TOW #24 - IRB

One Man's Wilderness is a book compiled by Sam Keith from the journals and photographs of Richard Proenneke. It is a lovely book which explores the beauty of the Alaskan wilderness and the challenges one man must overcome to survive in it. Proenneke uses vivid diction and explores his emotions in his journal to convey the beauty of the Alaskan Wilderness and how he struggles to survive in it. The reader feels Proenneke's emotions, experiences his thoughts, almost as it happens. When describing the sheer beauty of the valley which he occupies, the author says "Somehow I never seem to tire of just standing and looking down the lake or up the mountains even if it is cold. If this is the way folks feel in church, I can understand why they go." (Proenneke 141). He shares his thoughts as if the reader is a close friend, and the emotions that this all instills have a great range from joyous to somber. The book becomes extremely enjoyable due to the reader feeling like they are in an extension of the author's conscience. The author's vivid, yet borderline terse, diction carries the experience even further. When describing his observation of a pack of wolves, he says "Through the spotting scope, I could make out the narrow heads, the erect ears, the long muzzles. I would like to see those green eyes up close... suddenly one bolted nervously and loped down the ice" (Proenneke 129). Even though he condenses his days to the length of a paragraph or two, they never cease to be beautiful. This is the loveliness of the book. This is what makes it truly and profoundly special, how descriptive it is in such a brief amount of space. Proenneke's vision, his description, take this book, in all of it's glory, to the next level, making it one of the most impactful testimonials of all time to the power, and beauty, or nature.

TOW #23 - Visual

Neither facts nor light can escape from the loud mouth of Donald Trump. At least that's what this political cartoonist thinks. What he says mostly holds truth. Donald Trump is illogical and ignorant, but to say that everything that leaves his mouth is false is a vast overstatement of his ability as a leader and his honesty. Much of what Trump says is borderline fascist rhetoric, such as discussions about "illegal immigrants", islamaphobic generalizations, etc. To say, though, that all he says and does is ignorant unfounded rhetoric is misguided. His viewpoints on Chinese labor, ways to draw manufacturing back into America, is quite achievable and realistic. His viewpoint on tax reform for lower income Americans is certainly achievable and realistic, though it fails to actually raise the minimum wage and punishes small business over large enterprises. So is it fair to pigeonhole him into a purely reactionary, racist, and unrealistic cubbie? I don't really think so. This sort of rhetoric is exhausting, it fails to rise above the very tactics that the artist believes Trump uses. How hypocritical and ignorant is that? The reliance on the same stupidity that Trump alleges to use gives him the power to ridicule the media and Democrats for being unequal and unopen to new ideas. So yes, I do disagree with the artist, who fails to realize their own hypocrisy.

TOW #22 - More Than Just a Symbol

Hillary Clinton. Certainly a controversial figure. Is she a symbol of fading late 20^th century feminism, or a dynamic leader that will bring us into a new age? Many young women believe the former, and instead support Republicans or Bernie Sanders, however most others find themselves supporting Clinton. The article argues that Clinton has, and will, continue to address Women’s rights, but I can’t help but disagree with the author. Hillary does not address, or even understand, modern day feminists, at least in my definition. Clinton fails to understand a more recent, and popular adaptation of feminism, intersectionality. This idea states that all oppression, whether it be Women’s LGBT, or other minority, is interconnected and must all be addressed as one problem, and Clinton fails to realize this. She only recently supported LGBT rights, and probably only does now to get the support of her audience. Her belief in a Woman’s rights to choose is central to her campaign, and she criticizes Sanders because he does not have this as a central issue, but I cannot help but to disagree with her. Sanders plans to address all oppression at once, and not simply address women’s issues like Clinton plans to. So who really is the progressive candidate that Women need in the 21^st Century? To me, it’s Sanders. He truly believes in his word, does not flip flop for whatever is popular or easy to do, and is a true visionary, rather than the uncreative political juggernaut that Clinton is. Li Zhou would tell you that Clinton has a better track record, but as for me, I am more interested in the future, and not simply relics of the past.