http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/opinion/sunday/the-gops-feminine-mystique.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
The G.O.P.’s Feminine Mystique
By SAMANTHA BEE
In this article, Samantha Bee expresses
her opinion on a study done by UCLA’s Department of Psychology that analyzed
the faces of Women Democratic and Republican politicians. The study showed that women who are more
conservative have more feminine facial features while women who are more
liberal have less feminine facial structures.
Samantha Bee uses the techniques of figurative language, syntax, and diction
to convey her feelings for this study.
Bee includes interesting figurative
language in her article that allows her to speak to the audience on a more
direct level. When talking about the “Michele
Bachmann Effect,” Bee shows the ridiculousness of this study by saying that it
causes her to “briefly consider living the rest of [her] life in monkish
isolation on a mountaintop with only the cold wind for companionship.” Of course, this is a hyperbole and she doesn’t
actually think this, but the strangeness of this image and the association with
the study makes the audience understand that this study is absurd. Another example of figurative language is
when she says she finished reading the study, she was pretty sure “1970s Burt
Reynolds reached across the passenger seat of his Tans Am to give me a wink and
a boob honk.” Bee tries to show the
audience her feelings by alluding to an actor who she assumed most of her
readers would know. Bee also uses some
common metaphors such as “judge a book by its cover” and “given us the green
light” to allow the audience to better understand her ideas.
Throughout this article, Bee asks
many questions, both directly to the audience: “Did you know that it can also
teach you things that you never wanted to know and now not-so-secretly wish you
didn’t?” and rhetorically: “Is it the part where the Internet is flooded by a
bickering over which political party has the ‘prettier’ members of Congress and/or
prettier voters?” Through this
interesting syntax, Bee examines the facts of the study and asks the audience
questions, as if she is trying to get the readers’ validation of these claims
made by the study. It sounds almost as
if she is questioning the validity of the research. This
shows her reluctance to see the study as serious, scientific research.
Bee’s diction contains
contrasting elevation. Some of her
words, such as “visceral”, “maelstrom” and “construed” are elevated, however
she also uses words with very low elevation such as “ha ha” and “man-heads” and
colloquialisms such as “ugly stick.” The
low elevation diction allows the reader to connect with the article because
he/she is familiar with the terms. The
elevated diction reflects the fact that she is talking about a professional
study done by scientists at a respectable university, however her incorporation
of the low-elevation diction detract from the validity of the study.
Bee effectively uses rhetorical
techniques to show the audience how she thinks this study done by UCLA is
ridiculous. In addition, these
techniques help to create a piece that is entertaining and funny to read.
This article was really interesting to read about... I actually have a mannish-face though. Hm.
ReplyDeleteI think some examples that you labeled as figurative language might also be imagery? I don't know about you, but I really did imagine Michele Bachmann climbing to the top of a mountain and camping-out there. But perhaps that is just me.
The rest of the close reading was excellent. I especially liked your analysis of Bee's use of words like "visceral" and "maelstrom" versus words like "man-head" and "ugly stick". But perhaps she used this interesting mix of "high" and "low" diction to appeal to an educated and common audience.
I think that you had some really good examples of how the author used certain literary techniques in this article. I liked how when you identified different examples of diction, you not only described how it connects with the reader, but you also talked about the elevation. That was a nice touch to this close reading. I can see how the example you used about her writing that she would “briefly consider living the rest of [her] life in monkish isolation on a mountaintop with only the cold wind for companionship,” is figurative language, but I do agree with Daphine that it could also be imagery. Or maybe it's both? Just something to think about!
ReplyDeleteYou had some great examples of literary techniques in this article! I liked how you contrasted the elevated and "low" diction. I think that this editorial was meant to appeal to the masses and the elevated diction is meant to be confusing to most people. Elevated diction tends to add validity to certain claims: especially science, or pseudoscience. I think that this editorial is not meant to be read by scientists and highly educated people, so the "low" diction just makes the author get her point across more clearly. Your analysis of literary techniques within the poem was very interesting, however I think that before you start your analysis you need to first state the opinion of the author on the issue/study. Most of you examples didn't make any since to me since I didn't read the paper. It is helpful to understand the context that each quote is used in or else it just gets rather confusing. For example when you said, "Another example of figurative language is when she says she finished reading the study, she was pretty sure '1970s Burt Reynolds reached across the passenger seat of his Tans Am to give me a wink and a boob honk.'" This just sounds completely absurd and leaves the reader really confused if you don't tie it back into what the purpose for writing the piece. Overall though your examples were very good and this was a well written analysis.
ReplyDeleteLast month's peer reviewers suggested that you needed a more explicitly stated thesis and clearer warrants. You have responded well to the first suggestion, but I don't always see clear warrants in this month's Close Reading essay. In part, this is because you don't specifically say what Bee's exact feelings are until your conclusion--lacking this specificity in your thesis means that you then don't have words like "ridiculous," etc. in your claim sentences to tie your warrants back to. Lesson? Be very specific in your thesis! =) Be very specific in your claims! =) And keep tying everything together with clear explanations.
ReplyDeleteI liked your introduction, but I think your thesis might have illustrated your essay a little better. Your paragraph about figurative language was also good, but again, I think you should include types of language other than figurative. In your syntax paragraph, you mention questions, but I think you should also mention different types of syntax: Sentence length, sentence fragments, order of sentences, etc. I did really like your diction paragraph though, I love how you mentioned elevation and colloquialism and how you related it to the text. All in all, it is a good essay, I'd just consider expanding the things you mentioned a bit more. :)
ReplyDelete