Capitalism and Overcosumption

The visual piece above is a modified warning sign of crossing pedestrians. The alterations were made to be obese pedestrians. A cautionary color is used by the piece; implying that there is a cautionary tone embedded into its message. On the rectangular sign below the pedestrians is the cautionary message of "Childhood Obesity." A blue sky may imply the future, there are clouds implying the coming of conflict.

Perspective is composed in an interesting fashion. One looks up to the cautionary sign and looks up to the sky which may symbolically represent the future. This intentional placement of the image contrasts these two things as a merging reality; obesity is in the forecast. However, the sky is blue, which might imply that there is still some hope for obesity to be changed early on as a possible future towards something else. The obese pedestrians adopt a cultural universal since they may be applicable to any person since they are generic black silhouettes. The colors for the sky are cool to allow greater emphasis place on the warm yellow sign.

The message may fail for the following reasons. The written rhetoric conflicts with the visual rhetoric. The obese pedestrians are adults. Contrasting these two together creates a paradox in interpretation: is childhood obesity to be warned of, or rather are the obese adults the ones to be cautious of. Inconsistencies such as these interfere with the message intended. This may have been unintentional by the author, but the effect is critical.

 Possible audience for this visual image might be to parents. The composer wishes to question what values and decision making skills they might impart to their children. Certainly this is a cautionary sign that warns of the dangers children now face. A sorrowful reality that lies in the choices made by both the children and the decisions their parents set forth in an environment of processed foods and bombardment of advertisement directed at overconsumption of nutrients.

Locating and Using Sources

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/135/4/900.full.pdf+html

This journal article has the proper credentials from the University of Washington. The intended audience for this article is for experts in the field of nutrition. There is nutritional jargon embedded into the article. The article is able to convey its message thoroughly because it is very consistent and very specific on what is discussed. The article is centralized around the concept of economics and food prices as the basis for influencing obesity. The article appeals to logos and uses a very technical and numerical approach to support the claims found in the article.

Key points to note are the costs and their influence on American decision making and the link to obesity. The trend of convenience foods has rooted itself in American customs. Lowered prices have lead Americans to consume cheaper macronutrients and calorically dense foods. These trends have overtaken many American consumer habits. The low cost of the high energy dense foods is attractive in the lower households due to their affordability and their palatability over expensive nutrient rich foods.  The convenience of these foods also plays a factor in obesity. Money is emphasized by the article as one of the main factors driving obesity. Since money is so heavily tied to decision making; in terms of budgeting and in times of hardship. It is more logical to a person with low income to purchase a shelf stable product rather than fruit that may rot faster and lack the rich flavors food industries have to offer; this enhances the efficacy of obesity in America.The article also looks at the lawful implications that obesity has had a role to play in. The legal cases concern addiction caused by energy dense and nutrient dense foods; the food companies defended their case by stating that it was at the individual's liberty to not consume the products that lead them to overeating complexes.

Carnival Mirror

When you look, think, feel, and dream of something with hours on end, what do you see? Part of American culture lies within addiction, obsession of particular objects, people or random things. Depending on the severity of these particular things, they may either be minor or require legal sanctions.

There are particular addictions involving controlled substances that are demonized by society. The use of these drugs are definitely illegal, but the real question is why do we fall in these pit traps. Taking it from an anthropological standpoint we have to take a holistic view on the issue. Are there consequences for not giving in to the particular addiction? For example, are peers pressuring the individuals and pushing them down these stray paths? Do we seek out these dangers ourselves? Are personal reasons enough to justify these actions? Is our environment primarily to blame for these behaviors. Does upbringing affect the events leading up to this behavior?

Other behaviors are just as detrimental. Addictions to computers and the aspects associated with them. For example video games, there are people who neglect real life events. How did they come about to deciding on going on with the bare minimum in other aspects of life, but at the same time they are so passionate about the other drive in their life? Is that what addiction really is? A passion deemed taboo by society? A quasi-forbidden fruit we seek for diverse reasons. Is such a passion worthy of the negative criticism it receives? Subtly, society as a whole fractions off desirable and undesirable behaviors ultimately assigning stigmas to them.

What types of "passions" do you have? How did you come about to embrace or condemn your "passion"?