2+--+A.M.

**12.4.2011.** **1984 Anticipation Statement Response**

I believe that as a citizen of the United States, our government has a right to torture individuals who pose a threat in harming society. The realization people need to understand is that torture is mandatory in some situations. In order to acquire information the brutality used on one may save the lives of hundreds even thousands. “Torture of a person who is a threat to our country’s freedom is acceptable as long as the person does not die” this is a valid statement and should be taken in the highest regard. In 2011 the Gallup Organization, a research-based performance-management group, conducted a study in which they surveyed all over the country on the bases of capital punishment. Out of everyone surveyed the vote for the death penalty won 61% over a life without parole in a murder case. For killing one person this convict, according to the majority of American citizens would be put to death yet for planting a bomb in a park with a hundred families most would agree torture is not the best means for negotiation. 61 percent of Americans understand that for hurting other people one must be hurt so isn’t it also a valid point to hurt someone who has the full intentions of hurting others if you could save lives because of it? There is a difference in a law case between involuntary manslaughter and premeditated murder, by accident involuntary manslaughter can be anything to a drunken car accident to an accidental misfire, however premeditated murder is thought upon before and planned out so that when the time comes the person knows exactly how and when they are going to commit the crime. If understanding the rules, the death penalty can be given in both circumstances yet according to the given research still over half the population would be willing to condemn these people to death. This is where torture of an individual comes into play; if you knew this person was committing the murder wouldn’t you do anything to stop it? The problem is not that we as Americans are being brutality unjustly it is that we are using our brutality improperly. Torture has helped us in many ways in becoming the nation we are. The reasons for torture are varied and many I believe to be justly used, but in the case to torture one to save hundreds I find it to be completely and without question the way we should conduct our government. The reason for the government, the reason for the amendments’, for the constitution, Supreme Court, our whole judicial system is to protect and give every single citizen living in this country the protection and rights they need to live a full content life with the “pursuit of happiness.” As our government they protect us with the army against threating nations, shouldn’t they protect us against a man in a park with a bomb, especially if they have the chance to stop him and save lives? American’s have taken the use of humanity problems too far in my opinion, people that want to hurt other people need to be punished. Plain and simple. Eye for an eye, ear of an ear. The use of torture is not bad; the problem is that it has been used unjustly in the United States and in countries alike so now it is automatically condemned. If we can get information out of a terriost who is going to kill thousands of people, why wouldn’t we? And even if you’re complete against the use of these tactics, what if it was your family and friends? How could we not attempt everything in our power to save lives by hurting one? “Torture of a person who is a threat to our country’s freedom is acceptable as long as the person does not die.” I believe greatly in this statement, and believe the US government should take all means they need in order for to keep us safe.

**12.1.2011** **"I want a wife" Rhetorical Precis**

Judy Brady in "I want a Wife" (1971) prosecutes that the role of husbands in the hosehold is reliant upon their wives. Brady draws this conclusion by appealing to the wives through use of claims as to what would she like if she had a wife to depend upon. This relays how society has been built up to realize this is the norm for daily living and her counter judgement will not fail to be rejected by the men in the household. Women of this time are apt to creating new lives for themselves, thus Brady inspires them to understand the severity of the role in the household and create a better life for those who live by it.

The speaker in this is trying to prove men have it easy in this society and women have a hard life. The writer is a women leaving the point of view from a women and wife's point of view, from her own life she knows what its like to be a wife so throughout her article we see the relevance as it comes out in her writing. Brady uses many examples in her writing using repetition throughout the whole thing, 'if i had a wife.." this is what I would do. Her examples allow the reader to imagine how easy her life would be if she really did have a wife and how hard it would be to be the wife.

I believe that Orwell's intended audience for this books was the younger generation of power to come. Throughout the novel our character acts as "every-man", he represents all of us, yet witnessing his government come to power and take control he woes his readers to advance in the same way his country did. In Part 1 we are told that Winston is writing in his diary and doesn't know the time period, doesn't know how old he is, doesnt know all of this because his government is running it all. For me this was the greatest evidence of his anti-totalism feelings. The government of Oceania had taken over to much, the dictators had not become overwhelmingly burdened to their lives, but had infact become in control of the lives of their citizens. Another thing I found to be more conviincing was that throughout all this time our character has a hard time reliving the past of his childhood, by using this I think that Orwell was allowing us as readers to be more insightful into what this meant. The future generation has the all the power, they have the ability to come up with new thoughts and new ideas and for me I analyzed this use of neglection as a way of the government to prohibit new ideas of how to run the country. Orwell's novel is a compelling insightful story but not only is this use of overpowering government apparent in the book but it was also shown throughout Orwell's life. He watched Germany come into power, he knows how one must feel to live in a place where you have no control, and this for me was the most convincing evidence. If they can contorl the future by controlling the youth, there is no stopping the totailian government.
 * 12.5.2011 **
 * Intended audience for 1984 **

The basic message conveyed in this story is that total and complete control in any situation is bad. Throughout the whole book we are emersed into a society where the government is in control of everything, no one has any individuality because that right has been taken. Orwell showed that this society was never going to work and that if one doesn't change it will become our future eventually. At one point our character tells us "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human's face - forever." Individuality was not possible because the governent had too much control. It had practically brainwashed it's citizens so much that they could no longer think for themselves. "Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they they have rebelled they cannot become conscious." This quote shows just how much control they had that no one was even thought it was bad. The message Orwell shows is that one needs to understand something is going wrong in order to fight it. In this complete control took over making no one believe anything was going wrong, this was the point of the message.
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">12.11.2011 **
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">The Message **

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">After completeing this novel I believe that Orwell was attempting to open the eye's of his readers. In any situation we are apt to being submissive to an alternate understanding dependt on who is leading it. He wants us to stand up for what we believe as individual people even if it is against the norm of soctiey is. He creates a illusion like world that has taken every single given right from these people, yet his character tries to get away from it. Orwell wants our understanding to come from within ourselves not from another's point of view. . To inspire the readers he used what he found the most intersting thing that was happening in society: the government. Through events like the Holocaust, and the presiding communism threats the fright of the world becoming like the one in 1984 was evident in society. Through this orwell used his insights to gain understanding and allow for his readers to also become able to understand the greater meaning behind his novel. If we are all scared of what is to come his goal was to inspire in order to change the outcome and know how to fight back.
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">12.11.2011 **
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">The Purpose **