Instead of OTJ, read "The Cosmic Significance of Britney Spears" by Tom Perrotta. Extra copies are in my mailbox in suite 300. The essay is also saved on Oasis.
After reading the essay, answer the following for Journal #7:
1. Why do you believe Tom Perrotta decided to insert himself and us, the readers (speaking as "I" and "we"), into the essay?
2. How do you respond to that decision? What about it is effective, and what is ineffective?
12 comments:
I think that overall, it was a good decision to write this article the way he did. It connected to audience with topic as well as the writer. It was a pretty effective technique because it got you thinking about your opinions on Britney Spears, Elvis, Madonna and Kurt Cobain while you were reading it. Like I said, it was not just the “History of Britney Spears,” which would not really leave room for contemplation while reading. It would be cut and dry, a to b.
I do have to say though, it is very interesting reading this now as opposed to eight years ago, wow eight years, when she had not been married, did not have two kids, an estranged relationship with her parents, and before she shaved her head and went nuts. She went from, as he basically says, ‘Americas virgin princess’ to the penniless crazy crack whore on the corner that’s missing most of her teeth. Now I know that she is not missing teeth and is in no way near penniless, but at this point she is like a car wreck that America cannot turn their eyes away from. And her southern roots are no longer “cute.” They have turned into an excuse. Before it was cute and sweet. Now that she had her children and went in and out of a marriage to complete idiot, its ok, ‘because she is southern.’ That seems to be the excuse for her sister having a child at 16 too. Britney sure turned into a great role model for her. Way to go sis!
To the complete detriment of Britney, I hate to say it, I think we are to blame for her going nuts. And its unfortunate. I would be really interested in reading what Tom has to say about Britney now.
The use of terms like “we” and “I” is obviously designed to connect the piece more fully with the reader. For one thing, it lends the essay a more conversational tone. It also relates the topic more fully to the reader. Britney Spears is, as a product of how tuned-in we all are to popular culture, very familiar to all of us. Despite whether or not they try to deny it, most people can be lumped in with the author as having a vested interest in her life, even though it has no bearing on their own.
Britney Spears life, as most people will tell you, has turned into a disaster. The sweet, humble virgin of Perrotta's essay seems a far cry from the Britney of today. But in a funny way, I think she has lived up to his notions of a sort of pop star icon, in a weird way. He notes that Elvis, Madonna, and Kurt Cobain were reflective of their time period. While Britney's abilities as a musician are pretty shady, her life has certainly been a decent reflection of the decade. The massive celebrity trainwreck that no one can stop watching.
His use of terms that relate us to the subject are important because we're all pretty complicit in the tipping point of ridiculous celebrity culture that we've reached during this decade.
Journal 7- The Cosmic Significance of Britney Spears
I think the author used “I” and “we” in the article to make the reader feel more personally involved. It makes the article seem more like a series of personal opinions rather than a research essay. I think it was a good decision for this type of article and it made it all seem more relatable and understandable. Writing in the first point of view works well in the first few paragraphs as Perrotta describes his own personal experience with September 11. I was confused how this related to the rest of the article but it wouldn’t have been effective at all if he wasn’t writing in the first point of view. Perrotta probably uses “we” simply to engage the reader in the article. He states that the real question is “Do we need to think about Britney Spears?” which involves us in the thinking process that follows in the rest of the article while he compares Britney to other past and present pop culture icons.
1) I believe he decided to use “I” and “we” in his article to make it more personal of his audience. He wanted to draw us into his thoughts. Also, stars only become stars because of their audience. So it is like we are involved in Britney, Madonna, Elvis, and Kurt Cobain’s career. And if we weren’t into those icons or even around for some of them, we can connect to them through the essay, as well as the author.
2) I think it is effective. A lot of the author’s thoughts were awkward and jolting, but his writing style made it easier to read. Even though I found most of what he had to say irrelevant to the careers of the icons mentioned and our world in general, it did feel personal, which helped the article to flow through some messy ideas.
1. I think that he used "I" and "we" throughout the article because he described what is mostly common knowledge and experience. Everyone knows the people he mentions in this article; therefore it is as if the author can have a personal discussion with the reader about his article.
2. I felt like this article was really pointless and that it was trying to be pretentious. The title "The Cosmic Significance of Britney Spears" implies that it is a really important article, worth reading, and the way he writes to the readers makes it seem very personal and engaging. I felt like it was effective for its purpose, although I felt that its purpose was a waste of time.
I think that Tom Perrotta decided to insert himself and us into the essay because this way we become a part of the essay. It hits the reader at a personal level and makes them question if that is how they really feel about the topic. I think that he came to his conclusions by gathering opinions from a number of people and represented what they all said in census by using the word “we”. He is accurate in what he is saying about Britney Spears and he talks about things that have already happened. Therefore he already has prior knowledge of how the world reacted to it. I think that it is a good idea to use words like “I” and “we” because it does make the reader feel more personal with the essay. For me reading something that shares my own opinion makes the essay far more captivating and interesting. It is something that I can relate to and I want to hear what someone else has to say about. I think that his way of doing this is effective because it sparks a thought into the readers head to think about the topic and to agree or disagree with Perrotta”s argument. I think that is what he was aiming for. In the essay he shares his thoughts, but also asks questions like, “Do we need to think about Britney”? He encourages us to answer these questions. The only reason why this might be ineffective is because someone may get slightly offended that he is making accusations that everyone feels the same way as he does. Still, the essay does ignite an interest in thinking about the significance of Britney Spears.
I never thought to compare Britney Spears with figures like Elvis and Kurt Cobain (especially not Kurt Cobain), but I have compared her to Madonna before. The interesting part to me was reading this now knowing all the changes that have occurred in Britney Spears’ life. For example, when he talks about Britney begin this “virgin princess” and Madonna being a sex symbol. He had not yet experienced Britney and Madonna kissing at the Music Awards. And he has definitely not experienced all the crazy things that have been going on in Britney’s life now. I would love to hear what Tom Perrotta would have to say about her now.
I would say that this is a pretty interesting work of litterature. I think he did a good job of making what he was writing about interesting to the reader. He really made me think about celeberities and pop icons. I am not so sure that Tom wanted to throw himself into the picture, but I think maybe he was reaching out trying to see if people all thought like him.
Its pretty nuts to think that, almost ten years ago we all worshiped the ground that Britney Spears walked on. She was the biggest pop icon since madonna many said. However now shes just a mess. She can hardly preform anymore yet she wins VMA awards? I think it just goes to show that pop is not all about the music which is why is stupid.
He was very effective with making everday knowledge seem like it had been said for the first time by using a nice blend of terms and sytanx sentences. He was only really ineffective in I think he choice of pop icons, I think he could have possibly found more intresting stories.
1. I think Tom Perrotta was able to insert "I" and "We" into the article because there is such a common national opinion towards Britney Spears. He was able to make it personal because the way he felt about Britney at the time was extremely similar to the feelings that many others had throughout America. Though Britney has made quite a few changes in her life since this essay was written, even if it was written today about her recent breakdown and rehab stint the author would still easily be able to use those personal statements because his thoughts would be very relatable.
2. I think it was effective because it is an analysis of pop culture in America as well as Britney Spears in particular from his point of view. He was able to be witty about his personal opinions and his ability to find similarities between Britney and other music icons such as Elvis, Madonna, and Kurt Cobain. It may have been ineffective however because reading it today gives him less credibility in his opinions. Since her breakdown, it's funny to read this because he seemed to be very easily fooled by her "famous singing virgin" persona.
1. I believe Tom Perrotta decided to connect himself with us because it creates more a personal feel. I think he did this because it allows the reader to be an active participant in the reading, it almost gives the reader the option to either agree or disagree. Meaning that because it is so personal and connecting that the reader can sleep into an almost conversational type of reading where one is more likely to give opinions.
2. I feel that this decision is good for the subject but I feel that if a person wants to be taken serious in this day and age they must assume more of a third party view. Meaning that it is effective here but say he was writing about a newly discovered planet, I do not believe it would be effective then. But it is effective here and the reason is because he is writing about a celebrity and most people I meet are completely absorbed by celebrities’ lives. Because of this people do not want to hear some cold long-winded writer talk about Spears they want to hear someone they can relate to. What is ineffective about this I believe is the fact that I could not take him serious and the fact that I am not well versed on the subject of Britney Spears.
1. I think it is important to realize that this article was not necessarily written to be informative. You could tell that it really wasn’t meant to be informative the way he presented different facts, such as her surgery. He didn’t really introduce the fact that she had surgery at all, but somewhat assumed that the audience had already known about it. As with any pop culture, it is instead written as a perspective. The perspective he chose was the perspective of the public, which is his own perspective, our own perspective, and that of everyone who has ever seen Britney on the news. By doing this, he was able to accurately achieve his goal, which was to write something along the lines of “Britney in Review”, or “Britney by Comparison,” an article to readers to talk about, not inform, one of the most widely known pop stars today.
2. I think he did this very well in my opinion. As far as staying away from being informative, he wrote much more than just facts, but also included perspective and comparisons about everything he wrote about Britney. Truthfully, this does make the article rather biased, but that’s the point of it being perspective. One thing I felt he did go wrong though was the way he included Cobain. It was very sudden, didn’t really fit the flow of it all, and the article could have done without it. There wasn’t a real reason at all to make such a “black and white” comparison between the two.
1. I think that Perrotta decided to use “I” and “we” because this connects the reader to the piece itself. If he had written in regular essay form, he would have not used these terms and the article would have come out dry, and not relatable. Kind of like an essay. Since he is writing about Britney Spears, who is a pop icon, it is much better to engage the audience. This helps them to understand and relate to what the author was saying. The point was to show the impact that Britney has made on our lives and culture.
2. I found this method to be a very good choice. I felt like the author was actually trying to get his point across and make an impact. It got the message across and made me understand what he was saying. I love opinion pieces, which is exactly what this was. It would not have gotten the point across in the same way if he had written it in a regular fashion. I liked it and would not have written it in any other way. By writing it with “I” and “we”, it really makes you feel art of a discussion and makes you relate it to your life.
The only thing that would be ineffective about this article is the act that it is kind of biased. It was first hand and did not use many sources or outside opinions that did not correlate with his own views. However, it was an opinion piece so I don’t feel like it was. I can understand why some would feel that it was biased though. He could have used other sources to balance his cause.
Perrotta uses “I” and “we” for multiple reasons. The first, and most obvious, is to make the essay personal. The reader knows that this is Perrotta’s opinion. Using “we” also makes the essay personal for the reader, as if the reader were part of the essay. Perotta speaks in the plural because Brittney Spears is a well-known person. He understands that those who read this essay will be able to relate to the events he discusses. Who didn’t see or hear about Brittney Spears performance of “I’m a Slave For You” at the MTV Video Music Awards?
It is very effective because it does bring me, the reader, into the essay. I feel as if Perrotta is trying to say that this is the way the general public feels about Brittney, and this is the way I view her. His use of the word “I” is especially effective because it tells me that Perrotta knows what he’s talking about. It gives the essay of feel of notoriety. Perrotta’s use of personal experience is also evident through his utilization of “I.” Overall, it is very effective.
Post a Comment