TOW #13 "The Death of the Artist—and the Birth of the Creative Entrepreneur" by William Deresiewicz

          William Deresiewicz is an acclaimed editorial writer who has been writing for The Atlantic since 2014, and recently released his own novel. He focuses his writing around common trends in American culture, usually focusing his work around the arts and literature. Hence, the subject matter of his piece, "The Death of the Artist—and the Birth of the Creative Entrepreneur" does not come as much of a surprise. Deresiewicz begins this piece with a lesson in art history, as well as information on the ever-changing nature of what defines art. For the most part, this section is very factual. Additionally, he uses statements from many historians to add to the overall credibility. This demonstrates that what he is saying is correct and factual, which sets him up to have a credible opinion later in the piece. He also highlights the various definitions of the word artist, and the way that expectation of what an artist should be has changed drastically along with society. In doing so, he creates a juxtaposition with what artistry was, as opposed to what it is now. By adding such emphasis to the vast differences, Deresiewicz is able to demonstrate to his readers that the current definition of art was not always the norm. In many ways, Deresiewicz's writing is a reaction to the art movement that is happening now. The main two aspects of the modern-art world that he highlights are the nature of artists to take on various mediums, as well as the simple fact that in the twenty-first century popularity benchmarks the success of a piece. Although neither of these things are necessarily bad in their own right, Deresiewicz is able to give them both a very negative connotation through nuances created by his choices of vocabulary. He uses words such as, "sink, mourn, disappear, lose, etc." to point his readers in what he believes is the right direction, without forcing his opinion at them. This also helps set up the many rhetorical questions that he employs, in which he gives his audience lots of room to think for themselves- after he has given them a great deal of evidence supporting his opinion. Readers of The Atlantic are generally very well-educated, so it is safe for him to assume that they will logically evaluate the issue he presents on their own. Through his references of credible sources, juxtaposition, carefully chosen diction, and rhetorical questions, Deresiewicz creates a very strong argument that makes his audience reconsider the definition of art that has become a societal norm. I really enjoyed this piece, as it was very informative and really made me question myself in a sense of my own artwork and preconceived notions I had about what it means to truly be an artist.

I accessed this article on The Atlantic's website after first seeing it on Mr. Miller's website, and I would definitely recommend checking it out: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/the-death-of-the-artist-and-the-birth-of-the-creative-entrepreneur/383497/

TOW #12 IRB "The Right Stuff" by Tom Wolfe

         Tom Wolfe's, The Right Stuff, is an entertaining and informative read that I would highly recommend to anyone looking for a good non-fiction book that flows more like a traditional work of fiction. Wolfe seamlessly blends the abstract details from his own mind with the actual events and realities of the situations that he depicts throughout his work. I was pleasantly surprised at how much I am liking the book so far, and this factor of something being so concrete, yet also feeling "larger than life," definitely added to my personal level of enjoyment. Throughout approximately the first half of the, The Right Stuff, Wolfe focuses on the U.S.'s fascination with space exploration in the post-war era. However, I found the book to be more about the space race than the actual travel into space. In addition, the most important factor of the novel is the characters: whose bravery, and at times absurdity, eventually made the voyage into space possible for the nation. This daring and readiness to take enormous risks seemed to be exactly what Wolfe would describe as the right stuff to get the job done. When he published the book in 1979, Wolfe was already an acclaimed journalist who wrote for a wide variety of newspapers and magazines. His extensive body of non-fiction work makes him much more credible to modern-day readers, but also helped him compose the book when he was writing. The first Americans landed on the moon less than ten years before the release of, The Right Stuff, and so Wolfe was able to utilize those who were still alive as primary sources for the book.
         Throughout the first half of his book, Wolfe uses a combination of strong imagery and juxtaposition to highlight the courage of the Mercury Seven, who were NASA's first astronauts. The juxtaposition is really helpful for readers, as it makes a much more stark difference between the astronauts and the test-pilots who almost got the job instead. He shows the difference in personality, training, and ethics in order to reveal the complexity of the issues that faced the men. Additionally, he uses strong imagery in order to grab the audience's attention and add detail. From the very beginning of the book, the powerful descriptions that he writes really set the tone for the rest of the novel, "And today, here in Florida, in Jacksonville, in the peaceful year 1955, the sun shines through the pines outside, and the very air takes on the sparkle of the ocean. The ocean and a great mica-white beach are less than a mile away," (Wolfe, pg. 2). He also uses imagery to turn the audience's attention to what really matters: the people, rather than the events. 

TOW #11 "First Comes Baby, Then Comes Push Present?" by Una LaMarche

         In, "First Comes Baby, Then Comes Push Present?" NY Times staff-writer Una LaMarche questions the nature of the flamboyant "push presents" that celebrities such as Kim Kardashian have popularized more and more in the past few years. LaMarche is known for her cleverly sharing her thoughts on subjects such as feminism, privilege, and critiquing the modern-day media in the form of her own books, writing for the NY Times, and also guest-writing for the Huffington Post. With this in mind, I really did not need to question her credibility and knowledge on this subject matter, and also took her previously shared views into account when looking for nuances to alter my interpretation of the piece. In this particular writing, it seems as though she is talking to all women who have, or plan to have, children. In addition to sharing her own passionate opinion, she uses statements from women and medical professionals alike to make a very firm argument that ridicules the sincerity of "push-presents" and what they imply about a woman. Her purpose in writing is not in any means to say that women do not deserve to be shown some kind of gratification after enduring carrying a baby for nine months and then delivering some- she more so takes issue with the given name. She wittily proclaims, "it is hard to deny that the unfortunate name makes women sound like human slot machines waiting to spit out a jackpot," (para. 5). She skillfully achieves her purpose by writing something that is strongly worded enough to show significance, but also neutral enough to not make her readers feel the need to "get defensive."
        To achieve her purpose on a somewhat controversial topic by using a multitude of rhetorical devices and strategies, including juxtaposition, allusion, and helps her argument seem more logical by addressing the counterargument. She juxtaposes celebrities like Kim Kardashian with common people, and their thinking around "push presents." She does show to show the disparity between what is normal, and what is normal for a celebrity who can spend a million dollars on a necklace without thinking about it twice. In her contrast of the average women a celebrity, she alludes to the major differences in those who are extremely wealthy, as well as the way that this impacts someone's view on feminism. This greatly helps her achieve her purpose by showing the relevance of the issue she describes, and makes sure her audience knows that she is not just choosing to argue over something as small as a name. In addition, she addresses the counterargument, to show that she is aware of, and respects the other sides opinion. In doing so, she creates a very powerful argument that definitely changed the way I thought about the subject.

I accessed this article on the NY Times website: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/03/fashion/kim-kardashian-push-present-politics.html?ref=fashion&_r=0

This cartoon was included with the article, and I thought it did an awesome job in setting up LaMarche's ideas: