Leonid Afremov's Alley By the Lake

Source/Author:
Bron in 1955, Leonid Afremov is a Jewish painter who left Soviet Russia for the United States to pursue his passion for painting. He has been known to paint uplifting landscapes, cityscapes, and people using a palette and oil paint.

Context: 
Nothing has been written suggesting why Leonid chose to create this piece when he did.

Purpose:
This piece is very uplifting and aesthetically appeasing to the eyes. I cannot determine any reason, other than to be aesthetically appeasing and uplifting, to create such a simplistic painting. In portraying such an ordinary scene in a beautiful way, he suggests that there is beautiful in even the most ordinary of places.

Audience:
The painting does not indicate that it was created for a specific audience. I believe that pieces created purely for aesthetics are for the eyes of everyone.

Rhetorical Devices:
Juxtaposition and color contrast were the principle devices in this piece. The left hemisphere is certainly brighter and more cheerful than the dark colors of the right hemisphere. Part of this may have simply been to create a more realistic picture, as there would be more lighting on the sidewalk where there are street lamps than a river. This coloring also conveys the fact that the setting is at night. The blotchy strokes of the brush in the painting give off a mystical/magical feel to viewers which contributes to its romantic atmosphere. Lastly, the artist drew upon communal memories. Most people identify a romantic connection between two individuals walking together in a park-like setting a night. This memory further enhances the romantic vibes that the painting emits.

Author:
Dan Rottenberg is a historian, journalist, and, most recently, the editor of the Broad Street Review, an online newspaper. He has authored nine works thus far, ranging from sports history to the makings of wall street.

Context/Purpose:
In the brief introduction in the beginning of the piece, Rottenberg describes his reason for writing about Anthony J. Drexel. He contends that Pierpont Morgan is credited with the making of modern finance and most publications on the matter, minimize the impact that Anthony J. Drexel had on this young innovator and on finance itself. After reading various works that follow this description, such as The House of Morgan, he decided to create a book that highlights and examines the profound impact Drexel had on modern finance.

Summary:
This section only dealt with the life of Anthony J. Drexel towards the end (last 10 pages). In the rest of the section, Rottenberg describes the life of his father, Francis Drexel in great detail. He depicts Anthony's father as a adventurer and entrepreneur; he operated his own art school, sold his paintings in South America, and created his own "wildcat bank" in Louisville.

Audience:
This book was written for all Americans interested in finance. He successfully conveys his message with as little jargon as possible, making the piece accessible to all.

Rhetorical Devices:

• Arrangement: Process Analysis; sequential event-by-event telling
• Testimonies: The author implements direct quotes from the characters' memoirs, contemporary historical figures, and other historians
• Communal Memory: References Benjamin Franklin, Athens, Van Gogh, Voltaire, and many others
• Parallel Structure: The author uses parallel structure throughout the novel
• Use of semicolons: The author varies his sentence structure by using a combination of short sentences and lengthy sentences connected by various semicolons

Effectiveness:
So far Rottenberg has not really explained Anthony's influence on the making of Wall Street. However, he did examine the life of his father which helped readers to understand how Anthony became such a financial success in America.

'Breaking Dawn': Twilight gets older, wiser, better

Summary:
This article was a review of Twighlight's newest movie in the saga, Breaking Dawn. The title basically conveys all of the major points brought up in the article: "Twighlight gets older, wiser, better."

Source:
This article was found on USA Today's website. This news source is dedicated to describing and depicting monumental events occurring in contemporary America, therefore the article regards the Twighlight series as an integral part of today's pop-culture whether they find it enjoyable or not.

Context/Exigence:
Causal: This article was written on November 11, just fifteen days before the premier of Breaking Dawn Part 1, therefore this article was prompted by the release of the blockbuster.

Purpose:
Throughout the piece, the article both compliments and undermines the quality of Breaking Dawn. The article starts with the phrase "Let's face it: The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn — Part 1 would be a blockbuster if the film were about Edward and Bella watching an apple rot." This asserts the author's viewpoint that whether or not the Twighlight series got better (according to critics) would not have an effect on the the enjoyment level of its crazed fans. This implies that Twighlight's first couple movies were not particularly substantive or entertaining (according to movie critics). However, the article does make a point of saying that it has gotten better---to what extent however is unknown.

Rhetorical Devices:
Jargon that appeals to their audience: "Twi-hard fans"
Extended Metaphor: Watching the series=watching an apple rot; watching the movie = watching the apple being plucked (which is much more entertaining); "forbidden fruit taken"
Communal Memory: Makes comparisons to Gods and Monsters, Nosferatu, and the bible (forbidden fruit taken)
Use of Reservation: "But none of this will be unwelcome news to fans, who waited in tents for tickets this week to see the forbidden fruit taken." States that despite the lack of substance, people who love Twighlight will likely enjoy the film anyway.

Effectiveness:
Though this article may be crystal clear to those who understand his references, I simply lack the experience and reading repetoire to understand some of the specifics of what the author is talking about. I haven't watched Gods and Monsters, nor have I watched Nosferatu, so these comparisons mean nothing to me. While I am constantly told of Twilight's childish/simplistic plot of two teens who can't be together, I have not actually sat through a full showing of the films and therefore have no knowledge of where the series began in terms of substance. This lack of knowledge and experience makes it nearly impossible for me to then know how much the saga has improved, or how good Breaking Dawn is. While I have taken the opinion that Breaking Dawn has improved I still do not know by how much or if it is even a good movie now (according to my standards).