[IR] Spanx: The Modern-Day Cape for Super Women

We live in a day and age where mini skirts and bandeau bras are the center of controversy when it comes to discussing how clothing aids in the objectification of women.  According to the endless advertisements we see on a daily basis, everything is about what's on the outside.  Of course, any person with an ounce of respect for what's on the inside of a person is able to recognize that personality and actions are much more valuable than what others see physically.  But what happens when a layer in between the outside and the in is introduced?  What's above the heart but below the skimpy dress (or conservative dress)?  That's right, I'm talking about Spanx.

If you don't know what Spanx are (and therefore are most likely of the male gender), let me educate you for a moment.  Spanx are a line of underwear (bras, slips, tights, and undies) that are designed to squeeze your muffin tops and chub rolls so that they are less... noticeable.  The inventor of Spanx spent a mere $5,000 on investment when creating the product and is now the youngest female self-made billionaire in the world.  This fact shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who knows the sneaky tricks and overall popularity of Spanx.  Teenagers and aged women alike are drawn to Spanx like Pooh to a honey pot.  The question is whether or not these underwear products are anti-progressive in the feminist movement.  Orit Avishai seems to think so, and I would like to challenge her stance against Spanx.

As a notably overweight teenage girl, I can confidently say that I am no stranger to seeing "unsightly rolls" when I look in the mirror.  It's whatever, really, I'm cool with the extra chub here and there.  By no means am I not self conscious about my looks (what girl isn't self conscious, let's be honest) but I have refused to let my appearance determine my own self worth, which is why I can profess my love for shapewear and tell you that this is not a result of my desire to mask my own insecurities.  This goes along with my FIRM belief that most girls do not purchase nor wear certain clothing because they think it will attract boys, but rather because it makes them feel confident in their own skin.  This is parallel to the use of makeup; most often, a girl wears concealer and eyeliner and blush because it brings out the beauty that is already on her face.  Both makeup and shapewear, in my opinion, serve as enhancers of natural beauty, not camouflagers.  

People who would challenge the idea of being confident wearing certain clothing for the sake of just being happy are clearly not aware of the line that is drawn between being a certain way for someone else and being a certain way for oneself.  You know how I know I'm not gaining confidence from my Spanx through the belief that it will make me more attractive boys?  First of all, boys are hardly ever the first thing on my mind.  Don't get me wrong, I'm still a teenage girl with an interest in cute boys every once and a while, but what I put on in the morning is for me, not anyone else.  Another reason is because I would wear Spanx to bed (ergo in absolute solitude) if it wouldn't feel so strange wearing shaping tights under my pajama pants.  In the end, if a girl puts on a pair of Spanx and is able to look in the mirror and say, "Damn, I look good" without even thinking about what a boy will think when he sees such a sight, then for goodness sake, let her be empowered by the way she looks.

Article: http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/08/opinion/avishai-spanx-women/index.html

[TA] How the Objectification of Women and The Citric Acid Cycle are Related

Let me tell you something right off the bat: I love slam poetry.  Actually, scratch that-- I am nothing less than obsessed with slam poetry.  I felt like a kid on Christmas when I saw how many of my optional topics of conversation were centered around slam poetry (God bless you, Ms. Pyle).  I've seen a lot of the options before, and I was so glad to see one of my favorites on the list: The four girls in the BNV Finals in Washington D.C.

The fact that the performers were four very young, well-spoken girls was empowering in itself.  To see girls my age saying something that so many women recognize is important but don't have the time, courage or eloquence to say is so inspiring.  I am giving each of them a big spiritual "ROCK ON," I assure you.  There is also a noticeably unique effect in the fact that these four girls are so culturally and ethnically diverse.  It shows that young girls of any background can agree on something big.  The most important thing you can take from the performed poem is that girls that cover up are not worthy of judgement or objectification.  Hold on, I'm not done.  The women who are scantily clad and make spend most of their time working in a strip club are not worthy of judgement or objectification either.  The POINT is that a woman dress however she wants to dress, act however she wants to act, and say whatever she wants to say as long as it is HER CHOICE.  By no means am I saying that women should not show off their chest or their butt or their thighs; the problem is that girls, very YOUNG girls, are subconsciously forced to believe that dressing a certain way is the correct because it will make men attracted to them. The way women are being morphed into sexual objects more and more in the media affects every single girl that is exposed to any portion of society.  Even if a girl avoids advertisements, television, movies, newspapers, magazines, and newscasts is still able to see the way the media portrays women through the way people treat each other in the real world.  This whole situation is a lot like the Krebs Cycle, also known as the Citric Acid Cycle in biology.  In the Krebs Cycle, oxyloacetate attaches to an Acetyl group and sends it through a very complicated process that expels a few NADH+H+, a FADH, some CO2, and a small amount of ATP.  The cool thing about the Krebs Cycle is that while all of this is happening, the molecules in the mitochondrial matrix are working to build that oxyloacetate back up to start the cycle again with the next set of Acetyl groups.  The objectification of women is a lot like the Krebs Cycle because it begins with the media, which pumps out more and more images and ideas that encourage the issues we have today.  Throughout the cycle, many complicated things occur; girls hate themselves, girls cut themselves, girls can't look at themselves in the mirror, girls think they aren't worthy of love from anyone (especially a boy), girls read magazines, girls starve themselves, girls make themselves vomit after every meal, girls read more magazines, boys read magazines, boys beat girls, boys rape girls, boys kill girls, girls rape boys, boys rape boys, boys and girls make it into the newspaper, boys and girls go to prison, boys and girls make national television... and it all cycles back around to the media.  Well, would you look at that.  Isn't biology amazing?

(Disclaimer: by NO means am I assuming that all boys beat/rape/kill girls. For goodness sake, I'm not a man-hater.  But it's an issue that I strongly believe is influenced by the media's tendency to objectify women and make beating/raping/killing women more OK than it ever should be.)

[CC] The Infant Woman

One of the many points that Jean Kilbourne briefly discusses in her documentary Killing us Softly is the idea that women are often portrayed in the media as childlike.  The use of this kind of image is because it draws the connection between women and innocence.  By inserting the "child" theme between a grown woman and absolute purity, an almost entirely fictional line can be drawn within one small image.  It seems that this kind of tactic would be more effective in selling a product to men than women because it is (believe it or not) a highly sexualized theme.  These images cause men to contemplate the ability to tempt such innocence. A child is untouched and (ideally) free of flaws; to turn such a precious thing into something womanly, something that is seen as socially acceptable to think about in a sexual way, breaks that separation between child and adult.  
I can speak from experience with seeing this type of image because I see it in the Korean music industry on a regular basis.  In fact, K-Pop fans are clearly able to categorize every single music video that comes from a girl group or girl soloist as "sexy" or "cute" based on the concept they pursue for that music video or album.  Koreans, being the masters of cute poses (famously known as 애교 "aegyo"), see being cute as a life-long trait, especially for women.  The cutesy image has been extended for boys over the last decade as the music industry has grown.  In fact, music videos from boy groups and male soloists are always filed under two concepts: cute vs. tough.  (Notice that while "cute" is a common concept, "tough" is the alternative for boys and "sexy" is the alternative for girls).  Luckily, the Korean music industry does not tend to sexualize this childlike and cute concept. This is primarily due to the taboo that Korea holds over the topic of sex.  However, the increasing westernization of East Asia brings out the possibility that the sexy and cute concepts of Korean girl groups could merge into what we see as the sexualization of childish women in the western world.  
One might argue that this is not a form of objectification.  However, this theme uses the idea of making women the embodiment of a living doll makes a woman more like, well, a doll.  This advertising technique also becomes an issue when it subconsciously creates an acceptable view on child pornography and pedophilia.  Of course, by no means am I accusing all men of being closet pedophiles, but I do want to stress the importance of recognizing this sexualization of little girls because, frankly, it's quite gross.

[RD] He Kicked the Habit and Then the Bucket

My favorite rhetorical device of all time is probably the zeugma, and no, not just because it is a cool word.  Along with having an extremely awesome name, the concept of a zeugma is an extremely hard concept to grasp, in my opinion.  A zeugma is a sentence using one verb or adjective to describe two different words or events, while only appropriately applying to one of them.  I know, this sounds really complicated, and it kind of is.  But have no fear! The solution to your current state of confusion can be solved with a plethora of entertaining examples, as follows:

• "His boat and his dreams sank"
• "Mr. Pickwick took his hat and his leave"
• "First the door locked, then his jaw"
• "The farmers in the valley grew potatoes, peanuts, and bored"
• "She looked at the object with suspicion and a magnifying glass"

Pretty fun, eh? I find that when linking the two separate objects or ideas, one of them tends to be abstract and the other is rather literal, as seen in the first, second and fourth examples above.  Of course, this isn't always the case, but the most entertaining uses of zeugma tend to use this tactic of connecting the abstract with the literal.  Zeugmas are effective because of their whimsical attitude.  Even in a serious situation, the structure of a sentence using a zeugma passes the event off as something slightly sarcastic and meaningful.  It's definitely chuckle-inducing, that's for sure.

In a less funny context, a zeugma can be used to create a strong sense of danger or intensity, as seen in the third example above.  By giving an idea the same intense description as an object, that idea is put onto a whole new level of meaning that a reader can more easily connect with.  Zeugmas cause readers to stop and question what they just read, whether they are stopping to realize the power of the sentence or to absorb the wittiness of it.  

[CC] Do You Know a Sociopath?

The other day in class, we were discussing Part 2 of In Cold Blood and briefly touched on whether or not Perry qualified as a sociopath.  I decided to look a little deeper into this topic and use outside sources to come a little closer to determining whether Perry was in fact a genuine sociopath.
First off, a sociopath can be defined as "a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience."  This personality disorder is called "Antisocial personality disorder," and any person suffering from it can be characterized as having "a long-term pattern of manipulating, exploiting, or violating the rights of others" and often ends up commiting a crime or series of crimes.  Already, this definition seems to fit the character of Perry Smith fairly well.  He is known for being rather antisocial and also displays a somewhat odd disinterest in human sexuality.  The fact that he could kill the Clutter family members without batting an eye in the process also shows his lack of empathy for people he has no connection to or reason to care for.

Early signs of a sociopath that can be observed in children can also be seen in Perry.  One sign is usually frequent bed wetting, which we have seen Perry experience as a child in the house run by nuns.  Sociopaths, especially child sociopaths, often seek immediate gratification from others.  Perry displays this behavior with the people he clings to, such as Dick and his father.  A fairly obvious sign of an antisocial personality disorder is frequent violence.  Perry is known for having spurts of extreme violence and an unusually short temper, which even Dick fears at times.  The last common sign of a sociopath that Perry shows is a disinterest in intimacy.  While this sign can be seen in children when they are disinterested in mild forms of intimacy such as a hug, Perry's all around disinterest in sexual intimacy is a red flag.

When you put Perry's traits alongside the common signs seen in sociopathic children, it is evident to me that he is at the very least a mild form of the common sociopath.  

If you are interested in the many other signs of a sociopath (many of which can also be seen in Dick's personality), I recommend this article on children with an antisocial personality disorder: http://sandrarose.com/2008/03/are-you-raising-a-sociopath/

[FW] The Ruining of a Korean National Treasure

(Source of Topic: http://www.dramafever.com/news/american-boys-over-flowers-has-a-cast-meet-the-new-f4/)

A surefire way to make people feel uncomfortable about reading your blogs is to write about something that the average reader does not care about in the slightest.  Therefore, today I will be writing about Korean soap operas.  Welcome to my version of current events.
If you have any experience with Korean soaps (popularly known as K-Dramas,) then you have probably heard of the 2009 drama masterpiece "꽃보다 남자" ("Boys Over Flowers" or "Boys Before Flowers").  It happens to be my personal favorite k-drama that I have seen in my three years of drama-watching.  I simply cannot resist a full season of hour-long episodes oozing with sappy love confessions and raw emotions.  Don't even get me started on the infamously uncomfortable frozen kisses (they literally do not move their lips at all).
The plot is what really makes the drama so addictive.  In the very first episode, Jan Di, a spunky and painfully awkward dry-cleaner's daughter saves a boy from committing suicide at the elite Shinhwa High School.  In order to save itself from bad press, the school offers Jan Di free tuition to Shinhwa High School, where she runs into the rich and famous posse known as the F4 (Flower 4).  These four super hot guys are the ones who bullied the boy that Jan Di saved from killing himself, and she hates them instantly.  BUT WAIT.  Two members of the F4 are head-over-heels in love with the goose-like Jan Di, and she spends 22 episodes trying to decide if she loves one or the other or hates both of them.  If the plot isn't enough to draw you in, the glorious physiques of the F4 boys should do the trick, Gu Jun Pyo and So Yi Jung in particular.
Boys Over Flowers is a classic in K-Dramas to say the very least. Knowing this, it is understandable why so many people are confused and moderately angery at the fact that WillKinn Media has taken the liberty to create an American version of the drama.  What. What. Cue the baffled facial expressions.  Who gave this company the right to taint the name of one of the most legendary K-dramas of all time? I sure didn't. The article from Allkpop.com, which was released in September, mentions that only two of the six producers working on the production are fans of the original series.  This explains why the project was even attacked; a group of six people who were fans of the k-drama would not even bother to touch the American remake project.  The article also shows the cast list for the remake.  I am unable to gauge the quality of the drama, especially because the lead male roles are extremely attractive.  Pretty faces rarely equal exceptional talent, especially in low-budget remakes of Korean television shows. One of the lead character's love interests is played by Trenton Culkin, who most definitely looks like he could be related to Macaulay Culkin; However, my internet sources are so far failing me on confirming this information.  The other love interest looks like a part-time cologne salesman, part-time Abercrombie and Fitch model.  No thank you.  I like my entirely-clothed, chiseled-jawed, full-time actor Lee Minho.  What a stud.
 I think it goes without saying that I will be diligently watching and tracking the production and release of this series, solely for the purpose of judging it within the frame of reference I have gained from watching the forever unbeatable Korean version.
Now that I have been successfully dragged into looking at snapshots of Boys Over Flowers on Google Images and reminiscing over the glory days, I shall drop a visual into this post.  Enjoy.  

 

[CM] The Morality of the K-Pop Industry

Of all the wacky topics in the world that a teenager could be an expert on, I happen to be a pro when it comes to knowing a lot about South Korea's music industry.  Right off the bat, this sounds pretty harmless; how different can Korea's music industry be from those of America or England?

Oh, my friend, a new world is about to be opened up to you.

For those who know me (or have ever had a conversation with me, really) know that I have a huge passion for Korean music and Korean culture in general.  I have spent over two years exposing myself to what I see as the most fascinating entertainment industry in the world. But I have not turned a blind eye to the dark side of this phenomenon.

Korean pop music ("K-Pop", for short) is known and loved all around the world, from Egypt to Russia to Peru to the Philippines.  If you've never heard a K-pop song, all you need to know is that it is founded on catchy tunes, clean instrumentals, and bright colors.  There is very little focus put on the lyrics, since only the small percentage of K-Pop fans that actually live in Korea bother to understand what is being said in the songs.  A huge part of K-Pop is centered around the visuals.  Every great K-Pop song has a memorable dance routine and a shiny, clean-cut music video.  Rarely are either of these components missing.

The structure of the K-Pop industry is really where the word "immoral" is used.  Most K-Pop stars are found in the form of K-Pop groups.  While boy bands and girl groups may have died out in the 90s for Americans, they are the most common form of music artists in Korea.  These groups are put together by major labels such as YG, SM and JYP (known as "The Big Three" in Korea), who hand-pick children often between the age of 8 and 16 that audition for these companies.  These children then sign a contract with the music label and become trainees, undergoing daily/weekly training for two to seven years.  After sharpening their singing, dancing, rapping and interviewing skills, they are either made soloists or put into a K-Pop group with other trainees.  This newly formed group will be given a song and dance to learn very well and will later debut directly on television and YouTube for the rest of the world to judge.  A crowd of potential fans will show up at the group's debut showcase (the group's first public performance) with merchandise and light sticks; these fans might enjoy the group and become long-term fans, or on some occasions they will "Black Ocean" the group, turning off all of their light sticks to show disinterest.  Years upon years of training could result in a Black Ocean, practically ruining the career of a young Korean who simply dreams of becoming a star.

So, is this structure immoral? Many arrows point to "yes," but I would argue for the opposite opinion.  Yes, I am slightly biased because of my love for the results that this system provides me with.  But let us start at the very beginning of this whole process: the child chooses to follow their dreams of becoming a K-Pop star.  They discuss for ages with their parents, who probably planned on sending their child to school for a few more years, and determine whether a private life is worth giving up for a life in the entertainment industry.  After convincing the parents, they have to wow the judges at major music label auditions.  There are so many levels to pass WILLINGLY to become a mere trainee, let alone someone worthy of the title of "K-Pop star."  These teenagers are fully aware of the strife that one must go through to make it big in Korean entertainment.  They know that they will not be able to publicly date under the rules of the music label, they will rarely see their families, they might be asked to receive plastic surgery to appear more attractive, they will constantly be under the scrutiny of the public eye, and they will spend hours on end practicing dances and songs each day.  It is something they recognize from the very beginning and are willing accept for the sake of following their dreams.  Therefore, I would argue that the K-Pop industry, even with its obvious dark side, is not immoral.  It is the teenagers who sign up for this lifestyle that many westerners would see as "cruel," fully prepared to make the sacrifices that are so well known to those who are familiar with the K-Pop industry.

(Let me know what you think.  I love debating this topic.)

[CC] Political Fallacies vs. Propaganda - Where is the Line Drawn?

Reading President Obama's speech on the topic of Syria has unearthed some questions that I have been keeping private for a while.
It all started back in 9th grade when we were studying communist ideals through the book "Animal Farm" by George Orwell.  There were many vocabulary terms that accompanied this unit on communism, including "euphemism" and "begging the question." Such concepts were combined with the ideas of promoters of communism to create, what we call today, "communist propaganda."  Chances are that certain images come to mind when you hear these words; posters denouncing aristocracy, a pathological appeal to poverty, images of valiant leaders like Stalin or wise philosophers like Marx.  While some people witnessing this propaganda may have been skeptic of its validity, the general population was seeing and hearing what they wanted from the government.
Now that we are studying fallacies in class, I am starting to realize the connection between the terms used in relation to communism (euphemism, begging the question, etc.) and the terms we use to describe various fallacies. Over a dozen fallacies were found by our class in the transcript for President Obama's speech on the topic of Syria.  This makes me wonder whether the speech, or even just parts of it, qualify as propaganda.  Needless to say, this one specific example is not the only existing political piece involving fallacies.  Televised political debates, political commercials, telephone calls from political candidates; they all use fallacies in attempting to gain recognition, affection and, ultimately, votes.  Are Americans subconsciously absorbing propaganda by merely taking part in basic communication between politicians and themselves? If fallacies found in communist ideals create propaganda, don't the fallacies found in American politics put the American government on the same level as a communist government?  The previous sentence was a fallacy in and of itself, yet it is hard to admit that the mere idea presented through the fallacy did not have an effect on you.  This is the power of fallacies in politics.  I have a firm belief that propaganda is an amazing art; a flawless combination of striking images, carefully-chosen words, and creatively-spun fallacies. 

[RD] Analogies are as Difficult as Writing a Title for a Blog Post About Analogies

I have come to recognize an analogy as a rhetorical device that can either be very simple or very complex.  In either case, it is fragile.  Tamper with an analogy too much and the initial meaning is lost.  Leave an analogy to completely speak for itself and it will fall flatter than Dolly Parton's wig on a humid day. I think of analogies as slightly drawn-out metaphors or similes. Luckily, I wasn't completely off when it came to my own definition of an analogy; Dictionary.com similarly describes an analogy as: "a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification."  If you want to dig down into the roots of analogies, you will discover that the word "analogy" descends from the Greek word "analogos," meaning "proportionate." They are used to explain a concept or situation in a way that has more of a connection to the general understandings of the listeners or readers; using words to create socially equal portions between the speaker and the audience.  

My family and friends occasionally tell me that I am a master of using analogies when I try to explain concepts.  For example, I was discussing with my mother the personality traits that I have inherited from my father versus the personality traits of my mother.  My father and I are very much the type of people to focus on a few things we are passionate about and have a difficult time changing the feelings we have for our select few hobbies.  My mother, on the other hand, prefers to engage in various important parts of her life in a way that makes none of her hobbies in particular massively important to her.  I explain this concept with the following analogy: I am like a parent with two or three children of my own that I love unconditionally and nurture beyond compare.  Each of these children have somehow changed me in a very significant way, and to lose one would be absolutely heartbreaking.  My mother is in a different situation; it is as if she is running a daycare of dozens of other people's children that she nurtures, at times, as if they were her own.  However, she would not necessarily give up her life for one of these children if the circumstances led to such an event.  According to my friends and family, this analogy of my own creation is both accurate and comprehensible.
I couldn't help but use the almighty Google to find some famous analogies.  Rather than famous analogies, I found a collection of funny analogies written by teenagers that definitely deserve awards, in my opinion.  For example, "She grew in him like she was a colony of E.Coli, and he was room-temperature Canadian beef," is an example of a blunt yet creative analogy that almost indefinitely puts a smile on the reader's face.  My favorite of these humorous analogies is as follows: "The little boat gently drifted across the pond exactly the way a bowling ball wouldn't."  I found this example to be particularly funny because the way you can track the confusion of the reader.  All seems to be solemn and well in the sentence until "bowling ball" is reached.  The humor really hits with one key word: "wouldn't."  The mental image is established, the humor is noted, and the connection between speaker and audience is made.  
While it may be difficult to differentiate between analogies and metaphors or similes, analogies should be recognized as important rhetorical devices.  Without analogies, connections between a speaker with a complex topic/image to explain and an audience with various social perceptions/experiences would be drawn with much more difficulty. 

(25 Funniest Analogies Collected by High School Teachers: http://writingenglish.wordpress.com/2006/09/12/the-25-funniest-analogies-collected-by-high-school-english-teachers/)

Today a Storybook, Tomorrow a Peace Treaty [IR]

There are many social topics in this world that make me very happy, two of them being (1) East Asia and (2) the sharing of international cultures.  Call me crazy, but I am automatically attracted to any article, news reel, television show, etc. that is somehow related to Eastern Asia or cultural exchange.  I keep up with two online newspapers based in South Korea, one being conservative (동아일보) and one being liberal (한교레).  One article that particularly caught my attention was published in the Donga Ilbo (동아일보) last week and was titled "한중일 어린이 눈짓발짓 소통 동화책 만들다," which translates roughly to "Exchange Program for Children from Korea, China, and Japan."  I was so pleased to read about this unique program that brings together 100 young students from the three countries previously mentioned, all for the sake of writing children's books together.  
There are many unique components that come into play in this program.  The fact that the children are left to their own devices to pass creativity amongst students their own age that speak different languages than them is almost jaw-dropping.  To an adult, this concept is probably rather terrifying.  However, the students showed that with minimal help from translators, they could communicate in a way that efficiently and effectively allowed them to interact with each other.  The concept of interaction between people whose relationships are threatened by language barriers is becoming a major concern in governments all over the world.  The United States Government has devoted a large amount of time and money to sending potential translators and ambassadors to foreign countries for intense language immersion classes and camps, hoping to open doors to better communication with countries that require knowledge of the "13 Critical Languages" designated by the US Government.  I have looked into taking part in one of these overseas experiences (since Korean is one of the critical languages), especially after watching an interview with a young woman who moved from America to Korea and was able to read the Harry Potter series entirely in Korean after a semester or two of being enrolled in a language immersion class.
The collective and creative learning experience discussed in the article goes to show that the United States is not the only country concerned with building bridges with other countries.  Japan, Korea and China are all beginning to acknowledge the potential that the young citizens of their country have to make strong connections with foreign countries.  There are two main reasons that elementary, middle school and high school students have the best chance of proving useful in such a difficult quest for communication.  The first is because the younger the person, the less they are exposed to prejudices that might be a turnoff to foreign cultures.  This is especially true in East Asia, where countries have long been connected only by necessary trade and brutal disputes that often involved war.  The second reason is more psychological; younger students learn languages much faster than adults.  Early exposure and interest in foreign languages makes for a student that quickly picks up these languages that are seen as critical to many governments around the world.
I hope to see more countries and programs that will use the China - Japan - Korea Children's Story Exchange Program as an inspiration for the exposure of foreign cultures and languages to children.  I strongly believe that each student that takes an interest in creating communication between foreign countries and their own country is directly contributing to the creation of world peace.

(Here is the article in English: http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2013082618978 )

A Rhetorical Look at Sedaris [TA]

The rhetorical triangle can be a valuable tool when it comes to analyzing literature, such as David Sedaris’ memoir, Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim.  The three points of the rhetorical triangle (speaker, audience and subject) work together to give the writing an overall purpose.  The speaker (Sedaris, in this case) and his readers are connected by a common interest in comedy and anecdotes, both of which are contained in all of Sedaris’ infamously funny memoirs.  This mutual passion for sarcasm and wit between author and reader gives Sedaris a reason to write his stories down in the first place, not to mention writing them in a flawlessly entertaining fashion.  It is important for a speaker to be conscious of the topic he or she is writing about and have a relatively close connection to it.  In the case of Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim, the subject is the actual past of the author, giving it a special meaning to both the author and the reader.  This non-fiction writing draws the final connection of the rhetorical the triangle; the audience and the subject have a lot in common.  Because the stories told by Sedaris are all true, most readers can find many similarities between Sedaris’ life and their own, whether it be related to family, friends, setting or emotion.  The harmonies connection between speaker, audience and subject in Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim gives the memoir a purpose: to entertain readers by telling outrageously funny yet relatable stories from Sedaris’ own life.

                The most prominent elicitation of pathos in Sedaris’ memoir is through humor and wit.  By recalling stories from his childhood and early adulthood in a fashion twisted with sarcasm and hints of melancholy, Sedaris is able to make readers laugh chapter after chapter, even if the laughter is based on pity.  The essay “Blood Work” tells the story of Sedaris being mistaken as an erotic housecleaner and suffering the consequences of the confusion of his “client.”  Though this is arguably the most hilarious anecdote in the entire memoir, certain moments leave the reader feeling disgusted and laughing from discomfort rather than pleasure.  Nevertheless, whether it be through humor, sadness, or discomfort, readers are able to feel the emotions in Sedaris’ stories thanks to his witty writing style and real-life events.

                Like most non-fiction works of literature, ethos is established by the fact that the author experienced the events of the book first-hand.  It is most definitely possible that Sedaris could be making up many of his stories.  However, the common reader has a difficult time imagining how any author could draw such funny stories from his or her imagination.  Such outrageous anecdotes could only be a product of luck and a writer with a taste for humor.  The fact that he draws in real people from his life, such as his family members, old friends, and lovers, gives him credibility, especially because his sisters and current lover are people that can be easily looked up on the internet. Sedaris’ growing reputation has given him credibility over the years that his writing career has prospered.  Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim shows the establishment of Sedaris’ ethos by bearing his very real and witty character as a non-fiction author.

                Non-fiction writing rarely calls for the employment of logos, since much of the reasoning behind events is due to the personalities of the people involved in each story.  Sedaris’ audience members are bound to find themselves wondering why certain people in these anecdotes think and react to situations in the way that they do.  Sedaris provides a reasonable answer to these questions by attempting to accurately portray the personalities of each character in a way that connects directly to their words and actions.  For example, readers can use the information that Sedaris provides about his own father to explain why he kicked his son out of the house for being gay.  The author also shows why his mother is so stressed by telling stories of the trouble that her children regularly got themselves into.  Sedaris uses this descriptive technique to show that characters’ physical and emotional reactions are based on their personalities, effectively employing logos in his memoir. 

Let's do a Follow-Up

It is slightly difficult to conjure up questions that I have after reading this book for two reasons.   The first reason is because I have already discussed a lot of the questions I've had while reading the book, and the other reason is because I like to almost forget a book after I’m done reading it.  It might sound awful, but I’m not a fan of reading books that stick with me for ages after I finish them.  Anyway, I’ll discuss a few literary moles that have managed to dig their way into the well-kempt lawn that is my mind. 
                Sedaris’ relationship with his partner, Hugh, is a rather confusing one.  I find relationships in general to be quite baffling, especially when I have minimal knowledge about homosexual relationships.  I absolutely love Sedaris’ description of the love between Hugh and himself in the essay “The End of the Affair,” in which he very blatantly discusses the reality of getting into arguments with a lover.  I can definitely appreciate a raw approach to typical communication and compatibility problems of a relationship as opposed to a mushy approach, especially when the romantic aspect is preserved within the conflict.  My question is not a clean-cut one, but I just wonder how Sedaris and his partner have managed to make it work after all these years while having seemingly polar opposite personalities. 
                A major aspect of Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim is Sedaris’ family, which brings a lot of entertainment into each story.  Sedaris has a countless amount of siblings, all of which have massively colorful personalities and a plethora of great stories revolving around them.  The thing that struck me was how extremely different David Sedaris seems to be compared to the rest of his siblings.  I can see connections between him and his parents, but he seems to have gone off in a completely different direction than any of his siblings.  I suppose David Sedaris’ life seems to give him the “black sheep” status within his family.
                While reading Sedaris’ essays, I often find myself trying to recall a story that is funny enough to be written down and published in a book.  Oftentimes I fail to recall such a story (let alone a whole book of stories) and I wind up contemplating how Sedaris managed to have such an eventful life.  That would be my grand follow-up question to Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim: how can someone lead such a colorful lifestyle worthy of its own publication?  I’d like to live like that.

(Question Answered: What questions do you have after reading the text?)

I've Been Successfully Baited by a Comedian

                   Without a doubt, Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim has got to be one of the strangest book titles I’ve ever come across, simply because it is so difficult to determine what the book itself will be about.  I didn’t try to analyze the title too much before opening the book; I like that aura of mystery that most titles tend to emit.  The only thing I could really guess was that Sedaris would talk about his family, but even that I was unsure about.  Don’t even try to decipher Sedaris’ mind. It’s a lost cause, as far as I can tell, and it takes the fun out of reading his books.

                I was told by someone who has read almost all of Sedaris’ books that reader always learns the meaning behind the title, no matter how strange it is. As it turns out, I was blatantly lied to, for Sedaris never tells a story in which people are dressed in corduroy and denim, even in the form of some odd metaphor. The only parts that were even partially relevant to the title were minuscule and forgettable.  For example, Sedaris uses his essay “The Change in Me” to talk about his dramatic wardrobe change in middle school, which gave him an excuse to buy a pair of “blue corduroy hip-huggers.” Another essay titled “A Can of Worms,” a customer sitting next to Sedaris at a dinner in California is described to be wearing a pair of corduroy pants.  It is possible that the only I reason I managed to pick out these minor details was because I like word “corduroy.” Nevertheless, these are the only literary links that I found to have any kind of relevance to the title, besides the frequent discussion of family.

                Naturally, I used my good ol’ pal known as “The Internet” to solve the mystery behind the title Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim.  According to the book's Wikipedia page, Sedaris explained the title to a group of fans at a public appearance in Cleveland, Ohio.  He explained that he had been on a deadline when it came to titling the book, so he used the title of a book that his partner, Hugh, had a dream about about.  The title of the book in Hugh’s dream had been in French, but it was nothing less than original.  So there we have it; my patient reading in anticipation to learn the meaning behind the title of this book has all been in vain, and could have been answered in the beginning with a simple Google search.  But I guess that’s life, isn't it?

               
(Question Answered: What is the significance of the title? What can we conclude from the title before opening the text? What do we learn about the title as we read?)

The Sedaris Thirst Shall Never Be Quenched

                I have been looking for a good excuse to sit down and read and entire book by David Sedaris for years.  Now that I am able to read one (despite the fact that I haven’t finished reading Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim quite yet), I have already settled that I will be finding time to read more of Sedaris’ books in the future.  

                In the essay “Repeat After Me,” Sedaris describes a visit he made to his sister’s house in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.  Throughout the anecdote, he discusses the small stories about his older sister that she never intended to spread beyond her brother’s knowledge, but eventually ended up in one of David Sedaris’ books.  Considering the fact that Lisa Sedaris is not David Sedaris’ only interesting family member, it is not a surprise that Lisa’s stories are not the only ones that make it into her brother’s books.  In fact, all of the author’s siblings (and even extended family members) have at least one story worthy of a spot in the infamous Sedaris memoirs.  It is impossible to be surprised at how often Sedaris writes about his own family, since they are quite an odd bunch to begin with. 
                After realizing just how many hilarious and noteworthy incidents that have been produced by various members of the Sedaris family, I began to understand that shelves upon shelves of volumes of anecdotes could be constructed if David Sedaris somehow managed to find the time and commitment to recall each funny story from his past.  Therefore, I cannot imagine stopping at Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim when it comes to reading Sedaris’ books.  I will most definitely be picking up another one of his memoirs at some point in the near future.
(Question Answered: Would you read another book by this author? Why or why not?)

Sarcasm and the Muting Effect

One of the many components of David Sedaris’ personality and writing style that make him so entertaining is his intense sarcasm.  Those who have a specially tuned ear to sarcasm find Sedaris’ use of it particularly witty and sometimes shocking.  This unique form of humor is pleasing to each and every reader and unfailingly draws a chuckle or two out of me in each essay.  However, the most recent anecdotes I have read in Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim have brought a slight literary inconvenience to my attention. 

                I've noticed that when in the midst of an incredibly uncomfortable and out-of-the-ordinary situation, Sedaris tends to use his sarcasm to treat a situation as if such an insane occasion were a typical part of his mercilessly strange life.  At some points, this technique comes in handy in his attempt make the reader laugh, while in many other parts this has a muting effect.  The essay titled “Blood Work” describes a time when Sedaris was hired as an apartment cleaner by a man who mistook him as an employee for an erotic home-cleaning service.  The events that occurred because of this mistake are so humiliating to read that I almost sprained a muscle in my face due to cringing so fiercely.  However, the embarrassment is not clearly expressed by the author and is instead glazed over by an off-putting attitude that treats the situation as only moderately embarrassing, at most.  Some might argue that this technique is genius, and that Sedaris is leaving it up to the reader to carry the entire weight of the embarrassment as they feel necessary.  This is a perfectly valid argument, and I will not attempt to push it aside completely.  I, on the other hand, would highly appreciate more of an insight on how Sedaris himself felt in such a strange and uncomfortable situation.  In other essays, Sedaris pushes the described emotions and reactions in the direction of his family rather than himself.  Since he doesn't have the skill to see directly into the minds of his family and friends and copy his findings down in his book, the reader is left assuming that Sedaris’ portrayal of their reactions and emotions are relatively accurate.  I find myself simply wishing that Sedaris would talk about his own inner feelings and responses to events more often; it is a memoir, after all. 

                Despite the continuous laughter that Sedaris’ stories evoke from me, his use of sarcasm to tame his emotions in their raw, original state leave a few of the author's own first-hand reactions to be desired.

(Question answered: What parts distract from the work's overall effectiveness? Why?)

Belonging vs. Individuality

After reading three more essays from David Sedaris’ book Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim, I have managed to kindle more thoughts and ponder the common themes that I have noticed pooling in the divots of each story.

                The dominant theme in the last few essays has been the idea of belonging.  This is not any kind of new or revolutionary idea; it has been the center piece of many books already written.  However, Sedaris’ personal experiences with wanting to belong while still clinging to individuality are shockingly relatable and witty to the point of cringe-worthiness.  If someone were to ask me: “What is it like trying to be cool as a teenager?” my initial reaction would be to hand them a copy of Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim and tell them to turn to the essay “The Change in Me.”  In this essay, Sedaris recalls a personal story that shows how difficult it is for a teen to be wedged between the two cliff faces known as “individuality” and “fitting in” while not being able to get a stable footing in either place.  His story illustrates this social paradox with his plan to become a shining, admirable individual by imitating the hippies that he sees asking strangers for change on the streets.  Eventually, the young Sedaris learns his lesson when the hippies mock him for attempting to become a hippy himself, helping him realize that individuality is not something that you can force upon yourself or anyone else; uniqueness is acquired through the natural development of your own character.  

                 The same theme carries into the essay “Hejira,” in which a slightly older Sedaris struggles with his own lifestyles in a more serious way.  After turning over some rocks in his life, Sedaris discovers some of his own vital features.  He comes to terms with his sexuality, he seems to embrace his lack of motivation to keep himself in any college, and he finds himself using drugs to escape the embarrassment of the previously listed characteristics that he may suffer in society’s eyes.  This idea of individuality takes Sedaris from a state of unbearable and inescapable awkwardness to one of ironic comfort, even though the lifestyle that he takes on as a young adult causes his father to turn his own son away from his home.  Though, like every teenager, he may have struggled with finding their place in the world, Sedaris has conquered the position of raw individuality in the form of self-acceptance despite the disapproval of close friends and family; a harsh yet beautiful reality.

(Question answered: What dominant themes permeate the text? How are they developed?)

And I am Already Confused

After hours of in-depth research and careful consideration, I settled on the book that I would be reading for this summer’s AP Language homework.  The previous sentence is a lie.  The truth is, as soon as I saw that one of the optional books on the nonfiction reading list was written by David Sedaris, I immediately lowered the status of all other options on my mental scale of importance and settled comfortably on Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim. 

                Like all of Sedaris’ memoirs, Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim is in the format of multiple witty essays and anecdotes from his life as a son in a typical yet colorful middle-class family.  Despite the fact that I have only read five of the essays in this memoir so far, I have already found myself lost in trying to decipher Sedaris’ complicated family life.  The structure of the family itself is not the confusing part (even though his many siblings may be hard to keep track of at times), but rather the emotional connections between the family members.  The relationship between the children and their parents I find to be especially curious, as their attitude towards each other tends to change from one story to the next.  In the essay “Let It Snow,” Sedaris tells the story of an uncommon North Carolinian snow day, on which his mother locks him and his four young sisters out of the house until a neighbor finds one of them lying on the road in the dark.  On the other hand, “The Ship Shape” depicts a much more positive image of Sedaris’ mother and father as they enjoy their summers vacationing with the kids and encountering the ups and downs of real estate.  This almost careless transition between cruel and pleasant parenting can be quite off-putting and rather displeasing at times. 

The irritating component of these frequent mood changes is that Sedaris never really takes a clear stance on his attitude towards his parents.  Of course, I understand that a child’s love for their mother and father can withstand a hurricane of hardships and cruelty, but the author never steps in to help the reader form an opinion of his parents.  If I can make a guess, I think Sedaris is closer to his mother for natural human nurturing reasons and because he most likely appreciates the almost tactical roughness that she put him and his sisters through.  Sedaris is probably not quite as close with his father because he tends to be a source of humiliation for his son, like the way he rudely and persistently confronts the parents of a school bully and asks them for money in the essay “Consider the Stars.” Sedaris’ father also seems to have wanted to suppress his son’s homosexuality from a young age, which is becoming more evident as the author ages throughout the essays.  I’m not willing to make too many assumptions yet; I have much more to read before I can even come close to drawing conclusions on my current theories.

(Question answered: What confuses or makes you wonder about the text?)