John Rossi's E-Portfolio

John Rossi's E-Portfolio

 

Introduction

 

The initial thought of attending college filled my mind with trepidation.  For the most part, I had worked relatively hard in high school in hopes of attending a suitable university.  By the time I was a senior who already had aspirations of becoming a Nittany Lion (I was accepted into Pennsylania State University by November of my senior year), two thoughts began to worry me: I hadn't enjoyed any of my classes throughout all of high school and had not applied myself at all during my final year before college.  The belief that if I did not enjoy any of my college courses, I wouldn't succeed at Penn State constantly gnawed at me, and I felt that my "senioritis" (the term for seniors who give up on school) would leave me wholly unprepared for the trials ahead of me.  I couldn't have been more wrong.  In my first year of college, not only have I worked harder than I ever did before, but I found all of my courses to be enthralling.  My thirst for knowledge had become as potent as it's ever been, like a young boy who obsesses over each and ever detail of his new video game.  As a testament to my new found joy in learning, I created this E-Portfolio, which displays my work from the years I spent (and will spend) in college.  Thus, the purpose of this portfolio is two fold: to pay homage to the new ideas and thoughts that I have learned while attending Penn State and to showcase the improvements that I have made in both my writing and rhetorical skills.  I hope that by presenting the essays, blogs, and speeches that I will have written throughout my time in college, my passion for learning, which was all but dead as a high school senior but has now been reborn thanks to Penn State, will become apparent to the reader.

Hotel California: Excessive Materialism

The acclaimed song, "Hotel California", written and played by the American rock band, the Eagles, is both profound and allegorical.  The setting and story of the song describes a lone man arriving at a ostensibly normal hotel in California.  Through the interesting lyrics and catchy tune, the band vividly portrays the excessive materialism and superficiality of American society.

The song begins with the lyrics:


On a dark desert highway, cool wind in my hair
Warm smell of colitas, rising up in the air

By opening up the song with this statement, the Eagles are basically stating that initially, the protagonist of the song is free and unburdened by the trivialities of society.  This feeling, however, quickly subsides when the next set of lyrics are uttered:

Up ahead in the distance, I saw a shimmering light
My head grew weary and my sight grew dim
I had to stop for the night


Literally, the figure of light is the "Hotel California" that the protagonist stays at.  Figuratively, the light is the specter of materialism and superficiality that looms over American society.  Also, by mentioning that the protagonist's head grows weary and his sight grows dim, the Eagles are implying that materialism intoxicates the mind's of the people.  After these utterances, the song mentions that the "she" standing in the doorway, or materialism incarnate, could lead to "heaven or hell", implying that a life consumed by material possessions could be either blissful or tortuous. 

The chorus, which mentions that "Hotel California" is a lovely place with plenty of space that you can find all year, proves that materialism (represented by the hotel) is found everywhere (all year, plenty of space).

The next set of lyrics describe a girl whose mind is "tiffany-twisted", an obvious nod to materialism.  Also, they mention that the "she" has a mercedes benes.  The lines immediately following this are also very significant:

How they dance in the courtyard, sweet summer sweat
Some dance to remember, some dance to forget

Here, the "dance" is actually the act of pursuing possessions, and people fervently pursue possessions to either remind themselves of a time where they were happier, or become lost in their obsessions with vanity and wealth in order to forget about unhappy memories.

The Shawshank Redemption: the Nature of Hope

The Shawshank Redemption, a film based off the novel of the same name, is a commentary on the nature of hope.  The film revolves depicts the struggles of two prison inmates (who are serving lifetime sentences) attempting to survive the corrupt and sordid jail that is Shawshank prison.  As the film advances, the bond between the two men, Ellis Boyd "Red" Redding, the De facto leader of the inmates, and Andy Dufresne, a cultured banker convicted of murdering his adulterous wife, grows significantly.  A significant theme of the movie concerns the importance of hope.  Red, through Dufresne, ultimately learns that hope is the catalyst for overcoming adversity and despondency.

Upon arriving at the prison, Red notes that all prison inmates initially lament their loss of freedom.  Their outlook on life is further demoralized when the horrors lurking in Shawshank become elucidated.  Overtime, the corrupt prison system completely breaks the minds of the inmates.  The frustration felt over the lack of freedom slowly turns into a complacency: the prisoners now feel unable to function without the oppressive system dominating their lives.  Their reliance on the system becomes so overwhelming that their views on life become distorted; they are incapable of feeling hope and become apathetic regarding their emancipation.  In fact, the outside world becomes wholly alien to them, so much so that many prisoners often do not wish to leave the penitentiary.  The utter consternation that the prisoners feel regarding the outside world is probably best exemplified through the character Brooks.  Brooks, one of the oldest convicts in Shawshank (with one of the longest sentences), is finally released from prison.  After living only a relatively short time on the outside, Brooks is unable to cope with life outside of prison and hangs himself.  According to Red, Brooks was just like all of the other inmates: "institutionalized".

After many more trying years in Shawshank, Red has all but discarded his hope of living happily.  Andy, desperate to leave the prison behind and start life anew mentions his dream of owning a small hotel on the Pacific coast of Mexico.  Incredulous, Red tells him that wistful thinking will only drive him to madness, and that in order to survive, he needs to discard his emotions.  This was the last conversation the two had in prison, as Andy successfully escaped the next day and Red receives parole soon after.  Later on, Red receives a letter from Andy with the directions to his hotel and Mexico and the conviction, "Hope is a good thing.  Maybe the best of things.  And no good thing ever dies."  Andy, through his message, vividly conveys the fact that hope can never drive a man insane.  Rather, it can lead to his salvation (or redemption, as seen in the movie's title).  Without the hope of settling in Mexico, Andy would not have survived his ordeals in Shawshank, and would have become a broken, or "institutionalized" man.  Instead, it led him to persevere and eventually find happiness.  This infectious sense of hope even spreads to the normally phlegmatic Red:

"I hope Andy is down there.
I hope I can make it across the border.
I hope to see my friend and shake his hand.
I hope the Pacific is as blue as it has been in my dreams.
I hope."

To Kill a Mockingbird: Atticus Finch's Speech of Equality

Harper Lee's renowned novel, To Kill A Mockingbird, depicts the racial injustices of the deep south during the early 20th century.  Protagonist Atticus Finch, a knowledgeable attorney, is faced with the daunting task of defending a convicted black man in a hostile court filled with bigoted Alabamians.  Defendant Tom Robinson is charged with the rape of Mayella Ewell, a young white woman.  It quickly becomes apparent that despite the fact that Robinson is clearly innocent, the jury has no intention of acquitting a black man charged with raping a white women.  Despite the seemingly insurmountable odds, Atticus delivers a profoundly illuminating speech:

Gentlemen, I shall be brief, but I would like to use my remaining time with you to remind you that the case of Mayella Ewell vs. Tom Robinson is not a difficult one. To begin with, this case should have never come to trial. The state of Alabama has not produced one iota of medical evidence that shows that the crime Tom Robinson is charged with ever took place. This case is as simple as black and white. It requires no minute sifting of complicated facts, but it does require you to be sure beyond all reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the defendant.
Miss Ewell did something that in our society is unspeakable: she is white, and she tempted a Negro. The defendant is not guilty, but someone in this courtroom is. I have nothing but pity in my heart for the chief witness for the state, but my pity does not extend so far as to her putting a man's life at stake. She knew full well the enormity of her offense, but because her desires were stronger than the code she was breaking, she persisted. The state of Alabama has relied solely upon the testimony of two witnesses who's evidence has not only been called into serious question, but has been flatly contradicted by the defendant.
I need not remind you of their appearance and conduct on the stand. They have presented themselves in the cynical confidence that their testimony would not be doubted. They were confident that you, the jury, would go along with the evil assumption that all Negro's lie, and are immoral. Mr. Robinson is accused of rape, when it was she who made the advances on him. He put his word against two white people's, and now he is on trial for no apparent reason- except that he is black.
Thomas Jefferson once said that all men are created equal, a phrase that the government is fond of hurling at us. There is a tendency in this year of grace, 1935, for certain people to use that phrase out of context, to satisfy all conditions. We know that all men are not created equal in the sense that some people would have us believe. Some people are smarter than others, some people have more opportunity because they are born with it, some men have more money than others, and some people are more gifted than others.
But there is one way in this country in which all men are created equal. An institution that makes a pauper the equal of a Rockefeller, the ignorant man the equal of any president, and the stupid man the equal of Einstein. That institution is the court. But a court is only as sound as its jury, and the jury is only as sound as the men who make it up.
I am confident that you gentlemen will review without passion the evidence you have heard, come to a decision, and restore the defendant to his family. In the name of God, do your duty. In the name of God, gentlemen, believe Tom Robinson.

Perhaps most compelling, Atticus Finch elucidates the importance of the judicial system.  Finch points out the irony in Thomas Jefferson's affirmation; equality does not naturally exist: the diversity amongst humans undermines the notion of equality.  Because of this, the importance of the judicial system becomes exacerbated, as the judiciary is the only system that, for a brief time, can truly create equality.  Harper, through Finch, also notes the hypocrisy of America: the country dubbed, "the land of the free", does not even have a legitimately fair judicial system.  Finch then makes a poignant plea to the jury.  By stating, "But a court is only as sound as its jury, and the jury is only as sound as the men who make it up", Finch proves that equality is in actuality determinate of the convictions and biases of the people, and that it is the responsibility of the common man to uphold the country's epithet.

Ironically, Finch mentions that this case is "as simple as black and white".  The literal meaning behind Finch's words convey the belief that the Robinson is clearly innocent.  Also, Finch purposely mentions the colors black and white to indicate that racial biases are a serious problem in America.  Symbolically, the use of the two opposing colors represents the opposing beliefs regarding equality, akin to a yin-yang.  While the upholders of equality (like Finch) believe that everybody is entitled to the rights of a freeborn citizen, the Alabamian commoners believe that freedom is inherited based on race.

The Gettysburg Address of Baseball

Lou Gehrig, one of the greatest baseball players in history, had his career tragically cut short by the fatal illness, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS, at age 36.  When the cause of the beloved Gehrig's premature retirement became known to the public, the New York Yankees (Gehrig's team) dedicated a day to honor Gehrig, dubbed "Lou Gehrig Appreciation Day".  On July 4th, 1939, the New York Yankee organization and 65,000 fans showered their hallowed hero with love and adoration.  Gehrig, an emotional and polite man, could barely hold back tears.  Then, Lou Gehrig managed to collect himself and gave the world a phenomenal, heartfelt speech:

 

Lou Gehrig's farewell speech has become so revered that it has been called the "Gettysburg Address of Baseball".  The speech not only accomplishes Gehrig's initial intention of thanking the people who supported him, it also illustrates the humility and genuineness of Gehrig was as well.  In fact, Gehrig's farewell address left nearly all of the 65,000 people in attendance, including some of the most rugged sports journalists in New York, in tears.  Succinct yet clarifying, Gehrig's speech illuminated that despite the fact that he was staring in the face of death, Lou Gehrig refused to give into despair and instead thanked the people who gave meaning to his life.  By stating, "Today, I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the Earth", Gehrig illustrates his determination to not let his misfortune cloud his emotions.  This statement has become profoundly iconic, and it has often synonymous with baseball history.  

Overall, Gehrig incorporates emotional and logical appeals in his speech.  First, the content of the speech itself and the situation at hand (kairos) are obvious appeals to emotion.  Second, Gehrig, by listing all of the kind things that the people in his life have done for him, logically explains why he's a lucky man.  This can also be interpreted as an ethos appeal, as it establishes Gehrig as a beloved man since so many people have shown him compassion.

Full text version of the Farewell Speech:

 
"Fans, for the past two weeks you have been reading about the bad break I got. Yet today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of this earth. I have been in ballparks for seventeen years and have never received anything but kindness and encouragement from you fans.

"Look at these grand men. Which of you wouldn't consider it the highlight of his career just to associate with them for even one day? Sure, I'm lucky. Who wouldn't consider it an honor to have known Jacob Ruppert? Also, the builder of baseball's greatest empire, Ed Barrow? To have spent six years with that wonderful little fellow, Miller Huggins? Then to have spent the next nine years with that outstanding leader, that smart student of psychology, the best manager in baseball today, Joe McCarthy? Sure, I'm lucky.

"When the New York Giants, a team you would give your right arm to beat, and vice versa, sends you a gift - that's something. When everybody down to the groundskeepers and those boys in white coats remember you with trophies - that's something. When you have a wonderful mother-in-law who takes sides with you in squabbles with her own daughter - that's something. When you have a father and a mother who work all their lives so you can have an education and build your body - it's a blessing. When you have a wife who has been a tower of strength and shown more courage than you dreamed existed - that's the finest I know.

"So I close in saying that I may have had a bad break, but I have an awful lot to live for."  

Dos Equis: Portraying the New "Perfect Man"

The Dos Equis beer "Most Interesting Man in the World" campaign depicts a new portrayal of the ideal man.  While most beer commercials portray their customers as being amiable oafs who are only concerned about partying, Dos Equis portrays a different beer drinker.  Instead of a young party-animal, the man in the Dos Equis commercials is an older, suave and dignified man.  By proclaiming this man to be "the most interesting man in the universe", Dos Equis makes the bold assertion that the perfect man, contrary to all the other beer commercials' depictions, is a man whose wise, debonair, and taciturn.

 The first part of the commercial describes the many achievements of the "most interesting man in the world".  (My favorite one is, "He lives vicariously...through himself".)  While these descriptions are humorous and seemingly nonsensical, they also help illustrate the fact that the best man in the world is a renaissance man who does not only strive to be a womanizing, beer-chugging goofball.  The commercial does not imply that one can actually be exactly like this man because, simply put, he is perfect.  Rather, they want their consumers to take on some of the man's characteristics and revolutionize the stereotype of beer drinkers.  For example, by portraying the man as being well-groomed and collected with woman draped around him (he isn't trying to woo them like the other men in beer commercials and instead has the women come to him), Dos Equis makes the claim that men who drink their beer should be the life of the party through other means; they should impress others through their interesting personalities and noteworthy achievements instead of through their childish antics.  It's also interesting to note that the "interesting" man himself says that he doesn't always drink beer.  By having the perfect role model state this, Dos Equis implies that it does not want the average beer-drinker to always consume 12 beers a night.  Rather, moderation is optimal and can help you become like the perfect man.

The next set of Dos Equis commercials have the interesting man giving pieces of advice to the viewer:

Specifically, in this commercial, the "most interesting man in the world" makes an ostensible claim to not pick a job that doesn't match your skill set.  This statement holds more weight than expected, as people still manage to get trapped in unappealing and difficult jobs.  With these abridged commercials, Dos Equis proves that the typical beer drinker should be wise and pragmatic.

The Themes and Motifs of "Batman Begins", and the Evolution of Bruce Wayne

In 2005, director Christopher Nolan faced the daunting task of revitalizing the Batman film franchise.  The origin of Batman, one of the biggest icons in American culture, has been rehashed so many times that it has become redundant.  Nolan, however, not only defied the odds and made one of the best comic book movies of all time, he superbly rebooted an overly played out story and added much depth to an already fleshed out character.  Nolan's Batman Begins presents several fascinating ideologies on the human psyche, and examines the evolution of an icon.

The story of Batman Begins details Bruce Wayne's life from the tragic murder of his parents to the beginning of his vigilantism.  The film examines what drives this possibly psychotic man to forgo his vast inheritance and pampered life and risk his life unrewarded.  Through his use of realism and grittiness, Nolan makes the story (and characters) far more believable, and because of this, the audience fully understands what drives Bruce Wayne.  Since the story takes place during several different periods, the viewer essentially sees five different Bruce Waynes: the young eight year old who witnessed his parents' murder, the rebellious adolescent who's angry at the world, the mature but intense 30 year old Bruce Wayne, the drunkard/billionaire facade, and the Batman persona.

The first Bruce Wayne seen is the 8 year old Bruce.  His phobia of bats is first established at this juncture, and becomes a significant theme of the movie later on.  He's still young and wide-eyed, and his naivety doesn't allow him to understand why Joe Chill (his parents' murderer) would commit a murder.  This is a driving point in the next part of the film.

We next see Wayne as an adolescent returning from college, intent on killing Joe Chill.  He has become jaded and cynical, and his biting and incorrigible tone reflects this.  After being denied the chance of killing Chill, Wayne is lectured by both his childhood sweetheart about the fine line between justice and vengeance and the crime boss of Gotham City, Carmine Falcone, about fear and naivety:
 "This is a world you don't understand.  And you always fear what you don't understand."
Wayne realizes how naive he really is, and goes on to travel the world in order to understand the criminal mind.

After several years of traveling through Asia as a wayfarer, an older Wayne is offered the chance of joining a powerful and secret organization in order to fight injustice.  Wayne agrees, and begins to train with Henri Ducard, who serves as a surrogate father to Wayne.  Ducard teaches Wayne several valuable lessons.  Ducard states that Bruce's unbridled anger and determination can allow him to truly make a difference in this world:
"If you make yourself more than just a man, if you devote yourself to an ideal and if they can't stop you, you become something else entirely--a legend".
Ducard also tells Wayne that his anger gives him great power, but if left unchecked, can destroy him, and turn him into the very criminals who he despises.  This alludes to how in the real world, people with noble intentions can fall from grace and turn into the very things they sought to to eliminate.  Again, this theme alludes to Wayne himself, as he too fears what he is capable of:
 "They told me there was nothing out there, nothing to fear. But the night my parents were murdered I caught a glimpse of something. I've looked for it ever since. I went around the world, searched in all the shadows. And there is something out there in the darkness, something terrifying, something that will not stop until it gets revenge.  Me."
Most notably, Ducard states:
"Your training is nothing.  Your will is everything."
Again, this applies to the real world: that determination and heart is the foundation of success.
Finally, Ducard has Wayne take a hallucinogen that makes him see bats in order to confront his fear.  This alludes to the fact that one shouldn't shirk from his fears.  Rather, he should seek to overcome it.

Upon learning that the organization fights crime with a brutality rivaling that of the criminals they clash with (they murder as well), Bruce leaves, and travels back to Gotham to liberate the crime ridden city.  Wayne becomes the very thing he fears most, bats, and takes up the mantle of Batman.  To hide his identity, Wayne pretends to be a drunken billionaire in public.  At this juncture of the movie, Nolan fleshes out Bruce's psyche, and ironically points out that his normal persona is his mask, and his true face is that of the Batman's.  Nolan also points out Wayne, despite being a noble and righteous man, is not entirely stable.  Nolan, however, points out that Bruce Wayne is such a noble figure because he is aware of his imbalances and instead of descending into vengeful madness, uses his damaged psyche to help people:
"I'm using this monster inside me to help people."

Finally, in the ending scene, Nolan portrays just how righteous Bruce Wayne really is:

'Ey Yo Foget 'Bout it: the New York Way of Speaking

OK, so maybe we don't actually say that.  Despite this, New Yorkers still have a unique way of speaking.  The New York accent is easily one of the most recognizable accents in the entire world.  New Yorkers also abbreviate many phrases, giving them a distinguished dialogue all their own.

New York City is a hustling metropolis.  Here, eight million people have to scramble and hustle to make their engagements on time: they have to hail taxicabs, board buses, transfer subway lines, and speed through social interactions.  Because of this, New York culture is rushed, and things move a lot faster in New York than in other places.  The dialect reflects this.  As New Yorkers are constantly trying to punch the clock in order to meet their engagements in time, they often abbreviate phrases in order to speed things up a bit.  For example, instead of asking someone if they finished eating, a New Yorker will instead ask, "Jeet?".  Jeet is obviously faster than saying, "Did you eat?", therefore, it becomes part of the New York vernacular.  Also many New Yorkers often say, "comere", as opposed to, "come here".  Again, this is due to the fact that in New York, time does equate to money.  In addition to the innovative abbreviations, New Yorkers will speak very, very fast in general.  In fact, many non-New Yorkers have trouble simply keeping up with a NYC native in a conversation (my sister, a New York native, often talks so fast that even I, another New Yorker, can't figure out what she's saying).

While the abbreviations and fast paced way of speaking are easily identified with New Yorkers, the New York accent is the driving force behind the New York dialect's iconic status.  The accent is so easily distinguishable that when many people first think of New York, they think of the accent.  For example, the fact that New Yorkers replace the "r" sound at the end of a word with an "a" sound (New Yawka, Peanut Butta, wata) has become common knowledge.  A less known change in pronunciation revolves around the swapping of an "er" with an "iz".  For example, my grandmother, an old relic of Brooklyn, asks if I would like some "red-hot peppiz", as opposed to "red-hot peppers".  She also likes to wear her "slippiz" (slippers) at night.  These are but two of the many examples of unique New York accents.  Others include: "Long Island" becomes "Lawn Guylang", "Florida" becomes "Flarida", and "milk" becomes "melk".

The New York dialect has become one of the most iconic speech patterns in the world.  Hell, why do you think Bugs Bunny,  possibly the most recognizable character of 20th century culture, has a noticeable New York accent? (Bugs says he's from "toity toid" Street.)  And our very own Joe Paterno, the most famous man in the county, has a distinguished Brooklyn accent.  Because of the dialect, New Yorkers have been stereotyped as being uncouth and acrimonious.  Whether this is actually true, however, remains to be seen.  If you're curious, I recommend taking a little trip to the Big Apple and finding out for yourself.

Groundhog Day, and the Many Speeches of a Misanthrope

Groundhog Day, a highly regarded film, concerns an arrogant and misanthropic weatherman who is stuck in a time loop and repeatedly forced to live his personal hell.  Protagonist Phil Connors, to his horror, finds that he keeps reliving February 2nd, or Groundhog Day (a day where he travels to backwater Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania to cover the Groundhog Ceremony), and realizes that nothing can stop the time loop.  In other words, he can do anything he wants, and, regardless of his actions, will wake up at 6 AM on February 2nd as if nothing ever happened.  Upon realizing this, Phil initially exhibits bewilderment, than excitement, excessive hedonism, anger, hopelessness and depression, and finally, compassion and humility.   As a reporter covering the Groundhog ceremony, Phil is obligated to broadcast the events via television, and his numerous speeches (due to the time loop) reflect his gradual changes in personality and outlook and ultimately reflect his newfound sense of humanity.


In the first coverage of the Groundhog Day ceremony (the time loop hasn't yet begun), Phil Connors is his usual egotistical and condescending self.  He views the people of Punxsutawney as uncouth hicks who are uncultured due to their worship of a rat, and his first speech reflects these views:

The first speech, although indeed professional and succinct, has more than a little sarcasm and arrogance woven into it by the misanthrope.


Upon relieving February 2nd for the second time in a row (the time loop has begun), Phil's confident swagger and arrogant overtones have almost completely vanished, and he can barely contain his bewilderment.  His second speech conveys confusion:


(on camera)
"It's Groundhog Day...again.  That must mean we're at Gobbler's Knob waiting for the forecast from the world's most famous weatherman, Punxsutawney Phil...whose just about to tell us how much winter we can expect...


His sarcasm and disdain gone, Phil's second speech now contains a sense of doubt, and his inflection sounds unconfident and perplexed.


After multiple February 2nds, Connors begins to realize that he can live a life without consequences, and begins to indulge in excessive hedonism: he eats whatever he wants without having to worry about health, constantly seduces women, and steals money.  His next speech reflects his newfound sense of invulnerability:


(on camera)
"...Punxsutawney Phil, who as legend has it, can predict Spring.  The question we have to ask ourselves is, 'Does Phil feel lucky?'"


While this version of his speech sounds remarkably similar to his previous ones, his tone is much more light-hearted, and it seems the question he asks concerning "Phil" is not about the groundhog, but himself.


After what is implied to be several long years of repeating February 2nds, Phil Connors has become bitter and jaded about his fate.  He resents himself, and he wallows in his misery.  His next speech reflects this:

His tone is biting and vengeful, and misery seems to ooze from his body.

After more time has passed in the time loop, Phil has lost all hope in life and is desperate to end his misery.  Instead of the obviously venomous disposition he had before, his actions now seem to border on insanity:

There is now a sense of dark humor in his speech as he begins to believe that he must physically kill the groundhog to end the cycle.  He now also begins to contemplate suicide in an attempt to free himself of his wretched fate.


After many more years pass in the time loop, Phil, at the urging of his co-worker, Rita, begins to have a new outlook on his situation and on life in general.  He begins to use all of the excess time to his advantage, and begins to culture himself.  He learns the piano, learns French, and reads classical literature.  In addition to this, he begins to help the people around him, as he has gotten to know the citizens of Punxsutawney and is aware of their upcoming situations.  His newfound outlook is reflected in his final speech:

His speech, which is both cultured and well-versed, exudes good will and empathy, and elicits a positive response from both the townsfolk and his co-workers (who previously resented Phil).  Phil's final speech also helps convey the overall message of the movie: that life is what you make it, and that a positive outlook and compassion to your fellow human beings can alleviate any predicament.

Rhetoric about Nothing: The Themes and Language of Seinfeld

Seinfeld, one of the most successful and iconic television sitcoms of all-time, gained notoriety for its unique format and dialogue.  While many sitcoms focus on zany situations and moral values, Seinfeld emphasized realism and lack of sentimentality.  Though the show's dialogue is sometimes seen as mere frivolous banter, co-creators Larry David and Jerry Seinfeld use the dialogue and situations as spot-on mediums to address the quirks and daily occurrences seen in modern society.

The basic formula for a typical Seinfeld episode goes as follows: protagonist Jerry Seinfeld and friend George Costanza are eating together at a coffee shop, discussing an encounter they've previously had (typically with a girlfriend).  while this may seem simple,  the dialogue is so down to earth that the audience gets the feeling that in a real life situation, they would actually talk like Jerry and George.  Because of this, the dialogue resonates with the audience, and as a result, the viewers become so enamored with the plot that they begin to realize that the quirks pointed out in the show are in actuality commonly seen idiosyncrasies.  For example, in the episode, "The Mom & Pop Store", Jerry, in an attempt to find out if he actually was invited to a party hosted by a mutual acquaintance, sends his ex-girlfriend Elaine to investigate.  After speaking with the acquaintance, Jerry and Elaine are unable to figure if the host actually invited Jerry due to the fact that they are unsure of what word he emphasized:

Why would Jerry bring anything?

How many times have you found yourself unable to figure out if a person's being sarcastic or serious because you didn't know what word they were emphasizing?

The writers of Seinfeld have also used the witty dialogue and familiar situations to express their beliefs.  In a subtle yet astute manner, Seinfeld manages to critique beliefs that modern society have labeled taboo.  For example, in the episode, "The Outing", a newspaper reporter mistakenly believes that Jerry and George are a homosexual couple.  Jerry and George, in an attempt to prevent themselves from being "outed when they weren't even in", try to persuade the reporter to not write the article:

With that iconic statement, the writers of Seinfeld manage to express the dualism between homophobia and militant Political Correctness.  By stating "Not that there's anything wrong with it.", the writers have exposed the fact that P.C. has compelled people to state things in a supercilious manner out of obligation and in fear of offending the masses.

The genius of the show's writers (Larry David in particular) have made Seinfeld not only one of the funniest shows of all time, but also one of the most intelligent shows as well.

I Believe in Tranquility

http://personal.psu.edu/jar5583/Tranquility.mp3

Jeter, Roethlisberger, and Sports Media Rhetoric

Despite the fact that the media is solely responsible for reporting the news, bias is more than subtlety interjected into news reports.  Biased news reports are easily identified in sports media.  The ubiquitous reports/updates of teams, players, and rules always seem to have an extraneous connotation vividly jumping out at the reader.  These connotations often sway public thought, and as a result, opinions regarding sports are unconsciously shaped by the media.  Two recent stories, Derek Jeter's new contract dilemma and Ben Roethlisberger's sexual assault allegation, are perfect examples of sports media deliberately persuading public opinion.

At the end of the 2010  MLB (Major League Baseball) season, baseball icon Derek Jeter found himself in a dilemma: his playing contract for the New York Yankees expired.  Normally, this would be an innocuous situation, and the Yankees would resign Jeter before he could even finish blinking.  Instead, negotiations between the two parties stalled, and feathers were ruffled on both sides.  This stall in negotiations was due to both Jeter's advanced age and Jeter's sub-par performance in 2010 (his worst statistical season of his career).  The long and unmoving negotiations between Jeter and the Yankees were well documented by the media.  Instead of reporting the ongoing negotiations from a neutral standpoint, however, the media took sides from the outset.  The media blasted Jeter for allegedly refusing to take a pay cut, and sports articles even labeled the perennial All-Star and baseball cover boy as being "greedy and out of touch with reality".  Jeter, who has been heralded as the classiest man in sports, soon faced public scrutiny.  Anti-Jeter rhetoric reached a pinnacle when reports stated Jeter had begun entering talks with other teams, and sports fans across the nation fully bought into these accusations.  Nobody was more taken aback by these attacks then Derek Jeter himself, who stated publicly how angry he was at how publicized these supposed private negotiations were.  Jeter wasn't particularly thrilled at the media's accusations either.  And so, media propaganda managed to do the unthinkable: sully Derek Jeter's stainless reputation.

Ben Roethlisberger, ever a source of controversy, has been officially labeled as the villain of football.  Roethlisberger, who has been charged with two separate cases of sexual harassment, has become the media's punching bag.  While the accusations of sexual assault are deserving of criticism, Roethlisberger has become a pariah who, despite his many accomplishments, will forever be labeled irredeemable.  Ben Roethlisberger's reputation proves how manufactured an athlete's image really is.  Mark Sanchez, quarterback of the New York Jets, is the perfect antithesis for Roethlisberger: he's a media darling.  In fact, the two quarterbacks are often compared with one another; Mark Sanchez has been called a quarterback "with Roethlisberger's skills who thankfully lacks his stupidity".  What most people fail to realize is that Mark Sanchez has also been accused of sexual harassment.  The media purposely forgets to emphasize this, however, as Sanchez is their golden boy who has eternally earned their praise through his approachability and patience.

Opinions regarding current events are often articulated by the news, and sports media is the perfect exemplification of this statement. 

Jeter angry at negotiations

the end of arguing

While the Greek philosophers saw argument as a cultured process where intellectuals rationally exchanged ideas, modern society has perverted this notion.  Today, people see arguing as an immature and irreverent way of dealing with dispute.  The process of argument has unjustly been given a negative connotation by modernists due to the condescension of opinion and the belittlement of opposition.

Today, opinion is looked upon with disdain.  Unless you are considered an "expert" at a specific topic, you won't receive credit for a rationally explained argument.  How many times have you found yourself stating a perfectly logical position to a certain topic, only to hear the rebuke, "Well, that's just your opinion"?  In a country whose epithet is "the land of the free", opinion (and by extension, free speech) has become ostracized by the public, and America has become a paradox.  The limitation of opinion in America is probably best exemplified through Political Correctness.  While P.C.'s intentions are noble (it tries to limit derogatory speech), it has directly defied the right for people to speak uninhibitedly about crucial situations that the country is currently facing.  People must either not speak at all, or speak through an oppressive filter, lest they incur the wrath of P.C. advocates.  This fear of expressing of opinion has led to the "dumbing-down" of society, where intellectual debate cannot exist, and as a result, new revolutionizing ideas cannot form.

A commonly seen occurrence in modern argument is the belittlement of the opposition.  Have you ever recalled debating with someone, only to see them roll their eyes and jeer you after you've finished making your point?  What about hearing the response, "You're an idiot!"?  It seems that many simply do not want to listen to ideas, and will resort to the quick insult rebuttal and also forgo responding with civility.  In fact, I personally recall a time when a former high school teacher stated his views on a specific topic, then went on to state, "This is the only solution to this problem.  It is right.  It is just.  And it can't be denied.  Anybody who disagrees with this is awful!"  Bear in mind that a 16 year old student did not state this.  Rather, a full-grown man, who is paid to listen to students' opinions,  said this.

People have begun to fear argument.  Do to this, opinions, ideas, and reflections on culture will not spread.