"Sixteen Military Wives" by the Decemberists

1. This song is about military wives and what they have to go through with their husbands in the war. It describes how different people go about their lives when a war is going on.
2. The theme of this song is that America will always go on with its normal daily routine, no matter what terrible things happen to those who live there. The song describes a situation in which military wives find out about their husbands' deaths in the war. They are sent there by American powers to fight for their lives no matter what the cost. The song says, "And the anchorperson on TV goes... La de da..." This shows that in these terrible times of war, the people reporting to Americans about what is going on are not phased by any pain that people are feeling. The people in charge of America send people over to die in wars and when they do, they do not seem to be effected.

"Race for the Prize" by the Flaming Lips

The theme of the song is that people will do whatever it takes to reach a goal or win something if the result is great enough. At the beginning of the song, it says, "Two scientists were racing for the good of all mankind... For the cure that is their prize. But it's so dangerous. But they're determined." This describes a competition between two scientists to find a cure, which could be  about finding a cure for cancer. He says that the race is dangerous, but they are determined to get the prize because it is so important. The song goes on to say, "Theirs is to win if it kills them." This stresses to what great lengths people will go to to reach a goal or win a prize. They will keep going until they win the race, even if it kills them.

Death Penalty Essays

Of the two death penalty essays that we read in class, I believe that the essay by Kroll is more effective than the one written by Mencken. Normally, I would be more easily and strongly persuaded by an essay that primarily uses logos to sway the readers, like the Mencken essay, but that was not the case here. With such a serious and emotional topic like the death penalty, the technique that is most effective in persuading readers is definitely pathos. Kroll writes, "We were in the middle of something indescribably ugly. Not just the cold-blooded killing of a human being... It was nakedly barbaric." There are many times like this throughout his essay where Kroll uses words like "ugly" and "barbaric" to describe the death penalty, which have negative connotations. By describing it in such a negative way, it makes the readers feel sorry for anyone who has to go through the process, no matter what they did. It is human nature to believe that killing someone in cold blood is wrong, so people will be urged to think against this idea, thus strengthening Kroll's argument. On the other hand, Mencken wrote in his essay, "There are, indeed, many other jobs that are unpleasant, and yet no one thinks of abolishing them- that of the plumber, that of the soldier, that of the garbageman, that of the priest hearing confessions, that of the san.. and so on." Here he is using logic to refute the argument that the job of a hangman is unpleasant. Although this idea that he presents is logical, it does not have the grasping effect that appeals to emotion have on the readers in this situation. Kroll's use of pathos was definitely more effective in persuading me to agree with his argument than Mencken's use of logos.

Fallacies in Famous Speeches

1. "Let both sides unite to heed in all corners of the earth the command of Isaiah -- to 'undo the heavy burdens... and let the oppressed go free.'"
2. In this quote, John F. Kennedy commits the fallacy of Appeal from Authority. JFK uses a quote from Isaiah, who is an authority figure or an expert to many religious people. This is a fallacy because even though Isaiah is a figure of authority, his words may not necessarily be credible or true. He is using these words to try to persuade his audience, so it is a fallacy.
3. Even though this speech commits so many fallacies, it is so effective and still famous today because JFK used the fallacies in a way that made them believable and easy to agree with. Most of the fallacies that he used in his speech are used to stir up some sort of emotion or rally the people of America, so that very easily can cover up the fact that they really are fallacies. If people are having their spirits raised and being rallied, they probably won't be paying much attention to the credibility of the argument. Also, JFK used fallacies that people were sure to agree with, like Appeal to faith, Appeal to tradition, Argumentum ad baculum, and many others.

Duck and Cover

1. Overt Message- If an atom bomb goes off, everyone needs to know what to do. People should duck and cover if they see the flash of the bomb go off.
2. Covert Message- Everyone needs to be prepared for anything that could happen. With the looming dangers, people need to be ready to protect themselves at all times.
3. This is informational. The ad is not trying to convince people to protect themselves. People already know that they have to take precautions, but this is specifically telling them how to.

Overt & Covert Messages- Mars

1. Overt Message- Oil and competition are very important to everyone, especially in the United States. I got that because the whole cartoon was talking about how great oil is and making it out to be the best thing in the universe.
2. Covert Message- Everyone needs oil to be able to function in society. When the martian came to America, he saw that their society was running very smoothly and found out that it was because of the oil. Before he discovered the oil, the martians were angry and did not seem happy with the way they were living. When they discovered oil, they became happy and started working together and improved their society.
3. This is propaganda because there was an underlying, not straight-forward message within the cartoon. In the cartoon, there were Glittering Generalities. They described what the oil did for America and that it was so great, which could mean different things to different people and maybe even make it seem better than it really is. They also used transfer to connect ideas of capitalism to oil and competition.

Propaganda

1. The overt message is that people need to cook more of their own food and eat less bread. The woman is shown with a pot in her hands which suggests that she has been cooking something.
2. The covert message is that women who have husbands or other relatives in the war need to make themselves useful and not just sit around and wait. Cooking could be something that could occupy their time and if they just eat a lot of bread, they are purchasing this and not doing themselves any good.
3. The disparity of the two could cause many people to think different things, which is what propaganda does. There is not a very clear, straightforward message, but it gets people thinking.

"Clampdown" by The Clash

1. This song is about Nazi Germany, which is referred to as the "Clampdown". The song says, "Taking off his turban, they said is this man a Jew?" This is referring to the Nazi's view of Jews and how they treated them. Also, it says, "We will train out blue-eyed men to be young believers." This refers to the blonde-haired, blue-eyed men that Hitler and the Nazis viewed as the perfect citizen and Nazi.
2. The strong guitar part in the song creates and intense and strong feeling because the Nazis in Germany were intense and strong.
3. This song relates to propaganda because Nazi Germany used a lot of propaganda to demean the Jewish people and also promote the war. The song talks about how people can't refuse the control of the government. People were persuaded to believe in the Nazis and were deceived to think that it was the best government.

Rhetoric, Persuasion, and Propaganda Quotes

I chose quotes 11, 43, 68, and 76.
Analysis of quote 68:
"Vilify! Vilify! Some of it will always stick." - Pierre Beaumarchais
In this quote, Beaumarchais is addressing anything that is used to persuade someone to think a certain way or convey an idea, be it propaganda, rhetoric, or persuasion in general. To vilify something means to speak ill of, defame, or slander it. When trying to persuade someone of something, there is no guarantee that the message or point you are trying to get across will have any effect on that person or that they will remember your argument in the future. Beaumarchais is suggesting that if you use vilification when doing the persuading, at least some part of your message will get into their mind and stick there. As a result, your argument will be stronger and they may be more easily or strongly persuaded. I believe that he is saying that it is often not enough to persuade people with general tactics like facts and credibility and that sometimes attacking and demeaning something or someone is what it takes to create a very affective argument. An example of this vilification in propaganda is in Germany during WWII. There were many posters and other forms of propaganda made that were demeaning and negative towards Jewish people at that time. Something about this obviously stuck, since many Germans were persuaded to believe the harsh and hateful things that were said about the Jews. This is just one of the many examples of times when vilification in persuasion has caused ideas to stick in peoples' minds and be more effective.