Analogy theory

Christine Hauser, from the New York Times, on her article titled “‘Buddy Check on 22!’ Veterans Use Social Media to Fight Suicide” writes about the difficulties veterans face after coming back home and how social media influence in the task of keeping in touch and supporting each other through the grey path of depression and suicide thoughts. In addition, it is interesting when the author, referring to two sergeants, writes: “The two men, now thousands of miles apart, had become closer than brothers in Iraq, serving shoulder-to-shoulder under mortar and rocket fire.”

First, the article shows the relation between the number 22 use by the Facebook group ‘Buddy Check on 22’ stating this number is related to the average of veterans per day that had taken their lives by their own hands on 2010. (Para 3) It is frustrating and sad how veterans have to deal with survivor’s guilt, PTSD, depression and other mental illnesses, nevertheless it is encouraging how technology is used to support each other as a family and overcome the difficulties together.

Yet, I do not want to focus on the sadness of suicide or the struggles war veterans have to deal with, but focus on a crazy analogy theory that came to my mind when reading this New York Time’s article and relates to what I am living at the moment as an exchange student. Even though, I understand that being an international student will never be literally compare to be in war.

When students are on exchange, experiencing another culture, learning a new language, making friends and doing things for the first time it is like people who serve in the military; exploring a new territory, trying to understand a new language, surviving from the enemy and confronting situations for the first time. Therefore, all the emotions involved in all those activities are magnified for the simple fact that you are not in your comfort zone, you are not at home.

Once we come back to where we started, to the routine or the familiar environment, it is not comfortable anymore. It becomes a bigger challenge to adapt again to our old life, because all you have lived changed us and the things we left at home are the same but we are not. There is when the problem begins. The struggle is not with the language or with the need to stay alive, now it is with our minds, which is even worst.

However, with the current social media boom we are able to help each other and find support on those who are living the same situation, struggling just like us. Also, this kind of experience brings us closer to the people who are on the same boat, it is a relief to find empathy and rely on those who feel what we feel. It is not easy and if we let our mind win in the worse scenario we may end up literally kill by it.

In conclusion, the experience can be either traumatic, like in war or rewarding, like in an exchange, but both makes us lose our mind once we get back to reality and if we do not have the support from those who lived or are living the same we may lost it completely. Therefore, I ask myself: Is there a way to stop our minds to feel lost after this type of experience? How can we deal with depression post-exchange/post-war? What can we do when support from our fellows is not enough?

Make an impact using creativity

The Op-Doc titled “Games You Can’t Win” by David Osit and Malika Zouhali-Worrall is a multimodal opinion page, where the authors gracefully utilice video and words to tell the story of three different people who created video games to share what they have lived. A transgender woman, a mental illness sufferer and the parents of a child with cancer have chosen computarized games to translate their emotions. From the three stories, the one that impacted me the most was about the parents with the child who had cancer, when they say: “Life pulls us away so quickly that the memory of the people we love fades. This game is a reason for me to talk about Joel even after everyone stopped asking about him” (min 2:54)

Unfortunately, they are right. Society has reached the point where events from yesterday are already forgotten and we, as human beings need to find a way to remember those events, not because we are attached to it but because it is a reminder of how human we are. Furthermore, this is what they do through video games, utilizing their abilities to develop program as a way to transmit their deepest emotions, darkest fears or desires.

Phycologists alwalys say realising or taking out the emotions through conducting methods helps the brain and the body to feel better. A normal person would do it with exercise, playing an instrument or writing the emotions down in paper, however this three people have selected an extraordinary and creative way to show their feelings and the story behind them to the world.

So, I question myself to further things beyond video games: why do we use social media to brag about the things we have instead of using it to make an impact in society? how can we learn to tell our story in a way it can change a person’s point of view?

Life Versus Grades

On his article titled “Malia Obama’s ‘Gap Year’ Is Part of a Growing (and Expensive) Trend”, Mike Mcphate writes about the decision students have to make after graduating from high school whether if it is suitable to take or not a year off from school. Like the author of the article states, for students: “It sounds awfully nice: A yearlong postponement of schoolwork.”

Nowadays, taking a year or a semester off after finishing high school has become popular. Even  the president’s older daughter would be among the thousands of students to take a so-called gap year between high school and college. Students have made of this a trend and like the author writes it is an expensive one, not only in money but in time.

First, the idea of going on an adventure of a life-time before starting college sounds attractive, there is no doubt about it. However, many people still look at this idea with resentment, for example, some parents worry that their children could veer off track academically and never recover. Others like me, think that it is a waste of time and money (if you have to pay for it) because international programs normally cost about $35,000 or more.

Nevertheless, “studies have shown that not only do the students go on to perform better than their non-gap-year classmates, they also tend to end up in more satisfying careers” (Para 5) To be honest, this topic is a dilemma for me because it is necessary to put in a balance traveling or finishing university earlier, self-growing or building a career. It is a conflict: life versus grades.

In addition, if someone ask me for an advice about this topic I will not be sure on what to answer because even though I chose to postpone school for one semester to go on an exchange, I am still not sure if taking a yearlong break is a good idea, mainly because of the time a person is loosing. It is an amazing experience, but it is better to take the gap-year after begining university, either at the end of the freshman year or in sophomore year, that way you can expand your horizons and redefine the focus of your career or your life.

Finally, a lot of questions come to my mind: How can we find balance between traveling and academic life? What techniques can we apply to reach balance between life and career?

Different Worlds, Same Attitude

            The art of persuasion is a talent not everyone can obtain. One may learn how to use it but is never going to be naturally inclined as those who were born to lead others and utilize words as a tool to change people’s minds. So is the case of two much-mentioned figures that, for obvious reasons, have the attention of the media; however, if one thinks about them, they will not ever be put it in the same category, although in this article are view from the same lenses.

In his article titled “Clash of the Populists”, Mr. Ross Douthat successfully writes about how two people from completely different worlds can have the same focus and apply the same techniques to appeal to the public.

            They are the attraction, and we are the spectators. To be honest, we like the show that is presented in this worldwide circus. This is why the author is writing about the topic in first place. The article begins with cynicism, mentioning the books of the Bible (Daniel, Revelation and Necronomicon) which predicts that “the Man in White must do battle with the Combed-Over Titan, amid the ravening shrieks of Twitter and beneath the unblinking eye of Cable News.” (Douthat para 1). Right off the bat it is noticed that the article is not for any kind of audience because the reader needs to have religious background or at least an overall knowledge of what the Bible says to understand its sarcasm. Though, it is noticeable that this article is not read by any kind of audience but for more educated and older generation, interested either in politics or religion, sometimes both. Therefore, the author effectively reaches the audience by providing context and sarcasm at the same time.

However, in the next paragraph, when the author explains the meaning of the ‘joke,’ it does not have the same reach as the original because it lacks of the causticness of the first idea. It is also curious the word choice he makes when referring to the non-religious people as “less mystically inclined” (Douthat para 2), taking into consideration the one who writes the article is conservative, whose focus is mostly on religion. Consequently, by this word choice the article obtains the appearance of a non-biased writing and it accomplishes the mission of being open for readers of all opinions.

Mr. Douthat makes a marvelous transition moving from the sarcasm to a more serious and informative stance, amplifying how the whole drama between the Pope Francis and presidential candidate Donald Trump began. That is when the two of them exchanged insults.  The word the author utilizes is ‘war,’ exaggerating the context to obtain a bigger impact on the reader.

Then he explains the obvious reasons why the two men collided into the drama, highlighting the differences between them: “The celibate and the lecher, the ascetic and the billionaire, the mystic and the frank materialist.” (Douthat para 5) With these examples the author introduce us to the point he wants the reader to understand, which is that even though Trump and Francis may look at first sight like oil and water, they have components in common.

It is fascinating how for every motive Mr. Douthat provides about how the Pope and Trump are so dissimilar, he also gives reasons of why they are also strangely alike. And it is not only because both are world leaders, public figures, media attraction, but because the way they challenge their surroundings and the groups they belong. Therefore, the author catches the attention of the reader by writing accurate and in some sense creative information about the topic.  

The similarities presented in the article are backed up by past events and patterns the subjects (Trump and Francis) have been showing to the spectators. Ross utilizes other sources besides his own opinion, which give him extra points. For example, Matthew Schmitz’s article in The Washington Post, when he writes that “Francis challenges a hidebound Vatican bureaucracy and flirts with revising settled Catholic doctrine” (Schmitz para 5) while Trump “attacks conventional Republican politicians and violates every conservative orthodoxy.” (Schmitz para 6)

In the same line, the presidential candidate refers to their colleagues with words like “liar”, “loser” and in the worst cases “stupid.” The Pope prefers to use “Pharisee” and “whiner,” on the point for this public figure. Plus, both know how to select their targets and the way to address the audience, usually with simple language that appeals to emotions and sensible interesting topics.

On the other hand, Mr. Douthat offers on his article a slight tone of humor, using a common slang phrase generating a familiar colloquial word choice while explaining how much the billionaire and the pontiff like troublemaking to catch the attention of the public and of course, of the media.

After explaining the first idea, differences and similarities between the two individuals, the author changes the line and smartly links it with the fact that “by reaching people who usually tune out churchmen and politicians, they [referring to Trump and The Pope] have become leading populists in our increasingly populist moment.” (Douthat para 9) Therefore, both have the same enemy which according to Ross is the Western’s ruling class. Also, both in its own way provide the spectators with anti-establishment personalities that make them immensely attractive.  

In the last part, the author transmits to the reader a powerful idea: “The populist pope may be remembered as a great reformer, and the populist billionaire as the unlikely catalyst for the Republican Party’s long-delayed reform.” (Douthat para 13).  Pope Francis and Donald Trump, both have changed the preconceived idea that people have about the figure of a pope and a presidential candidate. In addition, Mr. Douthat not only compare the two persons but also reflect on the consequences their actions may have, which give the reader a wider vision of the topic.

In conclusion, the author of “Clash of populists” makes a great job and its outcome is a well written article in which the reader can find a different view of recent events since the piece provides a detailed insight of facts and opinions to support the author’s thesis. Mr. Douthat addresses the issue in a unique and creative way, not only by comparing the pontiff and the presidential candidate but for giving something to analyze to the reader. No one will ever imagine the Pope can be so similar to Donald Trump, for the simple reason they are from different worlds even though they have the same attitude. 

  

  

Work cited page

Douthat, Ross. “Clash of the Populists.” The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 20 Feb. 2016. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.

Schmitz, Matthew. “What Donald Trump and Pope Francis actually have in common.” The Washington Post. The Washington Post Company, 19 Feb. 2016. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.