Something I just found that made me pause. And think.

Washington, DC Metro Station on a cold January morning in 2007. The man with a violin played six Bach pieces for about 45 minutes. During that time approximately. 2 thousand people went through the station, most of them on their way to work. After 3 minutes a middle aged man noticed there was a musician playing. He slowed his pace and stopped for a few seconds and then hurried to meet his schedule.

4 minutes later:

The violinist received his first dollar: a woman threw the money in the hat and, without stopping, continued to walk.

6 minutes:

A young man leaned against the wall to listen to him, then looked at his watch and started to walk again.

10 minutes:

A 3-year old boy stopped but his mother tugged him along hurriedly. The kid stopped to look at the violinist again, but the mother pushed hard and the child continued to walk, turning his head all the time. This action was repeated by several other children. Every parent, without exception, forced their children to move on quickly.

45 minutes:

The musician played continuously. Only 6 people stopped and listened for a short while. About 20 gave money but continued to walk at their normal pace. The man collected a total of $32.

1 hour:

He finished playing and silence took over. No one noticed. No one applauded, nor was there any recognition.

No one knew this, but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the greatest musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, with a violin worth $3.5 million dollars. Two days before Joshua Bell sold out a theater in Boston where the seats averaged $100.

This is a true story. Joshua Bell playing incognito in the metro station was organized by the Washington Post as part of a social experiment about perception, taste and people’s priorities.

The questions raised:

*In a common place environment at an inappropriate hour, do we perceive beauty?

*Do we stop to appreciate it?

*Do we recognize talent in an unexpected context?

One possible conclusion reached from this experiment could be this:

If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world, playing some of the finest music ever written, with one of the most beautiful instruments ever made…

How many other things are we missing?

Fletcher Tracks Ferguson

I wrote this in 2007.

In addition to being a regular Monday writer on the Op-Ed pages of the Los Angeles Times, Niall Ferguson is a Harvard history professor—which may explain the elevated diction and didactic tone he employs when writing his fact-dense columns about contemporary global politics.  His topics are diverse and surprising, yet he provides sufficient background information and context to enable a careful reader to consider circumstances, repercussions and consequences of our emerging global society that may have otherwise gone unnoticed.  Ferguson writes for an elite audience: thoughtful, well educated, political and cosmopolitan.  In two of the three columns I am working with, Ferguson challenges and ultimately eschews the usual Eurocentric, (Anglocentric?) point of view. He does not hesitate to criticize the powers-that-be and recent foreign policy decisions in both Great Britain and the United States, and yet he seems conservative and measured in his views.  When he writes about the war in Iraq, for example, he acknowledges and describes many tactical mistakes that the West has made in this disastrous war, and yet he is critical of Clinton’s withdrawal of troops from Somalia, calling the removal as “cut and run,” a phrase that evokes foolish cowardice.  Ferguson is a thinking man who resists easy classification.

In his January 1 column entitled, “Auld lang syne for English speakers”, he opens with a rhetorical question — “I was going to wish you a Happy New Year, but why bother?” — and immediately establishes a conversational tone, yet he asks a question that borders on rudeness.  After all, January 1 is a holiday, and readers have been bombarded by happy greetings for days, even weeks.  So why is this guy withholding his wish for my happiness?  He goes on to explain that for 40% of the world’s population, it is not a new year — not yet.  Muslims will celebrate the new year, 1428, on January 20.  And 1.3 Chinese people — and he’s only counting those folks who actually live in the People’s Republic of China — will usher in the Year of the Dog on February 18.  As he goes on to explain the traditional song sung at New Years celebrations by Anglos — and here he includes the UK, Australia, New Zealand, portions of Canada, and of course, the USA — he points out that irony of this nostalgic tune is that it was written in Olds Scots language.  We don’t even understand what the song says — auld lang syne? — but we think it bids a sentimental good-bye to the old year?  Old friends?  Something old.  This is precisely his point, and he goes on to lump Anglo dominance, including the English language, into the pile of old things we may as well sing our sentimental good-bye song to.  Here Ferguson carefully buttresses his point with statistics, facts, and descriptions that clearly describe the waning of what “the American writer James C. Bennett has called ‘the Anglosphere’.”  Ferguson goes on to explain that perhaps, with “three centuries of commerce, conquest, migration and missionary work,” it may be more accurate to describe the Anglo phenomenon as a “diaspora.”  and then asserts what many might consider an alarming viewpoint, and he does it with the lightest touch of humor:

The key point, however, is that this Anglo diaspora’s glory days lie precisely in ‘old long since.’…Demography isn’t always destiny.  For the English-speaking peoples, however, it looks a lot like doom…To me, the Anglosphere and Anglo diaspora resemble the ruins of Nineveh and Tyre exhibits in the great Museum of Defunct Empires.

Ferguson spends necessary time writing definitions of phrases such as “Anglosphere” and  “Anglo diaspora” — and freely utilizes statistics and facts to further explain and support his claims.  These are important moves rhetorically as they enable the reader to both follow and consider the veracity of his points. 

Further, Ferguson’s regular use of the balanced, well modulated sentence is sometimes punctuated with a short, punchy line, to indicate the writer’s surprise, or his own conviction:

It would be cheering to believe, with Bennett and Roberts, that there is still a future for [the Anglosphere’s] distinctive culture (as opposed to its conveniently easy language.)  But I doubt it.

The first sentence has a rhythmic, lulling quality that contrasts sharply with the abruptness of his line “But I doubt it.” This short sentence serves to wake the reader up — did we even realize we were asleep?  That we had been operating under the assumption that the 21^st century would look just like the 20^th,?  Just maybe more gadgety?  — to the idea that despite what we wish or hope for, and despite what we are comfortable with, we would be foolish to believe that Anglo culture will dominate the globe indefinitely.  Ferguson’s short little sentence smacks us alert

Track a Columnist

In keeping with the College Board’s stated goal of fostering a “well-informed citizenry,” let’s read some writers who are discussing policy, politics and culture.

PROCEDURE:

Step One:  Find your columnist.

This is going to take some patience on your part.  For a more meaningful learning experience, find a writer you can connect with, or a writer who riles you up.  Take your time.  Browse and read.  Be willing to sit and search.

Step Two:  Collect six.

Collect six current, consecutive columns by your author. A little later in this handout you will find a list of web sites to help you on your search, and some general advice.

Step Three:  Annotate.

Each article must be annotated.  Annotate for the following

·      Speaker’s tone

·      Rhetorical strategies

·      Organizational shifts

·      Appeals to logic or emotion

·      Main idea/argument; supporting evidence.  Examine how the argument is constructed.

Mark places in the text that evoke a reaction from you, be it laughter, anger, or confusion.

Step Four:  Write.

After annotating, write a brief response (one-half page to a page) that includes the following:

·      A brief summary of the author's main point

·      The most salient strategies employed by the author and what effect they have

·      The article's effect on you

Your first annotated article and one-page response will be due in class for workshop and peer response on ___________________  If you are struggling, I can give you some guidance then.

Step Five:  The Grand Finale.

The final task is to write AN ESSAY that delineates the following:

·      The author's general focus in columns (e.g. political, family, arts, social problems)

·      Three of the author's oft-used stylistic devices

·      An analysis of the efficacy of those devices

You are to judge the author's writing style as convincing or ineffective and explain why; it is not necessary that you agree with the writer if you feel that a point has been convincingly made. Specific examples must be provided from at least three of your collected columns.

Those Seeking a Favorable Grade Should Follow the Suggested Guidelines:

·      Essay length is expected to be between 500-750 words.   You are going to have to find something to talk about.  This essay is too long to fake.

·      Times Roman, 12-point type, double-spaced with one-inch margins.

·      Your name, date, and class will be single spaced in the top left hand corner of page one.

·      A right header will contain your last name and page number on every page.

·      Include a Works Cited page, citing all six editorials in proper MLA form.  I will look at this page like a HAWK.  Ten points knocked off for any MLA infraction.  (Yes, we will go over this ad nauseum.)

·      I expect you to include specific examples in the body of your essay as you discuss various stylistic devices, and their rhetorical effectiveness, and I want to see two to four internal citations for three reasons: (1) to show you know the citation form, (2) to show you know how to gracefully incorporate quotations, and (3) to allow you to reinforce the validity of your argument by referring to "proof."

·      This is a formal, analytical essay based entirely on primary resources (your six columns). You should write in the third person present tense, avoiding the passive voice.  In the final paragraph, you may switch and shift to first person to evaluate the readability of the columnist and to explain your personal response to the writer’s style, perspective, and topics.

·      Between now and the due date, we will be reviewing William Zinsser, Chapter 2 in Everyday Use, and George Orwell’s simple rules for writing.  Please diligently avoid empty phrases, clichés, jargon, and obfuscation.  Dig these out of your essays like something that has gone bad in your refrigerator.  Find it, make a face at it, and toss it.

·      Please attach your annotated articles to your essay, behind your Works Cited page.  For full credit, I am expecting to see well-annotated articles. Notes go in your notebooks, and I’d like you to show these to me as well.   

How to Start – Advice and Websites

I will add this info to the blog…

Jump in!  But try to choose a columnist based on something besides their face.  This is a good place to go if you already know a name.  It's kind of hard to start from scratch here.

http://www.blueagle.com/

Arts and Letters Daily

One of the most comprehensives site I've seen.  You can access a dozen newspapers, book

reviews, and at least 30 columnists of all political stripes.

The Internet Public Library

American Journalism Review

Click on Newspapers, and you’ll see over 1000 national newspapers that are online…

Don’t forget to Google.

Check out the Pulitzer Prize website, and track down the prize-winning journalists, like Ellen Goodman, Thomas L. Friedman,

I am just now getting to know Naomi Klein; right now, she’s on my radar and I’m reading whatever I can find.

Did you know?

When you get to the newspaper’s homepage, you may find the name of the specific author you wish to follow on the home page; otherwise, check the Editorials or Op-Ed. Archives can be searched on these sites, but many publications require payment for articles older than one or two weeks. Therefore, do not let this go until the due date.  Start now and keep up, or it will end up costing you money.

Left or Right?

If you're not sure of the columnist's political bent, you could check here for conservative opinion. There's an archive for each columnist and links to current columns. Some good conservative magazines are National Review and The Weekly Standard; the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Times tend to be conservative.  Liberal columnists publish in The Nation, Salon, NY Times, and the Washington Post, among others. 

The New York Times   Click on Editorials/Op-Ed.

Maureen Dowd, Thomas L. Friedman, Bob Herbert, Paul Krugman, others

The Washington Post  Click on Opinions to see a list

of regular contributors like Jim Hoagland, William Raspberry, George F. Will

The Boston Globe  Click on Editorials/Op-Ed.

Ellen Goodman, Joan Vennochi

The Nation  Famously left. Calvin Trillin, Christopher Hitchens, Katha Pollitt (I sure like Katha Pollitt. She’s like ice water down the back.)

Chicago Sun-Times. Click on Commentary and use list of columnists.

 

Chicago Tribune  Click on  Columnists.

Miami Herald  Click on Opinion; Columnists are on the right; Click on Search/Archives for Carl Hiaasen (if you want to read him-don't know why he's not listed in columnists!).

The San Francisco Chronicle  Click on Columnists.

The Washington Times Click on Opinion/Editorial and scroll down to Regular columnists.

I haven’t even mentioned our beloved and beleaguered Los Angeles Times!  There are lots of great writers in the LA Times, and you can read it in traditional newsprint!

Quang Le!

I am sure this post will be of interest to more people than just QL, but I know Quang follows Jon Stewart and the Daily Show.  Terry Gross is airing a live interview she recorded with Stewart last week -- it's excellent!  I'm going to go figure out how to download it from the Fresh Air website.

Dear Students:

I recently updated the AP Nonfiction booklist (I mean, like earlier today).  If you want to browse the list and see if there's something that speaks to you, check it out!  It's over in the link list, third from the bottom.  That's the list you'll be choosing from to do your nonfiction book review later on in the year.

Humiliation.

While shooting an elephant is wrong on a moral and economic level, if we "put ourselves in Orwell's shoes" he does gain some justification. Imagine your boyfriend or girlfriend cheated on you. You confront the person he/she cheated on you with, and they punch you in the face. It's not easy to turn the other cheek now is it? Hardly anyone would walk away, losing their dignity and lover in front of your dozens of peers. Orwell wanted to keep his dignity, for it was at stake in front of the two thousand people he had amassed. The rowdy crowd was expecting a show, so he gave it to them. At the moment, pride is sometimes much more important than the consequences on hand. No one wants to be called a sissy. People would do anything to keep themselves from being publically humiliated. There was a story in the news about a college student who put a live webcam in his dorm room. At this time, the second roommate had asked for some privacy. He had brought in his "male companion". As a closeted gay male, his cover because of his roommate's insincerity. Furthermore, Orwell had to deal with the guilt of killing such a majestic creature, while the high school student would deal with suspension or expulsion. Unfortunately, the college student had jumped off of a bridge to escape this humiliation.

Jacoby and Religion

Susan Jacoby states that because of religions large role in our lives, it results in irrationality and belief in things that are scientifically proven wrong. In some ways, it is effecting education and making it one- sided because education will not challenge religious views because religion has such a large impact in our lives, even it if harbors hatred. Due to either one-sided, or absolutely no discussion at all of religion, we are taught no religious tolerance. For example, a six year old girl I was babysitting was talking faithfully about her religion and how it’s taught in her Christian school. When I happened to mention another religion, she became disgusted and knew only of the bad things this religion had done. I could easily tell there was already a deep hatred planted in her young little head for a religion that opposed hers, even at such an ignorant stage. I was shocked, to say the least, and I realized that her views are formed because at schools, we are not taught to tolerate other religions or we are not taught about other religions at all. Sure, our parents may tell us, but depending on the person, they probably have one sided views as well. We are never offered a unbiased, straight answer.