Visual Rhetoric

Buczynski, Beth. "Is Meat The World's Most Inefficient Food?" Is Meat The World's Most Inefficient Food? Care2, 12 July 2012. Web. 18 Mar. 2015. <http://www.care2.com/causes/is-meat-the-worlds-most-inefficient-food.html>.

The article and infographic are not extremely in depth, but cover the basics of several downsides to the production of meat. The article covers the meat industry’s effects on global warming, and inefficient land and water usage. The publisher of the article seems fairly left wing, having other tabs relating to women’s rights, LGBT rights and animal rights. From this it can be inferred that the audience will also be mostly liberal. Since the author and readers will for the most part be liberal, there is a lack of opposition which is going to lend itself to a clear liberal bias. Despite this bias, their argument is factual, compelling, and provides seemingly reputable sources. The source as a whole is making an argument similar to the one I will be making, but to an older and more liberal audience than I want to approach.

"Is Meat Sustainable?" Is Meat Sustainable? Worldwatch Institute, July-Aug. 2004. Web. 18 Mar. 2015. <http://www.worldwatch.org/node/549>.

This article, much more in depth than the previous one, is geared toward people, likely in or beyond college, that are already familiar with the issues being discussed. The article has in depth discussion of water waste, land usage, effects on global warming, deforestation as well as lifestyle improvements that come with switching away from a meat based diet, all of which are relevant to my argument. The article was originally published in Worldwatch Magazine, readers/subscribers of which are likely already informed on environmental issues having to do with sustainable food and so the article was written with such an audience in mind. The writer is clearly in favor of weaning the population off of meat in favor of more efficient food stuffs and argues their point effectively in a clear and detailed manner.

"U.S. Could Feed 800 Million People with Grain That Livestock Eat, Cornell Ecologist Advises Animal Scientists | Cornell Chronicle." U.S. Could Feed 800 Million People with Grain That Livestock Eat, Cornell Ecologist Advises Animal Scientists | Cornell Chronicle. Cornell Chronicle, 7 Aug. 1997. Web. 18 Mar. 2015. <http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/us-could-feed-800-million-people-grain-livestock-eat>.

This source focuses on the amount of grain wasted feeding livestock and posits that such an abundant amount of grain would be better used to feed people. The main argument is that the US currently grows enough food to end world hunger, but instead of doing so uses said food to feed livestock. There is a focus on comparative ratios between meat based and vegetarian diets that illustrate that vegetarianism is clearly more efficient. The article is written for a college publication and so is likely intended to be read by college students and others involved in collegiate academia. The article is older, from the late 90s, so the numbers are likely not up to date, but the essence of the argument should have held true and so yields valuable insight to be used for my final project.

Shah, Anup. “Beef.” Global Issues. 22 Aug. 2010. Web. 18 Mar. 2015. <http://www.globalissues.org/article/240/beef>.

This article is published on a website that focuses on global issues and is written toward an international audience seeking a global perspective. The source gives a number of statistics up front to contextualize the rest of the article. It then proceeds to curate a number of quotes from a variety of sources in order to give the reader a well-rounded view of the issue. While the sources are from a variety of publications, they all seem to be in favor of a lessened use of meat. The author is giving a less biased account that other articles of the same vein, confronting issues regarding positive outcomes from the meat industry including jobs creation, an important issue to much of America. This article will aid my efforts to reveal and confront opposing views in my final project.

Tina. "Global Hunger: The More Meat We Eat, the Fewer People We Can Feed." Global Hunger: The More Meat We Eat, the Fewer People We Can Feed | Earthoria. Earthoria, 25 Mar. 2008. Web. 18 Mar. 2015. <http://www.earthoria.com/global-hunger-the-more-meat-we-eat-the-fewer-people-we-can-feed.html>.

This article focuses on the idea mentioned in a previous source that the US grows enough food to end world hunger, but continues to not do so. The source has a brief and not-very-detailed overview of the statistics proving the vastly superior efficiency of vegetarian diets when compared to their meat based counterparts. The main relevance of the article to my final project is that is directly claims that the United States is capable of ending world hunger, introducing one of the most highly charged ethical dilemmas of my project- all other arguments aside, should not we stop eating meat just to save the hundreds of millions of hungry citizens of the world from dying of starvation?

    So, is Warhol's work a parody of Harvey's? Can parody be high art? Is replication allowed? Allowed? Who's even making the rules? Are there rules? If Warhol can just copy something that was already designed and produced and call it art, cannot anyone be an artist?

    Warhol's work does not parody Harvey's because it is not creating a commentary on the design, but rather is commenting on American consumer culture, and so in some ways is instead a parody of capitalism. High art is a myth created by the upper class and perpetuated by anyone whose livelihood depends on it. Replication is allowed. Everything is allowed. There are no rules. Anyone can be an artist.

    The idea of certain people being artistic geniuses goes against the idea of art as a subjective form, and art is a subjective form. Some people are more technically skilled and better suited to certain mediums, but anyone that creates with the intent to make art (and a fair number that create without any such intent) is an artist. The world as a set of cultures should not strive to keep the elite on their thrones as the best of the art world, but instead work toward everyone creating. Read-write culture is more possible than ever thanks to the Internet and should be encouraged and utilized. The more that is made, the more likely something that any random individual will like or has been searching for or can be touched by exists. So let's create a culture that allows every possible iteration of an idea exist ten times over and then some.

"Aesthetics: Arthur Danto." Warhol: Collaboration: Arthur Danto, Brillo Boxes and the End of Art. The Andy Warhol Museum, n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2015. <http://www.warhol.org/education/resourceslessons/Aesthetics--Arthur-Danto/>.

Andy Warhol, Brillo Boxes, 1964, Installation at The Andy Warhol Museum. Digital image. Warhol:. The Andy Warhol Museum, n.d. Web. <http://www.warhol.org/uploadedImages/Warhol_Site/Warhol/Content/Education/resourceslessons/New_Other_Professionals_and_Features/08232012_EDU_op_%20brillo%20boxes%20installation%20cropped_main.jpg>.