Annotated Bibliographies

1.      Jacobson, Robert M, M.D. (2011 November, 18^th). Choosing to Omit Recommended Vaccines Can Be a Missed Opportunity to Prevent Illness. Retrieved from http://www.mayoclinic.org/medical-edge-newspaper-2011/nov-18b.html

In this article, Jacobson is replying to a parent who is interested in learning more about vaccinating his or her child. He begins by explaining that vaccinations are recommended but not required for civilians, however schools have specific vaccination requirements which can vary from state to state. A committee called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices makes vaccination standards which many physicians follow when deciding which vaccinations to give children. The most important part of the article for my paper is when he begins speaking about some controversies on the safety of vaccinations. He explains that although there are some thoughts about the risks of vaccinations, the Centers for Disease Control Prevention believe that vaccinations are one of the top public health achievements. The benefits of vaccinations have allowed people to live longer and prevented many deadly diseases.

2.      Jernigan, Kristie J (2010, September 27^th) The Pros and Cons of Vaccinating Children. Retrieved from http://www.livestrong.com/article/244854-the-pros-cons-of-vaccinating-children/

           This article begins by stating when the first vaccination was invented and explains that vaccinations have both pros and cons. First, she explains that one pro is by reducing mortality. One study shows that vaccines prevent about 33,000 deaths per year and another says that they have lowered the death rate of children all over the world. Another pro is that they prevent contagious diseases. A study showed that vaccines have prevented 10.5 million cases of infectious diseases because they speed up a child’s immune system or can shorten the length of an infection. Along with these pro’s, the article explains that one con can be the side effects which are usually mild or temporary. Some milder effects include a fever and soreness at the sight of injection or can include some more severe side effects such as disability or even death. This article helps me to create my argument by allowing me to compare the pros and the cons of vaccinations.

freewrite

Between the three texts, all of us can point out the similarity of each being about power. However, which author captures this idea of power the most effectively? Berger in “Ways of Seeing” describes the power of image and how the importance of art in its rarity has changed due to replication; “mystifying”. Foucault presents an idea called “Panopticism” based off of the architectural structure (Panopticn) created by Bentham where power and order can be achieved efficiently. Kanye West exhibits his idea of power through both words and imagery in his music video “Power” where he is portrayed as a man of stature and wealth while women swoon over him.  All three pieces exhibit the authors’ ideas of power; how power should be kept, what makes one powerful, and how image creates power. In my synthesis I would like to discuss which piece exhibits power in a way that is most relevant in today’s society along with their views on the advancement/changes of society in relation to power.

Panopticism

“Everyone locked up in his cage, everyone at his window, answering to his name and showing himself when asked…” begins Michel Foucault’s excerpt about Panopticism in his book Discipline and Punish (283). He starts his piece with a description about the procedures taken to quarantine those with the plague in order to introduce the idea for which all disciplinary methods developed from. The way to assure “automatic functioning of power” is explained through the theory of Panopticism (288). Panopticism is based off of Jeremy Bentham’s idea of a Panopticon, which is a circular building divided into cells with a central tower used to look out onto the people in the cells. With this central tower, a supervisor can view the prisoners but they do not know when they are being watched thus creating the idea that “power should be visible and unverifiable” (288). With this idea, power is distributed and not given solely to one individual. The theory of Panopticism can be used in modern institutions such as schools, hospitals and prisons.

Responding to Kyle's response

            There is not one way someone can help to protect our environment as Kyle Madsen has so eloquently stated in his response paper to my article “Why Bother?” He explains my angle of vision as “too dominant and intense for some readers” and therefore some of my readers may be left out. However, I believe my angle of vision actually helps my article capture readers who would have not read it originally. Going “green” seems to be a popular staple for many companies, such as Starbucks as Madsen has already told us. Therefore, many readers may be more opposed to reading another article which has the same message as the movie which was used to scare people about the “climate change”: An Inconvenient Truth. By using more intense writing, I try to not only relate with my audience but I also do so with a persuasive and knowledgeable affect.

            My constant regard to gardening is just another way that I try to show my audience how easy helping our planet can be. Madsen does not realize that just because I strongly believe that gardening has multiple advantages does not mean that I have not included other ways to save our environment including: “forsake the clothes dryer for a laundry line across the yard, trade in the station wagon for a hybrid…” By reiterating the idea of using gardening as a solution, I try to show my readers that just because it is a way for us to help our planet does not mean that there are not other benefits. Not only does gardening “reduce your carbon footprint” but it also is a way to move your dependence from foreign companies to your own backyard. As a whole, Madsen’s response was a very strong way to suggest “realistic alternatives” and  to “learn to bother for yourself.”

Geertz Summary

“We were intruders” begins Clifford Geertz in his anthropological study of the Balinese cockfight. He began with a narrative about his visit to a Balinese village with his wife. The villagers treated them as though they were invisible, merely spectators of their lives. It was not until they were part of a cockfight, a “celebrated phenomena”, that they became noticed in the community. It was there that Geertz saw the impact cockfighting on the Balinese culture.

           

            Cockfighting is not simply a battle between two Balinese livestock, but an identification of the owner. Although the Balinese are repulsed by animal-like behavior and punish those who act as so, their passion for their cocks can be extreme. He uses descriptive language to paint a picture of both the avid prepping of the cock and the scene at a cockfight including the ring where the fight is held and the bloody battle itself. Before the cockfight commences bets are made depending whether it is a “deep fight” or a “shallow fight.” Geertz disputes that the monetary aspect is not what drives the cockfight but rather the affect of the outcome on social status. It acts as a replication of the relationship between social groups. The Balinese will not bet against those of their own collective group which proves as a way to unify the village against outsiders. The main purpose of the cockfights is to allow for the Balinese to convey their aggression and competition spirits through a symbolic ritual. By doing so, the village men relay their “animal-like” tendencies on something more socially acceptable.

            The cockfight is an assembly of the Balinese performing a ritual which can be used to understand the Balinese culture. Geertz, as an anthropologist, uses this custom as a “text” to further decipher the social and cultural structure of Bali.