Amplification through Simplification

         In the book Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud describes Magritte’s painting “The Treachery of Images”. In the painting, the subject clearly represents a common pipe. However, the message of the artist suggests that it is neither a pipe nor a painting of a pipe. Instead, this occurrence, as McCloud elucidates, connotes a concept of amplification through simplification. One should consider that McCloud’s primary pages that portray the painting embody and resemble one copy. He employs this technique to validate the use of images to characterize a person, place, thing, or idea.
       
          As mentioned by McCloud in Chapter 2, comics are cartoons. They are images that magnify traits by simplifying other figures and expressions. Using the same technique, McCloud visibly over-emphasized the images to mean something better than the other. The provided comic strip above, for example, illuminates the technique of amplification through the use of dark shade on the dialog with the picture of person with mouth wide open. While other strips are drawn normally, the third block of strip connotes a strong force or emphasis, which results in the fourth stating “What? You Don’t Have to Scream.” Truly, comics explain the method of amplification through implication, and they do that.
 
 
           Overall, McCloud clearly employs the concept of amplification through simplification throughout the sequential images and cartoons. In this discussion, the illustrated perception represents clarity of messages being conveyed. McCloud’s way of incorporating abstract pictures, signs, or figures in cartoons is genius as he clarifies his thoughts. As he asserts, he believes that artists can amplify and simplify those images to suggest its vital meaning.
 
 

Works Cited

McCloud, Scott. Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. Northampton, Mass (1993).

Gibson, Andrew. The Celebration of Cartoons and Comic Strip Art. Smashingmagazine.Com. 28 Dec. 2008. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.

What Comics Are, Scott McCloud

Based on Scott McCloud’s definition, comics are actually “bad art, stupid stories, and guys in tights” (12). These descriptions even make him hate these reading materials, which lead him to abandon them and only digest real books. When one of his friends suggests that he must consider comics as a reading material, he becomes fanatical and preoccupied until such time that he keeps on practicing making comic strips. Definitely, he learns to practice as a comic artist.

According to an article by Shuping, a comic is an image that articulates realistic stories. By definition, it may be a gag panel with a more diverse genuine work, or it can be a sliver of narrative having a few details and visual cartoons (Shuping). At some points, it is an unpolished, low-priced, poorly-drawn child fare. Its main purpose is to convey a powerful message, which is quite difficult to realize. Indeed, Shuping’s definition is appropriate as it describes comics. Whereas Shuping claims that comics are images that tell a story, McCloud, on the other hand, believes that they do contain hidden power that surprises the readers. According to McCloud, this media is a contrast of graphic pictures among others (9). In the end, comics are images that arouse visual reactions to deliver an informative material.

Overall, McCloud’s definition of comics has changed. Comics do not have to be bad arts or stupid stories. They must be important reading materials that offer meaningful stories. Though comics are reading materials with cartoons, they are in strip forms that share specific agenda. Hence, McCloud believes they contain concealed message that explodes surprises.

 

 

Works Cited

Shuping, Andy. What Are Comics? CCGCLibraries.com. 6 Mar. 2015. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.

McCloud, Scott. Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. Northampton, Mass (1993).

 

 

A Reflection on “The Free Speech Follies” by Stanley Fish

            People need to consider what they communicate as much as there is a right to free expression. Words uttered by a person either verbally or through writing cause an impact to the readers and listeners. With regards to the content, souls can be seared, realities become shattered, and hearts get ripped off. Words pierce through flesh and beyond settling inside an empty space where thought resides. As Fish, puts it, self-censorship should be embraced as a responsibility enabling a person not to say something that would lead to speech violation.

            In Fish’s article, the letter by a Seattle resident that read “Jews Manipulate America” is a clear illustration of violation of free speech. The writer’s content has threats like, “Jews might face another Holocaust.” People may never agree on some issues and are free to express what they feel but at the same time they should exercise the right in a way that they do not cause harm to other individuals. Communication becomes accomplished when it does not degrade or disgrace those of conflicting viewpoints. Which this would be my opinion, I believe that we all have the right to say what we want, but not by crossing the limits.

            Tony Smith a basketball player from Manhattan Ville College caught attention of many when she turned her back to the flag during recital of the nation anthem. Her action was a way of expressing her disagreement to the government policies in a tactful manner. She remained as a First Amendment hero because her way of communication though not very pleasant, proved to be authentic and expressive without hurting anyone. People should not be limited to speech but they should comprehend that for every action there is a consequence for actions.

A Reflection on “In Defense of Prejudice” by Jonathan Rauch

               In the article, Rauch is for the idea that as much as people are purposing to end prejudice, it is almost impossible to bring it to a standstill. Just like freedom of expression is present, same way sexism, racism, Christian bashing, racism, and other kinds of prejudice exists. Bigotry cannot be successfully controlled and efforts in doing do end up looking irrational. People exist in a society where each person belongs to a type of its own in terms of reasoning and different views on various issues.

                 In the case of Michigan student who felt that homosexuality is an ailment that can be corrected using therapy, was disciplined for violation of speech. It is a fact that most religions are against homosexuals and not a prejudice for those who practice it. The student’s statement was not bias but a mistaken belief. “American criminals are disproportionately black” is another example of a statement that is held as speech violation. It is a belief held by a particular group of people making it impossible to describe bigotry and hate speech. The author intends to convince the reader that although offensive speech leads to conflict in the society, a person cannot tolerate positive and inventive opinions without allowing other people’s ideas as well.

                Intellectual purity as a purist stance is a direction that leads to criticism by any group engendering prejudice. In essence it is a doctrine that destroys the mistakes rather than the person who commits the fault; the error gets penalized instead of the errant. Pluralism should be the way to go by making the best out of bias and not finding ways to eradicate it completely.

Fallacious Thinking

A logical fallacy occurs when a person makes a conclusion based on an illogical form of reasoning. Adopting a position in an argument that has false premises constitutes an error of reasoning. Formal fallacies occur in deductive arguments where a false conclusion is drawn from true premises. On the other hand, informal fallacies occur in inductive arguments where assumptions generate a conclusion that is not entirely satisfactory. The article published on the U.S. News website regarding Democrats’ opinion to take away guns from registered gun holders is fallacious.

The author emphasizes on passing the background test as an essential requirement before issuing applicants with licenses to own firearms (Cary). Similarly, the writer supports the argument that having a record of committing violent crimes is a legitimate reason to deny individuals their constitutional right to own firearms. Furthermore, the article relates many mass killings to mentally ill shooters (Cary). As such, it suggests incorporating records for those suffering from mental illness on the National Instant Criminal Background Check System managed by FBI (Cary). According to the article, integrating mental states of Americans on the website plays a significant role in denying mentally challenged individuals access to guns.

Arguments provided in the article constitute informal fallacies including individuals’ mental health status on the platform reduces instances of mentally sick people obtaining guns, which cuts of mass killings resulting from such cases. However, the premise is not certain since not all shootings are carried out by mentally-challenged people. Similarly, using past records of crimes as a basis for denying such participants licenses to own firearms is fallacious. It is possible that such individuals reformed and are bound to enjoy their constitutional right. The errors mentioned above compromise conclusions adopted by the author; hence, it is fallacious.

Cary, Mary. "It's True, Democrats Want To Take Your Guns." Usnews.com. U.S. News & World Report LP, 23 Oct. 2015. Web. 5 Feb. 2016

Meme Analysis

 

The above-presented meme posted on Kappit states that the Doctor tends to have more interesting adventures in cases when he lands in places where he originally was not supposed to land. This meme is rather incorrect because there are multiple examples of episodes when even “planned” landing led to absolutely unpredictable but intriguing chain of events.

            While landing on unknown planets or other locations and subsequent attempts of main characters to resolve unexpected problems indeed play a significant role in plot of most Doctor Who episodes, that is not a compulsory part of every episode, and many episodes have interesting plot despite the absence of this peculiarity. For instance, in episode, “The End of the World”, the Doctor and Rose successfully travel to the year 5,000,000,000 to an event dedicated to destruction of Earth by the expanding Sun. Nevertheless, despite being planned by the Doctor, the trip still has unexpected consequences as robotic spiders begin to disable main systems on a space station, threatening to kill everyone.

            The necessity of an unplanned landing as a precondition of an adventure is further denied in episode “Aliens of London” when the Doctor and Rose arrive back to London to visit Rose's mother only to discover that aliens murdered and impersonated few members of British government. This episode demonstrate that even when the Doctor makes planned trips to seemingly well-familiar and ordinary places, things can get extremely interesting.

            Similar pattern can be observed in episodes filmed decades ago. For instance, episode, “The Androids of Tara”, shows that interesting events might occur even when the landing was planned and main characters managed to stick to their original plan. Indeed, the Doctor and Romana successfully land on Tara. The Doctor feels so confident in the ease of obtaining another piece of the “Key to Time” that even decides to go fishing and allows Romana to go alone to retrieve the missing part. Everything goes as smoothly as one could only expect, and Romana successfully finds the missing part of the Key. Nevertheless, such a “perfect” beginning does not prevent the Doctor and Romana from being dragged into a conflict between legitimate Prince Reynart and his enemy, Count Grendel.

            In conclusion, examples from different episodes of Doctor Who prove that contrary to what the presented meme states, the Doctor can experience extremely interesting adventures even when he lands where he is supposed to and sticks to the original plan because unexpected events can happen anywhere even in places that seem safe and familiar.

 

 

 

“Aliens of London.” Doctor Who. BBC, London. 16 Apr. 2005. Television.

“The End of The World.” Doctor Who. BBC, London. 2 Apr. 2005. Television.

“The Androids of Tara.” Doctor Who. BBC, London. 25 Nov. - 16 Dec. 1978. Television.

“I don't always land where I'm supposed to. But when I do it's not nearly as interesting.” kappit.com, n. d. Web. 5 Feb. 2016.

 

 

Mark Twain’s “Advice to Youth”

“Advice to Youth” is an essay written by Mark Twain in 1882. As evidenced by the title, the main aim of the essay was to enlighten the young people in America and advice them on good conduct. This was Mark Twain’s 70^th birthday. His two books “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer” and “Huckleberry Finn” were the most popular readings for the youth at the time (Canfield, 2011). In order to determine the primary audience, it is imperative to take a look at some of the words that Twain uses in his speech. He heralds the speech by the statement “I will say to you my young friends” signifying that he was talking to a group of young people (Clemens, 1882). He also addresses the people in second person, which shows that he was addressing them in person. He tells the audience that “most parents think they know better than you do,” which shows that the young people in the audience were not accompanied by their parents.

Mark Twain uses several styles to address the youth in his speech. He uses humor that the young people can identify with. He explains his situation in his first birthday as compared to his old age. “I hadn’t any hair, I hadn’t any teeth, I hadn’t any clothes, I had to go to my first banquet just like that” (Clemens 1882). He uses simple language and grammar and styles that young people at low education level can understand. He uses irony, exaggeration and understatements. Mark Twain addresses six main issues that affect young people. He tells them to obey their parents selectively, respect their superiors, go to bed and rise early, advice on lying, handling firearms and reading widely and good books (Canfield, 2011). This gives proof to the thesis statement that Mark Twain wrote the speech for the American youth, probably between the ages of 10 and 18.

 

 

 

Clemens, Samuel. Advice to Youth. Text of a lecture given by Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens) in 1882. Print

Canfield, John. Chicken Soup for the Soul: Personal Stories and Advice to Today’s Youth. McGraw Hill, 2011. Print.