Lens For things fall apart

After careful consideration, I have decided that the lens i will use to analyze things fall apart will be the feminist perspective. I plan on using the novel as a strong standing resource its self  very often to provided several examples of oppression and to further my thesis. I will use and quote text other then things fall apart to prove that there is a sexiest biases in early literature.
Later in my essay I will bring to light the savage and unforgiving nature of the society until the European colonist came to settle and struturize the african natives. I will also discuss how the roles of husband and wife are relevant to the roles of settler a native. The oppression that had long be imp laced over the women in the society will now be placed over the native men in the society. Within  the original order of the african community women were often delt the bad end of many deals on behalf of there families or husbands.
I will discuss how when the settlers to be exact the christian religion becomes a new presents in the community how old values and beliefs become less valued or appreciated and the old ways seem to vanish with the identity of them community's culture but the status of women remain unchanged. I feel as though as time goes on across many cultures the place of women is similar the role is placed very low in terms of where one might fall within a male socially dominated world.

I personally think the author of this novel may have been trying to inform and create a world with many relevant a present issues. The author wanted to reflect the current worldly views in a different more simplistic way from the thought process of men when I came to the value a place of a women. To the importance of a women to a man. I believe that as time has gone on regardless of what era one has grown up in the few men have had power a control a their personal opinions have grown to influence all walks of a women's existence from their daily duties, to their image a self awareness.

technopoly

This chapter of technoploy, directly relates to the idea’s and themes discussed in the book brave new world, in the since that these books share a common bias on the way society is being and will be run. The brave new world is a postmodern society, in which people have now, instead of using technology to further their quality of life, they have instead created a society dedicated to the continuation of technology. The people have become parts to this social machine. Their lives have been conditioned and fitted to the needs and wants of the machine. The people no longer live with emotion, they are more like computers being programmed and instructed on how to live there life’s in compliance to the machines. This is an example of Neil postmen’s concept of technoploy. Neil postmen believe that a society that allows the uncontrolled growth of technology will lose it own since of humanity in the pursuit of compiling to the machine.

The difference between a technocracy and a technoploy is that a technocracy is a society that has entrupners creating technologies to better the process of production for their industry. For example in Neil postmen’s chapter from technoploy he write “Everyone invented, whoever has owned an enterprise and sought ways to make his goods more speedily” So a technocracy is the idea of wanted to do better and by using machines society can help us achieve more goals at a faster pace than ever before. After reading this chapter in relation to the brave new world, I have a larger more vivid understanding of what the author is trying to depict in the readers mind. The author has a world developing an working opposite of everything we have and believe in. This chapter sort of fills in the back-story of where brave new world has come from.

Rhetorical thinking

My personal evaluation of the academic write "Survival in Auschwitz" the writer is trying to identify the answer to a common question asked time and time again. The writer is attempting to point out the oddity of the topic and question; she is also trying to find out why there is not one exact answer to this question. I believe that this specific academic write may have been intended for a more humanitarian group, the awareness of the author influences the writing through the choice words she has chosen, since the writing seems to appeal to a humanitarian society she is trying to sympathize with her reader. She is also using very descriptive words such as dread and shameful to convey a clear image of emotion into the minds of her reads so she is also reaching out for pity.

In this academic write the author is discussing the justification of the holocaust and the likelihood of its reoccurrence in the near future. The audience this discussion has been admitted to, I believe will appreciate the points and arguments presented. As I read through the essay I found the main point to be. The author is able to use evidence freely as through conversation. The author presents there problems along with historical references, so every thought is combination of historical references and self opinions and questions. The writer uses college level diction, there grammar is not necessary correct but it still allows the text to function and convey a clear message. The language is very proper and formal the organization of the paper was random, thought where not exactly in a correct order, arguments and opinions ran in together.

The language that the writer uses doesn’t really impact the message to the audience very much at all, and the language didn’t really add or take away from the writer’s argument. As I read all the language to me seemed to be directed to a certain audience so if someone that wasn’t a part of this audience read this essay they might have a hard time understanding the meaning or image the authors trying to provide for her readers.

The Author in my opinion started off with old information and then led into their argument. She gave facts and examples of different things before she lead into her actually discussion, she used the introduction to kind of get the audiences support before she went into her actual argument. She begins the introduction like you would begin a normal conversation, her second sentence she asked a question to engage the audience to get their attention. She also quoted work from the author that wrote the poem she is elaborating on. Her paragraphs and thoughts are random, each paragraph kind of discusses a thought revolving the topic but none of them flow in together.

I personal think that the write has established herself as an authority on the matter because she has sited other people works and has even quoted from the document she is using to do her essay on. The write has built a very strong and convincing ethos. I could understand where she was coming from and I felt the urgency she was trying to stress on the matter. After readings this academic write, I have learned that there are many different ways to write a paper and still be able to communicate your message to your audience. I also learned that the choice of diction should be more targeted to the audience you plan to write or present your works to. This essay has in many ways contradicted the rules I have been taught growing up, such as the way we organize our thoughts and feeling. I was always told to write less about how I feel and more about the topic or matter, the order of the paragraphs I thought the introduction could only give a preview of works to come not present a problem.

My Life