Rhetorical Analysis

The rhetorical situation in the article “How Will Jeff Bezos Spend His Billions Now?” by Margaret O’Mara is the comparison of one of the richest men in the 21st century, Jeff Bezos with the gilded age figure of John D. Rockefeller. After stepping down as chief executive of Amazon, Jeff Benzos will continue to hold most shareholders stocks. O’Mara analyzes the actions of Rockefeller to identify the next financial moves of Jeff Bezos. The purpose of this article is to inform the audience of the freedom that wealthy people have that makes them available to further extend their capital. Their capital allows them to invest in other directions such as technology, charities, and other passions. The audience of this article are persons who have an interest in the economy and capitalism but also folks who want to know about the decisions that wealthy people make after “retiring”. The audience could be from ages 25 to 45 since they are more centred in this field. Along with their profits, O’Mara presents an important subject that is charity. She pointed out the donations that wealthy people contributed to. She also mentions Bill Gates, who “has given away more than $55 billion to support vaccine development, prevent malaria, improve public education and aid many other causes”. The author tries to give a message to the readers that wealthy people also give away money to charities. She mentions the recent contributions of Mr. Benzos in the Seattle area by stating that “Mr. Bezos recently began some substantial charitable ventures: the $10 billion Bezos Earth Fund to combat climate change and the $2 billion Bezos Day One Fund, which focuses on homelessness and preschool education”. This message implies that they are not egocentric and want to help people in need.. In order to verify the author’s credibility, we need to look at the background of that author. Margaret O’Mara is a writer and history professor at the University of Washington. She continuously writes about political history, science, technology, United States Urban history, capitalism and the 20th century. In her biography, she states that she writes about the “political, economic, and metropolitan history of the modern United States”. Her status confirms this opinionated article she wrote about the capitalist Jeff Benzos since she is oriented in the Political and Economic history of the US and confirms her credibility of the subject.

Baldwin Post

“If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is?,” James Baldwin inscribes the way a language evolves by using Black English to explain his claim. Baldwin points out something very important when he states “ The argument has nothing to do with language itself but with the role of language”. This quote shows the credibility and seriousness the author has about Black English. Later on, Baldwin argues the differences that a language had by pointing out examples of the French language in different countries. He also claims that languages often tend to tell the control of circumstances which also resonates with the evolvement of a language. Another important note is that he encourages people to not outdraw the consequences of their language just because it looks different from someone’s eyes. In regard, they should use that strength to accept and achieve their temporal identity because it is unique. Baldwin also points out the idea of language being proof of power by stating “It is the most vivid and crucial key to identify”. I do agree because if you have an accent you are immediately judged that you are a foreigner even if you have lived in that county for decades. I also liked the part where Baldwin says “You have confessed your parents, your youth, your school, your salary, your self-esteem, and, alas, your future.” by speaking Black English in England because it resonated with my example above. I think that language is connected to power because if you know more than one language you have the power to communicate with people around the world asides from other consequences. I think that society privileges certain typed of English because it feels right in their ear and when a sentence is grammatically correct and well-articulated. I have many personal anecdotes. For instance, in my country, I had to speak English with my teacher, however, if I made a mistake while talking everyone would laugh or try to correct me. So my peers and I always looked out for grammar errors while speaking English because of the fear of being judged. However, It was completely different when I moved to New York. I noticed that everyone speaks their language even if it is the same universal one. I learned that people tend to speak their minds and do not care about other stuff. But that does not prevent other language privileges that society has created.

3 Ways to Speak

In the video “3 ways to speak”, the speaker Jamila Lysicott argues that being articulate is being able to speak three ways from the same language. She discussed the differences between speaking at home, school, and with friends. She calls herself a tri-lingual orator because she speaks in three different ways that depend on her surroundings. She claims that when she is speaking with her friends in the block she says “I jus’ fall out wit dem people but I done!”. Or when she is in the classroom, she thinks “Yo! Why dese books neva be about my peoples”. She states that she treats all of her ways equally although she sometimes is caught up between them.  She also insists that being “articulate” means more than just having the ability to speak fluently and coherently. It is important to note that in her ted talk she also mentions the history of her way of speaking English. She states “I had to borrow your language because mines was stolen”, which implements the nonsensical racial disparity on her community by people who oppressed their ways of speaking the language. She blames the history for her three ways because it was not for that she wouldn’t have had to speak differently to anyone. While listening to the video, I also slightly resonated with what Lysicoot was claiming. I think that I speak differently when I am with my friends, professors and coworkers, and book. It is very common for everyone to change their tone, language, and appearance when they speak to different people. For instance, when I am with my friends I do not care if I make mistakes, I just speak whatever. However, when I am speaking with my professors I tend to speak in a formal language and be cautious about it. I think that Lysicott’s point is very intelligent and interesting, and I am glad I got the chance to watch it.

Hooks Response

In “Moving Beyond Pain”, Belle Hooks introduces a new point of view of Beyonce’s album Lemonade. Hooks’ central argument revolves around the image of Black women and how Lemonade of Beyonce portrays the physical representation of their bodies, hair, shapes, and sizes. Hooks suggests that Lemonade is created to represent a norm for black women, and a platform to show them as royals. She explains that the audience of the album Lemonade is not black women but it is the whole world. She says that it is all about the body as a commodity as it should not be considered radical or revolutionary since “Lemonade offers viewers a visual extravaganza- a display of black female bodies as transgresses all boundaries”. Hooks also compare Beyonce’s album with the ballad “Frankie and Jonny”, where she says that in the album, Beyonce tells a story of pain and betrayal highlighted with trauma and rage.

“Beyonce is the embodiment of a fantastical female power, which is just a that-pure fantasy. Images of female violence undercut a central message embedded in Lemonade that violence in all its forms, especially the violence of lies and betrayal, hurts.” In this passage, I found meaningful the idea of violence as an unacceptable act that should not be reinforced by either man and woman. Hooks criticizes the scenes in Lemonade that portray women with sexy looks that prevail the cultural sentiment of the acceptable use of violence to dominate. She shows that violence is not the answer to positive change. Rather it creates more separation and inequality between sexes. It is important to note the message that it gives out about the violence that is violence is unwelcome and terrible. It points out the feminist voice that human sexes should not go against each other and that they should come together to make a positive change to the world. It promotes inequality, rather, it supports dominance. However, Hooks is also grateful that Beyonce honors the culture of black women although it does not “serve as adequate ways to reconcile and heal trauma”.

Lebron Discussion

In the review
“Black Panther Is Not the Movie We Deserve”, the author Christopher Lebron writes to criticise the narrative that Black Panther’s message was “such black empowerment [that] was supposed to change things by effectively challenging racist narratives”. Lebron introduces a new point of view that the movie was a form of attempting to portray black empowerment, at a time when the former president Trump referred to blacks as “sons of bitches” who should lose their jobs due to social activities such as fighting against police brutality. The genre of this article is a Review for a Movie, in this case, Black Panther. Lebron criticizes the movie for being radical due to its message that his people have the power to help all black people by developing weapons using vibranium to even the odds for black Americans. The author suggests that the radical imaginings being: “an immensely rich and flourishing advanced African nation that is sealed off from white colonialism and supremacy; and a few black Wakandans with a vision of global black solidarity who are determined to use Wakanda’s privilege to emancipate all black people” are made to reconcile, and it divides the viewers. He also suggests that this was the intention of the movie’s director and writer (with Joe Cole), Ryan Coogler. The author is also confused whether the movie merely reflects the racial politics of the comic books that serve as its inspiration. In the end, Lebron ends his argument by saying “Black Panther presents itself as the most radical black experience of the year”. The audience of this genre is someone who has not seen the movie because in the second paragraph he states “spoiler alert”, but it does not exclude people of colour who were mainly represented in this movie. I think that this article tries to invoke its audience from a new perspective about Black Panther. Lebron suggests that we do not deserve this movie because it is powerful but not necessarily ideal for the reality we’re living in. After all, he claims that America is not yet prepared to see change by asking an interesting question “Why should I accept the idea of black American disposability from a man in a suit, whose name is synonymous with radical uplift but whose actions question the very notion that black lives matter?”