So it's no secret to a lot of people, even people that I hardly know, that I'm obsessed with country music. I guess I understand why people don't like it, it has very hick tendencies.
But when you put that aside, it really does tell a story. Some are about breakups, some are about marriage, children, drinking beer. Name anything along those lines and there is probably a song about it.
Something that a lot of these songs do are make an argument. They do not necessarily occur in duet form either. Singers sing about trying to convince their ex boy or girlfriend to take them back, or list the reasons why they're wrong, or try to persuade other's to do what they want.
Yes, the songs that focus on these types of persuasive arguments tend to be sad, but they're amazing. Someone especially known for music people can relate to is none other than Taylor Swift. Although I don't consider her country, for some reason that's the branch of music she falls under.
Her songs list the reasons as to why relationships failed, why they worked, or why they should just try them again. They're powerful songs too. She evokes an emotional response without really doing much of anything other than writing down the words in her head. Yet she's amazing at getting those emotions--and those arguments down. She calls on pathos to help her audience, and the person she is specifically singing to, understand where she is coming from.
She's not the only one that does this though. Brad Paisley and Carrie Underwood's duet "Remind Me" also appeals highly to emotions. The words, the voices, the music make the song drip with pathos. Not only does create emotions between those singing, but even to other people listening. The song makes you think of the past, and remember things that you sometimes try to forgot (plus they're both beautiful, why wouldn't you want to listen... like seriously take a look at Carrie Underwood).
If you don't fall for Taylor, Brad or Carrie, there has to be something wrong with you. Because, believe me, if someone was singing those same songs to me, I'd take them back in a heartbeat.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Thursday, March 15, 2012
A Little More on Controversy
As I struggled to come up with something to write about this week, I realized that all that I could think about when the topic of LA101H came up was controversy.
I definitely did not think it would be hard to think of a topic for our project. It was hard to think of something that everyone could really agree was a controversy. While debating topics with my group, it got me thinking: what exactly defines a controversy?
Dictionary.com defines it as "a prolonged public dispute, or contention; disputation concerning a matter of opinion." So something that the media really harps on; turn on the news and there are ton of these. The second definition was "contention, strife, or argument." This definition basically says it can be anything a person does not agree with.
To me it seems as if these two definitions clash. One says it must be a focus of public dispute, but the other just says it has to just be one simple argument. I also think that when it comes to public controversies, most people strongly stand on one side; there is less middle ground.
But isn't controversy partially in the eye of the beholder? Who says that just because one person is offended by something that others will agree? How do controversies really begin?
For some reason, I can't seem to think up any good reasons for these things. I guess that's part of controversies, they all seem to come out of no where, especially during a year like this: an election year.
I guess part of 2012 will be a constant conversation about controversies about what Democrats vs. Republicans have to say. Although it might not make sense, that just seems to be part of the word.
I definitely did not think it would be hard to think of a topic for our project. It was hard to think of something that everyone could really agree was a controversy. While debating topics with my group, it got me thinking: what exactly defines a controversy?
Dictionary.com defines it as "a prolonged public dispute, or contention; disputation concerning a matter of opinion." So something that the media really harps on; turn on the news and there are ton of these. The second definition was "contention, strife, or argument." This definition basically says it can be anything a person does not agree with.
To me it seems as if these two definitions clash. One says it must be a focus of public dispute, but the other just says it has to just be one simple argument. I also think that when it comes to public controversies, most people strongly stand on one side; there is less middle ground.
But isn't controversy partially in the eye of the beholder? Who says that just because one person is offended by something that others will agree? How do controversies really begin?
For some reason, I can't seem to think up any good reasons for these things. I guess that's part of controversies, they all seem to come out of no where, especially during a year like this: an election year.
I guess part of 2012 will be a constant conversation about controversies about what Democrats vs. Republicans have to say. Although it might not make sense, that just seems to be part of the word.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Controversy is Everywhere
No matter where we are, controversy is all around us. From the littlest things, like if Kim's "marriage" to Kris was real to things that have an effect on the entire nation like the war in Iraq, almost everything done in the public realm turns into some sort of controversy. The most recent one that seems to be blowing up the news, the internet, Facebook and even Twitter seems to be Obama's birth control mandate. If you are not familiar with this, here's a clip of him talking about it:
Now I understand that people can be against this. I understand that it is against the beliefs of the Catholic Church. But I'm sorry, this is a secular society. The church shouldn't have anything to do with it. You heard Obama say it: contraceptives save lives, prevent disease, and save families money. Frankly, more people could benefit from using said contraceptives (yes, I'm talking about you Snooki).
I'm not saying everyone should be for birth control or anything-- you are welcome to have your beliefs and so am I. The point I'm trying to make is that Obama's small decision to mandate something that almost all companies already do created a huge controversy. What is more important than that is the timing. It's an election year, will this hinder him or make him more popular? I think it's a combination of both. He probably gained lots of feminist voters, but may have lost some religious men and women.
It's interesting that such small decisions have the ability to create so much talk. Personally, I think it was a smart step for Obama. In the middle of all of the Republican primaries you really are not hearing too much about Obama. With all of the focus on the Republican party, Obama needed something to get the news talking about him once again. I think he might have done this better than ever expected. A topic like this causes people to take sides, something that really helps controversy along.
Then again, people like to argue, so anything really can be made into a controversy.
Now I understand that people can be against this. I understand that it is against the beliefs of the Catholic Church. But I'm sorry, this is a secular society. The church shouldn't have anything to do with it. You heard Obama say it: contraceptives save lives, prevent disease, and save families money. Frankly, more people could benefit from using said contraceptives (yes, I'm talking about you Snooki).
I'm not saying everyone should be for birth control or anything-- you are welcome to have your beliefs and so am I. The point I'm trying to make is that Obama's small decision to mandate something that almost all companies already do created a huge controversy. What is more important than that is the timing. It's an election year, will this hinder him or make him more popular? I think it's a combination of both. He probably gained lots of feminist voters, but may have lost some religious men and women.
It's interesting that such small decisions have the ability to create so much talk. Personally, I think it was a smart step for Obama. In the middle of all of the Republican primaries you really are not hearing too much about Obama. With all of the focus on the Republican party, Obama needed something to get the news talking about him once again. I think he might have done this better than ever expected. A topic like this causes people to take sides, something that really helps controversy along.
Then again, people like to argue, so anything really can be made into a controversy.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Bad Speeches
I know that I absolutely hate public speaking. So when we were given the speech assignment last week, nothing but nerves filled my body. While giving my speech on Thursday, I was pretty sure my nerves were visible.
I'm sure I wasn't the only one to feel this way. I could overhear many people in the class expressing how nervous they were as well. Well good news, the speeches were great. Everyone knew what they were talking about, picked amazing commercials, made eye contact consistently, and kept good body posture.
Even if you aren't very confident in your performance, at least you can take pride knowing that you are a better public speaker than our former President, George W. Bush:
Politics aside, George W. Bush is a terrible public speaker. He received harsh criticism from almost everyone for his inability to pronounce words, how often he stumbled on words, and his thick accent, which can be extremely hard to understand. Although you can blame some of this on nerves, President Bush probably should have learned to get rid of them after eight years in office.
He is one of the best examples of what not to do in a speech. In order to be successful when publicy speaking, you must make sure you're confident enough in yourself to keep from letting nerves harm your speech.
The only way to guarentee this confidence is practice, practice and more practice. It is also helpful to know when you plan to make eye contact, move your hands and body, and make sure you do not include any words that may trip you up when the nerves do kick in. If necessary, practice in front of a mirror. That definetly helped me when I prepared for our ad analysis speech. Do whatever it takes to have some confidence in yourself.
So maybe you aren't able to enstill this confidence in yourself. At least you can take pride in knowing that you're probably a better public speaker than a man that once ran our country.
I'm sure I wasn't the only one to feel this way. I could overhear many people in the class expressing how nervous they were as well. Well good news, the speeches were great. Everyone knew what they were talking about, picked amazing commercials, made eye contact consistently, and kept good body posture.
Even if you aren't very confident in your performance, at least you can take pride knowing that you are a better public speaker than our former President, George W. Bush:
He is one of the best examples of what not to do in a speech. In order to be successful when publicy speaking, you must make sure you're confident enough in yourself to keep from letting nerves harm your speech.
The only way to guarentee this confidence is practice, practice and more practice. It is also helpful to know when you plan to make eye contact, move your hands and body, and make sure you do not include any words that may trip you up when the nerves do kick in. If necessary, practice in front of a mirror. That definetly helped me when I prepared for our ad analysis speech. Do whatever it takes to have some confidence in yourself.
So maybe you aren't able to enstill this confidence in yourself. At least you can take pride in knowing that you're probably a better public speaker than a man that once ran our country.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
I love reality TV. All of it. I know that most of it's stupid, but I honestly get a kick out of watching people fight. Whether it's Jersey Shore, Toddlers and Tiaras, Jerseylicious, Worst Cooks in America-- fights are pretty hilarious, no matter what. Maybe that's just me though.
The interesting thing about these fights is that, in a good majority of them: the people fighting actually listen to what the other is saying... Are these seemingly immature people actually employing some form of rhetoric?
Technically, the aren't really fighting to do anything but make the other person angry, whereas rhetoric is supposed to be used to inform, persuade or motivate an audience to do something, reality show stars usually aren't doing that. But sometimes they do employ ethos.
My favorite of all the reality shows is Dance Moms, a show about, well, dance moms, at a studio called Abby Lee's in Pittsburgh. The children in the show are exceptionally talented, but the mothers are really the focus of the show. No episode is complete without at least one huge fight between the moms or with the instructor, Abby Lee. The moms are out for blood. They don't just attack each other, they bring their children into it. I may not be a mother, but one thing I know is that when you talk about someones kid, they're going to get really mad, and emotions get dragged into it.
Sometimes they even use pathos, and take some swings at each others parenting ability, or attacking their character in some other way. It's just too much to handle. I know that if I were in their position, I would be mad, but watching it I can't help but being entertained.
A recent episode included a same sort of fight, here's a clip:
Dance Moms "Aftermath"
Yes, they yell, but their aware of what the other is saying, which is more than I can say about some political debates. The fights continue week after week and get worse as they progress, yelling always occurs, but they always respond to what the other says.
They may be mindless fights, but they sure are entertaining.
The interesting thing about these fights is that, in a good majority of them: the people fighting actually listen to what the other is saying... Are these seemingly immature people actually employing some form of rhetoric?
Technically, the aren't really fighting to do anything but make the other person angry, whereas rhetoric is supposed to be used to inform, persuade or motivate an audience to do something, reality show stars usually aren't doing that. But sometimes they do employ ethos.
My favorite of all the reality shows is Dance Moms, a show about, well, dance moms, at a studio called Abby Lee's in Pittsburgh. The children in the show are exceptionally talented, but the mothers are really the focus of the show. No episode is complete without at least one huge fight between the moms or with the instructor, Abby Lee. The moms are out for blood. They don't just attack each other, they bring their children into it. I may not be a mother, but one thing I know is that when you talk about someones kid, they're going to get really mad, and emotions get dragged into it.
Sometimes they even use pathos, and take some swings at each others parenting ability, or attacking their character in some other way. It's just too much to handle. I know that if I were in their position, I would be mad, but watching it I can't help but being entertained.
A recent episode included a same sort of fight, here's a clip:
Dance Moms "Aftermath"
Yes, they yell, but their aware of what the other is saying, which is more than I can say about some political debates. The fights continue week after week and get worse as they progress, yelling always occurs, but they always respond to what the other says.
They may be mindless fights, but they sure are entertaining.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Put Your Dukes Up
I'll be the first to admit it: I am an awful person to get into an argument with. I'm incredibly stubborn. I really could care less about how other people feel about certain things. I'm aware that saying the above makes me sound like I think I'm entitled, but it's more that I just have very strong opinons.
Somehow I've started to change my ways. I've started listening more, not yelling over other people, and not saying anything I'll regret when arguing. The more I listen to debates, conversations, fights, etc, I realize that it's important to care about what people have to say.
This has become especially vital when fighting with the roomie. Don't get me wrong, we get along, but there are some things we just do not see eye to eye on. Like State Patty's Day for instance.
The rule says ONE person. ONE. Last time I checked, one and seven are not nearly the same thing. So when my roommate nonchalantly asked me if I would "stay somewhere else" that weekend, it got my attention. My first response was to get angry. But I've slowly picked up on the fact that yelling doesn't actually get you anywhere. So I looked up and let her explain her case:
"Because... if you aren't here, then I can pass off one of my friends as you. And then I only have six extra people."
There are pretty much 100 reasons why that wouldn't work, but instead of being sassy and telling her off for how, for lack of a better word, dumb that is, I smiled and explained by reasoning.
First off, none of her friends look like me. Second, I'm pretty sure if my RA, who happens to be one of my best friends, would realize that "Keirstyn" is, in fact, not me.
After telling her my obviously logical reasons, she got mad, but never once yelled. We were both angry, but always listened to the other. Eventually she calmed down and apologized, realzing that she was a little bit off base.
I have never had a fight solved so easily before. By keeping control of what I was saying and making sure I listened, it really made it seem like I was interested in how she felt about the situation, which kept her from having further reasons to get mad at me. I didn't yell. I didn't say anything rude. Each of us had our chance to talk and it led to us being able to quickly figure things out.
Using rhetoric can lead to great outcomes. Quicker fights, logical outcomes, no one gets hurt, everyone gets a chance to talk. Although I didn't get her to budge on how many people will be living out of my room State Patty's Day, I did get my bed back. So maybe I'm crossing my fingers that she gets caught and her guests get kicked out, at least I kept it to myself.
Somehow I've started to change my ways. I've started listening more, not yelling over other people, and not saying anything I'll regret when arguing. The more I listen to debates, conversations, fights, etc, I realize that it's important to care about what people have to say.
This has become especially vital when fighting with the roomie. Don't get me wrong, we get along, but there are some things we just do not see eye to eye on. Like State Patty's Day for instance.
The rule says ONE person. ONE. Last time I checked, one and seven are not nearly the same thing. So when my roommate nonchalantly asked me if I would "stay somewhere else" that weekend, it got my attention. My first response was to get angry. But I've slowly picked up on the fact that yelling doesn't actually get you anywhere. So I looked up and let her explain her case:
"Because... if you aren't here, then I can pass off one of my friends as you. And then I only have six extra people."
There are pretty much 100 reasons why that wouldn't work, but instead of being sassy and telling her off for how, for lack of a better word, dumb that is, I smiled and explained by reasoning.
First off, none of her friends look like me. Second, I'm pretty sure if my RA, who happens to be one of my best friends, would realize that "Keirstyn" is, in fact, not me.
After telling her my obviously logical reasons, she got mad, but never once yelled. We were both angry, but always listened to the other. Eventually she calmed down and apologized, realzing that she was a little bit off base.
I have never had a fight solved so easily before. By keeping control of what I was saying and making sure I listened, it really made it seem like I was interested in how she felt about the situation, which kept her from having further reasons to get mad at me. I didn't yell. I didn't say anything rude. Each of us had our chance to talk and it led to us being able to quickly figure things out.
Using rhetoric can lead to great outcomes. Quicker fights, logical outcomes, no one gets hurt, everyone gets a chance to talk. Although I didn't get her to budge on how many people will be living out of my room State Patty's Day, I did get my bed back. So maybe I'm crossing my fingers that she gets caught and her guests get kicked out, at least I kept it to myself.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
I Believe In French Fries On Sandwiches
For LA 101 H, we were required to create a "This I Believe" podcast like NPR does. I wrote about the time I first bonded with my step-dad at Primanti's and how from that night on, our relationship changed. Take a listen below!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)