stores were half closed for inventory in Boston. Otherwise I woulda broke records." (22). Willy is afraid of being judged for his less-than-stellar performance, so he exaggerates his abilities and makes excuses for his shortcomings, and often says he's more respected than he is. As the play progresses, Willy's mental stability deteriorates, perhaps because of his repressed feelings of inadequacy. After losing his job in Act Two, Willy's mental stability is almost entirely gone; he is forced to confront the fact that he is not as successful as he would like to believe.

Willy internalized this belief so firmly that he raised his sons by it as well. In Act One, he tells Biff and Happy "be liked and you will never want." (21). Biff says "I'm thirty-four years old, I oughta be makin' my future," which shows that the idea was at least partly instilled in him and his brother (21). So when Biff leaves for the West and becomes a drifter, Willy is unsurprisingly critical. He and Biff argue incessantly every time Biff comes home because Willy feels he is choosing to be worthless.

third response to course material

I enjoyed watching Death of a Salesman in class very much. I like movies much more than books. Not gonna lie. They're just so much easier to take in. In a movie, it's clear when you're supposed to be confused. It bums me out that movie producers often cut out parts of books, because I'd gladly watch the movie with everything included. That said, they aren't ideal for analysis, since the interpretation of the director or whoever else adds at least one level of obfuscation from the text's original meaning(s). Salesman had a sort of pessimistic mood, similar to that of The American Dream. Both were lamenting the futility of pursuing the American Dream, in a way, I guess. I hope we continue to branch out from this area, since I'm fond of derision and negativity and it just so happens that American institutions like capitalism and the government are very fitting targets. The readings from ch4 were all similarly themed, too, illustrating either a positive or negative outlook on the American Dream. I liked reading the Langston Hughes poem. He's pretty cool. I read a compilation of his stories about Jesse B. Semple, aka Simple, a few years ago for some school thing. I'd since forgotten about him. Uhh we also did that stuff with the questions. I really liked the "Marriage" poem we read by Gregory Corso. As for learning about the questions, though, it wasn't new to me. I'd never covered it in school, but I guess I've picked up on that stuff in my 12 years of multiple choice testing experience.

What did I miss?