AP Practice

2006 Question 3 about entertainers, politicians, ordinary citizens, commentators etc. expressing their opinions on a variety of topics.  Are these opinions worthwhile?  Does this expression foster democratic values?  In your essay, take a position on the value of such public statements, support with appropriate evidence.

Outline:
Introduction:
Today, it seems that our society is dominated by the influence of the media.  The opinions expressed by popular or well known figures have an immense influence on the values and political ideology of the general citizenry.
        THESIS: such commentary is valuable, however its prevalence is reaching a point of excess.  Americans are so constantly bombarded with other's opinions, it becomes difficult for them to formulate ideas of their own, resulting in a generally uninformed, although highly opinionated, citizenry.  This combination is counterproductive for democratic discussion and reasoning.

Paragraph 1:

• Biased commentators spew political rants, immensely influencing their viewers.  These so called "political theorists" often hold extremest points of view and back up their opinions with questionable data or manipulated facts and statistics.
• Because these people seem informed and are on TV, many Americans believe the skewed data they provide.
• Out founding fathers believed one of the cornerstones of a democratic republic was an informed and educated citizenry.  The influence of the media is often counterproductive for this.
• The preponderance of commentators and the increasing influence of opinionated media members has resulted in a decline in individual thought among the general citizenry.  No longer are people researching current issues and formulating their own opinions.  Instead, many are relying on the talking heads on CNN, Fox News or MSNBC to tell them what to think.

Paragraph 2:

• Media influence provides a vehicle for politicians to reach more people and expand their influence through televised speeches, debates and commercials.
• Pro: citizens watching speeches etc. can help them be more informed about a politician's platform
• Con:  the opinions, policies and ideas often promoted by candidates running for election can be markedly different from those outlined in their platforms.  
• i.e. candidate says he supports environmentalism in speech, using vague terms such as "alternative" or "green" energy.  But in reality, his "alternative" is natural gas, or "clean coal" both of which are limited in supply and have similar environmental consequences as the burning of conventional fossil fuels.
• doublespeak

Paragraph 3:

• Despite its downfalls, the media has some positive influences as well
• It enables citizens who are passionate about causes to reach a much wider group of people

Conclusion:

Although the media can enable minority view points to be heard, the increasing preponderance of highly charged opinions generally does more harm than good for democracy. Although more information may be "out there" people are relying on others to tell them what to think instead of formulating their own ideas.  This is counterproductive for a democratic society.

Sample 3A, Score 8:

This essay took a fairly neutral position on the value of such public statements.  Strong ideas, and generally good diction (a few errors but nothing excessively distracting).  This essay improved as it progressed.

Sample 3B, Score 6:

This essay seemed average but adequate. Discussed evaluating trustworthy v. untrustworthy sources, good examples (Rush Limbaugh)

Sample 3C: Score 4

This essay does not have a clear thesis so the student's opinion is fairly unclear.  It uses colloquialisms and faulty or only tangentially related evidence.  It is often unclear and confusing.

Postmodernism in The Poisonwood Bible

Postmodernism is often considered to be the style of writing that began after World War II.  It is characterized by the use of rhetorical devices like fragmentation, untrustworthy (or biased) narrators and generally unconventional methods.    Barbara Kingsolver's novel The Poisonwood Bible is relies heavily on many of these Postmodernistic devices.

The novel's very organization is fragmented.  Each "Book" is divided into many sub-sections (chapters) which are narrated by one of five narrators.   The mother, Orleanna, narrates the first section of each book and the four daughters narrate the proceeding chapters.  Each section is relatively short and each narrator has an unique voice, giving the book a fragmented feel.

Furthermore, the use of a first person, unreliable narrator is characteristic of Postmodernism.  Each narrator brings her own biases forward, many of which potentially cloud her judgement.  The youngest narrator, Ruth May, is often simply naive,  while the other narrators bring their own preconceived notions and judgements with them to Africa.  The use of the unreliable narrator, as well as fragmentation, enhances  The Poisonwood Bible and reflects the views many Americans and Europeans had on African society and culture.

Heart of Darkness vs. Apocalypse Now

For me the most striking, albeit most obvious, difference between Joseph Conrad's novel Heart of Darkness and the Francis Ford Coppola film Apocalypse Now was the change in setting.   Heart of Darkness is set in the Belgium Congo as Leopold II attempts to expand his colonial empire just before the turn of the century.  In Apocalypse Now the setting is moved to war torn Vietnam in the 1960s.  Despite the change in setting the underlying stories are the same.  This shows the common nature of conquest and that in any state of subjugation there will always be imperialists and authoritative, power hungry men like Kurtz.  The differing settings highlights the similarities between the two stories and shows the transcendence of Conrad's original novel.

Difficult Passage, Heart of Darkness

I was confused as to exactly what was happening around page 103, at the very beginning of Part II, when Marlow overhears the nephew and the uncle talking.  Perhaps it was because at times he only hears bits of dialogue, but I don't think I completely understood what transpired.  Here's an excerpt:

Perhaps it was just a simply a fine fellow who stuck to his work for its own sake. His name, you understand, had not been pronounced once.  He was 'that man.'  The half-caste, who, as far as I could see, had conducted a difficult trip with great prudence and pluck, was invariably alluded to as 'that scoundrel.' The 'scoundrel' had recovered imperfectly.... The two below me moved away then a few paces, and strolled back and forth at some distance.  I heard: 'Military post--doctor--two hundred miles--quite alone now--unavoidable delays--nine months--no news--strange rumors.'

Heart of Darkness Quotation Response

"They were no colonists; their administration was merely a squeeze, and nothing more, I suspect.  They were conquerors, and for that you want only brute force— nothing to boast of, when you have it, since your strength is just an accident arising from the weakness of others.  You grabbed what you could get for the sake of what was to be got.  It was just robbery with violence, aggravated murder on a great scale..."

The discussion of the European "conquerors" in Africa (and elsewhere during the era) is especially.  These people, like Conrad claims through Marlow, were not colonists.  They did not seek this land to live in, they merely wanted to exploit the nation's labor and natural resources for their own gain.  Their conquest was successful because they were stronger, not necessarily physically, but mostly technologically.  The Africans could not compete with the Europeans guns or other 'modern marvels.'  This unequal competition was in no way the fault of the Africans themselves or the result of the triumph of the Europeans, it was the result of chance (if you've read Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel, you know that it could be considered only the result of geography!).  Marlow also depicts the greed of these European explorers.  They pillaged and plundered what they could, not caring what devastation they left behind.

Journalists Won't Give You Receipts (Chapter 16)

This chapter focuses mainly on the interactions between Leopold and his growing opposition.  Leopold's popularity was declining and attacks were now coming from "all quarters."  Leopold attempts to fight back with counterattacks and positive reports (about the Congo) on an international scale.  He uses bribery and financial incentives, primarily through his Press Bureau, to get glowing articles and even books published about the Congo throughout Europe and America.

Despite his efforts, criticism of Leopold's Congo continued.  Morel encouraged the United States, as the first nation to acknowledge the Congo, to take action.  Influential figures of the day, including Mark Twain and Booker T. Washington, also encouraged President Theodore Roosevelt to do something.  Like it already was in England, Congo reform would soon become a full scale crusade in the U.S, despite Leopold's continuing efforts to court influential Americans (like John D. Rockefeller, who he granted major Congo Concession rights to) by offering them a share of his Congo riches.

Leopold continued to campaign in America, playing the role of the victimized Catholic (with the help of the Vatican).  He hired lobbyists to speak to Congressmen, give glowing speeches and write positive articles.  However, one lobbyist, Colonel Henry I. Kowalsky, would prove detrimental.   When he was cut from Leopold's payroll, Kowalsky exposed the Belgian King's bribery and lobbying to a prominent American newspaper.  Leopold quickly lost control of the American ideology about the Congo as his opponents began to rise in numbers and power there.

King Leopold made one final attempt to clear his name and created a biased Commission of Inquiry.  Although multinational, the commission was far from impartial.  In fact, none of its three members could speak enough English to converse directly with critical British and American missionaries.  Nevertheless, stirring testimonies, especially one by a Chief who named the 110 members of his village who were killed by the quest for rubber.  The Commission produced a 150 page reported that repeated nearly every criticism hedged by Casement and Morel.  Leopold made one final attempt to cover up the negative report.  When he released the Commissions findings to the press, he included a cover letter containing a "complete and authentic resume of the report," conveniently in English.  British newspapers, thinking they had a jump on the competition, hastened to publish the summary.  Only in the next few days, when editors read the full French version, did they realize how inaccurate the resume was.  The so called summary held none of the document's original meaning.  With his popularity in sharp decline and his old tricks failing him, Leopold's Congo State was resting on increasingly shaky ground.

Quiz Questions:

1. How did Leopold use his immense influence to get positive accounts about Congo travels and business published?
2. How did Morel shape his arguments to appeal to different American constituencies?
3. What is the significance of the title?
4. In what ways did Leopold try to "court" influential Americans? How successful was he?
5. In what ways did Leopold's lobbying and press effort begin to derail?  In your eyes, what was his biggest mistake?

Colonization in Africa and Some Seriously Screwed Up People

Not to sound conceited, but reading King Leopold's Ghost hasn't significantly changed my point of view on colonial enterprises.  For quite a few years now, I have understood the seriousness of the atrocities committed by Western colonizers; however, Hochschild provided significantly more "evidence" of these horrors.

The psychological profile of many of these early explorers was especially interesting.  Despite the commonality of a troubled home life and often significant personal baggage, I still believe financial gains are the principal reason for the exploration and colonization of "uncharted" territories, like the Congo.  When you look at the individual explorer's personal lives, many were plagued by financial problems.  Exploring new potential colonies, like the Congo, gave them the opportunity to gain fame and fortune, or at least merely avoid their debts for a few years.

Furthermore, the potential for economic gain was the principle reason many, if not all, nations engaged in colonialism (despite the "philanthropic" ideals rulers like Leopold II of Belgium preached).  Even in the scramble for Africa, mercantilism was still a pervasive idea.  Like Leopold, sought colonies as an economic venture.  Not only could a colony provide a market for the dominant nation's goods, colonies like the Congo also provided nations with raw materials, precious metals and valuable commodities.

King Leopold's Ghost brings memories of current issues involving forced labor, human trafficking and unsafe working conditions.  As developing countries strive to compete with the "Western" world, these governments encourage the building of factories that can churn out products faster and cheaper than their competitors in already industrialized nations.  This leads to child labor, unsafe working conditions, brutality towards employees and environmental exploitation (i.e. for natural resources) and degradation.

Even though the age of colonialism is generally considered to be over, problems with inequality among nations reminiscent of colonialism remain pervasive.  Still, the industrialized nations continue to dominate "Third World" countries.  Although the current super powers lack official colonies, they continue to exploit developing countries in a very similar manner.