I’m just beginning to look over your drafts now, so I will post any advice later as another post, but I thought I would get this up now.

Here are our notes from the board today, which are essentially a review of the devices.  Focus on your papers; comment if you have any questions. Oh!  Here is the official website, which features the trailer and such.  (Note the awards listed; what do they do for the argument?  Anything?  Keep authority in mind.)

We will be writing drafts of our analysis of Maxed Out this weekend.  You should write it as you would an article analysis, with a summation of the argument in the first paragraph, an analysis of the argument (not the topic) in the body paragraphs, and a concluding statement of the movie’s persuasiveness.  This assignment is worth 80 points (think a month’s worth of article analyses), so spend some time on it.  Here are our notes from the board:

While we didn’t get as far as I would have liked, this (coupled with your notes) should give you a good starting point.  Think of the above as an annotation of the movie; you won’t necessarily structure your analysis this way, but it is a good summation of the movie’s structure and the argued impact of many negative influences.

As always, if you have any questions please post a comment for the good of all or send me an email:

Today we began watching Maxed Out, a 2006 expository documentary on American debt.  As we watch, take note of how the argument is presented, keeping in mind the various elements that make up the movie:

• Audio
  • Spoken
  • Background
  • Soundtrack
• Video
  • Shot composition
  • Shot
  • Mise en scene
  • Camera placement
  • Framing
  • Subject arrangement
  • Camera angles
• Written
  • Title
  • Labels
  • Subtitles

We will discuss articles tomorrow and finish up the movie on Wednesday.  You will be analyzing the film (as you would an article) on Friday.

[BTW, Rope was filmed in ten shots—not bad for an eighty minute film.]

[Also, there was no mention of a kangaroo in the seven-year-old’s “rampage” at the zoo in Australia…]

[This post was WinsomeWiki’d on 5 Jul. 2009.]

We will be discussing DeLillo’s White Noise through chapter 34 on Monday.  We will write over this in about a week, so please keep up with your reading journals.

Another great discussion (From the Board below) over the censorship!  The debate was heated at times, so we’ll be writing our own argumentative articles this weekend.  By now you are all familiar with the basic structure of an argumentative article, but here’s a quick outline to help you with your writing:

• Know your position.  Begin with a basic argument, such as "Apples are good."
• Begin gathering support for your basic argument.
  • "Apples are healthy"
  • "Apples are all-American"
  • "Apples are portable"
  • "Apples can be eaten many different ways"
• Then, begin supporting each claim, adding statistics and quotations from other sources as necessary.
  • "Apples are healthy"
    • Food and Drug Administration
  • "Apples are all-American"
    • All-American Apple Council
  • "Apples are portable"
    • Relevant personal anecdote
  • "Apples can be eaten in many different ways"
    • Recipes
    • How-to guides
• After that, make sure your sources are credible and your claims are relevant and logical.
  • "Apples are all-American" (Appeal to emotion, but not a major point.)
    • All-American Apple Council (Biased source)
• After you are certain you have a logical argument, begin writing your article.  Draw your audience in with a "hook"—something to draw them in, give them interest in your article. (Look over your previous articles for examples.)  Also, because this is such a heated topic, don’t forget to appeal to those on the other side of the issue.

Post questions below for the good of all.

Legend: Black: from the articles, Blue: From you, Green: From me.

Trying something a bit different this time.  Black text paraphrased or "quoted" from the articles you brought in, blue text is your words.  (Please comment below if you feel I’ve misrepresented what you stated, or if you would like to clarify something.)

I missed the title of the first article (if you presented, please fill us in), but here is a link to the second, "Are these books Really ‘Required Reading?’" and the last "Golden Compass: Athiesm for Tots."

We will continue this discussion tomorrow.