To the Haters,

This post is not so much a reaction to literature as it is a reaction to a reaction to literature.
Let me explain. Recently, I have gotten into several debates with some of my peers (both inside and outside of this classroom) on the merit of the medium of comic books. My fellow classmates seem to be convinced that they are practically without literary merit when compared to regular books and generally look upon them with a certain amount of disdain and, if I may say so myself, arrogance. Their uneducated attitude has inspired me to defend a medium that I have become quite a fan of in the last several years.
For starters, several of my classmates (well, one really. But I won't single him out) are convinced that comic books are not even literature. I take extreme offense to that statement, especially considering the rather broad definition of literature. According to Merriam-Webster, the definition of literature is as follows:
(1): Writings in prose or verse; especially; writings having excellence in form or expression of ideas of permanent or universal interest (2): an example of such writings
A comic book tells a story through prose, so already it's in. Beyond that, many comic books have excellence of form or expression and quite a few express ideas of permanent or universal interest. If you really want to continue arguing about whether comic books as a whole are literature, I can simply roll out the example of "Twilight" to "prove" that books as a whole aren't literature.
Once it's been proved that it is literature, they fall back on another argument: "Well then they have less literary merit than books."
Really? Now let me ask you, how many comic books have you read? Now I'm not talking about some Spiderman comic you read in the newspaper as a kid because those are basically like reading the book of any Hollywood action movie (yes, those do exist), I'm talking something with depth and meaning, something like Sandman by Neil Gaiman or Watchmen by Alan Moore. You've read none? And yet you want to comment on their literary merit, something that is, for the most part, pretty darn subjective? Even Mr. Tallman admits that what he sees in a book is not always the only correct answer, that it is possible to view things in an entirely different way than him and still be right but you, without even reading any of them, are able to judge them in their entirety? If that doesn't SCREAM arrogance, I really don't know what does. 
If you don't believe that these comic books actually have depth, go read them. In them you will find some of the most interesting characters I've ever encountered, some of the most interesting plot twists I've ever experienced, and some of the most well-used tropes, themes and symbols I've ever found. The 8th volume of Sandman features an introduction by Stephen King that reads in part, "So these are smart stories, and cunningly crafted stories. Fortunately for us, they are also good stories, little wonders of economy and surprise." 
No offense to all you students, but I'm pretty sure Stephen King knows a thing or two about writing that you might not. So when he recommends something so strongly, I suggest you take a listen. 
After all that, they fall back on another easily contested argument: "Well, comic books don't need descriptions so they don't have as much merit."
Ohh where to start. In fairness, there is a certain amount of truth to this. The authors don't have to describe what everything looks like. However, this often leads them into an even more difficult description: what someone is like, what that person's essence, what their being is like. Beyond that, the visuals of a comic allow the author (who has a more significant process in the drawing than you'd think) another place to put symbols, to emphasize themes, adding another dimension to the important parts of literature that hide just beneath the story, adding to it in subtle but important ways. Finally, the art actually helps lead the story along, helps push the reader's assumptions and views in a certain direction, and add meaning to the story in a way that the author really has to be in firm control of if they want to have control over their story.

If this was too long for you, basically what I'm saying is that you should just shut your mouth about comic books until you've actually read some.

Surprised by Logos

When Mr. Tallman announced that we must write a blog post about some sort of rhetorical appeal, I immediately knew where I would go. The column on the left side of the Metro section of the Boston Globe always has some sort of appeal to pathos, whether it be a story about gang violence told from the perspective of the mothers of victims or a success story of some extraordinary kid. But, to my surprise, I found that this Sunday's column was much more of an appeal to logos. The article, by Yvonne Abraham, discusses Gavin Middle School in South Boston. Previously a school where 75% of the students scored less than proficient on the math MCAS, the school has turned itself around very quickly and very efficiently. The reasons why constitutes the bulk of the article. The first step Superintendent Carol Johnson took was to turn the school into the city's first in-district charter school, using a non-profit school management organization called Unlocking Potential. The newly christened UP Academy immediately saw math MCAS "proficiency" rates jump almost 25%, with English "proficiency" rates jumping 22% as well.
How did they do it? Not through any sort of radical new teaching method but through simple, logical steps that any school could pretty easily take. First, lengthen the school day. As obvious as it sounds, more time in school equals more learning. Second of all, hire extra teachers. The extra personnel allows for more tutoring hours with the students more collaboration between the teachers and extra professional days, simply because each teacher has more time outside the classroom to better their performance inside the classroom. Finally, UP Academy puts emphasis on teacher evaluation, giving the teachers the knowledge they need to improve their classroom.
What makes this an appeal to logos, though, is the relative lack of statistics. Yes, there were the before and after percentages I mention above, but Ms. Abraham makes no effort to prove that the steps taken caused those changes, instead merely pointing out a correlation. What proves to the reader that these steps have been effective is that they are logical. More time in school equals better grades: it makes sense. It doesn't require statistics or numbers to be persuasive, because it speaks to reason and logic.

Obama vs. the Middle East?

Note: This is not my appeal post, just something I finished up

After a summer of eating my first meal of the day with "The Boston Globe" or "The Wall Street Journal" in hand, I've developed a brand new idiosyncrasy: whenever I sit down to eat, I get an overwhelming urge to read something political. This time, I picked up the most recent print of Newsweek, a magazine I'm a fan of. While there were quite a few interesting articles on the movie trailer that has sparked Islamic rage across the world, the article that caught my eye was entitled "Obama's Mideast Meltdown" by Niall Ferguson. In it, Mr. Ferguson describes how he believes Obama botched foreign relations with the Middle East. This article certainly stimulated thought for me, although I'm still trying to figure whether or not I agree. Mr. Ferguson, does however, write very persuasively and succinctly.
Mr. Ferguson's first starts with a flashback to Jimmy Carter, another Democrat in the White House while a violent Islamic revolution was occurring. He quotes speeches by both presidents, pointing out how similar they both are and then makes the claim that as Jimmy Carter's hopes for respect and tolerance were met with extremism, so have Obama's hopes for respect and tolerance. While I was still skeptical of the claim that foreign relations were as strained as they were in 1980, Mr. Ferguson's use of primary sources is pretty darn powerful.
After that, Mr. Ferguson began backing up his claim with statistics, mostly polls showing how many of the population dislike America. While the blatant and occasionally brutal use of these statistics is very effective, my skepticism was not quite allayed. For one, any poll coming out of an area as unstable as that is going to be pretty inaccurate. For two, I have a hard time blaming a president for a region's opinions on the entirety of America. For example, the movie trailer that has recently gone viral has caused massive outrage among Muslim countries, but there is simply no way for Obama to prevent that. This section really does work though, because simply put numbers are very effective.
While I don't feel that Mr. Ferguson managed to completely convince me, his article was certainly well written, as they usually are.

Vundabar

NOTE: I know this is sort of an unorthodox post for an AP English blog, but I wrote this review for a music blog I'm a part of (http://muziqclub.blogspot.com/) so I figured I'd just post it on here.

Vundabar is a band from Scituate, Massachusetts, comprised of Brandon Hagen (vocals, guitar) and Drew McDonald (drums). They recently released their first EP, The Holy Toledo, which is available for free on Bandcamp.

For starters, I’ll just say up front that I do really like this EP. It ain’t perfect, not by a long shot, but it shows a ton of potential. The riffs, drum parts, vocals just their whole feel really has a certain amount of depth and originality that is a pleasure to the ear.

"The Paradox Of Choice"

Recently, I have been reading “The Paradox of Choice” by Barry Schwartz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice:_Why_More_Is_Less), a book that asks the question of whether the astounding amount of choice today’s world offers is truly helping us. I am only several chapters in, but I can already make several complaints about his writing and claims.

The first section of this book is dedicated to outlining ways that choice has expanded exponentially in our lives. It’s not exactly an exciting start, but I’ll get into that more later. One claim he made really stuck out to me. He mentioned TV shows and how the amount of them has simply exploded since the TV was introduced, eventually mentioning TiVo as another way that our choice has expanded. After all that, he claims that with all the choice available, “American TV viewers will be struggling to find a shared TV experience.” I found this statement to be highly objectionable. The most popular TV shows get millions of viewers. Finding someone at school who doesn’t at least know about the Big Bang Theory is quickly becoming impossible. Also, with the popularity of Facebook, being able to share in a show is exponentially easier. He made a similar claim with college too, saying that the lack of core courses was leading to a lack of a shared experience among young adults. Well, I thought, some colleges have upwards of 8,000 students. For each graduating class, that’s 2,000 students. No matter how many core classes you share, no one can really bond with 2,000 people. Psychologically, the average person can only form deep relationships with about 150 people.
Don’t get me wrong, I think that Mr. Schwartz probably has a valid point about choice, it just seems that it fits better for consumer choices rather than cultural or educational.

My second complaint involves the structure of the book. As I mentioned above, the book starts off simply listing ways that modern America has too many choices. Unfortunately, this gets rather tedious pretty quickly. He seems to be saying basically the same thing over and over, simply replacing what exactly he’s talking about without really altering the point of each section. Not only is it boring, it seems like kind of a waste being put here. It would make much more sense to me to save all of these statistics and claims to use in a more anecdotal way later on in the book. Used that way, it seems like it could add some validity and variety to a section that is perhaps more theoretical or psychological. As is, it’s just kind of boring. 

My College Essay

Playing on the BC High JV Tennis Team was a blast. I had improved my playing skills, made a bunch of friends and matured mentally. Although I was a little disappointed that I wouldn’t get to work on this awesome play a bunch of my friends were writing, I was looking forward to playing on the team, so sure that I would make it again. A week of tryouts later, I was officially cut from the team. By Monday at about 3:30pm, I had totally forgotten about tennis. At that moment, I was in the theatre, helping out with that play my friends and I were working on. I was having more fun than I ever had playing tennis, and more than that, what we were doing felt very satisfying. Although I had been playing tennis for basically all my life, the satisfaction and enjoyment I was experiencing from theater helped me quickly move on from the disappointment of getting cut.

Now that I’ve started in medias res, let me go back to the beginning of my adventures in theater. My first experience with theater was at the beginning of sophomore year, totally on a whim. I had a friend who did theater tech, and I had nothing to do in the fall so I figured what the heck. With the exception of August 2011 and August 2012, I haven’t really stopped since. Mainly, I’ve done shows for school but I’ve also worked as an intern at a local summer theater company and even been a part of an all-teen acting troupe. My biggest regret in life is that I was narrow-minded freshman year and convinced myself that “theater just wasn’t for me.” I could not have been further from the truth. Theater fits who I am and who I want to be perfectly. I was always shy, but theater has boosted my self-confidence. I’ve always thought of myself as a problem solver and critical thinker, theater lets me stretch those muscles every day. Despite being shy, I have always been interested in people (psychology is one of my favorite subjects) and theater is possibly the most social performing art there is. I have always believed that the best friends are not those who are the most popular, but those who are the most interesting. I have yet to meet an uninteresting theater person. Actually, there is a quote that really resonates with me from Aesop’s Fables that states “You are known by the company that you keep”.  To be known by the company I keep means to be known as quirky, interesting, intelligent, kind, funny and most of all outgoing and confident. After an entire childhood and early adolescence suggesting otherwise, I have found that my true home, my true niche in life is being a theater person.