Special Edition Blog Plop your homework assignment here
Post your Last Child in the Woods Essay here. In the comments, tell us what score you think you earned based on the rubric for the rhetorical analysis essay.
Technology has grown so prominent in our world today that it is consuming all aspects of our lives. It is being made accessible not only in the forms of television and cell phones but to deliver our mail through drones too. In Richard Louv’s 2008 passage, Last Child in the Woods, he argues that children are being fed technology rather than a nurtured love for nature. By using compelling tales of shared nostalgia, speaking from his own personal experiences, and creating situations to allow his audience to think, he dictates the importance of keeping level-headed in the battle between technology and nature. To show the effect technology has had on our world and on humanity, Louv begins to speak of nostalgia that most people have a connection with. Pieces of this shared aspect are dropped all throughout the passage, but he really hits hard with it in his closing paragraph. By using all these common memories, he is playing on his audience’s emotions. He stirs up long suppressed memories that bring loving and content emotions to the surface once again. Through playing off of emotions, Louv is able to establish a connection between his ideas and his audience, a connection that will allow them to feel more for what Louv is writing about. Another point Louv uses to argue his ideas is that he begins to speak of his own personal experiences and stories that he has. He uses a good portion of the middle of his passage to tell us a story that happened to his friend. She didn’t want a television in the headrest of her car, because she knew that it would only further an addictive attitude when it came to technology. He uses this example to show that there are many simple ways we can fight against technology. There are many ways we can prevent the minds of our future generations from being so pulled toward a screen. By telling this story, Louv can speak to his audience about what simple things they can do to encourage an appreciation of nature rather than one only of technology. A final way that Louv connects his writing and argument with his audience is by encouraging them to think throughout the passage. After speaking about the story of his friend, he starts the next paragraph off by asking a number of rhetorical questions. He strategically placed these within his passage. At this point, his argument and side on the argument is not very clear, it becomes so later though. He has yet to really show his bias and he poses these questions to allow his audience to think and decide what side of the argument they are choosing to be on. He allows them to form an opinion before he blatantly states his own on the matter. By doing this, he is also allowing for the audience to have a bit of control over their thoughts on the subject. After they have decided their opinion, he gives his, which brings the control back to him, because he now influences how they see it. Their opinion was still fresh and malleable, so he was able to influence them after they had formed it. This passage by Richard Louv opposed what was becoming the social norm. As more and more kids begin to sit in cars, their faces lit up by the blue glow of a screen, eyes peeled wide open as the greenery of God’s perfectly created Earth rushes past, they begin to miss out on the nature their parents lived in when they were their ages. The battle between technology and nature is far from over, and one will never beat the other, but a healthy balance must be reached. Through speaking to a shared nostalgia, using personal stories, and allowing his audience to think, Louv has begun to show his audience the path between the two sides. We must not focus on making one seem better than the other, but we must see balanced, healthy living as the best. This is not only for our children to be healthy children but to allow them to be able to effectively live their lives, the lives God intended for them, not a television character.
This could be improved by analyzing the passage chronologically. A line of reasoning is usually established more logically if it follows the ideas that are unfolded in the passage in the order in which they are written. I like the way you analyze this, and the thesis is exactly the tone and level of analysis we are aiming for. I think your assessment is accurate, but that going chronologically and imbedding quotes from the texts will bump that score up significantly.
Technology is rapidly growing and becoming more and more advanced, it is shaping the new generation in ways we don’t even understand yet. Richard Louv wrote an article about why it is important to separate nature and technology. Louv makes many point on why it is so important for the new generation to understand nature and why it is so important to them. In the article Louv explains the importance of nature and the reasons why technology is taking over the beauty of the natural world. Louv starts off by talking about how nature is used for advertisement and how it is making nature irrelevant in the world and that the world is slowly pushing off nature to the side for something worth looking at. In present day we see nature going away or becoming less important to us because we have different options then going outside to enjoy nature, and new products are being made every day that turns us away from the natural world. His main point he makes in the fact that cars nowadays have so much technology in them that distract us from just simply looking out the window. He tells a story about his friend who went to buy a new car, and when she was looking at them she told the sales person she didn’t want a screen on the back of the seat for her kid and the sales person didn’t understand why. Take Tesla for example the new cars that they are coming out with have so much technology in them it is remarkable, they drive by themselves, they have screens and games everywhere, and Elon Musk the owner of Tesla even announced that Tesla was going to make a tunnel that connects two cities together that Tesla drivers can put their Teslas in cruse control and send it through the tunnel at 200 plus miles per hour. This invention may be a ground breaking invention but the people who use the tunnel won’t drive through the the cities anymore and won’t be able to experience the beauty of nature from the drive from city to city. Technology is going to take out the beauty of the world not because it will destroy it but because it will distract us from just looking out the window on a drive and it will make nature boring. Technology is shaping the world in both good and bad ways more and more everyday. The article gives reasons on why we need to slow down with technology and just look at the world God made us. God made nature the way that he did for a reason and we just need to do our job and enjoy it. Throughout the text Louv makes many strong points on why we should appreciate nature more and why it is so important to enjoy it.
I would say your are grossly underestimating your ability to analyze a passage. THis is actually good. All you need is a few quotes inbedded in the text. This is a solid 3 and with a little work and practice, you could write yourself easily into a 4 or 5.
Technology is the guilty party in the case of stolen childhood. Most people seem to agree that childhood should be sent outdoors and that the new generation is missing out. So why then do they allow this to happen? . Richard Louv addresses this issue in his essay “Last Child in the Woods.” He writes a cautionary passage to parents, warning them not to give into technology for more peace and quiet because childhood should be anything but. By capitalizing on current events, sharing stories from his own life, relating himself to the audience using childhood nostalgia, and logically explaining the issue, Louv proves his point that technology is taking over the concept of childhood.
In the modern world, technology can do just about anything. Researchers at the State University of New York at Buffalo have discovered how to use genetic technology to manipulate the color of a butterfly’s wings. Louv draws in the reader with this phrase because it seems unrelated to the rest of his passage. He leads with this story and explores the way businesses are profiting off of nature. Then, he explains how nature is the ultimate advertiser because claiming to protect it can help to gain fast cash. Moreover, Louvs sees that nature is becoming something to change or simply just “ad space.” He fears this, and he connects these current events to this by showing examples of how nature is already being taken advantage of.
Louv addresses the issue of technology takeover by honing in on a seemingly minor invention, the backseat television in a vehicle. He tells the story of his friend trying to buy a luxury vehicle. In trying to purchase this new car, she refuses to look into any cars with backseat televisions. The salesman is not angry, rather confused. Louv expresses that there are very few people looking to avoid the use of technology in every aspect of life through this anecdote. Then, he explains that the reason parents give in to this extra screen time is for peace and quiet. Louv explains how parents don’t want their children to be glued to their screens, but continue to give them more and more time to use technology. Something doesn’t add up in that equation, and Louv is able to use this inconsistency to disprove that counterargument.
The way that Louv truly wins over his audience is in his description of watching nature out a cars window. His language is beautiful and takes the reader back to their personal memories of watching out a car window. He shifts the focus of his essay from logical and factual events to pure emotion. This new feel to the passage is almost raw, inviting the reader to relate to Louv and be nostalgic with him. His reason behind writing this part towards the end is because he has already gained the audience's trust and built upon the common belief that kids need to watch less TV. Now, he is able to play with the reader’s heartstrings, making them sad for the future generation that those kids will miss out on such a simple, yet beautiful view. Furthermore, this tactic inspires the audience to do something about this, and not to buy a car with backseat televisions.
Overall, Louv proves that technology is impacting the youth, stealing their childhood one little thing at a time. Through his use of current events, personal and logical explanations, and nostalgia, Louv draws the reader in and convinces them to fight back and draw the line on what is “too much” technology, so the youth can really begin to look out the window. Looking out at the real world, full of wildlife, sunsets, sunrises, rain, mud, and rainbows, is far more impactful than staring down mindlessly at a screen. This might be the change that encourages the young to dream and shows them there is good in the world.
Love the opening line! You actually march through that analysis quite well. It is chronological, which makes it easy for the reader to follow. It is also correct in that I think you seem to understand Louve's motives for writing the piece. This is good. I would say it is a 1-4-0. But I think you are really close to being able to nail that sophistication point. This is good Gina. Excellent work.
We are living in a world where technology is constantly improving and changing our environment. Technology has allowed us to stream movies anywhere and connect to wifi in a moving vehicle. Richard Louv wrote an essay that highlights the separation of humans and nature, in the way that it is becoming too distant. By discussing new improving technology, sharing personal anecdotes, and giving the audience a feeling of nostalgia, Louv demonstrates to the audience that technology is taking over the natural world and people are missing out on the beauty of nature because of a screen. Louv begins his argument that technology is taking over nature by introducing the newest technological achievements. He uses a logical approach and notes that genetic technology is now allowing scientists to choose the color of a butterfly’s wings. Additionally, scientists plan to use nature as a way of advertising. Louv says, “But the logical extension of synthetic nature is the irrelevance of ‘true’ nature-the certainty that it's not even worth looking at.” Advertising in nature will take away from the beauty of nature itself. People will focus on the advertisement rather than nature and once again it will cause separation. Furthemore, Louv wants nature to be appreciated and recognized for being naturally eye catching, not because of a bright advertisement for a municipality. Louv discusses advertising in nature in order to prove to the audience that true nature will no longer exist if technology continues to dominate in every aspect of our lives. Another way that Louv conveys his message is through sharing a story of his friend purchasing a new vehicle. New cars have advanced, luxury features intended to attract customers and improve their driving experience. Louv’s friend purchased a Mercedes SUV with a Global Pointing System, but the salesman was shocked when she did not want a backseat television monitor. Technology now allows kids to play games and watch television in the car to keep the driver unbothered. Louv poses the questions, “why do so many people no longer consider the real world worth watching?” Car rides are meant for looking out the window at the scenery or counting the cows as you drive past a farm in the middle of nowhere. Louv says that looking out the window during a car ride is our drive-by movie. By sharing this personal story, Louv is able to prove that technology has allowed people to miss out on the real world. Finally, Louv proves that humans and nature are separated by reminding people of their childhood memories. He brings them back to when they used to look out of the car window on a long trip and uses imagery of roadkill and animals by the roadside. When a movie could not be streamed from the backseat, kids would run toy cars on the window and watch the raindrops race down the glass. He takes the audience back in order to remind them of good childhood memories in which technology was not involved. Louv jogs their memories of the feeling of being connected to nature and enjoying its beauty. At this point the audience is feeling nostalgic and that they are being personally spoken to. Louv ends his argument with this to leave the audience thinking and hopefully coming to a realization of how technology truly has separated them from nature. Nature is meant to be appreciated and admired because it is naturally amazing. An orange and pink sunset behind an open field is a far more incredible view than a television screen in the backseat of a car. The focus on technology is driving humans and nature further apart with each advance. Louv writes to emphasize that technology can no longer separate humans from nature and we must not give nature the cold shoulder. By introducing new technology in nature, sharing a personal, current example, and reminding the audience of their own childhood memories, Louv convinces the audience that harmony between humans and nature is essential and we must stay connected to the real world.
Abby this is really good. I can tell you really watched the videos and are using the framework for the thesis, body and conclusion. You take the reader through a chronological analysis of the passage which makes it easy and enjoyable to read. You develop that line of reasoning in the introduction and follow through on that with great examples from the text and even some imbedded quotes. You pulled one GREAT quote out of there that really drives the ending of the essay, "why do so many people consider the world not worth watching". What a poignant quote and great way to tie the reader to the argument, which is what he does in the latter part of the passage. Great work. I would say this is a 1-4-0 or a 1-4-1. I think many of the readers would give you the sophistication point for the imbedded quotes and the nuanced commentary. Such a great job!
My parents and grandparents always speak of the “good old days” when they had to actually go to the library to have the capability to write papers or barely watched television because they were always doing physical labor or activities. Now, I research online to construct papers and watch a lot of television. They are not big fans of technology, because they have found that it separates rather than unites. In “Last Child in the Woods,” written by Richard Louv in 2008, he sort of builds off of this to show how disconnected most individuals are from nature. By exhibiting how great nature is and expressing how much technology will continue to change everyday practices, Louv successfully shows how technology has overtaken a major portion of our lives and separates us from the generation before. One method Louv used to deliver his message was by really selling how incredible nature is. He did this by using imagery and significant comparisons. For example, when speaking about looking at nature on car rides he said, “... the empty farmhouse at the edge of the subdivision; the variety of architecture, here and there; the woods and fields and water beyond the seamy edges (lines 50-53)...” This paints a clear picture in the mind of the reader, and it causes them to realize what they are missing out on. He then goes on to say, “This was the landscape that we watched as children. It was our drive-by movie (lines 54-56).” This comparison of nature to a movie shows that the physical world was and could still be a source of entertainment. Parents, however, just choose to give their children television, because it will maintain “a little backseat peace (line 37).” Many people are drawn into something when the writer has the ability to create an image or make an interesting comparison, because it allows them to envision and connect to something. This example leads to the realization that people are missing out on creation for something that is subpar. This reminds me of the saying, “Some people lose diamonds in search of stones.” Another way that he strengthened his argument was exhibiting the huge impact that television could have on the future generation. He executed this by utilizing nostalgia. First, he said that their grandchildren will question how truthful they are when they say that they looked out at nature while they were in the “nineteenth-century Conestoga wagon (lines 57-60).” Additionally, he stated, “‘Yes, we’ll say, ‘it’s true. We actually looked out the car window (lines 61-62).’” This whole piece of nostalgia shows how fast and easy it is for individuals to become separated from the beautiful world that God gave us. In the example, he basically said that it may only take two generations for this to occur, which is short when looking at how time flies. Lastly, he says reminiscently, “We stared with a kind of reverence at the horizon, as thunderheads and dancing rain moved with us (lines 67-69).” Nostalgia connects people to the ways of the past, and appeals to emotion. It has a strange impact, which is many times leaving the reader longing for more, and in this case, perhaps even producing a feeling of guilt. One day, I am sure that I will be the person telling family about the “good old days,” and wishing that I had taken my parents more seriously. Change will always come, but it is all about how one responds. It is important to live in the present, but while also remembering things of the past. By displaying the wonder of God’s creation and exhibiting the possible effect that television could have on children’s ability to see this beauty, Louv conveys the idea that technology not only closes us off from nature, but also how things used to be.
YOur thesis is good, but one change I would suggest is that he is not arguing that we are seperated from the prior generation, but that we are seperated from nature. I think bringing in the argument that we are growing very much different than the preceding generation is a smart approach, but when it comes to the thesis, make sure you are really setting up that line of reasoning for the development of your argument. You don't want to spend the paper proving how we are separate from past generations, right? Then, in order to elevate this, you need a line a reasoning that follows the passage. It needs to be chronological. The reason for that is that Louve ordered the passage the way he did on purpose. If you look at how the passage unfolds, it is easier to talk about how he designed it to impact the audience. He begins with statistical, scientific data, and then how does he move through the passage in regards to making his argument. So, to have a nuanced analysis, you need to look at his progression. I know that is a lot to think about when you are trying to write, but you can do that. You want to aim for a line of reasoning that follows the chronology of the passage. I would say your score for yourself is accurate, but that you can easily shift your approach and bump that up significantly. You are almost there! Don't give up!
Technology has had an amazing effect on the life we live today. Everyday tasks become less of a burden and life as we know it is getting easier. Despite the benefits of technology, there are some downfalls to living in a technological world. In this essay by Richard Loud, he shows how technology is causing losing being in touch with nature. By explaining the perpetuating culture of technology, showing how technology has become so constant, and explaining the good that the lack of technology can bring, Loud uses nostalgia and contrast to make it clear that society's touch with nature is being lost. Loud starts his argument with a visual of how nature is becoming synthetic. “Cash-strapped municipalities hope corporations agree to affix their company logo on parks in exchange for dollars to keep their space maintained.”(lines 10-13) Loud uses this example to show synthetic nature. “But the logical extension of synthetic nature - the certainty that it’s not even worth looking out.” (Lines 17-20). The author uses an example of how the corporate world is infiltrating the natural world. He uses a common example of an everyday scene. Technology is common for everyday use. Loud uses an example of how his friend wanted to buy a new car. He talks about how his friend could not leave the dealership until she explained why she didn’t want a television screen in the back for her daughter. He uses this story to show how much technology has been ingrained into our culture. It shocks people when there is not constantly a device close by. Loud explains how it becomes habitual to have and expect technological devices in almost every aspect of our lives. Loud concludes his argument by showing the good that can come from shutting off technology. He uses rhetorical questions to lead people to the logical conclusion of how children should be without technology to see how nature and cities fit together. He explains how the different architecture, subdivisions, and farmhouses educate our children. Loud uses the nostalgia of parents' childhood. He uses a story of someone asking what it was like in the nineteenth century. Richard Loud uses nostalgia and story telling to describe why being in touch with nature is becoming a less common thing. He shows the infiltration of technology into culture, explains the constant technology in our lives, and showing the good that the lack of technology brings. Technology makes lives significantly easier.p, but sometimes maybe we need to put the technology down. How many of us use our phone right before we shut our eyes at night? Turning off technology can be beneficial and should be done more often.
Your introduction says the right things, but be careful. There are a lot of missteps there. Just some diction mix ups that are unnecessarily taking away from your analysis. For instance, the author's name auto corrected to Loud. You do a good job providing evidence, make sure you fully develop the commentary. Putting the evidence in is great, but unless you capitalize on the opportunity to use it to make your point, it is just taking up space. You are almost there. You are putting in commentary, but it needs to be a little more poignant. Lets take that first body paragraph. After you quote lines 17-20, you might say something like, Louve uses an example of how the corporate world is infiltrating the natural world with the use of a common example of an everyday scene. He does this to show how small, seemingly meaningless changes are actually making a huge impact on our interaction with and disregard for nature. We are so distracted by life, that we are not even looking at our beautiful surrounding. Then, that actually leads into your next argument. It is shocking to the salesman that someone WOULDNt want a tv in her car. That is an example of the point you highlighted in the paragraph just before. He goes from general, to more personal, and then hits it home by tugging on the heart strings with nostalgia. That kind of an analysis is what gets the points. He uses rhetorical questions because that is how writers get people to put themselves into the story. And by then asking them to look out the car window so to speak, he hopes to show how much of a paradox there is between the way it used to be and the way it is now.
It is very difficult for an individual to comprehend our society in today’s world. We strive to define ourselves as individuals in the actions we take compared to the actions taken by the people around us, but many times we conform to the norm in an effort to fit in. We look for the best technology with televisions, cellphones, and vehicles, which sometimes can make the drive more about the features inside rather than enjoying the simplicity of nature. In his neatly organized essay “Last Child in the Woods,” Richard Lauv appealed to both logos and pathos in an effort to illustrate the separation between people and nature. Richard Lauv begins his essay by referring back to a friend who purchased a Mercedes SUV with a Global Positioning System. When pushed by the salesman to include a television in the rear seat, his friend said no to the idea. Mr. Lauv’s friend desired for her child to enjoy the beauty of nature rather than being distracted by the technology inside the car. Many Americans claim that they want their children to watch less television and to go outside more. So logically why would they purchase these “multimedia entertainment products?” Mr. Lauv used imagery to elaborate on the simplicity of just looking out the window from the back seat. He states, “children’s early understanding of how cities and nature fit together was gained from the backseat: the empty farmhouse at the edge of the subdivision: the variety of architecture, here and there: the woods and fields and water beyond the seamy edges.” Using these examples of imagery, Mr. Lauv logically implied that nature can indeed instruct. We just have to take the time and effort to pay attention. As the essay flowed, Mr. Lauv flashed back to the ordinary childhood experience in a car. He claimed, “We actually looked out the car window.” With an appeal to pathos, Mr. Lauv allowed his readers to reconnect with their joyous childish antics. He wrote, “We saw birds on the wires and combines in the fields, fascinated with roadkill, counted cows, and horses and coyotes and shaving cream signs, we held our plastic cars against the glass and pretended that they were racing toward some unknown destination.” By saying that, Mr. Lauv allowed his readers past emotions during their car rides to help them understand the simple yet confounding separation between people and nature. Never the less, by appealing to both logos and pathos, Richard Lauv highlighted and established the differences between people and nature. Even through a simple car ride, nature can call out to us, and allow us to see who we really are. It all starts with the decision of choosing to look outside you car window and letting your imagination take control.
So there are some really great moments in this essay. The opening about conforming is so good and starts this analysis off in a very sophisticated way. You establish his argument, and the rhetorical situation so beautifully Mason. It lead right in to the paragraph about the SUV shopping. The transition is great. The paragraph on that is very good as well. Fully developed, relevant commentary that is actually spot on. You lose control of the writing in the next paragraph a bit, but it works. Be careful about using a quote that is too long. I would rather you have a short quote with more commentary. That being said, I think I would say the essay is a 1-2-1. I think many readers would grant you the sophistication point for your ability to articulate so beautifully the rhetorical situation. Particularly in the opening about conforming and later in the essay when you talk about nature being able to instruct.
Kids in today's world do not know how to have real fun! Often times not, the cacophony and all of the distractions in the 20th century are too much to handle for kids and young adults. When playing outside or reading a book kids start to feel ennui, so what they do is turn towards their phones to make themselves feel as though they are interacting with someone else. Kids have lost all sense of connection between themselves and the “real world.” We live in a world where fun is ubiquitous in everyday life. With phones and all of these distractions everywhere we are often blinded, we do not see things around us as fun but as boring. Kids would rather play on their Ipads than playing baseball with their friends, or building forts in the woods. Entertainment is easily obtainable through phones, all you have to do is click on something and you can sit there for hours numbly watching videos, or playing games with your friends over a computer screen. However, learning is easily at one’s disposal with having for instance, classes online or even watching videos on, really, whatever you wish to learn. People don’t want to do this though, they want to become disconnected from everyone and play on their phones unmindful of the things around them. Buying a flip phone in 2021 is harder than one would think. Big companies like Apple are making better and better phones to be more “user friendly,” but what they are really doing is making it so that you become unattached with the outside world. Everything is electronic in the 20th century, even billboards are all animated to try and draw the attention of people. As Richard Louv states, “The woods and fields and water beyond the seamy edges-all that was and is still available to the eye. This was the landscape that we watched as children. It was our drive-by movie (Lines 52-56).” Doing these fun things outside will help us to discover the real world and make connections with one another, not over a screen but face to face. One day my kids will be asking me what I would do as a kid, and I want to tell them all of the fun things I did with my friends and how to have fun at the same time as being distant from this technological surge that has overcome the world.
I have never heard you use the words cacophony or ennui, but more power to you! If those are in your arsenal, they are great words used appropriately. Rmember the timing of this article. It was written in 2008, before the advent of kids having personal devices to the level that they do now Louve was actually putting out a warning shot about what might happen, and boy was he right. Look where we are now as opposed to 2008 when the worst offense was watching a movie in the car. So, he was right to be worried.
While this is a good argument, it is not an analysis Louve's essay. This is an opinion of yours about technology in todays culture. What Louve's essay was doing was using anecdotes, both technical and personal, as a wake up call for his readers. WHAT was Louves point and HOW did he craft his argument. This is not about what you think, but about what Louve thinks and how he relays that to the reader. What you have here is an opinion about technology with a quote from Louve. You must watch and engage in the videos and then you will be able to meet the expectations. But, I do like your fancy words! I would say this essay is a 2. Now, if it was essay #3, the argument essay where they give you a topic and you use personal opinion and experience to make a point, this would score higher. But this is a rhetorical analysis. I am also thrilled that it was on time and about the correct passage. More attention to detail needed on assignments. You are getting closer every day. Pay attention in class. You have everything you need to be successful, you just need to listen more carefully.
Imagine sitting alone in a room, when suddenly, the door flings open! The culprit? Your own cell phone! Technology has become too intrusive in day-to-day life, and is preventing others from seeing the beauty around them. Louv knows about the damage caused by the overuse of technology, especially on long car trips. By conveying a sense of nostalgia, presenting rhetorical questions, and creating hypothetical scenarios, Louv proves that children have lost sight of true nature due to the excess use of technology in the car.
Louv strengthens the impact of his argument by employing rhetorical questions. One instance of this is when Louv asks, “Why do so many Americans say they want their children to watch less TV, yet...expand on opportunities for them to watch it?” (Lines 43-45). Louv’s audience is filled with older adults who are most likely parents themselves. Louv realized that his audience, enamored by the grace technology brings, were those hypocrites. Therefore, his argument is strengthened as it makes the reader feel shame for their mistake and realize the author is correct. Louv continues by stating, “...Why do so many people no longer consider the physical world worth watching?” (Lines 45-47). As technology becomes more and more valuable in daily life, this rhetorical question reminds the reader that nature was, and still is, just as valuable to human life and entertainment. Louv uses rhetorical questions to prove his opinions have an established authority.
One way Louv presents his argument is by deploying nostalgia, and making the case that using technology in this way will take away valuable experiences. First, Louv states, “...Children’s early understanding of how cities and nature fit together was gained from the back seat” (Lines 48-51). Louv makes this connection to remind his audience of the wonder they had experienced while looking out the window. Furthermore, it proves that observing the world around them is educationally beneficial, which is important as parents want their children to be knowledgeable. In the final paragraph, Louv states, “We saw birds on the wires and combines in the fields. We were fascinated with roadkill...We stared with a kind of reverence at the horizon…” (Lines 64-69). Louv wants to remind his audience of the experiences they all shared of staring out the car window. Louv is making the case that if his audience gives their children too much technology in the car, their children will lose valuable experiences and learning opportunities due to the technology. Louv uses nostalgia to convince his audience that children looking out the window on car rides is beneficial for a child’s well-being, and that the excessive use of technology in the car will lead to children losing a great experience.
Louv proves the importance of his argument by painting the worst picture. One example occurs when Louv creates an imaginary story in which he tells his grandchildren the experience of long car trips. In the story, the children are painted as technology addicts who are ignorant to real nature. This could be related to political comics where children are criticized for similar traits. The audience may despise the children in those comics and fear their children could become like them. The parents fear they will be seen as possible failures for letting technology corrupt their children, and will now think heavily about the consequences of entertaining technology in the car. Louv capitalizes on the fear of modern age parents in order to convey the seriousness of his argument.
Technology makes children ignorant to true beauty. The convenience of technology has made everyone forget about the value of true nature, and even to the point of hypocrisy. If something is not done, children will become ignorant to the world around them and never reach their full potential. Next time you want to enjoy the real world, lock the door between you and your phone.
In regards to the opening, I do not actually think Louve is necessarily talking about children. He uses children as an example, but I think is really speaking here to the grown ups who are just allowing technology to erase the opportunity for their kids to experience life and nature as it was designed. I don't think his argument is to prove that kids use too much technology. So, once you establish what he is arguing, your goal is to point out his line of reasoning. How does he approach the topic and unfold his purpose. This is most easily done by going through the passage chronologically. Not to summarize it, but to show how he reasons through the argument. For instance, he opens with a very technical discussion about butterflies and how their colors are established, not by nature, but by technology. Why does he do that? and then he gets more personal and tells the story of a friend who does not want a tv in the back of her vehicle. Why does he do that? What is his line of reasoning. What is he trying to argue to his reader. This friend is counter cultural, meaning that most people have tv's in the rear of their car, and this to Louve, is a problem. And this to Louve, helps make his argument that man is being separated from nature at an alarming rate. He then goes on to pathos, right. He is appealing to the readers memories of long car rides, the nostalgia of growing up, to get their attention and to pay some regard to recognizing how their behavior and their choices are impacting the future generations. You need to go chronologically, but you do not have to summarize. Go by the development of his argument. I would say your assessment is probably right as far as a grade. A 1-3-0 or a 1-2-0 because it is disjointed with the skipping around to get evidence.
We “watched it all go by in a blink of an eye.” People today are being drawn away from their connection to nature by the appeals of technology. Richard Louv wrote Last Child in the woods to explain how we are getting separated from nature. By explaining the hardships of shopping for cars, giving the audience a glimpse into their past, and showing them what they are missing out on, Richard Louv convinces the audience that there is a problem with people and nature in our world today. One of the ways Richard Louv convinces the audience that people are becoming separated from nature by telling the story of his friend shopping for a new car. She decided to buy a car because she did not fall into the traps of the material world. The car she ended up buying had a lot of extra technology built into it, but she knew that getting a mini television for the back seat was a little too much. The salesman could not comprehend why she did not want the television, and he continued to ask questions until he understood the reasoning behind it. Additionally, Richard uses this story to portray to the audience how some people see technology as a must need. The friend who bought a car shows someone who has not been wrapped up in the appeal of technology. Richard told this story because it is current and relevant to our work today. Overall, Richard’s use of current events helps the audience relate to and understand the separation of people and nature, and the attachment of humans with technology. Another way Louv conveys his argument is by giving the audience a glimpse of the past. For example, he reminds the reader about their old habits as a child of looking out of the window while on a trip. Richard later goes on to explain this experience as a “drive-by movie.” He uses imagery which allows the reader to imagine and remember those good times. He uses pathos to make the reader think about those simple times. This allows the reader to think about how their lives were simple when they had a better connection with nature. Now that they are being separated, their lives become more complicated. Richard also explains that part of the problem is technology. He also strengthens his line of reason during this part of the passage because he shifts from the present to the past. Clearly, Richard Louv shifts to the past to strengthen his line of reasoning and reminds the audience of their past to support his message. A final choice Richard makes is shifting his passage to show what future generations will miss out on. He put the audience into a setting for when they get older and have grandkids. They will be telling them stories of all the things they used to observe while looking out of the window. They could share the experience of what goes on outside of a phone screen. But in the eyes of the grandkids this will just be a story, and they will not get the opportunity to experience this. Choosing to shift the passage to the past helped the audience understand what Richard was trying to say. If society continues on the path of separation from nature, and a stronger connect with technology, then we would miss out on a lot of amazing things. God created Earth and He said it was good. God would want us to enjoy the beauty of it, and not what is on our phone screens. Richards uses current events, a glimpse into the past, and things that people will miss out on to show the audience that they need to change. Next time you are on a road trip, put your phone down and enjoy what God created for us.
Okay, the introduction has everything you need. It tells what is argument is and then you provide a framework for HOW he makes the argument. It is a little awkward in spots, but it does the job. Going into the body, I think talking about the story he tells of the friend car shopping is smart. YOu do not need to summarize the story. All you have to do is refer to it with a nod or a quote and then spend the time you have adding in the commentary. I say this not because you over did it, but because you just will not have time for both, and given the choice, choose evidence and commentary as opposed to summary. I like the transition to Louv using an example from the past. What a good segway to talking about the car ride. And then the beautiful, natural flow into the future and his call to action for the reader. So good! Your line of reasoning is really based on Louv's transitioning from past to future in the essay, and it works very, very well. You have some missteps in regards to evidence Id like to see a few more embedded quotes and in your discussion of imagery, that what it conjures is a sense of nostalgia. In that same way, I would like for the story you used in the first body paragraph to be referred to as an anecdote. Just trying to up your game in little ways. So, all that being said, I think I would give the essay a 1-3-0 as you did, but must say that with the addition of words nostalgia and anecdote and a cleaned up intro, I would issue the sophistication point for your nuanced approach to the analysis by way of past, present and future.
“We considered the past and dreamed of the future, and watched it all go by in the blink of an eye.” This is a quote from Richard Louv’s Last Child in the Woods on the separation between people and nature due to technology. By establishing a sound line of reasoning in order to generate nostalgia, create concern for the future, and reminisce on ages past, Louv is able to provide a strong foundation for his message about the effects of technology on normal actions, like looking out car windows. Nostalgia is a happy and familiar sentiment about the past, and resurfaces with the recollection of happy memories from a significant amount of time ago. By establishing this, Louv is able to connect with his readers and get them to think about his topic. In this manner, he proves his ethos through relatability, and pathos through the nostalgia itself. In the text, he discusses the hanging of fuzzy dice on the rear-view mirror in line 36, and through imagery and a series of rhetorical questions brings the reader back into their childhood, in which they would stare out the windows and follow telephone poles and count animals as they passed by. This is crucial for the development of ethos and pathos, and is established through a logical approach. By starting out with background information and slowly giving examples to ease into his argument so that it is in context of his established framework is crucial for this essay, for it generates nostalgia through syntax and diction. The development of the essay shows this logical approach, and makes the argument easy to understand and follow throughout the text. By creating a concern for the future, Louv establishes a call to action in a subtle way through the development of his logos. By establishing the effect technology has on our lives and how it is affecting today’s youth is significant because it shows that things in the future could look very different. The certainty of the future outcome is unknown, but it is sure to make commonplace actions from the “past” seem bizarre, such as staring out the window and counting telephone poles, as mentioned in line 64. This alarming message is designed to make parents think twice about how they are raising their children, and reminding them of what they could be missing out on. This is significant, because Louv establishes that this is an important part of childhood. Finally, by having his readers think about past times, he is able to remind the reader about the good memories about childhood trips and car rides, as well as emphasize the power of the adolescent imagination. He states that through the imagination, children are able to gain an understanding of their surroundings and instill a sense of direction. Without this, it is likely that they could get lost more easily. Overall, Louv states that the separation between people and nature is becoming more significant, which in turn will affect society as a whole. Dependence on technology is becoming more prevalent, and it is slowly replacing commonplace concepts, which is bound to change society as a whole. It is crucial to evaluate and stop the world from losing important concepts, such as a nature connection, because God’s creation is for everyone to enjoy, and the sheer beauty of it can be unimaginable. Some luxury car companies are beginning to develop windows and windshields that are camera projections instead of windows, which in turn will separate us further. With the development of technology and eyes deterring from surroundings, ideas about the environment are beginning to change and people are retreating away from it. Do you want to live in a world that is entirely separated from its surroundings and does not even acknowledge the beautiful Earth we were given?
So in the opening, which is really good, I think would be great if you open it up philosophically to be more than about looking out car windows. He uses car shopping and car riding as examples for a much larger argument about the increasing divide between humans and nature. Right?
Then, you need to talk about how his argument unfolds. Chronologically. Speak simply, think simply. Back up. You are looking at it from close up. Forget about the technical approach and just write about what this guy is arguing and how he is doing it. You are overthinking it.
How often do you see a parent hand their children a tablet or phone as a method to keep them quiet in public? In today’s society, this seems to be an often occurrence and this relates to the point that Louv tries to convey in his article, Last Child in the Woods. By using specific examples and hitting a sense of nostalgia, Louv is able to convince the audience that our connection to true nature has become strained to the point that we just let it fly by in the blink of an eye. The first way that Louv conveys this message of separation is through using specific examples. Louv uses the story of his friend who was attempting to purchase a car in order to show that our society has evolved to include technology in everything, even when it is not necessary. The added technology appears to be there in order to appeal to the pleasure of parents and this is supported in line 37, in which it says, “...who will pay a premium for a little backseat peace…” (Line 37). It also says within the story that our world has become so technologically advanced that “true” nature is not even worth looking at (Lines 18-19). This specific example helps add to the overarching argument as it shows that the technology now included in cars is a need, rather than a want, in life. A second, and final, way that Louv successfully exhibits his argument is through the usage of nostalgia feelings. He begins to vividly describe all the various objects he, as a child, would look at out the car window and how that is not close to how it is at all anymore. For example, “we used our fingers to draw pictures on fogged glass as we watched telephone poles tick by...We were fascinated with roadkill and we counted cows and horses and coyotes and shaving cream signs…” (Lines 62-67). This use of detailed descriptions helps the reader to feel nostalgic about how car rides used to be and what was considered “entertaining” on these long rides. Now, instead of counting cows, children are counting how long their sibling has the tablet for or how many movies they can watch. This shift shows that the counting cows and other objects has become something of olden times, something nostalgic. Overall, Louv uses the examples and sense of nostalgia to argue that our connection to nature is terrible as a society and that we need to do something about it. He argues that we, as a society, need to decide what is too much and how we can step back and admire the true beauty of nature. If we do not do this, nature will truly fly by unnoticed by us.
THis is good Jackie. I wish you had developed one more idea an or added more commentary and evidence to what you do have. What you have is good, and you make the important points, but there is so much more evidence that points to the artful argument. It is a fantastic piece, so there is just an option to point out how good, how artful the writing is. As I said, this is good, but I think you could have pointed out other strengths he exhibited. That being said, I do think it is a solid 4.
Author: Hope Farley “…The logical extension of synthetic nature is the irrelevance of ‘true’ nature…” Technological advancements have been occurring in almost every field of study. The automobile industry is at the forefront of these advancements as many innovations have been done to vehicles over time including the installation of television screens within the backseats of family vehicles. This event has caused a lack of parenting and a disrespect to the true entertainment of riding in a vehicle: nature. Richard Louv conveys his belief that children are missing the value of nature by noting the disasters of synthetic nature, providing information about current vehicles, and reflecting on his own backseat adventures during childhood. Louv attempts to convey the message that nature is being abused. He begins his argument by describing an experiment at the State University of New York at Buffalo. The experiment surrounded genetic technology and the process of being able to choose the colors on butterfly wings. The experiment inspired writer Matt Richtel to develop a controversial statement that the virtual world is flooded with advertisements and that nature is the next and best option. But hasn’t nature already been violated with advertisements enough? To support his case, Louv mentions the messages that are stamped onto the sands of public beaches and the logos plastered around city parks. Nature cannot simply be. Nature is now only valuable as an ad space and is only appreciated due to synthetic nature’s stimulating effect. The vehicles commonly targeted towards families include suburbans, vans, and SUV’s. Louv supports his claim that nature is being disregarded by telling a story from a friend of his. His friend went to a car dealership and picked out a Mercedes SUV. The woman was a mother and did not want the television monitor in the backseat that came with the vehicle. As she asked for it to be removed the salesman insisted on knowing her reason why. The system keeps children entertained and quiet during a car ride. Two problems arise from this. Parents do not fulfill their duties as a parent to watch their child as a screen keeps them quiet and makes them behave. Children also miss out on the landscapes that are a glance out of the window away. Children learn many things from simply looking out of the window. Cities, suburbs, valleys, rivers, farms, architecture, murals, and forests are a few out of the many understandings that can be gained through a backseat window. The parents of today wish for their children to go outside and to experience nature. What they don’t know is that they are supporting their addiction to synthetic nature with the purchase of a new vehicle.
Lastly, Louv speaks from experience as he reflects on his childhood. He mentions the thought of telling his grandchildren that he looked out of the car window for fun, and they were surprised. He describes images he saw when looking outside of the window. They were vibrant and beautiful with bright colors and new scenes. The birds, cows, horses, and every animal was fascinating. The seemingly endless fields and waters sparked imagination. The horizon was looked at reverently. Louv remembered placing toy cars on the windows and imagining that the little car was going on its own adventures. Children dreamed of a bright future while in the backseat. Louv’s use of nostalgia is heartwarming and helps the audience put themselves in his shoes. The younger generation will remember the car ride as a funny movie or an entertaining show, instead of a beautiful landscape that helped shape creativity and imagination in developing minds. People today often look outside and instead of glancing at the beauty of nature, their eyes gear towards the giant signs and flashy advertisements. Louv writes in order to advise future and current parents to expose their children to the wonders of true nature. He does so by providing ideas regarding synthetic nature, vehicles, and nostalgia. Children have the world at their fingertips, and the world is best seen through the backseat window, not a screen.
Score: 1 for Thesis 3 for Body Paragraphs 0 for Sophistication
Well now, that is really good. It is insightful, you establish a line a reasoning, it is chronological and it is well written. If given a time constraint, which you WILL have, you could leave out things like the summary of the story about the mom shopping for a car. If, however, you were able to write all of this is 40 minutes, keep it as is. This is just fantastic, and I think you are underestimating the score. This is a 5 essay if not a 6. I give you the sophistication point for sure, but maybe a 3 or 4 for evidence and commentary because of the summarizing. Also, if I am nitpicking, which I am because I know you like to perfect your assignments, you focus a lot on "car shopping". He uses that example, but he is really just using that example to jump off into the nostalgia of the car ride. The car purchase and the car ride are not the subject of the piece, just the tools he uses to prove his point. Right? Congratulations. You are really a good writer Hope.
For a species that has spent thousands of years living among nature, it is surprising how oblivious we have become to the natural beauty that surrounds us. Richard Louv, a huge advocate for the reduction of technological dependence, writes about the gap that has formed between humans: creatures of nature, and nature itself. In his passage he addresses the issue by establishing an objective truth though logical observations, which conclude that humans are extremely dependent on technology. Louv then asks his audience why his statements are so agreeable, yet seem so unachievable. He then shifts into a nostalgic fictional story, further outlining the joy and appreciation we once had for the beautiful world around us. Humans have become disconnected with God’s beauty, and technological dependence is to blame. In the first portion of Louv’s passage, he recalls multiple statistics and stories, to further the narrative that technology is eating away at our love for nature. He writes about a visit to a car dealership, and how technology has leaked into parenting strategies. When his friend explains that a backseat monitor was unnecessary to have for his daughter, the car salesman was astonished, as if not having a TV in your car was absurd (Lines 29-33). By using an example as simple as purchasing a car, this gives the audience a better understanding of how technological dependence has infected every aspect of life. Even something as simple as driving from point A to point B, cannot be done without extensive use of technology. Richard Louv’s fact-filled approach to the passage gives an excellent background to his argument. Richard Louv's shift to the next part of the passage is essential in changing the opinion of his audience. Louv moves on to a series of rhetorical questions, which challenge the readers perception of the issue. He writes, “Why do so many Americans say they want their children to watch less TV, yet continue to expand the opportunities for them to watch it?” (Lines 43-45). By calling out his audience, he is enticing change among the people, rather than just spurting out facts with no meaning. His shift from a factual background to challenging the reader also gives meaning to questions asked. Both strategies go hand in hand and the connection between them allowed Louv to illustrate his idea with passion and attempt for change. In the final stretch of the passage, Louv creates a story for his audience, many years in the future. His story includes, “‘You did what?’ they’ll [our grandchildren] ask, ‘Yes,’ we’ll say, ‘We actually looked out the car window.’” (Lines 60-62). Louv’s slightly sarcastic story shows that the path humanity is taking today is leading us into a future with no appreciation for nature. He also uses a nostalgic effect by stirring up childhood memories of road trips, along with counting cows, telephone poles, ect. He finishes us his passage with an emotional tone, one that implies the children of the future will not have the same passion, or urgency to dream, as we once had. Richard Louv’s passage beautifully outlines the effects technology has on society. It has infiltrated every single crack it could fit into, and it is now clearly a problem. Louv’s logical tone to begin the passage, his shift to challenging the audience, and his conclusion that brings the reader close to tears, all contribute to the overlying theme that we need a change, before it is too late. If we do not take action now, Richard proves that something as simple as looking out of a car window will sound crazy years from now. How did a species that once thrived in, understood, and loved nature, become so terribly disconnected so few years later? The change happened quick, but the counter has to be quicker.
Considering that this was written in 2008, I think his point is being proven. This is a very, very good analysis of Louv's piece. You establish a line of reasoning, present an appropriate amount of evidence needed and use your commentary to highlight the author's purpose. You also do a good job at reading the rhetorical situation. You have underestimated the score. I would give this a 1-4-1 or a 1-4-0. It is sophisticated, but you have a couple missteps in grammar at the very end. Sometimes, the AP readers forget about how sophisticated the argument is by a simple mistake at the end. However, they should not do that. This is very good. God gave you a very good brain. That is a big responsibility. Don't forget to thank Him regularly and give Him all the glory. Great, great job on this!
By starting with how science and advertisements are advancing the way we view the world Richard Louv is allowing the readers to contemplate their own views on life. He tells how certain “packages” are becoming the normal need. We are becoming numb to the world around us and it’s beauty and wonder. He tells of the salesman’s shock do to his friends want to not have rear car televisions. This shows that it is not just the new generations who are ignorant towards their surroundings. Richard Louv tells about how even nature and major public places are being shaped by major corporations to be used as advertising. This shows how we are becoming majorly dependent upon being spoon fed constant stimulation. We don’t want to have constant advertisements shoved in our faces but we probably wouldn’t know what to do if they stopped. These advertisements might not have any real worth to have but they spend money on it anyway to get their name out there. We lose the beauty of what the ad is placed in front of or placed on. The author then talks about how driving and car rides have changed drastically in the past decade with the advancements of technology and advertisements. It used to be all about what you can see speeding by you in the car playing the license plate game, eye spy, or just looking at the beautiful scenery. We put long distance radios, touch screen gps, and televisions to distract the kids so you can have some peace and quiet. There aren’t many important family conversations, sing alongs to dad’s weird music, or trying to find where you are on a big fold out map anymore. It’s all about the money that companies are making but we don’t care because things are made simple or easy for our comfort. We are slowly making our world into one big virtual reality that we don’t have to leave our house to see everything. We don’t want to be inconvenienced by everything else that comes with experiences. It’s hard to be an individual now that there are so many ways for us to be connected and want to be like those we see on TV, on social media, or in advertisements. It’s all about a perfect life.
What do you mean about the new generation in the intro? I think you are on to something, but it needs to be fully developed. YOu have the right idea here. You are analyzing his argument philosophically, and you got it right, but what a rhetorical analysis is asking you to do is to figure out HOW he is doing it. What is his line of reasoning? and how can YOU as the analyst explain with your own line of reasoning what his argument is and how he achieved it? You have what his major points are, and you have a lot of commentary, but you are missing the evidence from the text. That takes a controlled read and a controlled, organized, well supported essay. You tend to ignore the details and just pontificate, which is a nice word for BSing. I would say you can usually pull that off, which is a great skill, but you are smart enough to actually read and write a good rhetorical analysis. You just need to carve out and commit to a thorough attempt. That being said, this is pretty good. But it could be great if you would just follow the directions.
Blink and you’ll miss it. When have we ever taken the time to slow down and look; really look? Put away the phones, the tablets, unplugged the headphones and just looked; thought about what we were seeing? Too many people are missing out on the bigger picture or the lessons that can be learned by taking a step back and simply existing. An essay written by Richard Louv tells how a simple act, look king out a car windo, can have a huge effect on people lives. By setting the tone, creating images for the audience, and bringing a touch of nostalgia louv is able to create an argument that makes people stop, breathe, and think.
Louv starts off the essay by giving his reader some statistics to work with. He tells them that there’s a a university out there that experiments in having humans can genetically alter the color of butterfly wings. With this research Louv moves into his main arigummet. Nature is being cast aside in return for a more virtual reality. Kids are no longer able to go past the age of 10 without some sort of form of technology, video games have replaced outdoor kickball matches, and children choose to text their parents dinners ready instead of walking upstairs to tell them. It’s a dangerous pattern that the world has become more modern. Louv used a story of his friend to express just how much society is campaigning for a “better” reality. The friend went to go buy a new car and when asked if she wanted a backseat television for her daughter, she refused but the salesman wouldn’t let it drop. He was instant that she needed this new attachment for her car and wouldn’t “let me (her) leave the dealership without it..” This woman knew better. She knew what would be right for her daughter at the time and Louv uses her story to establish the problems people could face if they refuse to conform to a technological society. His tone shifts after this. He begins to ask rhetorical questions to get his readers to think; think for themselves not what society is shoving down their throats. He brings up opposing though processes parents have for example, why would a parent say they wished their child would watch less television but at the same time give them more opportunities and ways to watch it? Louv then brings up an alternative to watching television one that almost every kid can relate to; watching the word past you by through your car window . By simply taking in what’s going on around you louv says you can learn lessons like understanding how cities and nature are interwoven and you can learn the geographical features of your area. It’s like when you’re going to your grandmas house and you pass the same houses, turn on the same streets, and perhaps pass the same park every time you go so you develop an understanding of where you are and how to get home. If a child was looking at a phone the whole time they would not be able to do that and that’s the point louv really brings home. That image of a kid sitting in the back of the car helps people relate to it when they were young. Louv does an even better job when he paints even more pictures of holding a toy car up against the window and pretending it was right there with you, riding down the same road. It’s the nostalgia that knocks the argument home and it makes people think. In the end louv does a successful job at conveying his message. His choices of using imagery, nostalgia, and tone help him devopp a strong argument nost people would have never thought of. So picture yourself in your next car ride, will you turn to your phone and beg for the ride to be over already or will you take a step back and appreciate the view form the window?
Tiffany, this is really good. You definitely have a very good voice in your writing. THere is a natural flow to your writing. I would say you get the sophistication point, but lose a point on the evidence and commentary. While it is okay to bring in current technical problems, you need to tie it to the rhetorical situation. Louv wrote this in 2008 and does not talk about the trouble with hand held devices. You could discuss that in the fact that his predictions were spot on, but he does not argue that this essay. But it is good Tiff. Be sure you can write this in 40 minutes.
Technology has grown so prominent in our world today that it is consuming all aspects of our lives. It is being made accessible not only in the forms of television and cell phones but to deliver our mail through drones too. In Richard Louv’s 2008 passage, Last Child in the Woods, he argues that children are being fed technology rather than a nurtured love for nature. By using compelling tales of shared nostalgia, speaking from his own personal experiences, and creating situations to allow his audience to think, he dictates the importance of keeping level-headed in the battle between technology and nature.
ReplyDeleteTo show the effect technology has had on our world and on humanity, Louv begins to speak of nostalgia that most people have a connection with. Pieces of this shared aspect are dropped all throughout the passage, but he really hits hard with it in his closing paragraph. By using all these common memories, he is playing on his audience’s emotions. He stirs up long suppressed memories that bring loving and content emotions to the surface once again. Through playing off of emotions, Louv is able to establish a connection between his ideas and his audience, a connection that will allow them to feel more for what Louv is writing about.
Another point Louv uses to argue his ideas is that he begins to speak of his own personal experiences and stories that he has. He uses a good portion of the middle of his passage to tell us a story that happened to his friend. She didn’t want a television in the headrest of her car, because she knew that it would only further an addictive attitude when it came to technology. He uses this example to show that there are many simple ways we can fight against technology. There are many ways we can prevent the minds of our future generations from being so pulled toward a screen. By telling this story, Louv can speak to his audience about what simple things they can do to encourage an appreciation of nature rather than one only of technology.
A final way that Louv connects his writing and argument with his audience is by encouraging them to think throughout the passage. After speaking about the story of his friend, he starts the next paragraph off by asking a number of rhetorical questions. He strategically placed these within his passage. At this point, his argument and side on the argument is not very clear, it becomes so later though. He has yet to really show his bias and he poses these questions to allow his audience to think and decide what side of the argument they are choosing to be on. He allows them to form an opinion before he blatantly states his own on the matter. By doing this, he is also allowing for the audience to have a bit of control over their thoughts on the subject. After they have decided their opinion, he gives his, which brings the control back to him, because he now influences how they see it. Their opinion was still fresh and malleable, so he was able to influence them after they had formed it.
This passage by Richard Louv opposed what was becoming the social norm. As more and more kids begin to sit in cars, their faces lit up by the blue glow of a screen, eyes peeled wide open as the greenery of God’s perfectly created Earth rushes past, they begin to miss out on the nature their parents lived in when they were their ages. The battle between technology and nature is far from over, and one will never beat the other, but a healthy balance must be reached. Through speaking to a shared nostalgia, using personal stories, and allowing his audience to think, Louv has begun to show his audience the path between the two sides. We must not focus on making one seem better than the other, but we must see balanced, healthy living as the best. This is not only for our children to be healthy children but to allow them to be able to effectively live their lives, the lives God intended for them, not a television character.
I give myself a:
Delete1/1 for the thesis
3/4 for the body
0/1 for the sophistication
This could be improved by analyzing the passage chronologically. A line of reasoning is usually established more logically if it follows the ideas that are unfolded in the passage in the order in which they are written. I like the way you analyze this, and the thesis is exactly the tone and level of analysis we are aiming for. I think your assessment is accurate, but that going chronologically and imbedding quotes from the texts will bump that score up significantly.
DeleteTechnology is rapidly growing and becoming more and more advanced, it is shaping the new generation in ways we don’t even understand yet. Richard Louv wrote an article about why it is important to separate nature and technology. Louv makes many point on why it is so important for the new generation to understand nature and why it is so important to them. In the article Louv explains the importance of nature and the reasons why technology is taking over the beauty of the natural world.
ReplyDeleteLouv starts off by talking about how nature is used for advertisement and how it is making nature irrelevant in the world and that the world is slowly pushing off nature to the side for something worth looking at. In present day we see nature going away or becoming less important to us because we have different options then going outside to enjoy nature, and new products are being made every day that turns us away from the natural world. His main point he makes in the fact that cars nowadays have so much technology in them that distract us from just simply looking out the window. He tells a story about his friend who went to buy a new car, and when she was looking at them she told the sales person she didn’t want a screen on the back of the seat for her kid and the sales person didn’t understand why. Take Tesla for example the new cars that they are coming out with have so much technology in them it is remarkable, they drive by themselves, they have screens and games everywhere, and Elon Musk the owner of Tesla even announced that Tesla was going to make a tunnel that connects two cities together that Tesla drivers can put their Teslas in cruse control and send it through the tunnel at 200 plus miles per hour. This invention may be a ground breaking invention but the people who use the tunnel won’t drive through the the cities anymore and won’t be able to experience the beauty of nature from the drive from city to city. Technology is going to take out the beauty of the world not because it will destroy it but because it will distract us from just looking out the window on a drive and it will make nature boring.
Technology is shaping the world in both good and bad ways more and more everyday. The article gives reasons on why we need to slow down with technology and just look at the world God made us. God made nature the way that he did for a reason and we just need to do our job and enjoy it. Throughout the text Louv makes many strong points on why we should appreciate nature more and why it is so important to enjoy it.
I give myself a 2
DeleteI would say your are grossly underestimating your ability to analyze a passage. THis is actually good. All you need is a few quotes inbedded in the text. This is a solid 3 and with a little work and practice, you could write yourself easily into a 4 or 5.
DeleteTechnology is the guilty party in the case of stolen childhood. Most people seem to agree that childhood should be sent outdoors and that the new generation is missing out. So why then do they allow this to happen? . Richard Louv addresses this issue in his essay “Last Child in the Woods.” He writes a cautionary passage to parents, warning them not to give into technology for more peace and quiet because childhood should be anything but. By capitalizing on current events, sharing stories from his own life, relating himself to the audience using childhood nostalgia, and logically explaining the issue, Louv proves his point that technology is taking over the concept of childhood.
ReplyDeleteIn the modern world, technology can do just about anything. Researchers at the State University of New York at Buffalo have discovered how to use genetic technology to manipulate the color of a butterfly’s wings. Louv draws in the reader with this phrase because it seems unrelated to the rest of his passage. He leads with this story and explores the way businesses are profiting off of nature. Then, he explains how nature is the ultimate advertiser because claiming to protect it can help to gain fast cash. Moreover, Louvs sees that nature is becoming something to change or simply just “ad space.” He fears this, and he connects these current events to this by showing examples of how nature is already being taken advantage of.
Louv addresses the issue of technology takeover by honing in on a seemingly minor invention, the backseat television in a vehicle. He tells the story of his friend trying to buy a luxury vehicle. In trying to purchase this new car, she refuses to look into any cars with backseat televisions. The salesman is not angry, rather confused. Louv expresses that there are very few people looking to avoid the use of technology in every aspect of life through this anecdote. Then, he explains that the reason parents give in to this extra screen time is for peace and quiet. Louv explains how parents don’t want their children to be glued to their screens, but continue to give them more and more time to use technology. Something doesn’t add up in that equation, and Louv is able to use this inconsistency to disprove that counterargument.
The way that Louv truly wins over his audience is in his description of watching nature out a cars window. His language is beautiful and takes the reader back to their personal memories of watching out a car window. He shifts the focus of his essay from logical and factual events to pure emotion. This new feel to the passage is almost raw, inviting the reader to relate to Louv and be nostalgic with him. His reason behind writing this part towards the end is because he has already gained the audience's trust and built upon the common belief that kids need to watch less TV. Now, he is able to play with the reader’s heartstrings, making them sad for the future generation that those kids will miss out on such a simple, yet beautiful view. Furthermore, this tactic inspires the audience to do something about this, and not to buy a car with backseat televisions.
Overall, Louv proves that technology is impacting the youth, stealing their childhood one little thing at a time. Through his use of current events, personal and logical explanations, and nostalgia, Louv draws the reader in and convinces them to fight back and draw the line on what is “too much” technology, so the youth can really begin to look out the window. Looking out at the real world, full of wildlife, sunsets, sunrises, rain, mud, and rainbows, is far more impactful than staring down mindlessly at a screen. This might be the change that encourages the young to dream and shows them there is good in the world.
1 for thesis
Delete3 for body paragraphs
0 for sophistication
Love the opening line! You actually march through that analysis quite well. It is chronological, which makes it easy for the reader to follow. It is also correct in that I think you seem to understand Louve's motives for writing the piece. This is good. I would say it is a 1-4-0. But I think you are really close to being able to nail that sophistication point. This is good Gina. Excellent work.
DeleteWe are living in a world where technology is constantly improving and changing our environment. Technology has allowed us to stream movies anywhere and connect to wifi in a moving vehicle. Richard Louv wrote an essay that highlights the separation of humans and nature, in the way that it is becoming too distant. By discussing new improving technology, sharing personal anecdotes, and giving the audience a feeling of nostalgia, Louv demonstrates to the audience that technology is taking over the natural world and people are missing out on the beauty of nature because of a screen.
ReplyDeleteLouv begins his argument that technology is taking over nature by introducing the newest technological achievements. He uses a logical approach and notes that genetic technology is now allowing scientists to choose the color of a butterfly’s wings. Additionally, scientists plan to use nature as a way of advertising. Louv says, “But the logical extension of synthetic nature is the irrelevance of ‘true’ nature-the certainty that it's not even worth looking at.” Advertising in nature will take away from the beauty of nature itself. People will focus on the advertisement rather than nature and once again it will cause separation. Furthemore, Louv wants nature to be appreciated and recognized for being naturally eye catching, not because of a bright advertisement for a municipality. Louv discusses advertising in nature in order to prove to the audience that true nature will no longer exist if technology continues to dominate in every aspect of our lives.
Another way that Louv conveys his message is through sharing a story of his friend purchasing a new vehicle. New cars have advanced, luxury features intended to attract customers and improve their driving experience. Louv’s friend purchased a Mercedes SUV with a Global Pointing System, but the salesman was shocked when she did not want a backseat television monitor. Technology now allows kids to play games and watch television in the car to keep the driver unbothered. Louv poses the questions, “why do so many people no longer consider the real world worth watching?” Car rides are meant for looking out the window at the scenery or counting the cows as you drive past a farm in the middle of nowhere. Louv says that looking out the window during a car ride is our drive-by movie. By sharing this personal story, Louv is able to prove that technology has allowed people to miss out on the real world.
Finally, Louv proves that humans and nature are separated by reminding people of their childhood memories. He brings them back to when they used to look out of the car window on a long trip and uses imagery of roadkill and animals by the roadside. When a movie could not be streamed from the backseat, kids would run toy cars on the window and watch the raindrops race down the glass. He takes the audience back in order to remind them of good childhood memories in which technology was not involved. Louv jogs their memories of the feeling of being connected to nature and enjoying its beauty. At this point the audience is feeling nostalgic and that they are being personally spoken to. Louv ends his argument with this to leave the audience thinking and hopefully coming to a realization of how technology truly has separated them from nature.
Nature is meant to be appreciated and admired because it is naturally amazing. An orange and pink sunset behind an open field is a far more incredible view than a television screen in the backseat of a car. The focus on technology is driving humans and nature further apart with each advance. Louv writes to emphasize that technology can no longer separate humans from nature and we must not give nature the cold shoulder. By introducing new technology in nature, sharing a personal, current example, and reminding the audience of their own childhood memories, Louv convinces the audience that harmony between humans and nature is essential and we must stay connected to the real world.
1 for thesis
Delete3 for body
0 for sophistication
Abby this is really good. I can tell you really watched the videos and are using the framework for the thesis, body and conclusion. You take the reader through a chronological analysis of the passage which makes it easy and enjoyable to read. You develop that line of reasoning in the introduction and follow through on that with great examples from the text and even some imbedded quotes. You pulled one GREAT quote out of there that really drives the ending of the essay, "why do so many people consider the world not worth watching". What a poignant quote and great way to tie the reader to the argument, which is what he does in the latter part of the passage. Great work. I would say this is a 1-4-0 or a 1-4-1. I think many of the readers would give you the sophistication point for the imbedded quotes and the nuanced commentary. Such a great job!
DeleteMy parents and grandparents always speak of the “good old days” when they had to
ReplyDeleteactually go to the library to have the capability to write papers or barely watched television because they were always doing physical labor or activities. Now, I research online to construct papers and watch a lot of television. They are not big fans of technology, because they have found that it separates rather than unites. In “Last Child in the Woods,” written by Richard Louv in 2008, he sort of builds off of this to show how disconnected most individuals are from nature. By exhibiting how great nature is and expressing how much technology will continue to change everyday practices, Louv successfully shows how technology has overtaken a major portion of our lives and separates us from the generation before.
One method Louv used to deliver his message was by really selling how incredible nature
is. He did this by using imagery and significant comparisons. For example, when speaking about looking at nature on car rides he said, “... the empty farmhouse at the edge of the subdivision; the variety of architecture, here and there; the woods and fields and water beyond the seamy edges (lines 50-53)...” This paints a clear picture in the mind of the reader, and it causes them to realize what they are missing out on. He then goes on to say, “This was the landscape that we watched as children. It was our drive-by movie (lines 54-56).” This comparison of nature to a movie shows that the physical world was and could still be a source of entertainment. Parents, however, just choose to give their children television, because it will maintain “a little backseat peace (line 37).” Many people are drawn into something when the writer has the ability to create an image or make an interesting comparison, because it allows them to envision and connect to something. This example leads to the realization that people are missing out on creation for something that is subpar. This reminds me of the saying, “Some people lose diamonds in search of stones.”
Another way that he strengthened his argument was exhibiting the huge impact that
television could have on the future generation. He executed this by utilizing nostalgia. First, he said that their grandchildren will question how truthful they are when they say that they looked out at nature while they were in the “nineteenth-century Conestoga wagon (lines 57-60).” Additionally, he stated, “‘Yes, we’ll say, ‘it’s true. We actually looked out the car window (lines 61-62).’” This whole piece of nostalgia shows how fast and easy it is for individuals to become separated from the beautiful world that God gave us. In the example, he basically said that it may only take two generations for this to occur, which is short when looking at how time flies. Lastly, he says reminiscently, “We stared with a kind of reverence at the horizon, as thunderheads and dancing rain moved with us (lines 67-69).” Nostalgia connects people to the ways of the past, and appeals to emotion. It has a strange impact, which is many times leaving the reader longing for more, and in this case, perhaps even producing a feeling of guilt.
One day, I am sure that I will be the person telling family about the “good old days,” and
wishing that I had taken my parents more seriously. Change will always come, but it is all about how one responds. It is important to live in the present, but while also remembering things of the past. By displaying the wonder of God’s creation and exhibiting the possible effect that television could have on children’s ability to see this beauty, Louv conveys the idea that technology not only closes us off from nature, but also how things used to be.
I give myself a:
Delete1/1 for thesis
3/4 for body
and 0/1 sophistication
YOur thesis is good, but one change I would suggest is that he is not arguing that we are seperated from the prior generation, but that we are seperated from nature. I think bringing in the argument that we are growing very much different than the preceding generation is a smart approach, but when it comes to the thesis, make sure you are really setting up that line of reasoning for the development of your argument. You don't want to spend the paper proving how we are separate from past generations, right? Then, in order to elevate this, you need a line a reasoning that follows the passage. It needs to be chronological. The reason for that is that Louve ordered the passage the way he did on purpose. If you look at how the passage unfolds, it is easier to talk about how he designed it to impact the audience. He begins with statistical, scientific data, and then how does he move through the passage in regards to making his argument. So, to have a nuanced analysis, you need to look at his progression. I know that is a lot to think about when you are trying to write, but you can do that. You want to aim for a line of reasoning that follows the chronology of the passage. I would say your score for yourself is accurate, but that you can easily shift your approach and bump that up significantly. You are almost there! Don't give up!
DeleteTechnology has had an amazing effect on the life we live today. Everyday tasks become less of a burden and life as we know it is getting easier. Despite the benefits of technology, there are some downfalls to living in a technological world. In this essay by Richard Loud, he shows how technology is causing losing being in touch with nature. By explaining the perpetuating culture of technology, showing how technology has become so constant, and explaining the good that the lack of technology can bring, Loud uses nostalgia and contrast to make it clear that society's touch with nature is being lost.
ReplyDeleteLoud starts his argument with a visual of how nature is becoming synthetic. “Cash-strapped municipalities hope corporations agree to affix their company logo on parks in exchange for dollars to keep their space maintained.”(lines 10-13) Loud uses this example to show synthetic nature. “But the logical extension of synthetic nature - the certainty that it’s not even worth looking out.” (Lines 17-20). The author uses an example of how the corporate world is infiltrating the natural world. He uses a common example of an everyday scene.
Technology is common for everyday use. Loud uses an example of how his friend wanted to buy a new car. He talks about how his friend could not leave the dealership until she explained why she didn’t want a television screen in the back for her daughter. He uses this story to show how much technology has been ingrained into our culture. It shocks people when there is not constantly a device close by. Loud explains how it becomes habitual to have and expect technological devices in almost every aspect of our lives.
Loud concludes his argument by showing the good that can come from shutting off technology. He uses rhetorical questions to lead people to the logical conclusion of how children should be without technology to see how nature and cities fit together. He explains how the different architecture, subdivisions, and farmhouses educate our children. Loud uses the nostalgia of parents' childhood. He uses a story of someone asking what it was like in the nineteenth century.
Richard Loud uses nostalgia and story telling to describe why being in touch with nature is becoming a less common thing. He shows the infiltration of technology into culture, explains the constant technology in our lives, and showing the good that the lack of technology brings. Technology makes lives significantly easier.p, but sometimes maybe we need to put the technology down. How many of us use our phone right before we shut our eyes at night? Turning off technology can be beneficial and should be done more often.
1/1 for thesis
ReplyDelete3/4 for body
0/1 for sophistication
Your introduction says the right things, but be careful. There are a lot of missteps there. Just some diction mix ups that are unnecessarily taking away from your analysis. For instance, the author's name auto corrected to Loud.
DeleteYou do a good job providing evidence, make sure you fully develop the commentary. Putting the evidence in is great, but unless you capitalize on the opportunity to use it to make your point, it is just taking up space. You are almost there. You are putting in commentary, but it needs to be a little more poignant. Lets take that first body paragraph. After you quote lines 17-20, you might say something like, Louve uses an example of how the corporate world is infiltrating the natural world with the use of a common example of an everyday scene. He does this to show how small, seemingly meaningless changes are actually making a huge impact on our interaction with and disregard for nature. We are so distracted by life, that we are not even looking at our beautiful surrounding. Then, that actually leads into your next argument. It is shocking to the salesman that someone WOULDNt want a tv in her car. That is an example of the point you highlighted in the paragraph just before. He goes from general, to more personal, and then hits it home by tugging on the heart strings with nostalgia. That kind of an analysis is what gets the points. He uses rhetorical questions because that is how writers get people to put themselves into the story. And by then asking them to look out the car window so to speak, he hopes to show how much of a paradox there is between the way it used to be and the way it is now.
I think a 1 3 0 is probably accurate.
DeleteIt is very difficult for an individual to comprehend our society in today’s world. We strive to define ourselves as individuals in the actions we take compared to the actions taken by the people around us, but many times we conform to the norm in an effort to fit in. We look for the best technology with televisions, cellphones, and vehicles, which sometimes can make the drive more about the features inside rather than enjoying the simplicity of nature. In his neatly organized essay “Last Child in the Woods,” Richard Lauv appealed to both logos and pathos in an effort to illustrate the separation between people and nature.
ReplyDeleteRichard Lauv begins his essay by referring back to a friend who purchased a Mercedes SUV with a Global Positioning System. When pushed by the salesman to include a television in the rear seat, his friend said no to the idea. Mr. Lauv’s friend desired for her child to enjoy the beauty of nature rather than being distracted by the technology inside the car. Many Americans claim that they want their children to watch less television and to go outside more. So logically why would they purchase these “multimedia entertainment products?” Mr. Lauv used imagery to elaborate on the simplicity of just looking out the window from the back seat. He states, “children’s early understanding of how cities and nature fit together was gained from the backseat: the empty farmhouse at the edge of the subdivision: the variety of architecture, here and there: the woods and fields and water beyond the seamy edges.” Using these examples of imagery, Mr. Lauv logically implied that nature can indeed instruct. We just have to take the time and effort to pay attention.
As the essay flowed, Mr. Lauv flashed back to the ordinary childhood experience in a car. He claimed, “We actually looked out the car window.” With an appeal to pathos, Mr. Lauv allowed his readers to reconnect with their joyous childish antics. He wrote, “We saw birds on the wires and combines in the fields, fascinated with roadkill, counted cows, and horses and coyotes and shaving cream signs, we held our plastic cars against the glass and pretended that they were racing toward some unknown destination.” By saying that, Mr. Lauv allowed his readers past emotions during their car rides to help them understand the simple yet confounding separation between people and nature.
Never the less, by appealing to both logos and pathos, Richard Lauv highlighted and established the differences between people and nature. Even through a simple car ride, nature can call out to us, and allow us to see who we really are. It all starts with the decision of choosing to look outside you car window and letting your imagination take control.
1/1 for thesis
Delete3/4 for body
0/1 for sophistication
So there are some really great moments in this essay. The opening about conforming is so good and starts this analysis off in a very sophisticated way. You establish his argument, and the rhetorical situation so beautifully Mason. It lead right in to the paragraph about the SUV shopping. The transition is great. The paragraph on that is very good as well. Fully developed, relevant commentary that is actually spot on. You lose control of the writing in the next paragraph a bit, but it works. Be careful about using a quote that is too long. I would rather you have a short quote with more commentary. That being said, I think I would say the essay is a 1-2-1. I think many readers would grant you the sophistication point for your ability to articulate so beautifully the rhetorical situation. Particularly in the opening about conforming and later in the essay when you talk about nature being able to instruct.
DeleteKids in today's world do not know how to have real fun! Often times not, the cacophony and all of the distractions in the 20th century are too much to handle for kids and young adults. When playing outside or reading a book kids start to feel ennui, so what they do is turn towards their phones to make themselves feel as though they are interacting with someone else. Kids have lost all sense of connection between themselves and the “real world.”
ReplyDeleteWe live in a world where fun is ubiquitous in everyday life. With phones and all of these distractions everywhere we are often blinded, we do not see things around us as fun but as boring. Kids would rather play on their Ipads than playing baseball with their friends, or building forts in the woods. Entertainment is easily obtainable through phones, all you have to do is click on something and you can sit there for hours numbly watching videos, or playing games with your friends over a computer screen. However, learning is easily at one’s disposal with having for instance, classes online or even watching videos on, really, whatever you wish to learn. People don’t want to do this though, they want to become disconnected from everyone and play on their phones unmindful of the things around them.
Buying a flip phone in 2021 is harder than one would think. Big companies like Apple are making better and better phones to be more “user friendly,” but what they are really doing is making it so that you become unattached with the outside world. Everything is electronic in the 20th century, even billboards are all animated to try and draw the attention of people. As Richard Louv states, “The woods and fields and water beyond the seamy edges-all that was and is still available to the eye. This was the landscape that we watched as children. It was our drive-by movie (Lines 52-56).”
Doing these fun things outside will help us to discover the real world and make connections with one another, not over a screen but face to face. One day my kids will be asking me what I would do as a kid, and I want to tell them all of the fun things I did with my friends and how to have fun at the same time as being distant from this technological surge that has overcome the world.
I have never heard you use the words cacophony or ennui, but more power to you! If those are in your arsenal, they are great words used appropriately. Rmember the timing of this article. It was written in 2008, before the advent of kids having personal devices to the level that they do now Louve was actually putting out a warning shot about what might happen, and boy was he right. Look where we are now as opposed to 2008 when the worst offense was watching a movie in the car. So, he was right to be worried.
DeleteWhile this is a good argument, it is not an analysis Louve's essay. This is an opinion of yours about technology in todays culture. What Louve's essay was doing was using anecdotes, both technical and personal, as a wake up call for his readers. WHAT was Louves point and HOW did he craft his argument. This is not about what you think, but about what Louve thinks and how he relays that to the reader. What you have here is an opinion about technology with a quote from Louve. You must watch and engage in the videos and then you will be able to meet the expectations. But, I do like your fancy words! I would say this essay is a 2. Now, if it was essay #3, the argument essay where they give you a topic and you use personal opinion and experience to make a point, this would score higher. But this is a rhetorical analysis. I am also thrilled that it was on time and about the correct passage. More attention to detail needed on assignments. You are getting closer every day. Pay attention in class. You have everything you need to be successful, you just need to listen more carefully.
This is Alex Smith
ReplyDelete1/1 for the thesis
3/4 for the body
1/1 for the sophistication
Imagine sitting alone in a room, when suddenly, the door flings open! The culprit? Your own cell phone! Technology has become too intrusive in day-to-day life, and is preventing others from seeing the beauty around them. Louv knows about the damage caused by the overuse of technology, especially on long car trips. By conveying a sense of nostalgia, presenting rhetorical questions, and creating hypothetical scenarios, Louv proves that children have lost sight of true nature due to the excess use of technology in the car.
ReplyDeleteLouv strengthens the impact of his argument by employing rhetorical questions. One instance of this is when Louv asks, “Why do so many Americans say they want their children to watch less TV, yet...expand on opportunities for them to watch it?” (Lines 43-45). Louv’s audience is filled with older adults who are most likely parents themselves. Louv realized that his audience, enamored by the grace technology brings, were those hypocrites. Therefore, his argument is strengthened as it makes the reader feel shame for their mistake and realize the author is correct. Louv continues by stating, “...Why do so many people no longer consider the physical world worth watching?” (Lines 45-47). As technology becomes more and more valuable in daily life, this rhetorical question reminds the reader that nature was, and still is, just as valuable to human life and entertainment. Louv uses rhetorical questions to prove his opinions have an established authority.
One way Louv presents his argument is by deploying nostalgia, and making the case that using technology in this way will take away valuable experiences. First, Louv states, “...Children’s early understanding of how cities and nature fit together was gained from the back seat” (Lines 48-51). Louv makes this connection to remind his audience of the wonder they had experienced while looking out the window. Furthermore, it proves that observing the world around them is educationally beneficial, which is important as parents want their children to be knowledgeable. In the final paragraph, Louv states, “We saw birds on the wires and combines in the fields. We were fascinated with roadkill...We stared with a kind of reverence at the horizon…” (Lines 64-69). Louv wants to remind his audience of the experiences they all shared of staring out the car window. Louv is making the case that if his audience gives their children too much technology in the car, their children will lose valuable experiences and learning opportunities due to the technology. Louv uses nostalgia to convince his audience that children looking out the window on car rides is beneficial for a child’s well-being, and that the excessive use of technology in the car will lead to children losing a great experience.
Louv proves the importance of his argument by painting the worst picture. One example occurs when Louv creates an imaginary story in which he tells his grandchildren the experience of long car trips. In the story, the children are painted as technology addicts who are ignorant to real nature. This could be related to political comics where children are criticized for similar traits. The audience may despise the children in those comics and fear their children could become like them. The parents fear they will be seen as possible failures for letting technology corrupt their children, and will now think heavily about the consequences of entertaining technology in the car. Louv capitalizes on the fear of modern age parents in order to convey the seriousness of his argument.
Technology makes children ignorant to true beauty. The convenience of technology has made everyone forget about the value of true nature, and even to the point of hypocrisy. If something is not done, children will become ignorant to the world around them and never reach their full potential. Next time you want to enjoy the real world, lock the door between you and your phone.
1/1 Thesis
Delete3/4 Body
0/1 Sophistication
In regards to the opening, I do not actually think Louve is necessarily talking about children. He uses children as an example, but I think is really speaking here to the grown ups who are just allowing technology to erase the opportunity for their kids to experience life and nature as it was designed. I don't think his argument is to prove that kids use too much technology. So, once you establish what he is arguing, your goal is to point out his line of reasoning. How does he approach the topic and unfold his purpose. This is most easily done by going through the passage chronologically. Not to summarize it, but to show how he reasons through the argument. For instance, he opens with a very technical discussion about butterflies and how their colors are established, not by nature, but by technology. Why does he do that? and then he gets more personal and tells the story of a friend who does not want a tv in the back of her vehicle. Why does he do that? What is his line of reasoning. What is he trying to argue to his reader. This friend is counter cultural, meaning that most people have tv's in the rear of their car, and this to Louve, is a problem. And this to Louve, helps make his argument that man is being separated from nature at an alarming rate. He then goes on to pathos, right. He is appealing to the readers memories of long car rides, the nostalgia of growing up, to get their attention and to pay some regard to recognizing how their behavior and their choices are impacting the future generations. You need to go chronologically, but you do not have to summarize. Go by the development of his argument. I would say your assessment is probably right as far as a grade. A 1-3-0 or a 1-2-0 because it is disjointed with the skipping around to get evidence.
DeleteWe “watched it all go by in a blink of an eye.” People today are being
ReplyDeletedrawn away from their connection to nature by the appeals of technology. Richard Louv wrote Last Child in the woods to explain how we are getting separated from nature. By explaining the hardships of shopping for cars, giving the audience a glimpse into their past, and showing them what they are missing out on, Richard Louv convinces the audience that there is a problem with people and nature in our world today.
One of the ways Richard Louv convinces the audience that people are
becoming separated from nature by telling the story of his friend shopping for a new car. She decided to buy a car because she did not fall into the traps of the material world. The car she ended up buying had a lot of extra technology built into it, but she knew that getting a mini television for the back seat was a little too much. The salesman could not comprehend why she did not want the television, and he continued to ask questions until he understood the reasoning behind it. Additionally, Richard uses this story to portray to the audience how some people see technology as a must need. The friend who bought a car shows someone who has not been wrapped up in the appeal of technology. Richard told this story because it is current and relevant to our work today. Overall, Richard’s use of current events helps the audience relate to and understand the separation of people and nature, and the attachment of humans with technology.
Another way Louv conveys his argument is by giving the audience a
glimpse of the past. For example, he reminds the reader about their old habits as a child of looking out of the window while on a trip. Richard later goes on to explain this experience as a “drive-by movie.” He uses imagery which allows the reader to imagine and remember those good times. He uses pathos to make the reader think about those simple times. This allows the reader to think about how their lives were simple when they had a better connection with nature. Now that they are being separated, their lives become more complicated. Richard also explains that part of the problem is technology. He also strengthens his line of reason during this part of the passage because he shifts from the present to the past. Clearly, Richard Louv shifts to the past to strengthen his line of reasoning and reminds the audience of their past to support his message.
A final choice Richard makes is shifting his passage to show what future
generations will miss out on. He put the audience into a setting for when they get older and have grandkids. They will be telling them stories of all the things they used to observe while looking out of the window. They could share the experience of what goes on outside of a phone screen. But in the eyes of the grandkids this will just be a story, and they will not get the opportunity to experience this. Choosing to shift the passage to the past helped the audience understand what Richard was trying to say.
If society continues on the path of separation from nature, and a stronger
connect with technology, then we would miss out on a lot of amazing things. God created Earth and He said it was good. God would want us to enjoy the beauty of it, and not what is on our phone screens. Richards uses current events, a glimpse into the past, and things that people will miss out on to show the audience that they need to change. Next time you are on a road trip, put your phone down and enjoy what God created for us.
1/1 Thesis
Delete3/4 Body
0/1 Sophistication
Okay, the introduction has everything you need. It tells what is argument is and then you provide a framework for HOW he makes the argument. It is a little awkward in spots, but it does the job. Going into the body, I think talking about the story he tells of the friend car shopping is smart. YOu do not need to summarize the story. All you have to do is refer to it with a nod or a quote and then spend the time you have adding in the commentary. I say this not because you over did it, but because you just will not have time for both, and given the choice, choose evidence and commentary as opposed to summary. I like the transition to Louv using an example from the past. What a good segway to talking about the car ride. And then the beautiful, natural flow into the future and his call to action for the reader. So good! Your line of reasoning is really based on Louv's transitioning from past to future in the essay, and it works very, very well. You have some missteps in regards to evidence Id like to see a few more embedded quotes and in your discussion of imagery, that what it conjures is a sense of nostalgia. In that same way, I would like for the story you used in the first body paragraph to be referred to as an anecdote. Just trying to up your game in little ways. So, all that being said, I think I would give the essay a 1-3-0 as you did, but must say that with the addition of words nostalgia and anecdote and a cleaned up intro, I would issue the sophistication point for your nuanced approach to the analysis by way of past, present and future.
Delete“We considered the past and dreamed of the future, and watched it all go by in the blink of an eye.” This is a quote from Richard Louv’s Last Child in the Woods on the separation between people and nature due to technology. By establishing a sound line of reasoning in order to generate nostalgia, create concern for the future, and reminisce on ages past, Louv is able to provide a strong foundation for his message about the effects of technology on normal actions, like looking out car windows.
ReplyDeleteNostalgia is a happy and familiar sentiment about the past, and resurfaces with the recollection of happy memories from a significant amount of time ago. By establishing this, Louv is able to connect with his readers and get them to think about his topic. In this manner, he proves his ethos through relatability, and pathos through the nostalgia itself. In the text, he discusses the hanging of fuzzy dice on the rear-view mirror in line 36, and through imagery and a series of rhetorical questions brings the reader back into their childhood, in which they would stare out the windows and follow telephone poles and count animals as they passed by. This is crucial for the development of ethos and pathos, and is established through a logical approach. By starting out with background information and slowly giving examples to ease into his argument so that it is in context of his established framework is crucial for this essay, for it generates nostalgia through syntax and diction. The development of the essay shows this logical approach, and makes the argument easy to understand and follow throughout the text.
By creating a concern for the future, Louv establishes a call to action in a subtle way through the development of his logos. By establishing the effect technology has on our lives and how it is affecting today’s youth is significant because it shows that things in the future could look very different. The certainty of the future outcome is unknown, but it is sure to make commonplace actions from the “past” seem bizarre, such as staring out the window and counting telephone poles, as mentioned in line 64. This alarming message is designed to make parents think twice about how they are raising their children, and reminding them of what they could be missing out on. This is significant, because Louv establishes that this is an important part of childhood.
Finally, by having his readers think about past times, he is able to remind the reader about the good memories about childhood trips and car rides, as well as emphasize the power of the adolescent imagination. He states that through the imagination, children are able to gain an understanding of their surroundings and instill a sense of direction. Without this, it is likely that they could get lost more easily.
Overall, Louv states that the separation between people and nature is becoming more significant, which in turn will affect society as a whole. Dependence on technology is becoming more prevalent, and it is slowly replacing commonplace concepts, which is bound to change society as a whole. It is crucial to evaluate and stop the world from losing important concepts, such as a nature connection, because God’s creation is for everyone to enjoy, and the sheer beauty of it can be unimaginable. Some luxury car companies are beginning to develop windows and windshields that are camera projections instead of windows, which in turn will separate us further. With the development of technology and eyes deterring from surroundings, ideas about the environment are beginning to change and people are retreating away from it. Do you want to live in a world that is entirely separated from its surroundings and does not even acknowledge the beautiful Earth we were given?
Thesis- 1/1
DeleteBody- 3/4
Sophistication- 0/1
So in the opening, which is really good, I think would be great if you open it up philosophically to be more than about looking out car windows. He uses car shopping and car riding as examples for a much larger argument about the increasing divide between humans and nature. Right?
DeleteThen, you need to talk about how his argument unfolds. Chronologically. Speak simply, think simply. Back up. You are looking at it from close up. Forget about the technical approach and just write about what this guy is arguing and how he is doing it. You are overthinking it.
How often do you see a parent hand their children a tablet or phone as a method to keep them quiet in public? In today’s society, this seems to be an often occurrence and this relates to the point that Louv tries to convey in his article, Last Child in the Woods. By using specific examples and hitting a sense of nostalgia, Louv is able to convince the audience that our connection to true nature has become strained to the point that we just let it fly by in the blink of an eye.
ReplyDeleteThe first way that Louv conveys this message of separation is through using specific examples. Louv uses the story of his friend who was attempting to purchase a car in order to show that our society has evolved to include technology in everything, even when it is not necessary. The added technology appears to be there in order to appeal to the pleasure of parents and this is supported in line 37, in which it says, “...who will pay a premium for a little backseat peace…” (Line 37). It also says within the story that our world has become so technologically advanced that “true” nature is not even worth looking at (Lines 18-19). This specific example helps add to the overarching argument as it shows that the technology now included in cars is a need, rather than a want, in life.
A second, and final, way that Louv successfully exhibits his argument is through the usage of nostalgia feelings. He begins to vividly describe all the various objects he, as a child, would look at out the car window and how that is not close to how it is at all anymore. For example, “we used our fingers to draw pictures on fogged glass as we watched telephone poles tick by...We were fascinated with roadkill and we counted cows and horses and coyotes and shaving cream signs…” (Lines 62-67). This use of detailed descriptions helps the reader to feel nostalgic about how car rides used to be and what was considered “entertaining” on these long rides. Now, instead of counting cows, children are counting how long their sibling has the tablet for or how many movies they can watch. This shift shows that the counting cows and other objects has become something of olden times, something nostalgic.
Overall, Louv uses the examples and sense of nostalgia to argue that our connection to nature is terrible as a society and that we need to do something about it. He argues that we, as a society, need to decide what is too much and how we can step back and admire the true beauty of nature. If we do not do this, nature will truly fly by unnoticed by us.
Thesis- 1/1
DeleteBody- 3/4
Sophistication- 0/1
THis is good Jackie. I wish you had developed one more idea an or added more commentary and evidence to what you do have. What you have is good, and you make the important points, but there is so much more evidence that points to the artful argument. It is a fantastic piece, so there is just an option to point out how good, how artful the writing is. As I said, this is good, but I think you could have pointed out other strengths he exhibited. That being said, I do think it is a solid 4.
DeleteAuthor: Hope Farley
ReplyDelete“…The logical extension of synthetic nature is the irrelevance of ‘true’ nature…” Technological advancements have been occurring in almost every field of study. The automobile industry is at the forefront of these advancements as many innovations have been done to vehicles over time including the installation of television screens within the backseats of family vehicles. This event has caused a lack of parenting and a disrespect to the true entertainment of riding in a vehicle: nature. Richard Louv conveys his belief that children are missing the value of nature by noting the disasters of synthetic nature, providing information about current vehicles, and reflecting on his own backseat adventures during childhood.
Louv attempts to convey the message that nature is being abused. He begins his argument by describing an experiment at the State University of New York at Buffalo. The experiment surrounded genetic technology and the process of being able to choose the colors on butterfly wings. The experiment inspired writer Matt Richtel to develop a controversial statement that the virtual world is flooded with advertisements and that nature is the next and best option. But hasn’t nature already been violated with advertisements enough? To support his case, Louv mentions the messages that are stamped onto the sands of public beaches and the logos plastered around city parks. Nature cannot simply be. Nature is now only valuable as an ad space and is only appreciated due to synthetic nature’s stimulating effect.
The vehicles commonly targeted towards families include suburbans, vans, and SUV’s. Louv supports his claim that nature is being disregarded by telling a story from a friend of his. His friend went to a car dealership and picked out a Mercedes SUV. The woman was a mother and did not want the television monitor in the backseat that came with the vehicle. As she asked for it to be removed the salesman insisted on knowing her reason why. The system keeps children entertained and quiet during a car ride. Two problems arise from this. Parents do not fulfill their duties as a parent to watch their child as a screen keeps them quiet and makes them behave. Children also miss out on the landscapes that are a glance out of the window away. Children learn many things from simply looking out of the window. Cities, suburbs, valleys, rivers, farms, architecture, murals, and forests are a few out of the many understandings that can be gained through a backseat window. The parents of today wish for their children to go outside and to experience nature. What they don’t know is that they are supporting their addiction to synthetic nature with the purchase of a new vehicle.
Lastly, Louv speaks from experience as he reflects on his childhood. He mentions the thought of telling his grandchildren that he looked out of the car window for fun, and they were surprised. He describes images he saw when looking outside of the window. They were vibrant and beautiful with bright colors and new scenes. The birds, cows, horses, and every animal was fascinating. The seemingly endless fields and waters sparked imagination. The horizon was looked at reverently. Louv remembered placing toy cars on the windows and imagining that the little car was going on its own adventures. Children dreamed of a bright future while in the backseat. Louv’s use of nostalgia is heartwarming and helps the audience put themselves in his shoes. The younger generation will remember the car ride as a funny movie or an entertaining show, instead of a beautiful landscape that helped shape creativity and imagination in developing minds.
ReplyDeletePeople today often look outside and instead of glancing at the beauty of nature, their eyes gear towards the giant signs and flashy advertisements. Louv writes in order to advise future and current parents to expose their children to the wonders of true nature. He does so by providing ideas regarding synthetic nature, vehicles, and nostalgia. Children have the world at their fingertips, and the world is best seen through the backseat window, not a screen.
Score:
1 for Thesis
3 for Body Paragraphs
0 for Sophistication
Well now, that is really good. It is insightful, you establish a line a reasoning, it is chronological and it is well written. If given a time constraint, which you WILL have, you could leave out things like the summary of the story about the mom shopping for a car. If, however, you were able to write all of this is 40 minutes, keep it as is. This is just fantastic, and I think you are underestimating the score. This is a 5 essay if not a 6. I give you the sophistication point for sure, but maybe a 3 or 4 for evidence and commentary because of the summarizing. Also, if I am nitpicking, which I am because I know you like to perfect your assignments, you focus a lot on "car shopping". He uses that example, but he is really just using that example to jump off into the nostalgia of the car ride. The car purchase and the car ride are not the subject of the piece, just the tools he uses to prove his point. Right? Congratulations. You are really a good writer Hope.
DeleteFor a species that has spent thousands of years living among nature, it is surprising how oblivious we have become to the natural beauty that surrounds us. Richard Louv, a huge advocate for the reduction of technological dependence, writes about the gap that has formed between humans: creatures of nature, and nature itself. In his passage he addresses the issue by establishing an objective truth though logical observations, which conclude that humans are extremely dependent on technology. Louv then asks his audience why his statements are so agreeable, yet seem so unachievable. He then shifts into a nostalgic fictional story, further outlining the joy and appreciation we once had for the beautiful world around us. Humans have become disconnected with God’s beauty, and technological dependence is to blame.
ReplyDeleteIn the first portion of Louv’s passage, he recalls multiple statistics and stories, to further the narrative that technology is eating away at our love for nature. He writes about a visit to a car dealership, and how technology has leaked into parenting strategies. When his friend explains that a backseat monitor was unnecessary to have for his daughter, the car salesman was astonished, as if not having a TV in your car was absurd (Lines 29-33). By using an example as simple as purchasing a car, this gives the audience a better understanding of how technological dependence has infected every aspect of life. Even something as simple as driving from point A to point B, cannot be done without extensive use of technology. Richard Louv’s fact-filled approach to the passage gives an excellent background to his argument.
Richard Louv's shift to the next part of the passage is essential in changing the opinion of his audience. Louv moves on to a series of rhetorical questions, which challenge the readers perception of the issue. He writes, “Why do so many Americans say they want their children to watch less TV, yet continue to expand the opportunities for them to watch it?” (Lines 43-45). By calling out his audience, he is enticing change among the people, rather than just spurting out facts with no meaning. His shift from a factual background to challenging the reader also gives meaning to questions asked. Both strategies go hand in hand and the connection between them allowed Louv to illustrate his idea with passion and attempt for change.
In the final stretch of the passage, Louv creates a story for his audience, many years in the future. His story includes, “‘You did what?’ they’ll [our grandchildren] ask, ‘Yes,’ we’ll say, ‘We actually looked out the car window.’” (Lines 60-62). Louv’s slightly sarcastic story shows that the path humanity is taking today is leading us into a future with no appreciation for nature. He also uses a nostalgic effect by stirring up childhood memories of road trips, along with counting cows, telephone poles, ect. He finishes us his passage with an emotional tone, one that implies the children of the future will not have the same passion, or urgency to dream, as we once had.
Richard Louv’s passage beautifully outlines the effects technology has on society. It has infiltrated every single crack it could fit into, and it is now clearly a problem. Louv’s logical tone to begin the passage, his shift to challenging the audience, and his conclusion that brings the reader close to tears, all contribute to the overlying theme that we need a change, before it is too late. If we do not take action now, Richard proves that something as simple as looking out of a car window will sound crazy years from now. How did a species that once thrived in, understood, and loved nature, become so terribly disconnected so few years later? The change happened quick, but the counter has to be quicker.
Probably 1/1, 3/4, & 0/1
DeleteConsidering that this was written in 2008, I think his point is being proven. This is a very, very good analysis of Louv's piece. You establish a line of reasoning, present an appropriate amount of evidence needed and use your commentary to highlight the author's purpose. You also do a good job at reading the rhetorical situation. You have underestimated the score. I would give this a 1-4-1 or a 1-4-0. It is sophisticated, but you have a couple missteps in grammar at the very end. Sometimes, the AP readers forget about how sophisticated the argument is by a simple mistake at the end. However, they should not do that. This is very good. God gave you a very good brain. That is a big responsibility. Don't forget to thank Him regularly and give Him all the glory. Great, great job on this!
DeleteBy starting with how science and advertisements are advancing the way we view the world Richard Louv is allowing the readers to contemplate their own views on life. He tells how certain “packages” are becoming the normal need. We are becoming numb to the world around us and it’s beauty and wonder. He tells of the salesman’s shock do to his friends want to not have rear car televisions. This shows that it is not just the new generations who are ignorant towards their surroundings.
ReplyDeleteRichard Louv tells about how even nature and major public places are being shaped by major corporations to be used as advertising. This shows how we are becoming majorly dependent upon being spoon fed constant stimulation. We don’t want to have constant advertisements shoved in our faces but we probably wouldn’t know what to do if they stopped. These advertisements might not have any real worth to have but they spend money on it anyway to get their name out there. We lose the beauty of what the ad is placed in front of or placed on.
The author then talks about how driving and car rides have changed drastically in the past decade with the advancements of technology and advertisements. It used to be all about what you can see speeding by you in the car playing the license plate game, eye spy, or just looking at the beautiful scenery. We put long distance radios, touch screen gps, and televisions to distract the kids so you can have some peace and quiet. There aren’t many important family conversations, sing alongs to dad’s weird music, or trying to find where you are on a big fold out map anymore. It’s all about the money that companies are making but we don’t care because things are made simple or easy for our comfort.
We are slowly making our world into one big virtual reality that we don’t have to leave our house to see everything. We don’t want to be inconvenienced by everything else that comes with experiences. It’s hard to be an individual now that there are so many ways for us to be connected and want to be like those we see on TV, on social media, or in advertisements. It’s all about a perfect life.
What do you mean about the new generation in the intro? I think you are on to something, but it needs to be fully developed. YOu have the right idea here. You are analyzing his argument philosophically, and you got it right, but what a rhetorical analysis is asking you to do is to figure out HOW he is doing it. What is his line of reasoning? and how can YOU as the analyst explain with your own line of reasoning what his argument is and how he achieved it? You have what his major points are, and you have a lot of commentary, but you are missing the evidence from the text. That takes a controlled read and a controlled, organized, well supported essay. You tend to ignore the details and just pontificate, which is a nice word for BSing. I would say you can usually pull that off, which is a great skill, but you are smart enough to actually read and write a good rhetorical analysis. You just need to carve out and commit to a thorough attempt. That being said, this is pretty good. But it could be great if you would just follow the directions.
DeleteBlink and you’ll miss it. When have we ever taken the time to slow down and look; really look? Put away the phones, the tablets, unplugged the headphones and just looked; thought about what we were seeing? Too many people are missing out on the bigger picture or the lessons that can be learned by taking a step back and simply existing. An essay written by Richard Louv tells how a simple act, look king out a car windo, can have a huge effect on people lives. By setting the tone, creating images for the audience, and bringing a touch of nostalgia louv is able to create an argument that makes people stop, breathe, and think.
ReplyDeleteLouv starts off the essay by giving his reader some statistics to work with. He tells them that there’s a a university out there that experiments in having humans can genetically alter the color of butterfly wings. With this research Louv moves into his main arigummet. Nature is being cast aside in return for a more virtual reality. Kids are no longer able to go past the age of 10 without some sort of form of technology, video games have replaced outdoor kickball matches, and children choose to text their parents dinners ready instead of walking upstairs to tell them. It’s a dangerous pattern that the world has become more modern. Louv used a story of his friend to express just how much society is campaigning for a “better” reality. The friend went to go buy a new car and when asked if she wanted a backseat television for her daughter, she refused but the salesman wouldn’t let it drop. He was instant that she needed this new attachment for her car and wouldn’t “let me (her) leave the dealership without it..” This woman knew better.
She knew what would be right for her daughter at the time and Louv uses her story to establish the problems people could face if they refuse to conform to a technological society. His tone shifts after this. He begins to ask rhetorical questions to get his readers to think; think for themselves not what society is shoving down their throats. He brings up opposing though processes parents have for example, why would a parent say they wished their child would watch less television but at the same time give them more opportunities and ways to watch it? Louv then brings up an alternative to watching television one that almost every kid can relate to; watching the word past you by through your car window
. By simply taking in what’s going on around you louv says you can learn lessons like understanding how cities and nature are interwoven and you can learn the geographical features of your area. It’s like when you’re going to your grandmas house and you pass the same houses, turn on the same streets, and perhaps pass the same park every time you go so you develop an understanding of where you are and how to get home. If a child was looking at a phone the whole time they would not be able to do that and that’s the point louv really brings home. That image of a kid sitting in the back of the car helps people relate to it when they were young. Louv does an even better job when he paints even more pictures of holding a toy car up against the window and pretending it was right there with you, riding down the same road. It’s the nostalgia that knocks the argument home and it makes people think.
In the end louv does a successful job at conveying his message. His choices of using imagery, nostalgia, and tone help him devopp a strong argument nost people would have never thought of. So picture yourself in your next car ride, will you turn to your phone and beg for the ride to be over already or will you take a step back and appreciate the view form the window?
1/3/0
DeleteTiffany, this is really good. You definitely have a very good voice in your writing. THere is a natural flow to your writing. I would say you get the sophistication point, but lose a point on the evidence and commentary. While it is okay to bring in current technical problems, you need to tie it to the rhetorical situation. Louv wrote this in 2008 and does not talk about the trouble with hand held devices. You could discuss that in the fact that his predictions were spot on, but he does not argue that this essay. But it is good Tiff. Be sure you can write this in 40 minutes.
DeleteThe author of the preceding blog is Tiffany Total.
ReplyDelete