GenZ Interviews

The era of GenZ has risen and thousands of young adults have already casted their votes. The 2020 election determines the future for America. Let’s take a look at some GenZ member’s responses…

1.How do you feel about the upcoming election?

2.As GenZ do you feel obligated to vote?

3.How is this presidential election different from the previous?

 

Liliana,18

1. “I personally believe this election will be one that we’ll never forget. I feel it is important to vote during this upcoming election because we are putting our trust into the president we believe can lead the country forward”. 
2. “I feel obligated to vote because there are several issues that Donald Trump hasn’t properly addressed. I believe Joe Biden has a big heart and cares for the people. He advocates for diversity, empathy, and most importantly respect”.  
3. “This presidential election is different from the previous because the current President has displayed poor leadership skills and he is not capable of running a country”.

Danny, 19

1. “There are no words to describe this upcoming election. Our faith is in the hands of us.I personally don’t like Donald Trump’s procedures for running a country”. 
2. “Being GenZ it is my duty to vote. Think about it. We live here. We call this place home. Furthermore, it represents our voices being heard. So why not do it? Donald Trump has clearly shown he doesn’t care about the people. For example, he doesn’t support The Black Live Matters movement, as he stated it was more of a hate crime than a protest”. 
3. “This presidential election is different from the previous because we need a leader that will think about the people and their needs especially because of the pandemic. We need a leader that will bring our country back together”.

Katrina,20 

1. “I personally feel that this election will be in the history textbooks years from now. I do feel nervous about the numbers”. 
2. “I voted because we have gone through so much, yet we never had a shoulder to lean on. The president chooses to ignore the cries of the American people”. 
3. “This presidential election can be seen as different from the rest because it’s an election that a lot of people will take part in, especially GenZ, because we are the new and upcoming generation who will impact the future. It’s our job to choose the right candidate for America in order for stability to exist within the political and social system of the United States. Right now many of us already made up our minds, Trump isn’t capable of handling a country. We have already seen the effects of him being president for the last four years, he hasn’t accomplished much”. 

After reading and analyzing the articles provided, each article shares a common theme. That theme is the building blocks of how GenZers views the world, their perspectives, observations, and how it intertwines in politics. The first concept that stood out to me was that members of GenZ and Millennials share similar political preferences. For example, according to the Pew Research Center “61% of Gen Z voters (ages 18 to 23) said they were definitely or probably going to vote for the Democratic candidate for president in the 2020 election while Millennial voters…plan to support a Democrat in November than Trump (58% vs. 25%).” I found this concept interesting because I thought Millennials would have different perspectives since they‘re from an older generation compared to the younger generation. Especially because many young voters are discouraged by the public. Another concept that stood out to me was that GenZers are much less likely than previous voters to think the Black Lives Matter protests are too violent. The last concept I found intriguing was Catie’s comment in Kate Bubacz’s article, “I think young people don’t vote because they are constantly being told that their opinions are wrong or that they don’t matter and that older people know better than us.” I totally agree with Catie’s statement because older generations seem to believe their opinion overthrow the younger generation’s opinion and claim they know better.
In addition, these articles prove as a guide to my own sense of who I am and peers because as being part of GenZ, I personally agree with all the controversial topics discussed. For example, “A Pew Research Center survey conducted in January of this year found that about a quarter of registered voters ages 18 to 23 (22%) approved of how Donald Trump is handling his job as president, while about three-quarters disapproved (77%).” I agree with this statement because it is clear that the majority of this generation won’t vote for Donald Trump. If I was interviewed for this article, I wouldn’t add anything because I felt like it captured the essence of GenZers successfully with data.

   A) Laura Bolin Carol’s article “Backpacks v. Briefcases: Steps Toward Rhetorical Analysis” guides and teaches readers about the process of rhetorical analyzing. She examines several claims on how to interpret a rhetorician’s speech. The first thing I learned was the rhetorical triangle which is a method that outlines three important elements of rhetoric, that can persuade the audience. Examples of rhetoric appeals include pathos, logos, and ethos. Pathos appeals to emotions, ethos addresses credibility, and logos establish statistics and evidence. It allows us to understand how the rhetoric functions within the context. The second thing I examined was how rhetoric is incorporated with writing and media. Media persuades us to make decisions, think, buy, and have an effect on the way we perceive things. Overall, media is one of the reasons why learning rhetorical analysis is so essential. The last thing I learned was how to implement rhetorical analysis in our own writing which can make our arguments stronger. It allows us to create questions in order for a deeper analysis. For example, “Does the rhetoric address the problem it claims to address? Is the rhetoric targeted at an audience who has the power to make change? Are the appeals appropriate to the audience? Does the rhetorician give enough information to make an informed decision?” These questions give an insight on how to make your analysis clearer.

B) One important quotation taken from the article, “rhetorical discourse is usually responding to some kind of problem. You can begin to understand a piece’s exigence by asking, “What is this rhetoric responding to?” “What might have happened to make the rhetor (the person who creates the rhetoric) respond in this way?” These questions allow us to expand our knowledge on a topic to take a deeper stand on a subject.

C)After reading this article, it will definitely  affect my essay because I’ll be reviewing my essay and making sure I follow the proper format of analyzing rhetorical analysis successfully.

One post that caught my mind was the fact that October 1st was national China’s day and that’s the same day when Trump tested positive for the coronavirus.  Is that not a coincidence because he refers to COVID-19 as the “Chinese virus”?  I found that pretty  intriguing.

    Orwell’s thesis’ argues the effect that politics has on the degradation of the English language. He further believes outdated jargon should be neglected, as he calls for original and critical thought that emerges from claiming power in language specifically in political expression. He challenges the notion that there is little possibility of avoiding the intellectually corrosive effects of political expression, nor the lies produced for political purposes by highly abstract language. Orwell identifies a type of indoctrination that arises when individuals in political speech use common turns of phrase. People pantomime a group line rather than thought critically. One of his key points is that repetitions arise from unoriginal thought that thus contributes to repetitions. One quote I found intriguing was “A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language”. This analogy encompasses the concept that Orwell believes the language becomes unattractive and inaccurate as it withdraws the deeper meaning and quality of one’s personal thoughts. Orwell also focuses on medicine to cure the English language, by first fixing the political process. One category of language that Orwell disapproves of is “Never use a foreign phase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent”. Examples of this type of language are very common nowadays. Many strategic writers tend to lean towards words that sound more sophisticated to make their work sound more advanced and appealing to readers. However, you don’t want to further complicate explanations, it’s better the reader understands and acknowledges your individual or personal ideas. Generally, my writing does exhibit this language use. Nevertheless, I do tend to steer towards a more direct and communicable way that is effective and understandable. I do find his critique to be valid because I’ve read so many essays where my peers utilize strong vocabulary to make their work sound more effective but it ends up becoming more insufficient and unable to comprehend. Furthermore, language use and politics intersects for me in some form or another. The most significant thing in the lives of all beings is language. We use language to articulate inner thoughts and feelings, to make sense of complex and abstract thinking, to learn to connect with others, to satisfy our wishes and needs, and to create rules and to conserve our culture. 

         Both essays “Shitty First Drafts” by Anne Lamott and “Rethinking the Shitty First Draft” by George Dila shed light on the topic of writing first drafts. While “Rethinking Shitty First Drafts” contradicts “Shitty First Draft”, each author both establishes their own perspective on the process it takes to obtain an exceptional essay. The basis of Anne’s essay “Shitty First Drafts”, initiates and informs the audience the method she utilizes for her writings. She encourages and inspires other writers that it is adequate to begin writing “shitty” drafts one after the other in order to reach the expectations and standards of establishing a writing piece. Anne states “For me and most of the other writers I know, writing is not rapturous. In fact, the only way I can get anything written at all is to write really, really shitty first drafts. The first draft is the child’s draft, where you let it all pour out and then let it romp all over the place, knowing that no one is going to see it and that you can shape it later” (Lamott, lines 4-6).  Lamott suggests that a shitty first draft is the key to a kick off. She describes her experience when  writing restaurant reviews for California magazine.Writing horrible drafts enabled her to see a change in her writings.In “Rethinking the Shitty First Draft”, I for one agree with George’s point of view and arguments he provides to support his claim. George Dila states “ He begins pouring cement for the foundation, it is uneven and the cement is somewhat watery, but he can’t stop to fix it. He begins hammering the walls up. They are cockeyed, and a bit shaky, but no problem, he can fix them later… Oops. Forgot the electrical wiring…You get the idea. The builder would end up with a pretty shitty house; so shitty it would probably be easier to tear it down and start over, maybe a little more carefully the next time” (Dila, paragraph 12-13)The analogy that George utilizes helps support his claim and makes his argument stronger. It is important to keep moving forward and leave nothing vital out. Leaving something out or forgetting a main idea or evidence  can throw your writing off in a way that will result in having to do double the work. My writing process is more like George’s writing process than Anne’s writing process. I believe starting from a “shitty” format will lead to the downfall of his/her essay. Growing up I have always begun my writing in a way that kept me intrigued and wanting to keep reading. Placing pressure and negative energy on myself would rather discourage me. Rather, one should have a clear focus and great opening that will aspire the author to expressing their creativity through affection rather than writing “shit”.    

In the autobiography “Born a Crime” in chapter 4, “Chameleon”,  Trevor Noah establishes the foundation of his childhood through race, identity, and discrimination. As a young child, Trevor struggled to fit into society especially because of the color of his skin. His parents were from two different worlds, his mother was black and his father was white. During this time, interacial marriages in South Africa under apartheid were illegal. Trevor Noah, being labeled under both races had a huge impact on his life.  His physical attributes determined how he associated with others around him. His childhood gradually taught him that everyone is alike. However, the color and languages we speak, places us in different categories. His perceptions and experiences about racism can reflect on how we view different ethnic groups in America. Today, children whose parents are interracial have become a more prevalent part of society that people need to accept. Children who encounter similar experiences like Trevor Noah, should be able to recognize and embrace their identity without society’s discriminating actions weighing them down.  I think the metaphor he utilized to describe himself and his parents was important. He says “Dad was white chocolate, mom was dark chocolate, and I was milk chocolate.”But we were all just chocolate”. This quote striked me because at the end of the day we are all humans and the color of our skins shouldn’t define our status. The word “Chameleon”, he uses is significant throughout the chapter. Chameleons are a group of lizards that are able to adapt to their surroundings and change color. Likewise, Trevor is able to adjust to both sides. He recalls a memory when he was operating his cousin’s ear and accidentally perforated her eardrum. His grandmother found out and beat everyone except for him. She stated, “Because I don’t know how to hit a white child”(Grandma,52). She knew if you hit a black child, he will remain black but if she hits a white child they will have different colors and she didn’t want to hurt him. As a result, Trevor had perks of being “white”. However,Trevor felt alone. He says, “There were no other mixed kids around so that I could say, oh, this happened to us”(Noah,53).  I found the text, “Born a Crime” interesting especially because I read and analyzed different sections of his book in high school. In addition, coming from an Indian background, society perceives Indians differently than they would perceive a white person. After 9/11, innocent Indians were detained by the government and put into jail because they resembled those who were part of the attack. Their skin color, being “brown” not only affected Muslims but Hindus, Buddhists, and Sikhs.Indians were labeled as “terrorists”.