20 November 2011—Close Reading

How Republican conformity is ruining politics

In this article, Michael Gerson elaborates upon a pattern developing within the republican party to reject candidates who do not fit strictly within the lines of the conservative platform. Their quest for purity, Gerson argues, is damaging to the political process.

Gerson presents facts in such a way that makes the pattern clear. He first shows how prominent GOP candidates have alike supported fiscal policies aimed at environmental protection, standing beside prominent Democrats in their support. But Gerson cites one such candidate, Newt Gingrich, as having said his media appearance with Nancy Pelosi, a Democratic leader, was "the dumbest single thing [he's] done in recent years." Gerson also mentions the attacks on Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and Mitt Romney, who each once lead in the polls, for supporting less-conservative policies. The candidates then apologize and realign their views in hope of remaining in the running, which Gerson says promotes "fealty above other, important public virtues such as stable judgment, competence, relevant experience and integrity."

Gerson's diction throughout the article is pejorative. He creates an image of the conservative base as one not to be taken critically, beginning with referring to the current GOP race as a "whack-a-mole" process. The words "heresy," "fealty," and "purity" have undertones of the antiquated attitudes of the medieval era, implying that the conservative conviction obstructs progression of American politics.


Gerson creates one particularly lasting metaphorical image in saying that the right has "created a box of orthodoxy so small that even the most conservative candidates must engage in undignified contortions just to fit." The "undignified contortions" help to reflect Gerson's later statement that "the purest candidates are often not the strongest candidates," allowing him to smoothly assert that successful politics requires compromise and creativity. 

20 November 2011—Response to Course Material

I have never disliked a literary family or set of characters more than I dislike the Lomans. It is extremely difficult to look past how frustrating they all can be to analyze what's behind their actions and what they say. I wanted to spend time with Voldemort's autobiography for a bit of fun reading after spending weeks with the Lomans. That's not to say I disliked the play itself or don't see its significance. I have a similar relationship with Invisible Man in which the unnamed narrator just gets. on. your. nerves.

I came in about 20 minutes late to class on the day of the surprise closed prompt and ended up not finishing, landing me a solid 4 from my peer reviewers. The scores we gave each other were already agreeable the first time around, which worries us because now we're not sure if we all really do understand the rubric, or if we all misunderstand it to a similar degree.

I haven't yet really gauged how well my group did with the prezi presentation, but I know that we gave it a considerable amount of effort. Maybe we should have coordinated with the groups preceding and following our era to set limits on authors and time periods to be sure there wasn't a great amount of overlap.

13 November 2011—Open Prompt

1989. In questioning the value of literary realism, Flannery O'Connor has written, "I am interested in making a good case for distortion because I am coming to believe that it is the only way to make people see." Write an essay in which you "make a good case for distortion," as distinct from literary realism. Analyze how important elements of the work you choose are "distorted" and explain how these distortions contribute to the effectiveness of the work. Avoid plot summary.

The use of satire as an outlet for social criticism was especially prominent before the twentieth century. In his essay entitled A Modest Proposal, eighteenth century British writer Jonathon Swift took the use of satire to new heights in his effort to expose the socioeconomic and moral issues of his day. In accordance with his ironic title, Swift's proposal is ostentatious and gruesomely unrealistic, his persona pretentious and cruel. His outlandish portrayal of the wealthy and his repugnant proposal were meant to shock his readers into recognizing the moral distortion in the world around them.

Swift uses a persona who claims to be unbiased and reasonable, but who very quickly is revealed to be exactly the opposite. In elevated language, he suggests that the poor of Ireland be bred, sold, and eaten by the rich (English landowners). He even elaborates the process down to specifics like what fraction of males and females will be left to breed and after what length of time from birth a baby would be available for sale. He lists the various benefits that would result from his suggestion, going from the immediate effect of lessening the amount of poor plaguing the streets to recommended recipe ideas. In a moment of sincerity, Swift compares this cannibalism to that metaphorically taking place between England and Ireland.

The persona's clear distortion of morality and preposterous proposal were a means of circumventing direct criticism of his time and the English monarchy. In the 1700s, writers had to be careful in vocalizing their opinions in fear of repercussions. Satire was a way to fly under the radar.

However, the extreme images Swift uses more effectively invoke emotional responses from readers than a straight forward, realistic proposal would. In his essay, he does list his legitimate ideas under his persona's clarification that they are everything society should avoid doing. Without the distorted context around them, the ideas wouldn't be fully emphasized, and readers wouldn't be emotionally vulnerable enough to feel that emphasis.

In his highly satirical A Modest Proposal, Jonathon Swift criticizes social issues involving eighteenth century Ireland and England. His warped persona and proposal protected him from possible punishment for his commentary, but also struck the emotions of his readers more so than a truly modest proposal could.