Visual Argument

I constructed my Prezi presentation over the grave effects cancer can have on young children, and the difference someone can make in their lives. My claim, put very simply, is that donations to any cancer research funds can save the lives of children; without it, more children will die.

My first image shows a child holding a stuffed animal with a grave look on his face, conveying his sadness and isolation. He is bald and in a hospital bed so the presence of cancer is obvious, which deepens this feeling and includes empathy for his neglect. 

From there I have an arrow that points to a young child who has had brain surgery to remove a tumor. This is evident because he too is bald, and the scars are very vivid. There is a person with him in the background but he is looking up at the camera, and that eye contact between the melancholy child and the viewer provokes sadness, empathy and a sense of hopelessness.

The third image is of a child who is being attended to by a nurse. He is again bald to make the presence of cancer obvious, and this shows how much these children are put through. It is included to elicit feelings of worry and pity, because of the look on the child’s face.

From there my visual argument splits into two paths, designated by arrows. Each stop along the prezi now has two images juxtaposed, illuminating two different paths the children can take in their battle with cancer.

The first set of images has four donation cans picturing children on each can. There is money being put into those cans of four different types of currency. This path begins with the donation of money to cancer research. It is not out to provoke an emotion, but to relate to the audience the action necessary to help the kids. The image it is set in opposition to shows a child in a hospital bed whose face is in dismay, and the entire picture has a dark demeanor. It shows a child cancer patient being neglected and feeling dejected.  This set of images is meant to make the audience begin to see they can do something about children with cancer.

The second set of images stem from an arrow from the donation picture and one from the picture of the little boy. The arrow from the donation picture points to a little girl who is smiling and has her arms raised, signifying victory. She has hair and the entire picture is very light. This picture is in direct opposition to the one of the little boy in the previous set of images, as this image provokes happiness, joy, enthusiasm, optimism, triumph and hope. The image underneath has the opposite effect. It shows a young cancer patient in declining critical condition, and the situation appears hopeless despite the presence of a doctor. This image is included to show desperation and hopelessness vs. the triumph of the above picture. The two paths are growing further apart from one another now.

The last set of images shows pictures of families with their loved ones outside of the hospital. The top picture, the one stemming from the donation jars and the girl with outstretched arms, shows a happy, smiling multi-generational family. This is meant to elicit feelings of joy, celebration and optimism. The kids in the picture are smiling, and clearly cancer free. The image below it, from the darker path, shows two men setting a casket down at a funeral. Since there are only two pallbearers it is clear the deceased is a child, and right over the casket you can see a young girl with a shocked look on her face. These two images represent the final stages the battle against cancer can lead you to, and harks back to the donation picture. At this point, I am trying to get the viewer to be thinking, “Can I go back and donate money at the beginning and save the bottom child?”

My purpose for this visual argument is to convey to viewers that cancer will not go away on its own; rather it will take the popular donations by everyone to kick this disease, and have everyone find that happy ending. The action I want people to take is to donate money to cancer research foundations to help prevent any child from being removed from their normal lifestyle. They should feel like they can give children back their childhood by donating money to foundations.

I invite you to view my prezi by clicking here:



Photo Credits:
Stephen Adams, Abandon Cancer Patient, http://www.wellnessuncovered.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1917:cancer-patients-abandoned-after-treatment&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=50, March 31, 2011

Make a Wish Kid, http://www.sodahead.com/living/barefoot-contessa-finally-agrees-to-see-make-a-wish-kid-too-little-too-late/question-1624451/?postId=53705057&page=5&link=ibaf&imgurl=http://whiterevolution.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/chernobylkidwithleukemia1.jpg&q=boy%2Bcancer%2Bpatient, March 31, 2011

Child Cancer Risk, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5194778.stm, March 13, 2011


Littlest Cancer Patient, http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LittlestCancerPatient, March 31, 2011


Sick Child, http://www.zimvi.com/?p=4303, March 31, 2011 


Funeral, http://sympathyfuneralflowers.wordpress.com/2010/07/10/six-children-buried-and-one-very-sad-funeral-in-hudson-falls/, March 31, 2011

Child Hope Donation Cans, http://illusion.scene360.com/illusions/3963/childhope-donation-cans/, March 31, 2011

J. Bourke, Happy child patient punching the air, http://www.wavebreakmedia.com/stock-video-footage-p-25812/Happy-child-patient-punching-the-air-.html, March 31, 2011

Sandra Magsamen, Family, http://www.oprah.com/relationships/Fun-Filled-Family-Activities/1#slideshow, March 31, 2011

Massumi ch. 1-2

After looking at the first two chapters of Massumi, I am completely exhausted. He is describing affect, something that cannot be described really, since by his own definition, as soon as you give a label to an affect, it inherently loses its affect-ness, and becomes just an emotion. He tries to capture the entity that exists in the half a second after something is unconsciously felt but before it is consciously recognized, but he chooses language that frustrates me. Maybe I am just too dense to get it, but I think it would be much more effective for him to use plain language when describing something so incredibly abstract. The poetic language seems to be geared toward eliciting a certain affect in his reader, which proves his point, but my problem is that without having previously read Damasio and Brennen, I would have no idea what he was talking about. He writes at such an abstract level that yes, his affect was transmitted to me thus proving his point that affects do exist, but if his was the first work I read over the topic, the point would be moot. I would have felt the affect unconsciously, but not realized what he was saying - at lease in the first read. I think he would have been better off explaining his argument in more plain language, and rely on his examples to illustrate his point.

Now to what he was saying. Equally crazy. This is a whole new element to the motto of the Delphic Oracle. (Well I guess not since the notion of affect dates back to Plato and Gorgias.) Now, to "know thyself" and control what affects change you (borrowing from the Brennen conversation), a person must recognize unconscious events - "perce[ive] this self-perception" (36). (Sticks and stones may break my bones but affects will never affect me...?)

At this stage in the course I find it hard to take issue with Massumi's argument, since it is clear to me that affects to exist and play an important role in how a person feels, although it does not play an overwhelmingly influential role. Moreso I take issue with how he relates his claim, which I feel is a petty distinction.

I did find his inclusion of other fields (quantum mechanics, biology, etc.) very interesting. I have always been curious to see if mathematical and physical properties could be applied to feelings, words, etc. insofar as you could estimate their weight, momentum, rotation (changes in meaning - dogwhistles and the like), potential energy, kinetic energy, etc. in relation to each other and who is perceiving them. It has been a crank theory of mine, but it seems to work with Massumi as far as I understand him. Instead of feelings and words however, Massumi takes it even further to include the precursors of feelings and notions - affects.

Written Argument

In this argument I have adapted a letter for this assignment that I actually sent out to raise money for cancer research. I am trying to elicit feelings of sadness and desperation through Mikey's story, and feelings of hopefulness and a sense of motivation to donate. The main claim if the letter is to donate to Texas 4000, but a strong secondary claim here is to be aware that cancer is a huge problem and one that can be solved. The link is below and if you are so inclined, visit www.texas4000.org to find out more.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DmUJce4K078invgzWxCR-1o1PX-cFb4NACiv2HtASEY/edit?pli=1&hl=en&authkey=CNSd6k0#

Damasio ch 1-4

Upon getting over the shock my mirror neurons gave me after reading about Phineas Gage, I began to try and wade through the neurological terminology Damasio uses to try and find a rhetorical use for the tale he is telling (taking "rhetoric" in a more narrow sense, not how Kennedy would define it). Using the stories of Gage and Elliot, Damasio was able to illustrate, however grotesquely, that certain parts of the brain govern certain aspects of life, be it reason, personality, etc, and maybe more importantly, that said reasons are not perfectly defined. It is not the neuroscience that interests me though.

I am fine with the fact that certain emotions exist on certain levels (ch 7), but thinking back to the beginning chapters it can be observed that the brain is not the product of some higher assembly line, rather it is tailored to the specific person through learned practice. This is knowing your audience on a whole new level.

In Damasio's Aside on Phrenology, he said that "[t]he mind results from the operation of each of the separate components, and from the concerted operation of the multiple systems constituted by those separate components" (ch1). So in essence our mind is an orchestra, and our ideas and speech that spew forth is the symphony composed therein. My question is, assuming an understanding of the basic paradigm of brain function, can a person appeal just to the string section, then to the horns, and so on until the entire consciousness is playing the rhetor's song? Second question: did Leo just make a movie about that?

Maybe a better question is: Should, or, is it effective to, target individual emotions related to the ideal state on the overall continuum you want your audience to be at (say resentment for anger), to build to the target emotion gradually?