Judging books by their covers

Image Basics

Image Similarities 

Intended Purposes

Cover 1: The cover implies that the book is about a sad/ melancholy European or American girl in the country who seeks or finds herself in solace. 

Cover 2: The cover implies that the book is about a child who is perhaps fleeing because of the blurry image. The child could also have just "let go" of someone's hand. The cover focuses on the author's name and perhaps will cause the viewer to infer that the child is Asian. 

Cover 3: The cover implies that the book is sad and about loneliness. The cover plays off the fact that if the pole "let go" of the boat it would drift away which is negatively connoted.

Cover 4: The cover is the most creepy because of the childish drawing of internal organs in a body of barbed wire implying capture. Additionally the drawing is taped to a window that shows a forest implying solace. The spooky handwriting draws attention. 

 vs. 
Cover 1 conjures the words "lonely", "hidden", "not modern". Quite honestly I think of a Taylor Swift song where she is sad because some guy dumped her and she is forever alone. Cover 2 makes me think of the words "running", "child", and "dream". I think that the child is running from the photographer because they are scared, mad, or unhappy.

Cover 1 if I saw it before I read NLMG would make me think the book is about a lonely girl in rural Europe or America. Because I have read the book the image represents Kathy H. at Hailsham. Cover 2 before reading would make me think that the book is about a child who is unhappy. Because I have read the book the image represents children who are donors running from the scary adult world of responsibilities.

Cover 1 is portraying Kathy H. from perhaps the perspective of Tommy or Ruth. Cover 2 is portraying any child (girl or boy) that is a clone. The perspective is perhaps from an adult or guardian.

Cover 1 places the book in a Westernized cultural setting. The teenage girl appears to have no makeup on and non revealing clothing thus implying innocence. Cover 2 places a focus on the author's name. This might make the author think that the dark haired child is of an Asian ethnicity or set in a country within Asia. The child's hair is short enough to be "boyish" but long enough to possibly be the hair of a young girl. The construct of independence is represented because the child is running away without help.

Cover 1 was perhaps made by a British company. As you can see in the map below a high percentage of people in the United Kingdom. The cover plays off the archetype of "innocent maiden" female characters because the young women is modestly dressed and submissive in posture. Cover 2 was perhaps made by a more globally oriented company. Approximately 75% of people in the world have dark brown or black hair. Using a child with this hair color would allow there to be a greater chance that the reader connects the child pictured with himself/herself or a family member. Additionally, it is not clear if the child is a boy or girl which would connect to all readers because females can think the child is a girl while males can think that the child is a boy.

TED Talk | Story Telling

TED Talk: Adventures in Twitter fiction by Andrew Fitzgerald 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

http://49.media.tumblr.com/043d4378d4b513020dd85d124e370cc9/tumblr_mq3k4c4f7J1qz8x31o1_500.gif

Twitter has become essential to people's lives and is a mechanism of broadcasting. 

http://49.media.tumblr.com/ab6126cde0e87f0872b67d6bb65982b6/tumblr_mq3k4c4f7J1qz8x31o2_500.gif

  Fitzgerald's main point is that new mediums create new formats of story telling which create new and evolved stories. Twitter and the Internet are both new mediums that connect many authors to many readers. Twitter is now being used as both a distribution medium but also a production medium. Short stories are split into tweets that are serialized where audiences can tune in daily at a certain time. This builds suspense because the reader no longer controls the speed of reading. Through Twitter there are parody accounts with fictional characters engaging in the real world providing a social commentary as well as non fiction real time story telling from historical accounts (eg. on this day 60 years ago...). Some historical examples of new mediums creating new stories is short stories in the digital marketplace becoming longer and longer because of reader requests. The digital format allowed for a quick feedback system. Also radio evolved from broadcasting reading of books to broadcasting live play of a story in a serialized manner. 

  Fitzgerald's purpose is to prove that new mediums (specifically Twitter) are creating new formats and new stories. He uses ethos when he begins the presentation "in my job at Twitter..." by showing that he is employed by Twitter he is thus knowledgeable on what users utilize Twitter for. He uses logos when he uses specific authors names and their Twitter accounts to prove his point. He is biased to believe that Twitter is revolutionary and impacts all users. The authors and accounts he mentions include Hugh Howey, Jennifer Egan, The New Yorker, Elliot Holt, West Wing, Mayor Emanuel- parody account, Dan Sinker, Crimer Show, RealTimeWWII, and Teju Cole. Fitzgerald uses pathos when he uses leading words. For example, when referring to the account RealTimeWWII he says: "you're beginning to see ways in which people are telling stories with nonfiction content that can be built into new types of fictional storytelling." Particularly, the word "new" is very leading because similar formats have been published such as in daily newspapers or emails having a "on this day in history" section. The word: "new" causes an emotional excited reaction in readers as they feel an advancement has been made but it is possible that the reality of the newness of the idea is not truly accurate. Fitzgerald kept most of his words scientific in nature which helped to build ethos but some leading words can still be found. 

  I chose this TED Talk because I am interested in the use of social media. I use social media to spread information pertaining to Millbrook and DECA events. I also have researched using social media to advertise to users. I was very interested to see how writers have creatively used Twitter to tell fictional stories. Using evolving mediums to tell stories is something very important to consider as it possibly (as Fitzgerald says) will impact the plot and message of the stories themselves. This relates to last year's theme of mass media. Author's change how they write and what they write if there is instant feedback from the audience. Author's may change their message to appease their audience if they get negative feedback and need to "boost" ratings.  

http://49.media.tumblr.com/c0fc717c30b5afc630ab7d661d4ade93/tumblr_mihjdjosWE1qz8x31o1_500.gif

This GIF is just an example of the use of Twitter to get instant feedback. Even it is from yourself :P

Scandalous Stanwyck

5. How is Barbara Stanwyck’s character portrayed in this film? What type of angles is she shot in? What type of lighting surrounds her? Is she a good, likeable, moral person? How does she interact with and treat Fred MacMurray’s character? What does this tell you about the way that women were viewed in the 1940s?

Good ol' Barb's character is portrayed as very sensual as in the first shots of her she is in only a towel. Additionally she is seen fixing her hair and makeup propagating the stereotype that women care significantly {and primarily} on their looks. Another situation to consider is the initial conversation between Stanwyck and MacMurray's characters. In this scene Stanwwyck is sitting or should I say "sexy" slouching {if that is a thing}. A notable part of this scene is that Stanwyck's ankle is highlighted. While nowadays it takes a lot to be consider scandalous apparently in those days all it took was a glance downward to the ankles. {Apparently, the 1940s to ankles is the 2010s to shoulders}. Finally it should be noted that there is a focus especially with the camera angles on her legs and their {magical} existence below the hemline of her dress.

Stanwyck's character is shot in many close and tight angles. Her outfit, face, hair, and legs {as previously mentioned} are highlighted. It is well known that is film was low budget which is reasoning for many of the tight shots but the producers and directors still chose to have these shots of not just Stanwyck's face and mouth {when it was moving}. The lighting that surrounds her is very stark. Her face {or legs} are very bright and the background is dark. She is portrayed not only through movements and camera angles but also through her verbal actions as sultry and troublesome. Throughout the film Stanwyck and MacMurray's characters banter. While on first glance showing Stanwyck's character talking might seem like a win for 1940s feminists it actually is not because she is shown as heartless. Phyllis appears to have no morals as she is proponent of adultery, murder, and well she is plain greedy and manipulative. Additionally all the men in her life end up in major trouble {dead, collapsed} as she does herself.

Although sometimes the curtain is blue just for the sake of being blue {see image below - apology for the curse word} it is interesting that Walter is the one who is able to overcome emotion and kill his S.O. This shows a transition in Phyllis from heartless to a emotional position where {as the kids say it} she is hit in the feels. Is should be noted that Phyllis does previously admit to Walter that she never loved him and in the words of Shakespeare "The lady doth protest too much". So maybe all her talk was simply that, talk, and she really did love Walter. Stanwyck's character's portrayal in the film is very indicative of the social situation of women in the 1940s. In the 1940s World War II was in full swing for the first half of the century. While this meant that women got more jobs out in the workforce and some even went to war there was still a movement of conservatism. The majority opinion was though in favor of working women since the economy depended on it. Women were encouraged to be masculine and help their countries by getting a job outside the home so it is no coincidence that Phyllis' scheming and power {money} hungry mind was showcased. This high level thinking was indicative of a man but a woman was having these thoughts instead {who would have though it}. You can definitely argue that Double Indemnity is more chauvinistic with the required help of a man and Phyllis' reliance on men but I believe {hope} that it was slightly feministic in nature.


{A review of my discussion in photos}

While Double Indemnity isn't a family film. I certainly saw more of Stanwyck's bare skin than MacMurrays.

Woah! Look at those shoes highlighting her ankles {scandy}. 

Hmmm. 1940s : ankles = 2010s : shoulders.

This is "why" women should care about their aesthetic {like Stanwyck's character}.
NOTE THE DRUNK MISSPELLING OF ANGEL! 

In Double Indemnity it appears as if Phyllis heartlessness makes her more appealing to Walter.
{Preach T-Swizzle}

Because women are creatures guided by only harsh and cruel emotions.

Excuse the language but sometimes teachers {AND IB STUDENTS} are like this when analyzing.

Those feelings sure hit Phyllis because she was a woman.
{Note: this is a crash course JOHN/HANK GREEN episode <3}

Rosie the Riveter was released two short years before Double Indemnity was released.
Women were prided for their strength and "manly" qualities such as scheming {perhaps}.

Found that feminism ;)