Blog Assignment #4
The essay discusses the idea of war porn. Our society has created the phase war porn and it s quite common. This essay answers the question of why we should photograph these gruesome and sadistic images of Iraqi soldiers; such as the Abu Gharaib case. More or less through conversation between what others have said about war porn and a few documented sources, the author has come to the conclusion of how can we not photograph these images?
The author creates an original thought of how war porn has become part of our society. I believe that if we take part in a society, then it is our responsibility to take action and contribute to society positively. Even though these pictures such as the men piled up on top of each other and the other standing in a cross like figure covered in feces are disgusting and demeaning, this is reality and we must take action accordingly. No one really wants to see it but war porn unfortunately becomes a part of our society, and as members of the society this issue should be known and taken care of.
The pictures capture the word war porn. As stated in the essay, war porn was evident before the Abu photos but never had the intense impact of the photos. No one really understood the idea of war porn. Seeing the actual picture and sympathizing with the tortured prisoners moved the viewers and take a step back and really look at the situation. The essay goes back and forth as to whether war porn really forces us to take action after seeing the Abu Gharaib photos or discourages us due to its emotional impact.
In “From Public Sphere to Public Screen: Democracy, Activism, and the ‘Violence’ of Seattle,” Kevin Michael DeLuca and Jennifer Peeples is an article that discusses how the photos force us the take action, as I mentioned above. Instead of discouraging us, the photos most definitely motivate us even more to take action. The media’s visual representation of these photos frequently promotes democratic participation. To demonstrate the idea that the war porn is so frequently accessed and is open to the public is through Google. Google is a very popular search engine that is used every day and can be accessed by anyone around the world. The author creates ethos by showing how easily it is to find war porn. Pretty much anything can be found online and thousands of war porn photos can be see by a click of a button. As I mentioned above our access to the war porn definitely encourages democratic participation. The author supports their idea further by Philip Zimbardo’s very popular and recently published book The Lucifer Effect. It compares two phenomena’s and their influence on public debate. Both very public affairs will and has raised many eyebrows and have taken attention to.
The images in this essay are probably the most important part of the essay. It creates emotional, ethical and logical appeals for the essay. It grabs the reader’s attention and makes the essay very believable obviously. If you haven’t seen the war porn images before the essay does a good job of explaining them, and if you have then the author reiterates the war porn very clearly and convincingly. The author makes logical appeals through Google, and how easy war porn can be accessed. Google is a something that can be related to almost anyone. If anyone has used Google before, they know the reliability, massive amounts the information, and the accessibility of sources the search engine has. The author also pulls from other authors and articles, books etc in order to address the author’s idea on war porn. Through the use of many sources, the main point of the essay develops and doing so makes the essay credible and believable.
Hi Haley. I like how you note how a.) effective images are in making scholarly arguments and b.) how in order to make my own argument persuasive, I define war porn, illustrate it, and draw on the work of others to make my point. Notice in particular how I use the various sources I am conversing with. I use some to define concepts, others as a catalyst to argue against even though I concede with their main arguments in some ways, and still others to help me argue against other sources. I also use sources such as Latour and Peeple’s and de Luca to make my own point. I apply Latour’s concepts to war porn as well as Peeple’s and de Luca’s argument about spectacle as democratic participation. In all these ways, I use secondary research to make my argument.
For primary research, I use rhetorical analysis of warporn and conduct Google research. In an extension of this essay, I also did research in the New York Times archives, which really solified my argument. In a way, I think by researching the concepts from Latour and Peeple’s and de Luca and applying them in orignal ways, they could be said to be primary sources too. At any rate, what I want you to really see is how many different ways I use sources in order to make my argument, how I use primary and secondary research, and make logical and emotional appeals to establish my own ethos…
Great analysis Haley. As Laurie pointed out, she used sources to define ideas through agreement and disagreement. One source would say warporn were isolated incidents while another source called it an immediator. Laurie looked at both and drew conclusions based on multiple viewpoints. Laurie also includes her own research (the data collection from Google); which you adequately stated. Keep up the good work.