TOW #13 - Visual Text: Star Tribune Editorial Cartoon “The Talk”

For this week’s TOW, I decided to analyze a political cartoon for the first time. This cartoon was created by the Star Tribune’s resident cartoonist, Steve Sack, the winner of several awards for his depictions, including most recently winning the 2013 Pulitzer Prize for editorial cartooning. This particular cartoon was not created in response to a specific event, but rather to address a cultural disparity: how our US justice system treats minorities a compared to their white counterparts. Sack does this by mainly relying upon the use of juxtaposition. The first thing that the viewer notices about the cartoon is its title, “The Talk”, which is in very large font and all-caps. Next he or she sees the use of juxtaposition given by two nearly identical scenes: the first, a white father talking to his son about “the birds and the bees” while in his son’s room on his bed, and the second, a black father talking to his son about guns and the supposedly blind US justice system while in his son’s room on his bed. I chose this cartoon because I can relate to it personally, as I have had the latter talk with my own parents, and the theme of injustice between whites and minorities connects to my current IRB, The Autobiography of Malcolm X. Based on the cartoon’s title and the content of the talks between the white father/son and the black father/son, one can infer that Sack intended to communicate that the reality for minorities in America, specifically African Americans, is that they are treated unfairly in our justice system, and that that is a problem that whites do not have to worry about. Regardless of whether or not you agree with Sack’s message, I believe he communicated it clearly and successfully through the use of juxtaposition and by relying on cultural memory of minorities historically being treated unfairly compared to whites.

"The Talk" by Steve Sack

TOW #12 - IRB: Section One of The Autobiography of Malcolm X

From the very outset of the first chapter, The Autobiography of Malcolm X has been wildly entertaining and even more insightful. Before this school year in which the independent reading books we choose have to be nonfiction, I was extremely close minded to and doubtful of the possibility that I could somehow actually enjoy reading a nonfiction book, yet less than halfway through the year, my false fear has been turned on its head. The last book I read, Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell, kept me interested by stating theories that initially sounded like nonsense, until he provided the data again and again to back up his claim. The Autobiography of Malcolm X is fascinating in a way that I almost cannot believe that it is in fact a nonfiction book: the story is almost too riveting to be true. So far from what I’ve read, Malcolm X (originally Malcolm Little) has had his house attacked or burned down twice by racist hate groups, his family torn apart by the social justice system, his mother taken away to a mental hospital, had himself moved to a white foster home, and he currently lives from menial job to menial job, which he passionately hates. Even turning to selling drugs and using them himself. Starting in Nebraska, moving to Michigan, than Boston, and onto New York. I am not yet at the point at which I know he is incarcerated and begins to really turn his life around. However, as I read page after page, I become more and more invested in his struggle of rising above the stereotypes and those actively trying to keep him down. Although to an obviously much lower degree, I have seen some similarities between what Malcolm has experienced and I have experienced myself in terms of racial prejudice. As I continue reading, I plan to pay specific attention to how his circumstances combine and ultimately lead to the formation of the passionate and highly capable leader Malcolm X becomes.

Tow #11 - Editorial: The President on Inequality

In this New York Times editorial by its Editorial Board, they discuss the message of President Obama’s speech on Wednesday. Overall, the editorial is supportive of what Obama said which was that he will be focusing the rest of his time as President towards, “‘...the defining challenge of our time:’ reducing economic inequality and improving upward mobility.” To show their support of Obama’s message, they provided statistics that legitimize what he is talking about is an actual issue deserving of all the attention he plans to give it. For example, they state that, “Six in ten workers in a Washington Post Poll last week said they were worried about losing their jobs, the highest number in decades.” 

They also support Obama’s message by giving other examples of countries with similar relative wealth gaps such as Jamaica and Argentina and suggest that America’s future could be very similar: filled with “growing cynicism and despondency.” Not only does the editorial provide support for Obama’s message in this particular speech, but they also give examples of how the President has attempted to fix this issue previously, but has been blocked by republican opposition to almost any solution he has proposed. They provide the example of Obama’s views on raising minimum wage and taxes for the wealthiest American’s, the later opinion republicans seem to absolutely detest. 

The editorial ends by again referencing the President’s speech when he questions what the Republican Party proposes as solutions to the problem, instead of only what they dislike. The editorial’s author(s) last sentence states that the republicans’ silence “explains why economic inequality is rising.” Ultimately, I found the editorial to be effective as the validate the issue that will be the focus of the rest of Obama’s Presidency by providing statistics, and also compare the solutions he has already proposed to those of the republicans which, at this time, are nonexistent.