TOW #13 | Written - FDR’s “Pearl Harbor Address to the Nation”

Franklin D. Roosevelt delivered a powerful speech that expressed the shock, anger, and fear the nation had after the Japanese launched a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. The nation, originally against involvement in World War II, took a different turn after the infamous “Attack on Pearl Harbor” incident. FDR utilizes anaphora and patriotic diction to address the issue at hand and declare war against the Japanese.

When describing the attacks that occurred the night earlier, Roosevelt uses a large amount of repetition to emphasize that it was not only our country that got attacked. He begins every sentence with “Last night, Japanese forces attacked,” followed by a location, such as Hong Kong or Wake Island. The anaphora is used to highlight the several attacks that the Japanese performed the night before. It seems as if he is listing the several different areas to emphasize how many other places were attacked along with Pearl Harbor. This allows for the audience to gain understanding that Japanese attacks are not a small issue: their attacks on other areas outside the United States are killing thousands of innocent civilians. Roosevelt takes this understanding from the civilians as a rationale to declare war against the Japanese and take involvement in World War II.

While many see the United States’ involvement in World War II a natural reaction to Pearl Harbor, there were certain measures to be taken and many factors to be considered before stepping into another world war that could potentially lead America down like the first one. Franklin D. Roosevelt appeals to both the frustrated audience that wishes revenge against the Japanese as well as the politicians that are fearful for America’s future if they choose to take entry in World War II through his speech, “Pearl Harbor Address to the Nation.”

TOW #12 | Visual - EBOLA!

America is the country known to supersize everything--from drinks to people to even rumors. Most of the times, these “supersized” rumors and epidemics cause such a great deal in the United States that many begin to forget the abhorrent consequences to supersizing other things as well. The Sacramento Bee decides to address and bring awareness to this fact in their visual text, “EBOLA!” portraying the people’s ignorance to other health issues due to the prioritization of health concerns popularized by media.

The most prominent device the Sacramento Bee employs in their visual text is the utilization of words. “EBOLA!!!” is written in large font inside of a thinking bubble above the man’s head. By making the word “ebola” in a large font, the author is able to portray to their audience how important the man in the text considers the issue of ebola to be, so much that it trumps over all of the other problems he is encountering, such as obesity, smoking, and drinking. This creative use of wording continues throughout the text as the author writes “super” and “big” on the french fries to emphasize the large amounts of food that Americans consume and how that adds to one of the many overlooked health issues in the United States. The author also writes statistics in the empty spaces next to the man of the amount of deaths related to obesity, smoking, and drinking. Adding statistics to the cartoon allows the audience to understand how large-scale these health issues are and how many deaths they can cause, unlike media-popularized health epidemics like ebola.

Although the American public may not be aware, the next “big issue” will be taking over their nerves, brainwashing them to avoid a certain disease and once again steering their eyes away from the true issues that cause so many health-related deaths. The Sacramento Bee takes this issue and creates a unique cartoon that both highlights the overshadowed issue and criticizes the American public.

TOW #11 | Written - Chief Seattle's "Oration of 1854"

The 1850s were a difficult time for most Native Americans. By that time, European immigrants had taken over the majority of the United States, knocking over the Native Americans’ natural culture and history for a more modernized one. In response to such catastrophes occurring, Chief Seattle raises his voice in his “Oration of 1854,” proclaiming that their natural reserves should be conserved. Through figurative language such as similes, Chief Seattle proposes a treaty in an effort to persuade Governor Stevens to conserve the Washington territory for the Native Americans.

In the midst of an analogy between weather and the current situation of the Native Americans, Chief Seattle describes that his “words are like the stars that never set” (1). Utilizing such an analogy places an emphasis on the fact that his words are unchanging, suggesting that the following proposition he is to make will not be swayed by differing opinions. This emphasis helps to portray to the audience, Governor Stevens, that he is firm in his stance and is not willing to budge. Stevens’s gained understanding that Chief Seattle is firm in his proposition shows Stevens that Chief Seattle is serious about the proposal, and is determined to pass the treaty. Furthermore, Chief Seattle appeals to his audience’s sense of guilt through similes, comparing the white men as “grass that covers the grass prairies” and the Native Americans as “scattering trees of a storm-swept plain” (2). Through the juxtaposition of a positive illustration of white men and a negative illustration of the Native Americans, Chief Seattle is highlighting that white men are plentiful and considered higher than the less populated, lower Native Americans. Holding him and his men at such a low level evokes a sense of guilt from the audience; Governor Stevens now most likely views the Native Americans as not well treated due to him and his white people. This guilt could result in swaying him into not buying more land and instead negotiating with Chief Seattle and make a treaty.

Although by this time period, Europeans have already dominated the majority of the United States, a select few people, like Chief Seattle, believed that more could be done to conserve Native American culture and territory. He expresses his determination through tear-jerking figurative language that sets both his purpose in stone and blossoms a flower of guilt in his audience. Will those blossoms, however, be enough to change the “grass prairies” of white men into meadows of Native Americans?