TOW #20 - President Trump Is Skipping The White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner

https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomnamako/trump-skipping-whca?utm_term=.xplq6KdGl#.lq8oPz3yM

"The annual, celebrity-studded WHCA dinner has long been criticized as a display of too-cozy relations between the media and people they are supposed to cover fairly and critically. It usually involves a comedian or master of ceremonies roasting the president, and then president responding in kind."

This week, Donald Trump has become the first president after Nixon to not attend the White House's Correspondents' Association Dinner. To President Trump, this dinner promotes such "Fake News" he has spread awareness to during his campaign. News reporters like the New York Times, NBC News, and CNN will be in attendance.

Tom Namako makes the claim that Trump is not attending this dinner because his views on the media and how it illustrates himself as a political leader. I agree with Namako. I think that part of Trump’s failure to gain support from most medias sources is the way he handles criticism. It seems that whenever the President is critiqued, he has to shoot back with a tweet or a snarky retort. Take Meryl Streep’s acceptance speech at the Golden Globes, for instance. When Streep spoke out about how it is troubling to know that someone who is that insensitive to disabled people could be representing our country, instead of responding to Streep with an apology, or even a rational behind his earlier claims, Trump instead felt the need to tweet about it, like a teenage girl. He said something along the lines that Streep was an overrated actress, and how her comments were violent.

I think that, when examining what makes Trump and other inefficient leaders weak is that of their use of the rhetoric. Maintaining ethos at all cost should be essential for anyone politics, especially towards those who opposed your views. If this is not practiced, people will dislike one not just because they disagree with them, but because they think one put their emotions in the way of their craft.

TOW #19 - Dear Evan Hansen makes Top 10

http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/7694135/billboard-200-chart-moves-dear-evan-hansen-hamilton

http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/7694135/billboard-200-chart-moves-dear-evan-hansen-hamilton

In a weekly update of the top albums purchased and consumed, Billboard music makes mention of frequency of Broadway musical cast albums on this chart. Dear Evan Hansen has become the Hamilton equivalent of the year. So far, the cast and crew has sold about 29,000 albums, putting them at number 8, (behind Lady Gaga and Rebal McEntire).

In the article, Keith Caulfield, co-director of charts at Billboard, writes of the past musicals to make the top 40. This list is small, with the inclusion of Hamilton (obviously), The Book of Mormon, and Hair. Caulfield argues that in order to have this degree of success as a Musical soundtrack, a requirement of modernism is needed.

I agree with Caulfield’s argument. As a theater nerd myself, I am always aware of the differences between the “mainstream” musicals out, as suppose to the “hipster” musicals the me and my friends listen to. For example, I know a lot of people who listen to Hamilton despite not being into musicals at all. What makes this musical so popular is its similarities to modern-day music (as well as its historical accuracy, for some). That being said, I imagine if I showed these non-theater people the soundtrack to Sunday in The Park with George or Evita, they would not show the same enthusiasm.

Caulfield uses inductive reasoning to reach his argument. First, he mentions specific musical titles, like Hamilton, Hair and Dear Evan Hansen. Next, he tells us what these scores have in common. He draws the conclusion that all the top musicals are also the most similar to the top music on the radio. Finally, Caulfield synthesizes that all the Musicals to make the top 40 display a commonality of conventionalism, and because of this, in general, musicals that have “pop” sounding scores are more successful.

TOW #18 - They Poured Fire on Us From the Sky (IRB)

Judy A. Bernstein writes of the tragic events that took place during the Sudan Civil War in the autobiography, "They Poured Fire on Us from the Sky". This accredited book tells the story of three boys, Benson, Alephonsion, and Benjamin, the three of them brothers and cousins. These "lost boys" were sent across the world from Sudan to Ethiopia and Kenya in order to escape the terrible conditions of their hometown. The book is structured with alternating passages narrated by each of the three boys' perspectives.
Found in the title, the author plays allegory of the children's story, "Peter Pan" when often referring to the three boys as "lost". This comparison is genius, as it displays just how young the boys were when having to flee the country, and contrasts with the immature nature of the "lost boys" in Peter Pan. Another rhetorical device used in the book is vivid imagery. When describing the events, the boys do not shy away from telling the horrible truth. Benson describes the journey in saying "We could feel our bones trying to exhibit themselves to the world. Everything around us looked ugly and wild. We couldn't find happiness in ourselves, and no one could put it in us." This appeals to the audiences Pathos using upsetting and bleak diction. It also adds to tending the purpose: to display and bring awareness to the underprivileged countries in our world.

Before hearing of this book, to be completely honest, I did not even know of the Sudan Civil War. It is not commonly taught in History classes (at least Wissahickon’s history classes), so I felt a little ignorant to the situation, especially after reading the first view chapters. I am a prime example of why this book is so important in all its arguments. I hope in the future that I can have a voice in helping weaker nation who may experience similar cruelty such as the ones faced in Sudan.

TOW #17 - Beyonce's Pregnancy Photoshoot

In the midst of this week, it was announcing that the multi-millionaire couple, Beyonce and Jay-Z, are expecting twins! The news has spread all over the media, celebrating and anticipating the birth of "Queen B"'s second and third child. Along with the release of the announcement, an album of a collection of photos of the artist has also infected the media. Besides it being beautiful and perfectly timed (well played, B), the photo shoot also employs many rhetorical strategies used to prove the artist's central claim that she has "Three Hearts".

First off, Beyonce is sporting her wedding val. This reveals that she is still in a committed relationship with her husband, as well as further entailing she is keeping her vows. Beyonce is wearing her undergarments, showing that she (and other women) can still be beautiful and youthful although pregnant and a mother, which defies the stereotypes of what an expecting-mother should feel. The background of flowers could be suggesting the natural beauties that life has to offer. This shows how Beyonce values the patterns of nature and draws a metaphor of "the flowers blooming" and her twins growing. With her hands on her stomach, Beyonce shows the closeness and gives off nurturing body language between her and her babies.

Overall, Beyonce’s photoshoot “I Have Three Hearts” is intellectually sculpted to grab the media’s attention. It reveals Beyonce as a mother, as well as shows the underlying message that motherhood is beautiful and should be cherished. Like so many other famous people, she wants to show her audience and followers that she experiences many of the same aspects of life, despite being a celebrity. It seems apparent in many aspects that generally, famous artists want to be recognized as people too. Specifically, Beyonce points out through her pregnancy that she lives an ordinary (and perhaps a little glamorous) life.