Outside Reading Set #3: Book Review

1/9/11

“Where's The Beef? One Man's Search For 'Steak'”

David Sax

Book Review

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129600724

In his review of Mark Schatzker’s book Steak: One Man's Quest for the World's Tastiest Piece of Beef, David Sax takes a primarily formalistic approach. In particular, Sax commends Schatzker’s style: “Much has been written about red meat in books like Betty Fussell's Raising Steaks, Beef by Andrew Rimas and even parts of The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan. But Steak stands apart because of Schatzker's fun, accessible style and his willingness to slay the sacred cows of what supposedly makes great steak.” Sax also pays attention to diction, especially appreciative of Schatzker’s vivid descriptions. He often refers directly to Schtazker’s text, citing examples such as: “Grass-fed beef, all the rage with environmental and health advocates, may be more environmentally sound, but as the author finds out, it sometimes tastes like "an old, atrophied, abscessed organ left in the trunk of a car sitting in a Miami parking lot for two weeks in July.”

To show his approval of Schtazker’s fluid style, Sax incorporates his own smooth, parallel sentences: “We are taken from feedlots in Texas, where the wind carries dust storms of dried feces, to French cave paintings of prehistoric cattle. We smell the dewy grasses of the Scottish highlands, chase rare breeds in Italy and enjoy charcoal-grilled rib tips on the Argentine pampas.” In this example, he also makes sure to employ the power of three to drive his point home. Another aspect of Schtazker’s style that Sax echoes is diction: Sax often deliberately includes alliteration in his own writing to emphasize the importance of the diction that he values in Schtazker’s writing. To emphasize the unique nature of Schtazker’s novel, Sax makes direct allusions to other, similar pieces of work. Comparing the former to the latter, it is clear in Sax’s opinion that Schtazker’s novel stands out. Sax’s biggest praise of Schatzker’s novel is its original style and interpretation of a somewhat banal topic. This reminds me of the classic plays we’ve read, such as Oedipus Rex and Hamlet. People watch these plays not for the well-known stories they are derived from, but for the fresh interpretation they provide.

Sax’s careful, direct quotations of the Schtazker’s novel are the greatest strengths of this book review. Not only does Sax make clear, logical claims, he also makes sure to back up those claims with evidence straight from the source. In this way, readers “buy” his argument much more easily. In terms of literary analysis though, Sax could have discussed more elements. To begin with, he focuses primarily on one critical approach: formalism, which in and of itself is a little limiting. Furthermore, he only addresses style and diction. To create a more engaging book review, Sax should try to analyze the book from different angles.

Outside Reading Set #3: Editorial

1/9/11

“I’m Running Too”

Patricia Marx

Editorial

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1582313,00.html

“I’m Running Too” is a comical parody of the presidential candidate speech. Using heavy verbal irony and rhetorical questions, Patricia Marx crafts a witty, sarcastic voice which thoroughly captures my attention. From the start, Marx establishes a strong point of view through: “My fellow Americans: I’m a follower, not a leader. That is why I am declaring my candidacy for President of the United States.” Simply by injecting mocking irony into her statements, Marx pointedly criticizes presidential elections. She asks questions like “What do I stand for?” and gives ludicrous answers: “Universal health care, definitely. Or if not universal, then at least darn good coverage for any and all female candidates from Manhattan who have straight, dark hair, because what if I get hit by a bus driven by someone else in the race?” She reiterates this question-answer format throughout the essay, particularly emphasizing the hypocrisy of the presidential race.

Diction is another technique Marx plays with to shape her comical voice. She often uses puns, such as “For instance, what if, at the end of the year, the government sends you a bill? Not a bill as in “The Senate passed the McCain-Marx bill,” but a bill as in ‘Excuse me, is the tip included in this bill?’” In order to point to the pettiness of the elections, Marx uses a method that is almost the opposite of using a hyperbole: she leads with a relatively important topic, but then immediately trivializes the topic. A good example of this is: “How else am I qualified? When I was a little girl, I dreamed of becoming President. Or maybe I just dreamed that I was president. When I’m President, you can depend on me to roll up my sleeves and do something about that.”

The mocking and satirizing are the main strengths of this piece. Marx uses her strong, opinionated voice to describe herself as a weak presidential candidate. This deliberate contrast sharpened my understanding of her criticisms and drew me into her argument: candidates are not leaders at all, but followers. In this piece, Marx assumes that readers can catch every political reference she makes. This may be a weakness because sometimes, her point is lost on the reader if the reader does not actually catch the reference. Although this essay has a clearly developed voice, it is not suitable for an AP exam because the language is informal and sentences are fragmented. Furthermore, organization is minimal, since the speaker erratically jumps from topic to topic.

Outside Reading Set #3: Reflective Essay

1/8/11

“It’s Inconvenient Being Green”

Lisa Takeuchi Cullen

Reflective Essay

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1686805,00.html

In “It’s Inconvenient Being Green,” Lisa Takeuchi Cullen reflects on her growing concern over her lack of eco-consciousness. The musing, wry tone of the piece suggests that Cullen is not the only one afflicted by “eco-anxiety.” Immediately in the title, Cullen alludes to Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth.” She implies that there is a new inconvenient truth: oftentimes, it just takes too much effort to be environmentally friendly. Therefore, when Cullen describes extreme examples of “green” actions, her tone is gently mocking, since she knows that the average person does not go to such lengths to combat eco-anxiety. In particular, she paints a slightly foolish picture of her own inadequacies: “Like the bear in the commercial, I squeeze it tight. I like my toilet paper. I like it a lot."

Cullen’s effective use of parenthetical remarks, such as “(or 52 square meters, which sounds a lot better)” and “(or 55,636 km, which sounds a lot worse)” add to the feeling of “eco-anxiety” that she describes. Cullen thinks a loud in a series of examples, employing the power of three to emphasize her point and add to her musing tone. In addition to using metaphors such as “Mine is the Sasquatch of carbon footprints. Anxiously I ponder the ways I might reduce my shoe size” to create comic effect, Cullen plays with sentence structure to maintain her dry, humorous tone. In particular, she tends to lead with a clause that sounds serious, but immediately follows that clause with a somewhat silly comment, as demonstrated by “I have seriously considered banning Christmas gifts this year to avoid the senseless consumption of sheer stuff, but I don’t want my kid to say she saw Mommy dissing Santa Claus.”

Cullen’s casual, lighthearted comments draw me into her piece. Though she seems to be mocking the futility of rousing everyone to environmental action, her sarcasm is more playful than dark; this makes her seem much more approachable to the reader. Cullen’s effective communication of her reflection is another major strength of her piece. Often in reflective essays, authors tend to lose readers by adopting a much less focused, musing tone. Cullen’s writing, however, has a very good balance between reflection and analysis; as a result, her point is always fairly clear. The weakness of this piece is its occasional repetition of sentence structures. While this repetition sometimes helps clarify the point, it becomes a little boring after a while. Cullen’s writing is probably not suited for the AP exam because it has many fragments and colloquial terms. The casual tone works for this piece but probably not for the exam.

Class Notes: Weeks 12-13 (12/13/10-1/7/11)

Stoppard Article:

· traditional drama:

o human actions in social context

o action moves from normal situation which is upsetàseries of conflicts as characters seek to cope with upsetàfinal conclusion-something is resolvedànormality = returned

o overall logic

o discernable shape: beginning, middle, end

o consistent logic

o “horizon of significance”: world ordered by certain normative understandings-enable audience to understand what is going on as coherent and accessible vision

§ establishes sense of moral meaning

o confusion at Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead is a lack of these traditional elements

· Theater of the Absurd

o refers specifically to the works of a number of modern playwrights: particularly Beckett, Ionesco, and Pinter

o dramatic world seems to have become empty of any horizon of significance

o nothing is reliable

o absurd, without logic, without comfortable reminders about time, space, and memory

o setting = often featureless

o absence of anything that might help one to understand oneself, one’s purpose, or one’s place in the social scheme of things

§ why Rosencrantz and Guildenstern keep asking what they’re doing/where they are

o even protagonist’s identity is problematic

§ why no one (including themselves) seem to be able to tell the difference between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern

o difference between existential and absurd drama:

§ existential-to achieve the dignity of being human, we must act upon our freedom to choose and launch ourselves into the world

§ absurd-no dignity; heroes lack whatever it takes to act confidently in the world; essentially grotesque clowns

Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead Discussion:

· Why the insistence on the sameness of the characters?

o audience can clearly see the differences

· Player has the most knowledge

o most mobile character

· “Life in a box is better than no life at all” (71)

o huge thematic statement

o there is actually a knock at the beginning of the play

o stage = box

o Guildenstern is mad in this scene because Rosencrantz strikes a little too close to the truth; the latter, however, just rants without any idea of the insight he is actually spewing

· take notes on Stoppard article (to be updated)

Death of a Salesman Discussion:

Why does Miller use nonrealistic techniques? What are they and how do they follow the important precept “form follows function?”

· memories/visions of Ben

o Ben = symbol of American Dream; therefore, the death of Ben implies the death of the American Dream for Willy

o Ben goes to Africa and Alaska to exploit-emphasizes that an inherent part of the so-called American Dream is stripping others of their resources

o “A man is not a piece of fruit”: point of play-Willy is a piece of fruit; the company strips him of all of his resources and then just tosses him aside

· choppy scenes/transitions from past to present, reality to visions

o shows Willy’s own erratic state of mind

o shows that Willy has no firm grip on reality

o shows that Willy is in denial about what is real and what only exists in his memories

· memories of the past

o the “Golden Days” archetype

o they have 2 cars: Chevy symbolizes the American Dream

§ Willy tells his sons to polish the car-symbolic of encouraging the dream

o Studebaker symbolizes the pipe dream-it’s the car Willy actually drives

§ symbolizes that Willy can never be happy with his current dream of becoming a salesman

How does Linda “mother her husband?” Is this a healthy dynamic? Do her sons have to compete for her maternal love?

· Linda does not demand anything of Willy; instead, she treats him more like a baby

· dairy motif symbolizes breast feeding

· treats his violent outbursts more like temper tantrums

· Linda does not actually respect Willy; she just wants to pacify him

· everyone calls Willy a “kid”-emphasizes his lack of manhood

· Biff and Willy are neglected

o Happy tells her repeatedly that he’s getting married; Linda just tells him to “go to bed”

o Biff laments that he can’t find himself; Linda just calls him a “bum”

loved versus well-liked

· Willy doesn’t understand romantic love or family love

o places more emphasis on being “well-liked”

o brushes off the whole affair with “the woman” as a case of his loneliness

o at the end, says Biff “likes him” when Biff clearly loves him

success versus happiness

· Willy confuses success with happiness

o doesn’t realize that in order for any shot at any happiness, he needs to be true to himself

o only Biff realizes the importance of self-identity in the end

o Happy follows in Willy’s footsteps-wants to “finish what Willy started”

· Ben is happy because he follows his nature

o he is ruthless and ambitious, so he follows that dream

Is it possible to have the wrong dream?

· definitely-Biff makes a reference to Willy’s “phony” dream

· a dream that goes against someone’s nature is the wrong dream for that person

· Willy renounces his joy in working with his hands; instead, he strives to be something he will never be happy with: a salesman

Overall Connections:

· The whole discussion about dreams reminds me of Langston Hughes’s poem “Dream Deferred.” I think the different outcomes of a dream deferred can also apply to the wrong dream. The wrong dream may also “fester” and ultimately “explode,” as Willy’s does.

· When we discussed Oedipus Rex, we also mentioned the theme of “Know Thyself.” Kreon knows himself better than Oedipus Rex does; therefore, he meets a better end. Similarly in Death of a Salesman, Willy dies still not knowing himself, while Biff stays alive and finally figures out that the only thing to do is to stay true to himself. Therefore, at the end of the play, Biff seems to be the only one with a bright future.

· Linda’s nobility reminds me of Penelope’s faithfulness in The Odyssey. However, as a whole, I think Penelope is more pure. Linda is the picture of the devoted housewife, but at the same time, she is a deeply troubled mother. She does not give her kids the maternal love that they need and she does not give her husband the respect that he deserves.

· Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead is essentially an absurdist re-interpretation of Hamlet. This reminds me of the discussion we had about audiences watching plays for the new, fresh point of view as opposed for the original story line. For example, people watch Oedipus Rex for Sophocles’s new spin on things, not to find out what happens.