TOW #13 - IRB: The Glass Castle

The Glass Caste, by Jeannette Walls, has a very unique introduction and start to the novel. In a needy family, Walls often travels around the country just to find herself moving away again. There is really no point in which she officially settles somewhere. Walls’ parents, people very seemingly unfit for the parental job, locate to the desert for the beginning of Jeannette’s childhood. She becomes fascinated by nature. After relocating to West Virginia, attempting to leave growing debt and alcoholism, the children realize their need to leave.

            In an attempt to share her unique story, Jeannette Walls illustrates the complications of families in America. Her story, although far outside the norm, is only one of many similar unwritten stories of people whom could not leave their hard lives. Walls expresses a want to free herself from her past, giving the novel an occasion. She wants to run away from the lies and hiding.

            Although the situation Jeannette is in is very troublesome and difficult, she constantly uses humor and diction to appeal to her purpose. Humor is used throughout the book to create an inspirational tone. Even when the worst parts of her childhood were being explained, the humor put a hopeful tone in the book and foreshadowed the fact that Walls was able to escape the constraints of her past. Diction is also used to appeal to the purpose. Diction is used to describe the uniqueness of her childhood. Each time the family relocated, the diction allowed the reader to understand the emotions and the thoughts of the author.

            Jeannette Walls wants to inform her audience about her past in an attempt to teach them that no matter what, it is never too late to liberate yourself from your past. She teaches the audience that keeping struggles and lies inside make for inevitable disaster. I believe she does this in an effective way and allows the audience to learn a lesson from a unique perspective.

TOW #12 - article: "You Have No Idea What Really Happened"

When something significant happens in your life, it is usually embedded in your mind for a long period of time. The memory of this event makes the certain day clearer than any other average day. Although, when put to the test, your memory of that day is not as sharp as you would confidently think. In the article “You Have No Idea What Happened” by Maria Konnikova, the way memory works is questioned and explained.

            There are many unsolved conclusions to how memory works. Ulric Neisser, a cognitive psychologist, put his students to the test. A few days after the explosion of the Space Shuttle Challenger, Neisser asked his students to take a short quiz recalling where they were and what they were doing when they heard about the news of the explosion. Two years later, the same student were asked the same questions in hopes of drawing the same conclusions. Although their confidence of the accuracy of their answers were at an all-time-high, their answers were almost all incorrect. In an effort to inform and prove that our memories are not as sharp as we perceive them to be, Konnikova draws in the psychologically interested public to show them their wrong thinking.

            As a majorly informative piece, Konnikova presents her evidence through different research projects and data, such as neuroscientist Lila Davachi’s study using pictures of animals and tools being paired with a series of shocks. This information found that once an emotional event occurred as you saw an image, such as being shocked as you saw an animal, your memory of animals you have previously seen would be enhanced. This informed Konnikovas audience that memory is strengthened at periods of more emotion.

            Although people tend to feel confident when recalling their memories of an important event, our thoughts get jumbled and after time goes by, our recollection displays an incorrect view of what happened. So, Konnikova asks her audience, what really did happen?

TOW #11 - article: Second Inaugural Address of Abraham Lincoln

           Compared to first, Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address was shorter and simpler to the first. Since Lincoln had already completed his first term in office during the complete duration of the Civil War, his Second Inaugural Address was about reuniting the United States. Lincoln viewed the war as a something the North and the South should get past and create union and peace.

            This address has a very large and general audience, being that he is targeting both the North and South regions of the United States. As an attempt to open the eyes of the general public of America, Lincoln aimed to teach the United States to “strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”. This address, being during the time of the pending conclusion of the Civil War, was aimed towards reparations rather than mistakes of the past.

            A strong strive for unity can be taken out of this speech. The purpose, being to inform the opposing sides of the North and South about the importance of unity and peace, is supported through repetition and diction. Lincoln mentions God many different times throughout the address. By bringing in a spiritual aspect, Lincoln connects the two sides and provides something both the North and the South can claim. Finding things in common with the opposing forces help bring them together. Lincoln’s diction also plays a role in achieving his purpose. He uses words with positive connotations such as “bind up”, “achieve”, “strengthen” and more. These words make the address seem hopeful.

            As the president, it is one’s duty to unify a nation and but the citizens of America before all else. Lincoln’s purpose in addressing his people was to provide means to unify and to bring two sides together to make peace. I think that his purpose was achieved because Lincoln went straight to the point of his address and kept his thoughts concise and upfront.