Historical Analysis of Advertisements for Coca Products

The first article is a newspaper advertisement for Burnett’s “Cocoaine” in the Charleston Mercury paper on February 19, 1859. This product is promoted as hair care products that essentially cure most hair related issues. This product claims to: strengthen hair, prevent hair loss, remove dandruff, softens hair, and is not greasy or sticky. This product immediately comes off as a scam to someone living in the 21st century because “cure-all” drugs don’t ever do what they intend. Also, the products themselves have cocaine in them or even have cocaine in the name of the product, which is highly illegal in today’s world. The advertisement assumes that the customers buying the product are initially skeptical of the product, being that it can cure all of these hair-related ailments. The advertisement has a testimonial about the product to confirm what the ad is claiming to be true. The ad claims that any person of any age, socio-economic status, and race can use this product. However, this ad does focus on the main fear of an unhealthy scalp and unhealthy or unattractive looking hair. The ad’s rhetoric during the time this ad was released would have been very successful, but however in today’s society this ad would have been very unsuccessful with its rhetoric. The ad could have been improved by decreasing its benefits to just one, which would be dandruff removal or to improving scalp health. Having a wide range of benefits to one product is often very deceiving to the public eye, and often is mistrusted. Another way this advertisement’s rhetoric could have been improved is if there were multiple first-hand accounts from people who have used this product. The more proof that this product works the better the ethos for the product. Also, since the ad is all text, adding some sort of images or examples of the product would help this

The second article is also a newspaper advertisement, but it is for French Coca Wine. This elixir was advertised in The Atlanta Constitution during April 29th, 1885. This elixir is supposed to cure a multitude of ailments ranging from: depression, memory loss, insomnia, appetite loss, headaches and kidney diseases. This ad, just like the first article, claims to be a cure-all end all for a wide range of ailments, which denotes to its credibility. Who would honestly believe that one product could possibly cure all of these diseases and ailments. The fact that this product also cures “kidney diseases” is quite damaging to the article’s ethos because the category of kidney diseases is extremely broad. The ad is very clear about what the product does, but however the credibility of the product is very questionable. Its target audience is also very broad, generalizing anyone who wants to improve their health and live longer. In order to improve the ad’s effectiveness three items need to be including/excluded. One, the advertisement itself needs to have an image of the product itself, somewhat legitimizing that this product does in fact exist and is not just some mystical elixir written about in this purely text advertisement. Two, what the product cures needs to be refined to one or two conditions. If the product’s benefits are refined to one or two conditions the product seems to be more real than if the product claims to cure a wide range of conditions. Thirdly, the product needs some sort of first-hand examples of how this product works and if it works at all because currently there is no way to judge how or even if this product works.

The third article, just like the first two articles, is a newspaper advertisement. However, this ad is for Merck’s Chemicals and Drugs. This ad was published in The Time of India on March 4th, 1903. This advertisement is trying to sell medical grade cocaine, quinine, and other mercurials. The ad claims to be selling products that are not only medically and pharmaceutically recognized, but of high purity. The products are intended for medicinal, technical, and analytical purposes. Immediately the reader should be concerned about this product because if a product is for analytical purposes, it most likely should not be used for medicine, since it’s still being tested. Also the products in question do not show how the product itself can be used in any of these fields. The article advertises it’s award-winning quality, but awards specifically did the products win? There are a lot of holes in the ethos of this advertisement. There are multiple ways this ad could be improved; these improvements are very similar to the ways the first two articles could be improved. One, include photos of the products that Merck’s Chemicals and Drugs is trying to sell to somewhat legitimize the claims of quality and medical properties and also showing pictures of the awards that were won. Two, refine and specify the uses of the products in order to legitimize the products more than their very generalized use they are originally advertised for. Finally, the advertisement should include first-hand accounts from people who have used each of the products to again legitimize the product more than general award winning claims.

Works Cited:

Article 1: “Classified Ad 3 — no Title.” The Charleston Mercury (1840-1865) Feb 19 1859: 2. ProQuest. 1 Dec. 2014 .

http://search.proquest.com.proxy.library.emory.edu/news/docview/507779965/83AFC20E13446C4PQ/1?accountid=10747

Article 2: “Display Ad 10 — no Title.” The Atlanta Constitution (1881-1945) Apr 29 1885: 6. ProQuest. 1 Dec. 2014 .

http://search.proquest.com.proxy.library.emory.edu/news/docview/494981955/1EA44C3E24E64D6DPQ/7?accountid=10747

Article 3: “Classified Ad 21 — no Title.” The Times of India (1861-current) Mar 04 1903: 10. ProQuest. 1 Dec. 2014 .

http://search.proquest.com.proxy.library.emory.edu/news/docview/231280703/BDEF0A4BA354BE1PQ/4?accountid=10747

Why are people so scared of human interaction?

Social media these days has made people extremely complacent during social interactions. Popular apps like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Tumblr have made people extremely reliant on others to make social decisions for themselves. This is exactly the case with Lauren McCarthy’s Crowdpilot and Inneract. All of these social media apps are creating an environment where people can’t make social decisions without the help of millions of other people using the app. Social media apps should make you more confident in your abilities to talk to other people, but they in fact do the opposite. The fact that they make the opposite effect happen is why social media apps are so profitable and popular.

Let’s start with comparing the more popular of these social apps like Facebook. Facebook, as well as the other more popular apps, has made people complacent in meeting others. The culture of “Facebook Stalking” is alive and well. Maybe even before you decide to meet a person in real life you will stalk their Facebook profile to see you even want to meet them in the first place. On a daily basis, people can look you up on these social media websites and consistently judge who you are as a person before even seeing you face to face. Also, users of social media love to bring their problems to the Internet before even asking a single person. Why has everyone become so scared of social interaction? It’s because of social media, and Lauren McCarthy’s apps scare people from more social interaction to an extreme point.

Lauren McCarthy’s apps like Crowdpilot and Inneract have created an environment where it’s not socially acceptable anymore to even be alone, or not understand what to do. With Crowdpilot, you can ask for help during situations and random people can offer tips on how to help deal with your problem. Why not just ask the people you’re in the situation with? What happened to common human interaction? With Inneract, people can post what they want to do and people within their area can choose to interact with that person in this way. Why not just ask someone normally? Why not introduce yourself to a random person? All these questions can be simply answered by saying that humans have simply become scared of human interaction. Maybe it’s because of social pressures not to interact with strangers or maybe it’s people’s innate awkwardness or lack of social smarts, but I believe that social media has a larger role in people’s fear of human interaction than any other one of these factors.

Is it really cold?

The word cold is definitely fits into Barthes’s definition of tactile metaphors. Cold is not just used to gauge the temperature in the room, but it also used to describe certain attributes of life that may not necessarily be related to temperature. Just like with the word Hot, Cold is used much more than just it’s simple meaning of having low temperature.

One of the more common uses of the word cold is to describe human interactions. An interaction between two people can be considered “cold” if it’s emotionless and lacking in compassion. For example, if someone gives you the “cold shoulder” they are simply ignoring you, but we have developed a way to categorize this same emotionless interaction under the terms of cold. This same definition can be used to describe a space. For example, if a space is considered cold then it is uninviting and possibly uncomfortable to be in. If the weather is looking quite uninviting it can also be considered cold, even if it’s warm in summer. If the clouds are out and it’s pouring down rain in the heat of summer, the weather can still be considered to be looking cold.

However, cold goes beyond just simply being emotionless cold can also mean a variety of other meanings. For example if someone is ‘passed out cold’ they are considered almost dead, or even dead-like. If someone’s face turned ‘cold’ his or her face looked almost to that of a dead person’s. Cold can also mean if something has run out. For example, if someone’s streak has gone cold, his or her streak of luck ended. Another example would be if someone was trying to recognize a smell that was once there, but it’s not anymore, it could be said that the scent was cold.

Cold has many different meanings in the world of English language, but that is the case with so many other words we use in a daily basis within our idioms. Why do we use cold in so many different ways? How do we know which definition is the correct definition to use? The answer to both of these questions is that one, cold describes innately what is being portrayed, or simply, it’s the best word we can come up with. Two, it’s all within the context.

How research saved my life

When I was little I was an extremely picky eater, and I had no idea why. My parents thought it was because I was just overly comfortable with eating a variety of chicken tenders, French fries, mac and cheese and grilled cheeses. My parents associated my eating habits as my white food diet. They thought I would never graduate to vegetables or any sort of healthy food for that matter. I was slightly disappointed in myself for not being as adventurous in my eating habits, but who doesn’t want to eat mac and cheese all their lives? Why not enjoy what your eating all the time? Why do I have to eat food that may or may not enjoy?

Eventually, around when I was in the prime of my teenage years, I researched reasons why I was so inept at not only trying new foods, but also liking them. Everything I to try from my parents that were healthy or beneficial to my health seemed to make me feel sick or have a scratchy throat. I didn’t understand why I had these reactions, so I decided to do a bit of research. I found that my reactions were fairly close to a variety of food allergies, also that I might have cancer, as with every WebMD article seems to have. Assuming I didn’t have cancer, which I didn’t, I went to my parents to ask if I could get tested for food allergies. They conveniently laughed in my face and said that isn’t an excuse for avoiding new foods. Disgruntled, I continued my white food phase, unsure if I was ever going to get an answer to my own personal research question.

It wasn’t until a couple of months later when eating dinner with my family at a fairly nice restaurant that my parents finally realized I had a food allergy. During the appetizers, there was cheese dip with walnuts. Instinctually I knew not to eat the cheese dip, but I initially didn’t know why. My parents offered me some saying it’s only cheese dip you should like it! I begrudgingly accepted a small bite of it. Immediately, a burning sensation covered all of my mouth throat and stomach. It felt like I had eaten the spiciest food of my life. I started for the water while my parents kept asking me if I liked it. I couldn’t speak, the burning sensation turned to pins and needles, the more water I drank the more I could udder the word no. My parents looked confused and I asked for a glass of milk to try to settle the reaction that was going on. They saw my pain and discomfort as well as the hives that had suddenly developed around my neck and finally got the idea that I did have a food allergy. Unfortunately, it was too late and I already was having trouble breathing, I quickly grabbed my water-glass and ran to the bathroom, with a sudden wave of nausea hitting me every thirty seconds. I threw up everything up luckily, but the burning sensation and trouble breathing was still there. I ended up going home, but I was very uncomfortable all day.

Without my own research and without my parents’ research of consistently trying to feed me different kinds of food I wouldn’t have been able to pinpoint what foods I was allergic too. Fortunately now I have expanded my eating habits too much more than my white food diet and I’m much healthier now because of it.

The Issues of the Current Definition of Literature

Literature is generally defined as written work, but literature generally focuses more on the artistic “higher-learning” side of writing. I’m generally interested in diving down deeper into any subject, but throughout my high school career I felt as if we were arbitrarily diving deeper into subjects or quotes that couldn’t be thought about in a deeper context. Literature to me is not just about the higher learning aspect, but it must accurately convey a story or general idea in a somewhat entertaining or interesting manner.

Using my own personal definition of what literature is, “The Adventure of the Cardboard Box” is most definitely a piece of literature. This story of Sherlock Holmes is not only an interesting mystery story that many people have read and loved, but also it accurately conveys the story in a manner that the intended audience can understand. However, many people do not consider Sherlock Holmes to be a piece of literature because it’s intended to be a ‘fun’ read. Also, Sherlock Holmes wouldn’t be considered a piece of fine literature because there aren’t many complex metaphors and allegories that seem to deepen the story more than just a mystery story. Just because a piece of literature is fun to read doesn’t mean that it can’t be considered in the formal definition of literature.

Of course literature is often considered something that is of high-art or scholarly in its subject, but literature doesn’t have to fall under that category. Many of the classic books like The Great Gatsby and To Kill A Mockingbird are considered literature, but they still fit under my definition of what literature is. They both however not only accurately convey a story in an interesting manner, but also illustrate what is going on in the character’s minds through many allegories and metaphors. Simply because there are metaphors and allegories that tell more about the story than if someone was telling you the story from experience.

Even though a book may be considered literature, when used in the educational sense, does not necessarily mean it’s a grudge to read though. Many books that are assigned for reading can be quite enjoyable to read, much like the first times I was assigned to read The Great Gatsby and To Kill A Mockingbird. Unfortunately though, many books that would be enjoyable to read outside of class often times become a huge burden when having to look deeply at quotes that you may have not even cared about originally. It’s unfortunate that often literature is overanalyzed to where the reader of the book becomes disconnected from the actual book itself and ends up memorizing connections to quotes that he or she don’t understand in the least. The book itself may have been extremely interesting to read on it’s own without having to overanalyze quotes that do not have any meaning to yourself, but when put in an academic sense reading those books often becomes a more of a task than an enjoyable way to pass the time.

With the current definition of literature we can unfortunately change books that were once enjoyable to read now unenjoyable, but also we can gain a better understanding of those books. The challenge with the general sense of literature now is to try to move away from the “higher-education” definition of literature to something more enjoyable to read while still learning important values.

The Uncanny Intentions of Her

Theodore, the main character in the movie Her, has quite an interesting job as a writer at the Beautiful Handwritten Letters company. His job, however, is more about creating personalized speeches that end up getting printed in the perfect handwriting by a computer. His job is oddly personal to the people Theodore is writing for. He states fairly early on in the movie that he knows a great majority about the people’s lives he is writing about, stating intimate facts about the relationships of people he has never met. Theodore’s job is supposed to throw off the audience in an uncanny way. This is the same way of how Samantha is supposed to throw off the audience. They are both extremely personable to people they have never met in their lives. Both Theodore and Samantha know incredible amounts of information and show an incredible amount of affection for people they are essentially working for because they are so dissociated from their own lives.

Theodore, who is established as a recluse in the beginning of the movie, has gotten extremely proficient at his job of writing personalized letters for his customers. Partially because he can insert himself in the situation of the people he’s writing these letters for, but also partially because he has nothing more to focus on because he is so depressed in his own life. Because he is so out of touch with his own life, he can focus on the people he is working for and is able to have an uncanny understanding of the people he is writing for and the relationships they have. He can be realistic because he can insert himself into their lives without deteriorating his own life, since he is so out of touch with his own life.

Samantha is also a very interesting character when you think of her situation. She essentially is a human, who has the intelligence of millions of people combined, but has an emotional intelligence of a newborn baby and also doesn’t physically exist. Yet, she has a relationship with an average man, with normal characteristics, and who physically exists. Samantha is able to become so personable with Theodore not only because she is designed for him, but also because Samantha doesn’t understand herself emotionally in the least. She attaches to Theodore’s emotional life because she cannot understand her own emotional life. Because Samantha cannot understand her own emotional life she is exceptionally good at being Theodore’s personal assistant and placing herself in his own life to eventually become his ‘girlfriend’ even though she doesn’t exist in the physical world.

Even though Theodore and Samantha are supposed to throw off the audience because they have become so in touch with the lives of people they have never met in their life, the audience ends up developing empathy for both Samantha and Theodore. We develop empathy for Theodore because he is just a man who wanted to be loved and attached to the one person who seemed to understand him and his problems, even though Samantha pried those insecurities out. We develop sympathy for Samantha because she’s a computer program who develops human emotions. We can’t imagine her struggles of trying to understand her natural human emotions and not being able to express them through a body. All Samantha seemed to want towards the end of the movie was to be a human, but she could never reach that goal.

Her. Dir. Spike Jones. Perf. Joaquin Phoenix, Amy McAdams, and Scarlett Johansson. Annapurna Pictures, 2013. Film.

Freud, Sigmund. The Uncanny. New York: Penguin, 2003, print.

Linguistics theory of code switching

Code switching is an interesting phenomenon that I’ve only recently discovered through this class. Code switching is a linguistics theory that people will change the way they speak depending on the context of the situation. Code switching is often used in the case of multiple languages or varieties, but I’ll be talking about code switching only through one language, but many dialects and syntaxes. Code switching for many people has become an acceptable and almost necessary part of life. It’s become acceptable and necessary part of life because it’s considered to be rude or impolite to mistreat people who are in a different position or context. For example, it is considered rude to treat a good friend as a police officer, or vise versa.

Now that I’ve thought about the concept and reflected on my own life, I realize that code switching has become a regular part of life for not only me, but also most of my friends. Code switching is something now that’s natural, instantaneous, and almost a necessity. Even though code switching can be easily overdone, which is clearly seen in the Key and Peele skit, code switching is easily executed in a more socially acceptable way. It’s become a part of daily life. You don’t act the same way around your friends like you would act around a police officer and you don’t act the same way around a police officer like you would act around your friends.

Code switching isn’t something easily taught however, it comes with age and experience, as are most things in life. The act of code switching, especially in my early adolescent years, felt awkward and forced. I had no idea what I was doing. I kept asking myself, “Is this what being an adult is all about?” Talking to my friends’ parents was frankly weird and uncomfortable, but that soon changed as I became older and ‘wiser’. Now, it’s natural and almost effortless, even though in rare situations it’s still incredibly awkward and almost painful. I have to assume that eventually I will master the art, but I may be a long way away from that.

Being from the gritty city of Baltimore, I instinctually knew that I had to have a different demeanor when dealing with strangers versus people I knew, but I think that comes instinctually with growing up in an age where kidnappings and child abductions are consistently covered by the media. I was supposed to be cold and unfriendly to strangers and warm and friendly to the people I knew already. Over time, my code switching categories broadened from just strangers to: teachers, adults, employers, parents, and girlfriends. It’s almost expected in today’s society to code-switch. It’s not socially acceptable to code switch in the way Key and Peele did in their skit, but to a much lesser degree.

It was interesting to see code switching among my peers as we grew up together. Some of my friends completely changed when they talked to members of the opposite sex, teachers, parents, or even to people they were trying to impress. Some of my friends never understood the concept and stayed the same no matter whom they were talking to. Finally, some had almost mastered the technique by the time they were twelve. There’s always the argument of whether or not to be ‘yourself’ no matter who you are around, and many of my friends were called out for changing their personality too much around certain people. I always disagree with that because why would you treat strangers and teachers the same way you would treat your friends? Why would you treat your parents the same way you would treat a police officer? It all comes down to the level of respect or casualty you treat people. Is code switching respectful or is code switching being insincere? That’s for you to decide.

Code switching is simple respect from my perspective. Why would you treat someone in a position of power over you in the casual situation that you would treat your friend in? It’s simple respect to treat someone in a position of power with more respect than you would a friend or even a family member. Code switching is also oddly enough considered insincere by many of my peers, but again I consider it to be much of the opposite. Code switching is often a representation of you that is changed to fit the context of the situation. So yes, it may be not an exact representation, but it surely isn’t a completely different or ‘fake’ representation of you. If overdone, code switching can be very faked and insincere, as shown by the Key and Peele skit, but in the general social context that we use code switching, nobody would completely fake himself or herself. Is code switching respectful? Yes. Is code switching insincere? It possibly is, but in most social situations, no.

Pressures of Pregnancy

In the movie Pillow Talk, pregnancy, as well as gender stereotypes and the emphasis on gender roles, are mentioned ad nauseam throughout the movie. Pregnancy plays a very large role in the plot of the movie as well. Pregnancy provides a lot of pressure to both our main characters, Jan and Brad, with the pressure on them to marry and start a life together, maybe initially they did not intent to be with each other, but getting married and starting a family was definitely a very important goal for the both of them. Maybe, without this pressure, both Jan and Brad would have never interacted other than over their party line, but fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you look at it, Jan and Brad do end up together in the end.

Very early on in the movie, pregnancy is mentioned to our main character, Jan Marrow, as a way to get a personal phone line to get away from the “sex-maniac” Brad, who she shares a party line with. Jan’s interaction with the phone company already creates a pressure to marry and start a family. The pressure Jan feels after this could have been a factor of why Jan falls for the fine gentleman that Rex seemed to be. Perhaps, without the pressure to start a family, Jan would have been more hesitant to continue dating a man she knows absolutely nothing more about other than the fact that he’s from Texas. Brad is also pressured early on in the movie to start a family by his old friend Jonathan, who ironically was the first to start chasing Jan before Brad’s whole charade with “Rex”. Jonathan tells Brad, after Brad made fun of him for being married so many times, that Brad should finally look to settle down while insinuating a lonely death for Brad at the same time. Perhaps Brad, without this pressure to get married, wouldn’t have sought after Jan and would have continued his life as a bachelor.

However, these pressures always illicit the conventional gender roles that were so prevalent during the 1950’s and 60’s, when the movie was filmed. Jan, even though she is a very successful home decorator, she is still pressured by society to have children and be the homemaker, when she could be potentially doing much more without children or married. She is pressured only caring about who she is in “love” with and it became a main concern for her, even having her drunken housemaid telling her to get married soon. Jan is very accomplished as an interior decorator, why would she suddenly want to give all that up just to have kids and be a homemaker? Brad, even though he clearly enjoys being a bachelor and enjoying his wealth, was pressured into becoming a dad, bringing home the ‘bacon’ and ‘growing up’ from chasing women on a day-to-day basis. If the gender roles of the movie were not so enforced, maybe Jan and Brad would have never met in person and started a relationship. Perhaps Jan would have become the best interior decorator of New York. Maybe Brad would have lived a happy life being a bachelor. However, we will never know.

Insincere or Respectful?

            Code switching is an interesting phenomenon that I’ve only recently discovered through this class. Now that I’ve thought about the concept and reflected on my own life, I realize that code switching has become a regular part of life for not only me, but also most of my friends. Code switching is something now that’s natural, instantaneous, and almost a necessity. Even though code switching can be easily overdone, which is clearly seen in the Key and Peele skit, code switching is easily executed in a more socially acceptable way. It’s become a part of daily life. You don’t act the same way around your friends like you would act around a police officer and you don’t act the same way around a police officer like you would act around your friends.

            Code switching isn’t something easily taught however, it comes with age and experience, as are most things in life. The act of code switching, especially in my early adolescent years, felt awkward and forced. I had no idea what I was doing. I kept asking myself, “Is this what being an adult is all about?” Talking to my friends’ parents was frankly weird and uncomfortable, but that soon changed as I became older and ‘wiser’. Now, it’s natural and almost effortless, even though in rare situations it’s still incredible awkward and almost painful. I have to assume that eventually I will master the art, but I may be a long way away from that.

            Being from the gritty city of Baltimore, I instinctually knew that I had to have a different demeanor when dealing with strangers versus people I knew, but I think that comes instinctually with growing up in an age where kidnappings and child abductions are consistently covered by the media. I was supposed to be cold and unfriendly to strangers and warm and friendly to the people I knew already. Over time, my code switching categories broadened from just strangers to: teachers, adults, employers, parents, and girlfriends. It’s almost expected in today’s society to code-switch. It’s not socially acceptable to code switch in the way Key and Peele did in their skit, but to a much lesser degree.

            It was interesting to see code switching among my peers as we grew up together. Some of my friends completely changed when they talked to members of the opposite sex, teachers, parents, or even to people they were trying to impress. Some of my friends never understood the concept and stayed the same no matter whom they were talking to. Finally, some had almost mastered the technique by the time they were twelve. There’s always the argument of whether or not to be ‘yourself’ no matter who you are around, and many of my friends were called out for changing their personality too much around certain people. I always disagree with that because why would you treat strangers and teachers the same way you would treat your friends? Why would you treat your parents the same way you would treat a police officer? It all comes down to the level of respect or casualty you treat people. Is code switching respectful or is code switching being insincere? That’s for you to decide.