Synthesis Essay Example

Class,

Below you will find an excellent essay from one of your classmates. This essay shows a thorough understanding of each of the texts and synthesizes them in a really interesting, original way. The paragraph transitions are smooth and powerful, leading the reader to the next paragraph almost naturally. Depending on time, I may post the essay again with extensive comments, pointing out why the essay succeeds.


Synthesis Paper


     In our modern society, we live in a time where there are always influential factors that correlate with the choices we make. While we do live in a country in which we are given many liberties and rights, there is a controlling factor (not just the government) that holds authority over the way individuals are shaped and molded. In Foucault’s “Panopticism,” he argues that in order to develop and maintain an efficient society containing population increase and economic development, power should be distributed in a way metaphorically represented by a panopticon. In Berger’s “Ways of Seeing,” he claims that the power held within an image is being destroyed through our society’s means of reproduction. In West’s song “Power,” he sings of how his life is affected by the forces of power itself. We may all have “power” over something, but there is always something else that holds “power” over us. The idea that society holds a power- a power to influence our choices, opinions, behaviors, thoughts, and way of life- is synthesized and relayed throughout the three pieces of writing by Foucault, Berger, and West. Although these authors all speak of power in a different sense, they speak of the influences of power on our society.
      Power can be seen as a term with a positive connotation or as a term that is seen as the root of all evils. In both Foucault’s “Panopticism” and Berger’s “Ways of Seeing,” power is not spoken of in a negative light, but in a way that shows how power has changed or has the ability to change our society in different ways. Foucault uses a panopticon as a metaphor to represent how discipline and punishment works in our modern society. A panopticon is an architectural figure in which all inmates can be examined and observed from one spot without being seen. Foucault speaks about how the organization of a panopticon allows power to operate efficiently though disciplinary mechanisms. According to Foucault, the power of control and examination on citizens of a disciplinary society is a functional mechanism to bring about an efficient society. In this type of society, the spread of disciplinary institutions that use methods of control and observation is necessary. These institutions are present in our society today and include schools, churches, hospitals, and prisons. In these institutions, power is used on individuals to make them a productive person in society. With more and more productive individuals in a society, economic and social growth follows that will blossom the society’s development. As a society’s efficiency improves, there are more opportunities for control and observation to make even more productive individuals. Through these disciplinary institutions, power is used on individuals as they are becoming more productive. According to Foucault, “the panoptic mechanism provides the common thread to what could be called the power exercised on man as a force of work and knowledge of man as an individual. (Foucault 299) In these institutions, the process of producing productive individuals involves the power of influence. The knowledge and wisdom we gain is highly influenced by the people we surround, like our teachers, coworkers, and colleagues in our respective institutions. These disciplinary institutions shape their individual’s way of thinking, acting, behaving, and feeling. “…it still exerts a moral influence over behavior…” (Foucault 296) As a result, these newly developed ways of thinking, acting, and behaving become the norm and way of life. More and more people start to conform to these behaviors and thoughts that were originally developed from the disciplinary institutions. Because a panopticon allows everyone to come and observe any of the observers, this represents that the power of influence in our society is not fixed. Everyone has the power to examine and control… the control and examination of each other’s thoughts, actions, and behaviors. In our society, there is not a central individual who exerts all this power of influence. Everyone is significant and holds this power to influence each other because of our interactions in the disciplinary institutions. This power of influence shifts back and forth between authority figures and citizens in a society that is based on this functional mechanism described by Foucault. We influence the government to create new laws or make amendments to the law, but this power of influences equilibrates and our teachers or coworkers may influence our opinions on what amendments to vote for or against. In a sense, our society, that seems to be running like the panoptic mechanism Foucault describes, is operating to achieve an efficient society through reproducing individuals that have the same way of thinking and acting, and individuality and originality is lost.
     This same concept of reproduction of individuals can be related to Berger’s description of the reproduction of an image. We are losing the power to be the best we can be and our true selves because we are always being influenced by social factors, like a reproduced piece of art. Berger argues that “in the age of pictorial reproduction the meaning of paintings is no longer attached to them; their meaning becomes transmittable: that is to say it becomes information of a sort, and, like all information, it is either put to use or ignored; information carries no special authority within itself.” (Berger 153) An original image holds a power to reveal an idea, a ritual, or an experience. But, with the reproduction of the image, its original power and authority is removed as they enter the mainstream of life over which they no longer have power within themselves. With the reproduction of artwork and the social and political forces, our perception and interpretation of artwork becomes skewed because of the power of those forces influence our values and ideology. The way we view artwork has changed over time because of social changes. Our society has influenced us to value some things more than others as well as what is desirable and valuable. Our perception is manipulated by the power of influence that our society holds. A piece of artwork is only as unique as its rarity, not meaning. “But in either case, the uniqueness of the original now lies in it being the original of a reproduction. It is no longer what its image shows that strikes one as unique; its first meaning is no longer to be found in what it says, but in what it is.” (Berger 149) If our society has influenced us into thinking how great a specific piece of artwork is, then the demand for that artwork increases. As the demand increases, so will the monetary value of the artwork. This shows that the value of the image is not based on the meaning of its image, but because of its market value. “It [artwork] has become impressive, mysterious, because of its market value.” (Berger 152) This influential power that society holds has shaped our way of seeing. Artwork is like the effector who receives the negative effects of society’s power over us. Sometimes it almost seems as if we believe things but we have no idea why. It seems as if our interests and interpretations of things are being narrowed as much as possible because of our natural need to conform to what is the “norm.”
     Why is our society so easily influenced by this power? Since this power of influence shifts, and not one person holds a power, what would it be like if one person had all the power to influence, but was not easily influenced by other people’s opinions and thoughts? In West’s “Power,” he sings about how the idea of power influences an individual. He represents power as a burden on himself because it has made him a person of who he is not very fond. Kanye West has gained power through his rise as a rapper and no one can take down his power, except for power itself. (example essay on the class blog) In this song, West is the one who holds the power, and he raps about how it has influenced and shaped himself into developing his egotistical personality. In Foucault's and Berger’s writings, they show how society has a power to influence, but in West’s “Power,” he shows how power itself influences an individual. With his fame, he has acquired the power to influence others, as he is the social force of society that influences. Although many Americans hate him because of his poor attitude, his record sales do not fall, and this is all because he exerts the power to be an influential person in society. West raps about how this power has made him a hated person in society, and how he receives a lot of criticism and judgment. But, he does not care what people say about him, as he is impermeable to all the hatred and criticism he receives and he is not easily influenced anymore by everyone else’s opinions in society. Society’s power of influence on him was how he gained his power because it helped shape the way he thought about everything. He has gained the power to think for himself, and because of this, it makes it easy for him to not be influenced by society and the media. Although there are highly influential people in our society who bring beneficial changes in our society, they had to have gained this power through something else that influenced them. He sings the line, “No man should have all that power” to show that the power of influence is actually very powerful, and can create a negative domino effect. This is why Foucault’s “Panopticon” shows how the organization of power is actually spread out and spread evenly amongst individuals.
     In conclusion, in Foucault’s, Berger’s, and West’s pieces of writings, they all synthesize an idea of how society holds a power of influence over its citizens, and how this power is able to create a norm for the way we behave, act, and think. There is an extraction of knowledge because society ends up shaping the way we perceive things and causes us to be prone to judgment and criticism if we do not conform to be the “productive individual” that is reproduced to maintain an efficient society. We all exhibit this power to influence, but some people in society, like the media, hold it to a greater magnitude. It is actually better this way than having only one person holding all this power to influence because if this power is spread out, then at least there will be chances of new ideas emerging in our society.

Excellent Student "Reflective" Response Essay Example

Below, you will find an excellent example of a "reflective" response essay. The student has essentially applied Geertz to a recent event involving Michael Vick, who was convicted of dog fighting. The essay succeeds on many levels. First, the author takes a risk in form, almost imitating Geertz, by mixing narrative and analysis. While the piece may be accessible, it rarely if ever slips into a colloquial tone without purpose. In other words, even though the piece may seem "colloquial," the piece reflects the control of the author.

Americans Unable to Ignore Animal Cruelty

A Response to Clifford Geertz

            In April 2007 Michael Vick was indicted with felony charges for operating a dog-fighting venture. At the time I was a junior in high school watching in amazement as controversy erupted in Atlanta. As a child in Central Florida I learned from my family, friends, and community that animal cruelty is immoral. When the news broke that Michael Vick had taken part in the drowning, hanging, and electrocuting of dogs, my immediate environment howled with outrage and disgust. I assumed that everyone in the country shared these views excluding the very few that were committing these atrocious crimes.  After watching ESPN’s “Town Hall Meeting” I realized that my beliefs were not as widespread as I had previously believed. The meeting was a racially charged disaster that drove one blogger to write, “ESPN reminds you, black and white people hate each other.” The argument: the white media and government were punishing Michael Vick for his “black culture”, which included dog fighting. Back then I scoffed at the idea that animal cruelty could be used as cultural expression. Today, I have to pause and think. In the essay, “Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight”, Geertz examines how cockfighting reflects the Balinese culture and way of life.

            Clifford Geertz and his wife visited a Balinese village where they were, “invisible men.” The village ignored them and refused to acknowledge their presence. One day the couple joined the village in running from police after a cockfight and hid out in a local couples’ home. After this event the couple received acceptance from the entire village. The Balinese villagers were tickled by the Americans running from the police, and enjoyed listening to the story. Through this acceptance Geertz was able to start learning about how important cockfights were within Balinese culture. Balinese men have a, “deep psychological identification” with their cocks and the, “double entendre is deliberate.” The Balinese men spend enormous amounts of time with their cocks, feeding them, grooming them, or, “just gazing at them with a mixture of rapt admiration and dreamy self-absorption.” Animal-like behavior is considered repulsive and babies are not allowed to crawl. In the cockfights this, “animality,” and men meet and battle in a, “bloody drama of hatred, cruelty, violence, and death.” Geertz then shifts his essay to the rules and standard practices of cockfights. Cockfights are held in a ring and begin late in the afternoon and usually 10 fights comprise a program called a, “sehet.” The rules of cockfighting are written on palm-leaf manuscripts and have been passed down over the generations. Handlers tend to the cocks during the fight and will even resuscitate the bird. The umpire has absolute authority and Geertz never witnesses any villager complain or question an umpire’s judgment. Betting is also a very large part of the cockfights and can get very complicated. Geertz learns that the village always supports the local cock just as an American town supports the local football team. The cockfight embodies the culture, social networks, and rituals of Balinese life.

           

            Geertz invites his audience into the Balinese world hoping we will take advantage of the easy access he has provided for us. Although Geertz successfully creates metaphors in which to help the audience identify with the Balinese Villagers he ultimately failed to connect me with his impassioned take on cockfighting. His failure results from his lack to realize that I, as an American, must first overcome my disgust for animal cruelty before I can begin to understand the depth of culture and meaning in Balinese cockfighting. The Michael Vick saga proves Americans and myself struggle to overcome this animal cruelty barrier, which is crucial to opening our minds and understanding the Balinese. "Everybody always told me all I had to do was go play football and be successful on the field and everyone will forget what I've done," said Vick. "I don't find that to be true." American minds trapped by this barrier will remain closed to any further interpretation of what they deem to be a vulgar act.

            While reading “Deep Play” I realized that I am the tourist and Geertz is my guide. I ride along blindly on my tour bus and trust every word Geertz speaks into the intercom.  He takes me along his practiced route so that I will experience Bali the way he has designed for me.  Cockfighting is strange and exotic so Geertz tries to put it in a way I can understand. He describes villages going to, “away games,” where they root for their local cock. I easily relate this to the Atlanta Falcons fans and how they travel around the country to support their star quarterback. The cock and the quarterback both bring communities together and stir in them a want for excitement and victory. As the villagers will not remember the amount of money won in a cockfight neither will the Falcons fans remember the score of the game. It is the moments of nail biting excitement and victory that both communities will cherish for years. They are eager to return home with bragging rights, celebrating their champions.

            I raise my hand and ask Tour Guide Geertz what happens to the cock if it loses? Geertz responds that in order to lose the cock must die and then he begins to explain the rules in a matter of fact tone. I immediately focus on the finality of death. This is no longer in the realms of football; this is a matter of animal cruelty and life. I envision blood spraying, feathers flying, and roosters screaming as their flesh are torn to shreds. As my face contorts due to the disturbing images, Tour Guide Geertz speaks into the intercom, “ and if you look to your right you will see my landlord with his t-shirt that reads, I am cock crazy!” Not once does Geertz take it into consideration that his audience is undergoing culture shock and I have started planning an escape.

            In order to push the American Audience and myself over the animal cruelty barrier, Geertz should include all of the gory details of a cockfight. We Americans are hypocrites and will succumb to the temptations of the cockfight just as Geertz and the Balinese do. We are drawn to the dramatics and a battle to the death will make us salivate. Even though we may not change our view of it being wrong, our excitement and temptation will allow us to empathize with the Balinese and therefore overcome our animal cruelty barrier.

           

            While Geertz is effective in providing ways for his audience to relate to the Balinese, asking Americans and myself to simply overlook our revulsion to animal cruelty is unrealistic and ineffective. Due to this barrier I cannot view cockfighting as anything more than a disgusting practice performed by a people too alien to understand. Therefore I cannot grasp nor connect with the impassioned Geertz on cockfighting in the Balinese culture.

Summary/Analysis Kanye West Example

Great Student Example of Summary/Analysis

Summary/Analysis of Kanye West’s “Power”

            Rapper Kanye West, well-known for his cleverly-constructed yet controversial song lyrics and videos, compares his rise in the music industry to the rise to the superiority of Greek gods in his video “Power”. In this one minute and forty-three second video, a stern and omnipotent West plays the role of a Greek god as a number of subordinate Athenian characters slowly and gracefully move around him. West, who gradually marches forward in front of the open gates of heaven, exerts dominance and resilience even in the growing presence of these characters, which symbolize what he calls “the cruel world”. In both the lyrics and video, Kanye West reminds critics that his rise to the elite as a rapper has given him such power and responsibility that no one can knock him off his pedestal except for power itself.

Through his body language, Kanye West captures the role and journey he has taken as a song artist. He embodies a tough-as-nails persona through his piercing eyes and bull-like charge in his walk. As West steps forward, he encounters a growing crowd of Athenian figures, most of which are females portrayed as sex symbols. West’s forward walk signifies his ascending toward the pinnacle of his music career. The encounter of the female characters as well as the two male characters that leap in the air and draw their swords refer to the distractions that West himself inevitably faces in his career: women in search of fame, sex, or money; criticism from the media; and feuds with other artists. Just as notable is the placement of the female figures that resemble runway models; West deliberately positions these Athenian female characters below him to indicate that women are inferior to him. Throughout the entire video, West stares straight ahead

at the viewer, paying no attention to the characters surrounding him; by doing so, West insinuates that his focus is on his career and that he will not let anyone keep him from attaining and maintaining success in the music industry.

In addition to body language, Kanye West’s choice of words to describe himself and to address his critics highlights his egocentric personality. West admits that he “embodies every characteristic of the egotistic,” and in the chorus, he refers to himself as a “21^st century schizoid man.” Schizoid, according to the Cleveland Clinic, is a type of personality disorder characterized by aloofness and detachment from others, little desire or enjoyment for close relationships, “difficulty relating to others, indifference towards praise or criticism, and daydreams or vivid fantasies about complex inner lives.” These characteristics may well describe Kanye West, but it is the deliberate insertion of the phrases “embodies every characteristic of the egotistic” and “21^st century schizoid man” that one realizes that West is fully aware of his arrogant, self-centered personality. This awareness empowers him to ward off any form of criticism hurled at him.

 In the music business, great power draws greater scrutiny from the media and the public. As Kanye West points out in his lyrics, many of his critics believe that West is an “abomination of Obama’s nation” or a hated figure in present-day American society.  While such a comment may have at first offended West, West simply shrugs it off and reminds critics that “at the end of the day goddamn it he is killin’ [it]/[he] knows damn well [his critics and supporters] are feelin’ [it].” In other words, despite people’s abhorrence toward him, he continues to excel in both album sales and song charts. His music still resonates with people, and based on his prolonged success in record sales and on billboard charts, people continue to value his music, which is what matters to him most.                                                                                                                       

Finally, in an unexpected turn of events, Kanye West adds a suicidal element to the end of the song when he reiterates that he is “jumping out the window [and] letting everything go”. While West accepts and embraces the power that he has gained through his success as a music artist, West knows that he is vulnerable to the added pressure and scrutiny that comes with power. This overwhelming pressure can eventually lead to the demise of the powerful, but West sees this tragedy as a “beautiful death”. In this paradox, West suggests that there is beauty in the reassuring fact that by achieving success in his career, he has obtained the freedom and power to rid himself of everything he has gained. One may question why West would want to purge himself of his accomplishments. In response, West implies that he is only human and that one can only take so much pressure before he or she can no longer handle the demands of the media and the public, thus leading the almighty to dispose his or her power.

In the video “Power,” Kanye West appears not as a human being but as a god; a force that shows no sign of slowing down or losing strength, but beneath his tough exterior lays this vulnerability that feeds on growing power. As shown in his dominant stride, West, infamous for his detached, self-absorbed personality, embraces his egotism in order to protect himself from those figures—women, critics, foes--that take advantage of him or that wish to see him fail. In the lyrics, West considers himself “chosen” in a “white man’s world”, given the adversities that those particularly in the black community are going through such as poverty, education, and incarceration, and yet he still struggles with his own hardships, including taking on adult responsibilities as a prominent musical figure in society. For West, “reality is catching up with [him] taking [his] inner child [while he is] fighting for custody,” his “inner child” being that comfort zone that allows him to use his imagination and to engage in complex and creative thinking. This obstacle suggests that while Kanye West’s critics are not a major threat to his power, he, however, is.