TOW #28: Jesus Camp (Documentary)

In "the land of the free," the limits of free speech are a controversial topic that will continue to be disputed for a long time. This gray area is one of the underlying questions that comes into play in the 2006 documentary, Jesus Camp. In this documentary, three young children are followed as they travel to a Evangelical Christian camp that will teach them more about their religion and help them learn how to spread their beliefs to others. These spotlighted kids are Levi, Rachael, and Tori. They all come from very religious families and intend to devote their entire lives to their beliefs. The woman in charge of the camp is named Becky Fischer, and she shares her goal with the cameras in the beginning of the documentary. She wants these kids to have such strong faith in Christianity that they would be willing to sacrifice themselves for their love of God. She knows that the values that are learned at a young age are the fundamental basis for which children build on. So if these dedicated children are taught the ideas and concepts of Evangelistic Christianity when they are seven, the core values will be instilled throughout the duration of their life. At camp, they do things like repent for their sins, smash ceramic labeled "government," and hear a speech from a man protesting abortion. They also talk to a cardboard cutout of George Bush, and pray for him and his administration. The conflict comes in when political statements are made through religion. Abortion is currently a major political fight, but it is also a religious issue. The separation of church and state is called into question when all parties (whether political or not) have the right to say what they choose. Is this camp brainwashing kids by indoctrinating one-sided opinions into youth? Or is this establishment just passing down the same views that this particular church has always held? Bias is hard to avoid in reality, but this documentary questions the limit that exists. Representing the other side of the argument is a radio-talk show host who is obviously more liberal. He speaks with a few people as the film goes on, even interviewing the leader of the camp at one point. That talk is where their clashing views are most contrasting. Although the filmmakers released a statement saying that this film was intended to have an objective view, there were a few cinematic decisions that created a certain feeling. At points, the documentary seemed to be criticizing the camp and the Evangelical Church. Most of the documentary was set in the Midwest, a fairly rural area. I am aware that, being liberal and growing up in the area that I did, I have my own personal bias, but I am attempting to be as unbiased as I can. The views of the scenery between content scenes create a tone of loneliness and isolation. This mood does not tend to be positive, instead, it makes viewers (at least me) a little apprehensive and off-put by the camp and where it is located. Another factor is the characters that are not at the camp. Early on in the film, the main group of focuses go bowling. In this group is Rachael, one of the featured children. On this trip, Rachael goes up to a stranger and gives her a pamphlet. She also tells this woman how much God loves her and wants to know her. As Rachael leaves, the woman, who was very polite, looks confused and taken aback. This is pretty unusual in today's society and by including this bit, it is clear that some people may not want to be persuaded to change religions. This would be exercising their own personal rights as well. The reaction proves that this type of interference in strangers lives could be negative. A lot of really substantial facts are presented in this film, and it made me think a lot about the difference between sharing a faith and pressuring others to have faith alongside you.

http://www.impawards.com/2006/jesus_camp.html

TOW #27: TOW Reflection

AP English Language and Composition has without a doubt improved my writing skills. This is most obvious in my weekly TOWs which I have been adding to all year. At the beginning of the year, I thought that these blog posts needed to have a specific formulaic structure. I had never had a blog before, which was part of the problem, but I also did not realize how much transitions and good flow affected a piece. It was not something I was fully aware of at that point in time. My first TOW post was about the war that was then occurring in Syria. I didn't know much about it, so it was interesting to learn, but over time I realized I could be so much more creative and branch out with my posts. They did not all have to be responding to the headlining political news story of the week. I believe that the introduction in this first post was fairly strong, but my conclusions were still weak and ineffective. Rather than ending with a creative statement, I formed a bland sentence depicting how the article related to me. It is obvious, to me at least, that my conclusions among other things improved dramatically in the second marking period. For my TOW from December 15, I responded to an article on a selfie that Obama had recently taken. This article had traces of politics, like the my first TOW, but it was more entertaining to right, and more based in America's cultural changes than government decisions. By this point in my writing, I had started to focus a lot more on my flow and style. This post was definitely a lot stronger than the previous one in that respect. Also, rather than concluding with my straightforward opinion on the article, I incorporated a societal view into my writing and connected my personal thoughts to the situation. So rather than saying that I liked the article, I instead brought it around to honoring the deceased, Nelson Mandela. In the third and most recent marking period, I believe that I wrote one of my best TOWs yet. It was my 20th TOW and I was writing it in response to my IRB: Eat, Pray, Love. This book was amazing, which probably helped me to write a stronger response, but it also included a lot of rhetoric on the narrator's part. I believe that that post displayed the improvement that took place throughout my junior year journey. I had a well- thought out thesis, which outlined my essay, allowing an organization that did not exist previously. This change drastically benefited the flow of my piece. My conclusion was also stronger and less forced than it had ever been. In all of my responses, I could definitely still improve the transitions between ideas, but that skill has come a long way since September. While tedious at times, I do think this regular writing exercise has forced me to address issues with my writing that I otherwise would not have. It has made my writing more effortless and I am grateful for that improvement.

TOW #26: "What Your Name Says About How Believable You Are," Matti Vuorre

Growing up with a name like "Kayleigh," with all those silent letters, there have been many a time where people had to repeat it back to me a few times before they finally mastered it. I personally do not think it's hard to pronounce, but the world seems to disagree with me. I have never believed that this difficulty with pronunciation and memorability could mean something else for how I am perceived.  In the article, "What Your Name Says About How Believable You Are," by Matti Vuorre, I realized that people may think me a liar due to reasons as simple as my name. The article opens with the word "imagine," clearly in order to provide a hypothetical situation for audiences. This creation of a real life situation allows readers to put themselves in the context of the argument. By asking people what they would do, Vuorre is able to potentially support the article with that evidence. Reader's gut reaction would probably be to pick the easier name to say, whether they realize it or not.After that, the author made a comparison to turtles, saying that "if I told you that turtles are deaf, unless you are an expert in sea-dwelling reptiles, you probably have little information to help you decide whether the statement is true or false." By comparing this issue to turtles (something many people know a lot about), Vuorre is able to aid with comprehension for everyone reading this article. Finally, the author includes a personal anecdote, describing events from his life as a recent immigrant to the United States. By keeping this story in the piece, it adds an appeal to ethos because it shows he has experienced the struggle of a difficult name and the hardships it entails. This article was very well written and spoke to me, as I remember all of the substitute teachers that butchered my name. This information is solely based on studies, so it could be a coincidence, but if there is ever a situation where you have to pick from two otherwise equal candidates, remember that you could be unknowingly biased based on name.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-your-name-says-about-how-believable-you-are/?WT.mc_id=SA_Facebook