Journal 4/21

 Free entry on Feed! Write about anything that you want in Feed. This is your chance to sound off about any subject in the book as well as whether you liked the book. Please write something substantial that will  encourage discussion among your peers.

One thing that really stood out to me in Feed was the peeling skin. At first I thought it was just something that went along with the book's "the environment is ruined because of the companies' complete disregard for things that aren't extremely profitable/ as efficient as possible" sort of theme, but the seminar that we had really gave me some more ideas about it. This journal will go over two possibilities and rule one of them out. First is that the degradation of society goes hand-in-hand with the degradation of the population's physical condition. This adds some symbolism to the mix, but doesn't really make sense. This book takes place over the course of about a year, and the dumbing-down of society has definitely been going on for longer than that. I mean,Titus mistakes Spanish- a language spoken by millions today- for Mayan. Also, this book wouldn't make correlations that deep. It's full of clever satire, but I wouldn't expect it to make such an unimportant part of the Feed universe serve that purpose. For those two reasons I'm taking symbolism out of the question. 

The second idea, one which I think fits into Feed better, is that the peeling skin is somehow related to the lesions. The lesions are quite influential in the story, going as far as helping to portray the personalities and motives of the characters. They are even addressed by the president in a speech,  further attaching them to the main interests of the book's population. I think that the lesions are the first stage of what soon becomes extensive skin loss, which is a sensical progression. This could be environmental or caused by the feed- I'm not really sure, and the book doesn't give many details regarding their source. This was just the idea that, in my opinion, made the most sense and fit the most snugly into Feed's world.  

Journal 4/7

NOTE (for Ms. Harrison): I accidentally blended the second and third journal possibilities together, so I hope that's ok.

I created this fake advertisement to satirize products that are meant to simplify the process of doing something and claim to make everyday life easier (or ads in general).

 

You're on your way to work. Today is an important day for you-there's a big meeting for a project that could get you promoted! As you go through your papers, making sure you've got all your important work-related documents, you notice that you have nothing to hold them together. In today's busy world, there's no room to fumble with gangly staplers- that's why your friends at Red Dog Co. created the Paperclip™. The Paperclip™ uses a strong, reliable steel that has been regarded by metallurgists and people who know things as high-quality. But, you may ask, how does the Paperclip hold up against competitors? The Paperclip™ beats out both Glue® and Tape ®, which are both regarded as inferior by statistics we're not going to list. When you buy the Paperclip™, you can say goodbye to unorganized papers and yes to your boss when he offers you that promotion.*

* The Red Dog Company is not to be held liable for meetings with superiors that do not end in promotions. 

Did our reluctance to share data frustrate or anger you? If so, buy the consumer pack! At a half-reasonable price of $199, you will be able to obtain that information quickly and easily on the go.

Analysis: rhetorical devices and three appeals 

-I used exaggeration with the "trademarked paperclip", which takes the name of a product to an extreme by it being an everyday item that, in reality, no one company holds the rights to. The same go for "Glue" and "Tape".

-I used irony while listing affirmations on the product's usefulness/reliability by credible sources, which also involves ethos. You would expect to see credible names and titles, but instead get vague descriptions. 

-I satirized the proof to back up a product by refusing to list the statistics gathered about it, also involving logos. Not showing the proof also satirizes the greed of companies, as I later mention that the viewer can pay an unrealistic amount of money to see those stats. That could, at the same time, anger the viewer at the companies' expectation that you would spend lots of money to see those stats; this ties in pathos.