Assignment 6: Choices

One major thing to me is the fact that Orlean included the history of the websites she mentions throughout the article. "...and three thousand visits to Taxidermy.net every day, where taxidermists can trade information and goods with as little self-consciousness as you find on a knitting Web site:" (Orlean 3) This is interesting because the fact that there is taxidermy websites does not matter to the championships and should not effect the reader's thought on the championships. The fact that she continues to use it throughout the article is interesting too. I wonder why she thought that the reader would care about a website, especially in 2003!! I, myself, looked up the site, but I was curious because I grew up around taxidermy. I think the time period she wrote this in probably lead her to believe the reader might look it up because the Internet was still fairly new to the majority of the world.

I had mentioned this in class, but the fact that she turns to the feelings of the taxidermists themselves is interesting. "The taxidermists take the competition very seriously." (Orlean 4)I think it is very important that Orlean includes this thought. One can assume that the taxidermists take the competition seriously, but it reinforces the idea into the reader's mind. I realized during class that the majority of the general public, does not like the idea of taxidermy as trophies, none the less as museum pieces. If this was say American Idol, would everyone thoughts be the same? I think the majority of the general public would say that they like it. However, if you talked to any musician, they will tell you it is the dumbest thing on earth. Do the contestants of American Idol take the competition seriously? I would hope so, or why are you on the show in the first place? So my thought is: if you do not like the subject, does it make it wrong or stupid? To you, it might. But to the taxidermists would think otherwise. I think Orlean realized this and the fact that she added it to the article, is very important! This definitely adds to the dedication that is shown with the mention of the websites and the next choice, the seminars.

I find it also very interesting that Orlean adds the information about the seminars. I think that this is more important to the article than the thoughts on the various websites on taxidermy. "In the seminars, the atmosphere was as sober and exacting as a tax-law colloquium. 'Wiskers,' one of the instructors said to the group, giving them a stern look. 'I pull them out. I label them..." (5) I think that Orlean adding the thoughts about the seminars adds almost a attraction feel to the championships. I feel that maybe the next time that they are held, that more people will show up not only because of the mounts that are entered into the competition, but as to maybe hear the seminars and attend the various other activities. Orlean paints a picture that provides an event that anyone could attend if they feel like they might have an interest in the championships.

Work Cited:
Orlean, Susan. "Lifelike." The New Yorker 9 June, 2003. Online.

Assignment 6

I think Orlean's tone is informative, but surprised. She is especially surprised in the beginning of the article. For example: "The championships were held in April at the Springfield, Illinois, Crowne Plaza hotel, the sort of nicely appointed place that seems more suited to regional sales conferences and rehearsal dinners than to having wolves in the corridors and people crossing the lobby shouting, 'Heads up! Buffalo coming through!" (Orlean 1) Here Orlean reveals a sense of astonishment to the fact that this fancy hotel is holding a taboo event. I think she is a reliable author , because she seems to be surprised and informative. She maintains here ethos throughout the piece in my opinion, due to the fact that she talks to various people throughout the event. Orlean conveys the facts involved throughout this piece. She considers the fact that the reader may know absolutely nothing about taxidermy and the fact that the reader may be a taxidermist. She keeps the flow of facts about the championship and taxidermy in general consistent and informative throughout the piece. I believe Orlean wrote an article instead of another medium, because she was assigned this piece and there was no other choice for her.

Work Cited:
Orlean, Susan. "Lifelike." The New Yorker 9 June, 2003. Online.

Assignment #5

I grew up in a hunting family. In fact, I have written an article on searching for shed elk antlers and in fact won the Youth Volunteer of the Year Award-Eastern States for the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. So in my experience, these types of articles are usually assigned to the journalist or the journalist has an expressed interest in the subject. In this case, Orlean seems to have been assigned this piece. Her purpose was probably because it was assigned to her. However, her topic informs the reader of the happenings of the World Taxidermy Championships. She explains in specific details the events she witness. She made it feel like you were in the same room sitting right next to her.

I think that she was trying to bring a taboo subject to a wider audience. In my experience, most people cringe at the thought of a stuffed animal or hunting in general. This article conveys the fact that not all mounts are acquired from hunting, but also natural causes. She almost sympathizes with the taxidermists that their art is a very important thing that people either ignore or hate. She reveals that the art is not only in skinning the animal, but also in the very specific details that come with the profession. 

As a person who grew up around taxidermy, nothing seemed to stand out to me. I have handled some mounts before and have seen some amazing mounts of bears and elk. One specific one is of a 8 ft Alaskan Brown Bear whom is standing on its hind legs with its paws ready to attack. I used to watch a TV show on the History Channel entitled "Mounted in Alaska." It showed the viewer what it was like to taxidermy an animal. Orlean left out a lot of the gore involved, but left in the majority of the harder tasks. I think that Orlean probably realized that hunters and taxidermists would probably read this article. I think she conveyed the details beautifully. 

My questions as follows:

  If you are a person that looks at taxidermy as hatred towards animals, did this piece change your mind? If so how? Does Orlean take the taboo associated with the profession out of it? Did you realize that what she was getting at is that they respect and love animals and that is why they follow this profession?

Here is a great photo of a Wisconsin elk!!

                                         Here is my article that ran in a national newsletter!!

Standing By CP

My controlling purpose is the comic relief of Sedaris as well as the judgments the characters have on each other.

Reflecting on Revision

I thought most about the others' writing that they had conveyed a specific theme. In one case, it was racisim. Nothing really specific stood out to me, but it was interesting to see that they chose racisim. It was not surprising to me that they chose it, but it was intriguing to think that they would chose that specific route. I was intrigued because I really had not used the idea of racisim in my paper only stupdity and comic relief.  This specific student used racism to convey the specific part about the hatred which the student saw in the instance of the two men conveyed for President Obama.

I really did not that about what I was writing. I looked at the requirements and wrote what I thought sounded good. I have really no reason behind picking specific things besides that they were in the piece and because of this, I felt that they needed to be touched in my paper. I would clean any misleading statemtents up in my paper to reflect the main point of it. For example: "When most people hear the name: Adolf Hitler, they usually feel a hatred for the name. However, just because that one man at one point in history committed some horrible crimes, does not mean that all people named Adolf or Hitler will or have committed the same crimes or any crime at all. Parents are still naming their children Josef and that Stalin, another dictator’s, first name."
 

Assignment #4: Choices

    In the case of the world around him, he probably wrote it because he really was just fed up with the things he encountered throughout his travels. He probably wanted to convey his frustrations with the general public. I think that the effects on his readers are that it hopefully makes them realize that they may have acted without using common sense before they committed actions. I think that this is the main purpose of the the piece and it relates to everything in the piece.

    The time that Sedaris chose, may not have any purpose behind it. It might have been that these encounters just happen to be after certain historical events. It may have been that he only wanted to touch on these specific encounters due to the fact that they take place after historical events. The effects of this choice may be to have the sympathize the reader with him in the same opinions that Sedaris has himself. This choice relates to everything because it relates to the main purpose of showing how people can act without using common sense. 

     Sedaris chose to show the disrespect for others to show that there is still certain feelings in this world. It too was the main purpose of the piece. I believe he wanted to show the disrespect that still happens in the world today. It might actually shock the reader into realizing that they have either, been a victim, perpetrator or a witness to the disrespect. It connects to everything that is in the piece. In fact it is a bases to the piece.

    I think that Sedaris chose to use a magazine article is to reach the biggest audience. He probably was doing it for more money and more awareness of his topic. It may not have reached the right readers or in fact it may have reached everyone that should have read the piece at that point in time. This is a major factor to the piece, because it brings all the components to the readers as the author intended to.

Assignment #4

Well in my opinion I think that Sedaris wrote this piece because he was fed up with the stupidity which he witnesses the majority of his travels. The time he is living in is a post 9/11 and post President Barack Obama being elected for the first time world. 9/11 caused countless changes to the air travel industry. The election of President Obama has sparked a new way of thinking in the United States. That race still means that you can do anything, however it has also brought up a lot of racism that was not that present. It does make a lot of people angry with the current way of  government. He sees a lot of the disrespect for others. In the instance of the young man wearing the t-shirt, he realizes that he could be the next President of the United States. He tries to convey the age-old saying: "Don't judge a book by its cover!" I do find it interesting that Sedaris uses a magazine article though. He could have submitted it to a psychology or sociological journal as a new opinion on human behavior in an airport.