TOW #28: Documentary Rhetorical Analysis Part 1

        Throughout America's history, there has existed an "American dream," characterized by a physical and emotional manifest destiny. Some have achieved the manifest destiny by expanding to America's west coast, but for the Siegels, manifest destiny means something else entirely. In The Queen of Versailles, a documentary directed and produced by Lauren Greenfield, it involves redefining luxury. The Queen of Versailles details the lives of the Siegel family before and after the 2008 financial crisis struck. The "queen" referenced in the title refers to Jackie Siegel, resort tycoon David Siegel's pageant wife, and her ceaseless obsession with wealth and beauty. David Siegel was the lavish owner of the now-failing Westgate Resorts company. The main subject and source of conflict of the film is the family's decision to build the Versailles house, modeled after the actual Palace of Versailles built for Louis XIV several hundred years ago. Had the Versailles house been completed, it would have been the most expensive privately held home in America. About halfway into the film, the 2008 crisis hit, leaving once-billionaire David Siegel and his family "struggling" to hold onto their partially-finished Versailles house. The remainder of the film follows the family as they try to hold onto their assets. Meanwhile, the Siegel's friends, employees, and relatives truly struggle to hold onto their homes, emphasizing the ridiculousness of the Siegel's situation.
     The purpose of The Queen of Versailles rings loud and clear, so much so that by the end of the documentary, the Siegels themselves begin to hear the ringing, too. The purpose is to mock the idea of excessive decadence and wealth. To achieve this purpose, the director, Greenfield, uses contrasting characters, ironic music, and hyperbole. Greenfield's use of contrasting characters proves especially effective throughout the documentary. There are two very different types of characters Greenfield features: those who are desperately poor and those who are overtly and excessively wealthy. The poor include Jackie Siegel's family and high school friend as well as the Siegel's Filipino nanny. For example, just after the financial crisis of 2008, Jackie Siegel's best high school friend calls to tell Jackie that her home is being foreclosed while Jackie empathizes from her lavish bedroom which is nearly the size of her friend's entire home. Another example of this contrast occurs when Greenfield focuses in on the Siegel's primary nanny, Virginia, who was originally from the Philippines and has not seen her own children for eleven years because she cannot afford to visit them. The Siegels, in comparison, look foolish and cruel in contrast to Virginia. To further emphasize this contrast, Greenfield shows Virginia's makeshift home, which is actually just a shed-sized playhouse for the Siegel's children, followed by the Siegel's enormous mansion. By comparison to everyone around them, the Siegels are classless, rude, wealthy people who fake empathy for those less fortunate than them.
     Greenfield's use of music has a profound effect on the tone of the documentary. Just as though they were the royal owners of the real Versailles residence, the Seigels waddle around to classical music that might have been suitable background music for Louis XIV himself. For the Siegels, however, this music only serves to point out the ridiculousness of their situation. At several points during the film, the audience sees Jackie Siegel, teetering in high heels, wearing tacky clothing, sporting dreadfully heavy yet ineffective makeup to music that would have been fit for her exact opposite. Whereas classical music generally implies wealth and class, in The Queen of Versailles it highlights the wealth and lack of class. This draws a distinction between wealth and class, illustrating the idea that they do not come hand-in-hand. Although they are wealthy, the Siegels are classless, emphasizing the meaninglessness of wealth. By the end of the film, the audience feels more respect for the financially "poorer" characters and distaste for the Siegels. Additionally, Greenfield uses a special type of hyperbole to achieve her film's purpose. Although she might not have intended to do so, the director depicts every theme not with twinkling lights, but with flashing neon signs, so to speak. To demonstrate the emotional chaos the Siegels endure despite their wealth, Greenfield depicts actual chaos, in which the family's animals are literally running wild and dying. To demonstrate the Siegel's shift in attitude regarding their wealth, Greenfield films ugly, bleak weather along with the character's routine interactions. The effect is very blunt, making it very hard for the viewer not to see Greenfield's point. All things considered, Greenfield achieved her purpose very effectively.

TOW #27: TOW Reflection

In the first TOWs I wrote, I stuck to a certain format; I answered all of the questions separately and then I tried to blend them together into a cohesive TOW as demonstrated by my first marking TOWs, such as TOW #10. This was not as successful as the format I used later in my TOWs, which was much less structured. Also, I noticed that as I slowly abandoned my routine, I also began to write more concisely and artfully. In TOW #22, for example, I used mini transitions to move from idea to idea, which was something I had never done before. I believe I've mastered the writing of introductions and conclusions. Looking back, it has become much easier for me to transition into my idea from nothing and end in a reflective, interesting way. At first, my TOWs were a bit choppy since I had no viable way of introducing and concluding them. Reading my third most recent TOWs compared to my first TOWs, this is where is see the most improvement. Despite my progress, however, I could still improve my ability to write clearly. I tend to write in a way that sounds a bit awkward, and although I think I have improved on my tone throughout this year, I still have some progress to make. I even noticed that I wrote in a way that we'd discussed in class as not so good. In my tenth TOW, for example, I used a double negative, writing "it is not uncommon." I still write in a way that can sound a bit clumsy, so I would still like to improve my tone and stylistic voice. Overall, I definitely did benefit from these assignments considering that I've expanded my horizons in my search for good TOWs. I've also learned to analyze both visual and written texts more effectively. I did not benefit considering the fact that I did not consistently analyze the texts as much as I could have.

TOW #26: "Team Spirit"

College sports, like professional sports, are televised, but college athletes, unlike professional athletes, are not paid. 

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2014/05/12/140512taco_talk_gopnik

   Throughout history, there has been extensive debate over who should receive more money: the overseer or the worker? This same debate has arisen regarding college sports, particularly college football, bringing with it even more issues to consider with college sports. In his article "Team Spirit," Adam Gopnik proposes a couple of changes in the world of college sports. The purpose of "Team Spirit" is to convince readers, athletes, coaches, and colleges to consider changing how athletes transition from the high school sports career to the major league sports career without the need for college, which he argues is pointless anyway since "academic departments... offer non-courses to student athletes who may not even be fully literate" just to allow them to play at their college. To accomplish his purpose, Gopnik uses various examples, rhetorical questions, and analogies. 
     Gopnik references Northwestern University to explain the inequity between the players and the coaches. He cities that Northwestern made two hundred and thirty-five million dollars between 2003 and 2012 from their football program alone; however, players are still not given concussion-testing and inclusive medical coverage. Readers are likely to feel empathy for the football players at Northwestern University because this example generates pathos. This example illustrates how truly unfair the world of college sports, thus supporting Gopnik's idea of reforming college sports. 

     Additionally, Gopnik lets his readers come to his same conclusion by strategically using rhetorical questions. After mentioning the seven million dollar per season paycheck of the coach of the University of Alabama's football team, Gopnik asks "Shouldn’t those who do the work share the wealth?" The result is a dramatic contrast: wealth against poverty, health against illness, the one percent against the ninety-nine percent, all of which Gopnik's readers already have more than likely already thought about, just not yet in relation to college football. 

     By using analogies, Gopnik appeals to readers, such as myself, who do not entirely understand the world of college sports. Gopnik compares college football to a drama program. If the drama program's musical earned a lot of money, enough to pay the teachers involved quite well, it would seem reasonable to pay the student actors involved, although then it wouldn't just be a school drama program. I, at least, can say that this analogy helped me to understand the real conflict with college sports. Overall, Gopnik effectively accomplished his purpose in my opinion.