Geoengineering: Changing the Landscape of Design

    In her op-ed published in the New York Times, Naomi Klein (author of “The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism”) brings environmental issues to the forefront of people’s minds as she discusses geoengineering and its implications.  As our planet’s ecological conditions continue to deteriorate, many people are turning towards the tantalizing, easy fix to this problem presented by “rogue” scientists: geoengineering.  Geoengineering, essentially manipulating the environment to combat global warming, might be effective in reducing some of global warming’s effects; however, it brings with it a slew of issues that could adversely harm the environment and interfere with natural cycles and patterns.  Klein establishes herself well through evidence and real life examples and scenarios.  Yet she also uses many causal relationships to examine the multiple potential effects of geoengineering procedures through many differing lenses, such as environmental, political, diplomatic, and historical.  The variance in perspective gives power to her piece, a power that I think is intensified through Klein’s elegiac style.  She concludes a list of geoengineering’s possible ramifications by saying, “In the age of geoengineering, we might find ourselves confronting the end of miracles, too,” (2).  All of the consequences listed, and the negative words in which they are described give the article a negative, mournful air.  However, I feel this effectively reaches out to an audience of Americans Klein felt are “muted” towards geoengineering and its effects.  Overall, I think Klein established the gravity of our current environmental situation, thus fulfilling her purpose.

Monet's Water Lilies

The image shown above is one of the eight Claude Monet Water Lily images on display at the Musée de l’Orangerie in Paris.  Built solely to house eight of Monet’s water lilies, the Musée de l’Orangerie has eight of the water lilies on display, all of which depict a pond with water lilies in the different seasons (two per season; the above image shows the water lilies in the Spring).  Click here for a virtual tour of the Musée de l’Orangerie (click "Visite Virtuelle" to start the tour).

In the later years of his life, renowned impressionist artist Claude Monet created hundreds of paintings featuring water lilies from his garden in Giverny.  The above image presents water lilies during springtime, and it is fascinating how springtime dictated many of the painting’s elements.  Spring is a transition season from cold to warm, and these changes are expressed metaphorically by the painting’s changing hues, from darker blues to lighter lavenders.  It appears as if rays of light are pouring onto the pinker sections of the water, a deliberate choice that uses pathos to appeal to the audience’s typical associations with springtime as a time of light and growth.  The painting appeals to natural human emotional connections between light colors and feelings of peace and tranquility, which likely  resonates with a wide audience of people around the world.  In particular, the painting’s positive depiction of the pond seems like an endeavor to impress upon the audience the value of natural beauty.  Monet effectively uses his audience’s cultural memory, which helps lead the audience to the painting’s purpose.  Monet’s purpose was to have his water lilies cohesively act as a motif of water, and remarked, “The motif's essential is the mirror of water whose aspect is constantly being modified.”  This is immediately clear to the viewer: the focal point of water, with the water lilies and tree simply as the painting’s border, highlights water’s importance to the image as well as its diversity, and the pastel colors used create feelings associated with springtime.

Potentially, A Piece to the Puzzle

   Despite the medical breakthroughs of our time, the cause(s) of autism are still unknown and there is no cure for the condition.  However, autism researchers have just received permission from the US Federal and Drug Administration to begin a research study testing the effectiveness of a child’s own stem cells from their own umbilical cord blood as a treatment for the disorder.  This is an informational, very objective article that author Mary Brophy Marcus, reporter for The Philadelphia Inquirer, appeared to be directing towards the general American population interested in medicine and diseases (like autism). Marcus does a good job using logos to appeal to the audience and enable them to follow the flow of the facts presented in the article.  She also does a commendable job qualifying herself through the quotes and opinions of respected physicians who will and will not be directly involved with the study, which shows an effective use of ethos in establishing her credibility.  However, Marcus hardly varies her syntax, consistently structuring sentences, “___ said, ‘quote,’” (subject verb quote). By backing up and establishing herself as a reliable source, I think the article’s basic purpose of explaining the study to the reader is accomplished.  However, I feel that the article might have made a larger impression on the reader had Marcus used more varied devices to reach out to the audience.

Head to Head: Obama vs. Romney in the First Presidential Debate

Here is a shot of each candidate’s facial expressions at a point in the debate when Romney was speaking.  This juxtaposition is highly indicative of how the audience perceived each candidate, regardless of what they said.  To watch the debate in full (or just a portion of it), click here.

   This past Wednesday marked the first Presidential debate between President Barack Obama and former Governor Mitt Romney.  Held in Denver, Colorado, and moderated by Jim Lehrer of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), this debate focused on domestic issues, specifically the economy, healthcare, the role of government, and governing.  Each candidate’s purpose was to convince undecided American voters to vote for them, and it is fascinating how diction, tone, facial expressions, and body language influenced the audience’s perception of the candidates.  Both candidates effectively used ethos, pathos, logos, and anecdotes to appeal to the average American.  However, throughout the debate, President Obama did not make eye contact with Romney and often wore an expression of boredom and superiority.  Though he effectively substantiated his plans for America, he distanced himself from the audience through his explanatory tone.  Overall, I do not think his purpose was fulfilled because his negative body language undermined many of his statements.  In addition, Obama did not challenge Romney, while Romney consistently questioned Obama’s claims.  Romney effectively appealed to and engaged with the audience through his ardent tone of voice.  Although he grimaced painfully most of the time Obama was speaking, and was unable to give specifics about his own policies, he seemed passionate and confident about his plans.  I feel that this positively influenced the audience in his favor, and that Romney was able to accomplish his purpose.  It will be interesting to note how the rhetorical strategies of each candidate may change in upcoming debates.