My name is Tim. I'm from Bethlehem, PA. I'm a sophomore/junior in finance. I am involved in nothing and I love it.

I have no pictures of myself except what other people take so this is from Halloween. By the way, I'm the cow, not the cop.

Paper 2

Now We’re Talking
“There are no raindrops on roses and girls in white dresses.” The world is not the happy place it should be. With endless metaphors and musical variety, Panic! at the Disco’s Build God, Then We’ll Talk is a critique of the changing social values of American society. Both the music and the lyrics are used to great effect in contrasting the past with the present.
The lyrics of Build God, Then We’ll Talk contain a narrative as well as an ethical commentary of the events described. These two distinct parts are shown structurally with the narrative serving as the verses and the commentary as the refrain and chorus. The narrative begins by describing an old and run-down motel and then centers around a girl who prostitutes herself to an attorney for a job. After that she prostitutes herself again to a constable to avoid arrest. The girl is not a whore by trade (her prostitution is literally described as “moonlighting”), instead she is “a virgin, accessorizing with a rosary” who “really needs the money” (Panic!). The girl is a metaphor for innocence succumbing to the evils of the world.
In between the verses describing her moral fall is the refrain: “what a wonderful caricature of intimacy” (Panic!). This line, repeated seven times throughout the song, casts moral judgment on the actions of the girl, the attorney, his wife (who stays with him despite his cheating), and the constable, who all cheapen the intimate nature of sex for personal gain and carnal pleasure.
This negative and judgmental view is continued in the chorus:
“There are no raindrops on roses and girls in white dresses
It's sleeping with roaches and taking best guesses
at the shade of the sheets and before all the stains
And a few more of your least favorite things.” (Panic!)
The chorus is a parody of My Favorite Things, a song from the musical “The Sound of Music”. In My Favorite Things, Maria (a nun), thinks about her favorite things to make herself feel better when she is upset. “Raindrops on roses and girls in white dresses” are two of the things she lists in the song. Panic!, in Build God, Then We’ll Talk, takes the same stance, but leading to a different outcome. Since Maria’s favorite things exist, she should be happy. In Panic!’s case, none of their favorite things exist. In saying that “there are no raindrops on roses and girls in white dresses” Panic! is saying that there is nothing to be happy about. The chorus as a whole is generalizing the specific situation described in the song to represent society as a whole. Society has lost its traditional values. This loss of values is also expressed metaphorically through the music of Build God, Then We’ll Talk.
With roots in “Indie rock”, Panic! utilizes the expected instruments: electric guitar, bass guitar, drums, cymbals and vocals. However, they also incorporate many instruments that are rarely featured in modern rock: the cello, accordion and piano, as well as many synthesized sounds. This eclectic array of instruments is used to great effect in the song. The song follows a complicated pattern varying between musical intensity and release, often rapidly changing back and forth for contrast.
The first verse of the song begins with a vocal solo, with only light accordion music in the background. The accordion was intentionally used by the band when writing the song for its whining timbre. In an interview with Christina Fuoco of Entertainment News, Brendon Urie (the lead singer of Panic!), explained:

Initially, it seems that the song will have patterns of musical release. The beat is steady, the vocals are hushed. This initial period of release is disrupted at the end of each line by heavy guitar chords and increased volume from the singer. As the verse continues, there is noticeable crescendo in the vocal portion and the percussion instruments join to play the beat, making the accordion almost unnoticeable. At the first refrain, the tempo doubles and the vocals expand in range but the song quickly returns to the quiet, slower tempo it began with for the second verse.
The first two lines of the second verse are even more hushed than the first verse, and lack the sharp, loud notes at the end of each line. However, the third line quickly shifts to a more intense tone. The tempo picks back up to twice what it started; the singer increases his volume; the cymbals pick up the faster beat. This is the most intense period of the song so far. This period of intensity continues through the second repetition of the first refrain, but is again lost at the onset of the third verse.
The third and final verse continues the overall pattern of the song. Though it is less intense than the refrain preceding it, it is more intense than any of the other verses. The volume has dropped, though not as significantly as before. The third verse also retains the faster tempo. The third verse shares the use of starting softly and then building up with crescendo and accelerando. While this happens in each of the verses individually, it is also the overall style of the song, with the decreases in intensity not equally the increases that came before them. The conclusion to this song-long crescendo comes in the chorus.
The chorus begins with a booming drum and fireworks (the sound) in the background. From here on out the tone of the song is completely different. This mirrors the end of the narrative and begins the reflection upon it and society as a whole. The intensity of the chorus is much higher. For the first line of the chorus, the entire band sings a note a scale above the rest of the song, setting up for the vocal changes to come of the main singer. For the first time in the song, the increased volume is maintained for an entire stanza. Further, the faster tempo and wordiness of the chorus gives the vocals an affrettando feel. The guitar and drums also return to the forefront for the chorus. The sleazy sounding accordion is gone, and every part of the chorus has more energy. Needless to say, the chorus is the most intense part of the song.
The bridge between the repetitions of the chorus is an instrumental solo. This solo introduces the cello to the song, and it plays the tune of the chorus in its own classical timbre. The cello, as opposed to every other instrument so far in the song, follows the same melody that the singer did in the chorus. The melody is an odd mirror of that of My Favorite Things (PATD). The change in notes is similar, but descending in pitch in Build God, Then We’ll Talk, instead of increasing in pitch as in My Favorite Things. The cello adds a classical feel, and, when contrasted with the chorus that precedes and follows it, parallels the societal loss of traditional values.
After the bridge, the chorus is repeated twice. These two repetitions are identical to the first two, except that the cello continues to play the melody. In the final repetition, however, the word “the” is added several times to the lyrics. This increases the affrettando tempo of the vocals, for one last burst of intensity to end the song.
The increased intensity of the chorus drastically changes the meaning of the song. With the chorus, the song seems to be looking down at society for its loss of traditional values. The accordion gives the song a “sleazy” sound. Every instance of musical release is shattered by intensity, paralleling the transition from the traditional and good to the modern and dirty. The chorus, however sad its literal message may be, is musically uplifting. This transforms the song. Instead of a funeral for the past, it is more analogous to an Irish wake. Instead of somber mourning, the loss of something cherished is remembered and celebrated.
With an effective blend of narrative, satire, sarcasm and musical metaphor, Panic! utilizes every rhetorical device available to them. The song paints a picture of moral decay and instructs the listener on how to feel about it. Instead of pity, the lyrics urge the listener to despise the stories characters. The music integrates with the lyrics to highlight a shift from the pure and innocent to the dirty and shameful through the interplay of musical release and musical intensity. The undeniable intensity of Build God, Then We’ll Talk is used to convince the listener to acknowledge a bad situation, but not to mope about it.

Outline 2

Outline 1

A. Introduction:
a. Attention Getter: How many of you plan to vote in the upcoming election?
i. How many of you plan to vote for Hillary Clinton?
b. As you all know, Hillary Clinton is attempting to become the next President of the United States.
c. On January 7th, Senator Clinton spoke to several undecided voters in a coffee shop in New Hampshire.
d. The event has become widely publicized, not for what Clinton said, but for how she said it.
i. Referring to running for President of the United States, Marianne Young asked Clinton "how do you do it? How do you, how do you keep upbeat and so wonderful?"
ii. Clinton responded with a nearly standard political line: it’s hard but she wants to make America a better place…
iii. What was unique about this sound bite is that Hillary looked like she was going to cry the entire time. She sniffled, her voice trembled.
e. While not the over the top crying episode the media would lead many to believe, the truth is that:
f. Thesis: Hillary Clinton crafted a speech perfect for the moment, perfect in addressing the situation and audience, yet mindful of constraints.
B. Transition: With her careful delivery, Hillary Clinton helped to craft her public image and propel herself towards the presidency.
C. Exigence:
a. Clinton had an established public image because of her husband’s presidency as well as her own stint as a New York Senator.
i. She was seen as smart but calculating.
ii. Voters were saying that they just plain did not like Hillary Clinton as a person (Anne Kornblut, Washington Post). People generally viewed her as impersonal and artificial, and her own campaign said they wanted to humanize her.
b. Going into this speech, Clinton’s chances of winning the New Hampshire democratic primary looking grim.
i. Obama had just won the Iowa caucus.
ii. According to the New York Times, Obama was leading the polls in New Hampshire, and especially devastating to Hillary, the women’s vote.
c. Things did not look good for Hillary’s campaign.
i. If she did not turn things around, she would lose the first three states of the democratic primary process and leave Obama with the momentum to cruise to the ballot.
d. The tear-filled delivery that Clinton gave solved this problem.
i. Her “genuine human” moment came just in time.
ii. In the New Hampshire primary a day later, Hillary won over Barack Obama, due largely to her landslide victory with women.
D. Constraints:
a. Hillary Clinton’s main constraint when speaking to a group of people is balance.
i. As a politician she constantly tries to play both sides.
ii. Everything she says to win over a group of voters pushes other voters away.
1. An example of this is her stance on the war. Being a democrat, she has joined the anti-war side during election times, but has voted strongly to support Bush’s hard-line policies.
iii. Because of this, Clinton must try to walk a fine line, carefully choosing each action in an attempt to please the greatest number of people.
b. Hillary also had to balance her attempt to humanize herself in the eyes of the public while maintaining a strong image.
i. A strong image is necessary when you are running for president, especially for Hillary in her attempt to be the first female American President.
ii. She may have gotten a little teary, but if she had started bawling it would have been political suicide.
E. Transition: Although many people would view the crying episode as an extreme ploy, it worked perfectly for Hillary because of her audience.
F. Audience:
a. The immediate audience of the speech was the sixteen people at the coffee shop in New Hampshire.
b. Really though, Hillary was performing not for the few people attending, but for the millions who would see her on television.
c. Her speech was targeted at the national television audience, but specifically at the people of New Hampshire because of the upcoming primary.
d. Even more specifically, her audience was women.
i. Most of the sixteen people attending the speech were older women voters.
ii. The emotional appeal was specifically targeted towards women.
1. ABC New reports that several of the women in attendance who previously had been leaning towards Obama shifted to voting to Clinton after this speech.
e. The impact of the teary-eyed speech was that Clinton won the New Hampshire primary and the female vote.
G. Conclusion:
a. With a near-crying delivery of her speech, Hillary Clinton perfectly addressed the situation and audience while being respectful of her constraints.
b. In the eyes of many, Hillary Clinton changed herself from a machine to a person.
c. She turned what seemed to be an inevitable loss to Barack Obama in the New Hampshire primary into her first victory of the race.

References:

Dowd, Maureen. "Can Hillary Cry Her Way Back to the White House?" The New York Times 9 Jan. 2008.
Kornblut, Anne E. "An Emotional Clinton Reflects on How She Does It." The Washington Post 7 Jan. 2008. 8 Feb. 2008 <http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/07/an_emotional_clinton_reflects.html?hpid=topnews>.
Snow, Kate. "Clinton Gets Emotional on Campaign Trail." ABC News 7 Jan. 2008. 8 Feb. 2008 <http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/01/clinton-gets-em.html>.

comments:

Caitlin Leahy: You had a good conversational attitude and subtle transitions which worked well in your speech. You had a good knowledge of your topic and you had good eye contact. However, I woudl try varying the rate and inflection to emphasize the important points more. I felt like your ending was a little abrupt...I wasn't really expecting it. But other than that good job!

Whitney Trompeter: I'm not sure if I would automatically come off as pro-Hillary because you could lose some of your audience coming off so strongly bias. However, the rest of your speech wasn't like that, which was good. I thought you speech was interesting. I really liked the twist you put on what a woman presidential candidate can and connot get away with in the media. It actually made me think because she is only considered inhuman because she is a woman, but she tears and people are like yay, she tears like women do or they are like she cried and she's weak like a women...so yeah on the whole, good speech and it made me think.

Michael McKenna: You provided plenty of references that you researched for your speech. The transitions were very subtle, yet they were there. You kept a very nice pace as well--not too fast, and not too slow. Go Obama!!!

Jess Mannion- You took a risk by showing your bias towards Hilary Clinton in the beginning of your speech, but it was executed in a way that made most everyone want to hear what you had to say. You seemed really familiar with the topic and references which gave your speech good credibility too! Just work on consistent projection, most of the time you had good projection, but there were a few times when it wasn't as strong. Overall though good job!!

David Oh: You were very casual and loud enough for everyone to hear you clearly. Your speech was very well structured and your basic introduction of Hillary was informative. You had a very interesting speech also. Great Job

Laura O'Neal: Tim, you seemed really relaxed and confident throughout your speech. I wasn't expecting this topic, but I think that really made your speech more interesting and easy to pay attention to. You seemed well-researched and had some really good observations. Overall, your speech was really good. The only thing I noticed was that you didn't have a decisive closing statement, but besides that, good job!

John Galvin: Tim this was a great speech. You are clearly well informed on current events which did wonders for your credibility. Your speech was full of interesting facts, and easily kept the attention of the audience. I can tell you practiced a lot because this came out really well.

Siama Manzoor: Tim, good job with the speaking and eye contact. You had good background information and seem very knowledgeable about your topic. I thought you talked a little much about Hillary though, rather than her speech. Also, I didn't always notice when you were transitioning. Overall, good job and thanks for educating me!

Enrique Ortiz: I thought your topic, speech, and outline were terrific! (I am a Hillary Supporter) Also, your attention getter was great for the audience at hand, maybe not so much for Hillary, but excellent overall. I thought your eye contact was consistent/effective, and that your tone while delivering the speech was appropriate. As far as talking about Clinton, I thought that the speech you used needed a significant amount of background information to place Hillary’s remarks into context, and you allocated the sufficient amount of time to the subject. As far as the next speech goes, I think you should continue to do what you have been doing, but try to dress a little bit more formal to add that feeling of politico! Also, since the speech will have been introduced to the class, you should jump straight into the content of the speech.

Scot Brown: First off, I would strongly suggest against ever asking a public forum who they plan to vote for, unless they have already indicated they are comfortable with voicing that. But some people aren't, and asking people to declare who they are going to vote for in public could lose you audience support. Also, you indicate that Hillary used this in an attempt to humanize herself. But you also indicate that she had planned this whole thing out. Which would make it not spontaneous or humane at all, and in fact quite the opposite. It would a cruel manipulation of emotions. I do not doubt Hillary's sincerity or your's, but these two threads were never reconciled in your speech.

Comments Speech 2:

Michael McKenna: You had a very interesting viewpoint in your speech. Also you provided strong evidence to the points you made. The pace was good as well. Your use of the visual aid really helps your claims that you make, good use of that.

Liza McKenna: Your attention getter was good and your presentation was pretty conversational. You did say um a few tmes but you set up your visual video clips really well.

Joe Belack - You intro and attention getter were both real solid. Your use of humor and confidence played well with your topic of choice. Your closing was also very good. Overall I thought your speech was a really good one.

Scot Brown: Good use of visual aid, and nice touch addressing the issue of Hillary's genuiness.

 Create your own educational wiki!HelpPublic, not yet premium Privacy Policy RSS