Questions for a Second Reading on Bordo October 25, 2006

1. Susan Bordo has an agenda. She goes into explicit detail about some of the text, whereas other areas serve as being “just a tease.” A lot of this is shown in her placement of the pictures in the text. This is a way for her to sort of “control the pleasure” of the reader. Bordo will go into great description on how Fashion icons like Calvin Klein explore sexuality in clothing (jeans, in particular) and how Berger says that “men act and women appear” (p. 190). Then, however, she’ll throw a picture of a half-naked to 3/4-naked man and throw the reader for a loop. Here Bordo is, going into great detail about her opinions and analysing our culture and its view of men’s sexuality. The reader understands what she is talking about and follows her points of view, but is still surprised when an actual image of what she is talking about pops up. Perhaps this is the whole point at which Bordo is trying to get: that our culture still is not ready to make men as vulnerable in ads as they are for women. In this way, the layout of her text helps to further define her argument. Also, Bordo goes more into detail about examples of occurrences of ads and description of the male body than she does about the philosophy or psychology is why the examples are as they are. This is perhaps to prove to the reader that we are more interested in seeing things than knowing why they happen. She understands people’s attention spans.

2. Bordo uses subsections in her text in order to keep the reader interested. She tries to intrigue the women and gay male readers by first displaying the “well-endowed” Calvin Klein model. Bordo explains how men are becoming sex objects in advertising more and more, like women have been for the past decades. Next, she goes on to explain how more and more male nudity in advertising has made men appear more vulnerable. These ads approach a subject where no one before had dared to suggest. She then goes on to explain how Calvin Klein discovered ways to accentuate the men’s frontal and backsides with his jeans. After that, Bordo explains the poses of front-facing and leaning, and what the body language implies about the men’s attitudes. Her last three bold-faced sections explain how men have continued to grasp the fashion world and become more accepted in it. Bordo expresses her thoughts on the matter by stating, “I, however, tend to see consumer capitalism rather than women’s expectations or proclivities as the true motor driving male concern with appearance” (p. 209). All of these subsections help to set the pace for Bordo’s text. The beginning ones mention the details of the male body, how women and gay men appreciate them, and how they are becoming more and more acceptably placed into the ads of society. These are the loudest subsections, because Bordo puts everything and all of her opinions on men, what she thinks is sexy, etc. in a somewhat blatant way. In the later subsections, once she has grasped the readers’ attentions with this somewhat still “hush-hush” topic, Bordo goes on to explain how society has in fact molded our opinions and how men have struggles overcoming obstacles such as the stereotypical macho male and the anti-narcissist. These ending subsections are a bit slower than the first ones, because they are not quite as descriptive and “raunchy” per say; rather, they express the changing society in the world we are living in, and how we adapt to them.

3. Bordo addresses how people react to certain subject positions. She explores the face, the lean, where the head is placed, what the subject is doing, and which body parts are accentuated. Bordo explains that the face is supposed to be used to present macho men and intimidation. The lean, on the other hand, usually shows casualness and is often found with younger men who are laid-back. Bordo explains society’s opinion on men by exploring the meaning behind the placement of the head. When the men are facing the camera, it shows that they are more vain and want to watch people’s reactions to their bodys. Bordo explains, however, that society often teaches us that it is more manly for a male to look away from the camera instead of at it. This expresses that the men is comfortable with himself and that he does not need positive reactions from girls to prove this to himself. An example of a man looking away is found in the Nautica advertisement, on page 191. The man is working on a boat, a masculine activity, and does not have time to worry about his looks. Society has taught us that this is what it means to be a man. The Calvin Klein ad poses an interesting topic. The man is leaning in the picture somewhat and has rather effeminate features. The reactions from Bordo, her female, companions, and gay men, however, have taught us that the picture can still arouse people. Bordo writes, “His body isn’t a stand-in phallus; rather, he has a penis-the real thing, not a symbol, and a fairly breathtaking one, clearly outlined through the soft jersey fabric of the briefs” (p. 170). Though he is not a Superman figure, the bulge in his briefs and his body stance presents sex and movement. Here, therefore, the lean is used as a sexy body placement, rather than one for younger boys. Bordo does well at explaining how certain stances cause different reactions from their audiences. She does not do as well with explaining society’s opinions though, much because I am given the impression that she has yet to decide for herself what is truly sexy for men. For example, at the end of her writing, she explains that she finds Clint Eastwood’s chest sexy, even though he is older and not very muscular. This is because he is a real man, and, to her, that is sexy in itself. She explains how it is not considered manly by society to be Narcissistic, but she also notices that these viewpoints have changed over time. John Travolta’s character in Saturday Night Fever, for example, is eg0-centered, yet still looks good and still contains that quality sex appeal. It is not Bordo’s fault that she cannot outline a definite view of what is sexy in a man from society, because that view is constantly changing with our culture.

Advertisements October 11, 2006

Each of the two advertisements dealing with Kotex feminine napkins which we explored in class has a different sales technique. The first ad, the one with the almost-cartoon strip, appeals to its audience that the thing which they are selling is etiquette advice. The consumers should choose Kotex for their brand because it is simply the proper thing to do. Kotex is sensible. It is just the best, and there is no other way to put it. In the second advertisement, the one which uses Cybil Shepherd as its spokeswoman, Kotex uses a different sales appeal. Instead of simply having cartoon drawings sell the product, this advertisement focuses on Cybil Shepherd, a famous face in the 1970’s. The technique here is similar to the one used in the first ad, because, in both circumstances, the “masterminds behind it all” try to entice the consumer by expressing that buying Kotex napkins is simply the right thing to do. Everyone is doing it. The one in the 1970’s simply goes a bit further by using a famous starlet to sell the product. They hope that the results from women will be, “Oh! Cybil Shepherd uses Kotex? Then I have to, as well!” Though similar in this mass-appeal regard, the advertisements’ techniques are different. Much of this is because they come from different eras. The 1940’s and the 1950’s, the time period in which the first advertisement came out, focused a lot on proper decorum for women. The cartoon strip is none other than a Miss Manners guide for the proper thing to do in all situations (in this case: wearing Kotex!). It appeals to the typical woman of the time, who was stereotypically a housewife who took pride in her husband, cooking, and appearance. The time period revolved around being proper and polite. Explicitly the ad appears to be a guide on what to do in what situation. Also, it is a somewhat practical ad in the sense that it lists the sizes in which the pads come, and it gives a statistic about how Kotex is the leading brand. Implicitly, however, it is just a method of propaganda, telling women to wear Kotex. The 1970’s ad with Cybil Shepherd also appeals to the women of it’s time, in the ’70’s. By this time, women were more liberated from the typical housewife role. They were not as expected to be proper in all situations, and they were more open to ideas of being themselves. The ad affective embraces this by trying to appeal to all sorts of women in the ’70’s, rather than one type, as the other ad does. It appeals to women who are “questions, answers, and beautiful stor[ies],” but it implicitly implies that all sorts of women, no matter who they are, should use Kotex. Unlike the other advertisement, this one does not give any sort of statistic for why women should use Kotex. This shows that, over time, the advertisers have found ways to draw in their audience and almost “trick them” into buying things, without giving out any factual information about the product. The Cybil Shepherd one relates some to the other ad, as well, because it mentions the release of a feminine deodorant; therefore, in the ’70’s, advertisers were still somewhat concerned with appealing to the female beauty and decorum. Both of these ads, therefore, take us into the historical context of the time period, which explains why which advertising mechanism worked best when.

Different Budweiser advertisements show a similar pattern of changing its way of appeal over time. The comparisons I have found certainly prove Douglass’ warnings to be true, since there is a definite change in advertising methods over the years. Thanks to adflip.com for the following images.
This ad is from the ’40’s. It does not portray Budweiser as simply a good tasting beer. Rather, it goes on further to explain how Budweiser supported our forefathers at war; therefore, it is a patriotic, traditional, “homey” beer. This appealed to the people’s values during the ’40’s, because it was around the time of World War II. The Budweiser company, therefore, took advantage of the national situation as a way to market their product and reach out to the priorities and values of the time period. People needed someone or something to turn to, in order to feel comforted while in a state of war, and Budweiser stepped in to do just this.

This Budweiser ad is from the ’80’s. It clearly has a different propaganda method behind it from the earlier advertisement. The ad here appeals to the values of the time period in that the ’80’s was a time where people became more interested exploring the depths of comedy. Douglass mentions in her writing that this time period was also a time where people superficially tried to improve their looks. That could be applied here in the sense that, vainly, people wanted to buy products whose advertisements appealed to their own sense of humor. The ad makes references to National Lampoon, famous reading material of its time. Also, the fact that the people in the ad are the actual taste buds sets off the goofy sense of humor often equated with the time period.

Both advertisements show how marketers try to appeal to the values and states of being of their respective time periods. They show just how far companies are willing to go to sell their product.

Second Reading of Douglas October 4, 2006

1. Douglas clearly wants to do away with the typical sexual image of women. All the people towards whom she directs a cynical opinion represent the aspects of woman which she sees as being superficial. In the images which she disparages, all the aspects which she deems “womanly” have to do with the superficial “bratty” traits which go hand-in-hand with woman who obsess only about looking their best. She starts out satirizing the methods of Cybill Shepherd to try to draw in the viewers. Douglas writes, “‘I’m worth it,’ insists Cybill Shepherd in her brattiest na-na-na-poo-poo voice as she swirls her blond hair in my face” (p. 117). Douglas insists that Shepherd’s motive of convincing her audience is acting spoiled and upper-class. The location of this commercial, on a fancy white couch in the middle of a photo-shoot, also implies that the socially elite are the best sources of cosmetic advice. All of the people in the ads whom Douglas satirizes are the people who care very much about their outward appearances, especially woman in the 1980s. They seem to enforce the notion that you can only feel good about yourself if you are beautiful. The people whom Douglas emulates, on the other hand, are the people who argue the opposite about the image of woman. These are the people who support women in the work-world, hard-working moms, etc. who do not solely care about their appearances. She poses the question that supports this, “What if every woman in American woke up tomorrow and simply decided that she was happy with the way she looked?” One to think about, most definitely.

2. Though Douglas certainly shows off her great sense of humor in this piece, she is not simply writing to joke around. In fact, Douglas uses technical terminology throughout the essay to prove that, though she takes on a cynical tone, she also feels strongly about what she is writing. For example, she throws around terms like “yuppie” and talks of elitists to prove her point that people in advertising try to prove to people that women should look their best if they want to appear to be of a high status. She mentions how this beauty contest has been known particularly from Generation X. When these people were of a younger age, they wanted to explore makeup. Now, however, they are all getting wrinkles and sun-marks. Instead of giving into older age, however, these are the people who still want to look their best and are searching for products that will make them appear younger. Douglas implies that people assume women are always supposed to look their best, no matter what they are doing. Souglas is then able to find the root of the problem through many of the women and advertising companies in her own generation. Many of the problems, Douglas finds, are associated with the media and the historical, political, and cultural events on which it focuses. Douglas explains, “Narcissism as liberation gutted many of the underlying principles of the women’s movement.” Advertising companies found ways to express women’s rights in their products, such as Freedom Spray and Virginia Slims, which tell women that it is alright to get lunch cancer- men can! The makes of these products, Douglas writes, tried to appeal to both feminists and anti-feminists, depending on their particular approach. Another strategy Douglas explores is the one used by intellectual females who figured out how to select good wine and which books to read. Certain labels, like Hanes, clung on to this and tried to adapt to it. Douglas at least appreciates their attempt. She shows this when she writes, “These women were huge successes at managing the impressions they gave to others, coming across as distinctive, nonconformist women who nonetheless conform perfectly to dominant standards of beauty.” Douglas, though she does see the difference between these ads and the aforementioned ones, still is able to note that they cause women to be reliant on the approval of the opposite sex. According to Douglas, once women can simply accept their own intelligence, the bags under their eyes, and their not-so-perfectly-bronzed skin, this is when they can truly make a new name for themselves.

Women Aren’t Perfect-and They Don’t Have to Care! September 27, 2006

(taken from oldnavy.com) This is an image of a maternity sweater. It goes against what Douglass says about the media, because it presents women in their NATURAL states, without tons of makeup and perfectly-toned bodies. Women do not have to be supermodels to be wearing trendy clothing; they can be mothers, too. Also, just because pregnant women keep up with the trends does not imply that they are narcissistic, it simply means that they embrace their new motherly physical qualities.

(taken from newbalance.com) This goes against the typical media-enforced ideas that women have to always look their best. Also, Douglass emphasizes that the media DOES show women working out, but only doing so to get more noticeable bodies. This image, however, proves that some media sources, especially athletic ones, show women dominating in sports and becoming strong, not simply obtaining greater sex appeals.

(taken from bettycrocker.com) This image shows females baking desserts and smiling about it! According to Douglass, the media forces women to teach themselves to step away from sweets and to concentrate on healthy foods. This way, they will be able to keep their good figures. Betty Crocker, however, shows that dessert can make anyone smile!

(taken from plowhearth.com) Plow and Hearth teaches women that it is OK to have muddy feet if they are working in the lawn. This woman obviously does not care about the condition of her feet. Also, the fact that she has been working in the lawn shows that women do not just need to sit around and beautify-they can do yard-work and get dirty! If flecks of mud DO happen to get on her face, it is purely by accident. She is not concerned with Douglass’ mention of a mud-mask, in order to keep her face looking young and vibrant. This photograph is simply meant to portray a woman taking care of her lawn.

Questions for a Second Reading on “Ways of Seeing” by John Berger September 20, 2006

1. Berger tends to pay a lot of attention to the relation between art and history. He even ends his Ways of Seeing by stating, “A people or a class which is cut off from its own past is far less free to choose and to act as a people or class than one that has been able to situate itself in history” (p. 155). This is relevant to the charts which Berger intersperses in his writing about how different classes of people interpret museums. History, in this sense, stands for art’s authenticity over time. It is relevant to pictures, because people’s perspectives on viewing the pictures is constantly changing. Over time, it becomes more difficult to fully grasp the painter’s original feelings and intents when painting the piece. Also over time, the ways in which we view pictures has changed, through things such as the invention of the camera. Berger explains, “Because of the camera, the painting now travels to the spectator rather than the spectator to the painting. In its travels, its meaning is diversified” (p. 144). Modern devices influence interpretation. Paintings can also “take us back” to places throughout history. If I had to define history based on its use in this essay, I would probably come up with something like: “history is a collaboration of many people’s feelings and interpretations of life, leading up to present day.” The relation Berger shows between the past and the present, is one that holds both positive and negative aspects. Positively, pictures from the past can help us to understand the artists’ feelings throughout their lifetimes; however, our viewpoints are constantly changing. Negatively, therefore, we may adapt paintings to modern-day society and completely miss their meanings. It is bad, Berger teaches us, to over-analyze works and “mystifying” them. He writes, “The art of the past no longer exists as it once did. Its authority is lost” (p. 155). It is hard to understand pieces of art of you cannot allow your mind to become free and to go back in time to understand feelings of those artists. If Berger has not “discovered” the past, then he has either completely misinterpreted the paintings about which he has written, or he has advanced our thoughts and opinions for the better by evoking new questions and ideas about art. To imply Berger “situating” us in history explains that he has taken us to the creators of artworks and gotten us to really think about their true motivations in producing them. He mentions that people who have been denied this right have been denied freedoms. This could be taken for a political meaning, because certain cultures and peoples have been oppressed over time and prevented from truly exploring their past. Furthermore, this could be applied to examples such as the Civil Rights Movement, etc.

2. Berger names the unnamed art historian’s interpretation of the Hals painting “mystification,” because the unnamed historian overanalyzes the piece and pays more attention to nitpicky details rather than feelings and emotion. Berger, himself, defines mystification when he writes, “Mystification is the process of explaining away what might otherwise be evident” (p. 140). I would characterize Berger’s account of the Regentesses painting as “emotionally-aware.” Rather then looking at details in the painting and connecting them to society around the turn of the seventeenth century, Berger pays more attention when looking at paintings to the feelings and motivations of the artist. I would say that what he sees is really there, but it is not self-evident, because there is a difference between looking at a painting and seeing it for what it is worth. It takes an expert to really see a painting, because the expert knows that true art possess some sort of meaning behind it. Berger, in this case, appears to be an expert. He not only looks at images in churches, he sees that the images are a part of them. Also, he distinguishes between original works of art and their replications, by stating that uniqueness is lost through reproduction. If the artist paints what he feels at that moment in history, then a reproduction twenty years later could not possibly house the same emotional feelings as did the original. Artists are “in the moment” in this sense. Berger further elaborates on this when he writes, “Reproduction isolates a detail of a painting from the whole. the detail is transformed. An allegorical figure becomes a portrait of a girl [see bottom, p. 148]” (p. 149). Again, he likes emotion. Berger also reflects upon how words can change the feeling of a painting, like the explanation that Wheatfield with Crows was Van Gogh’s last painting before he took his own life. Berger writes on knowing and believing affecting ways of seeing. He knows that people need to not let technologies and reproductions of great works of art affect their interpretation of the works’ original meaning. He also knows that he, himself, has been a victim of this. Berger believes that, in order to reach this goal, man would have to go through a hard battle to try and get themselves to fully appreciate and understand art and its history.

September 11, 2006

comment here on the post below- for some reason comments are off for that one.

Answering Questions on Walter Percy’s The Loss of the Creature September 11, 2006

1. Percy, in writing his many examples of tourists and students, presents differences between them. The first man mentioned cannot truly experience the Grand Canyon, because he plans the whole trip ahead of time. He has set expectations from unreliable sources: the media and postcards. The tourist who views the Canyon in its natural state is in a better situation, because he is looking at nature, instead of man-made trails. He will simply start a trend, though, and pretty soon the beaten track will not be so beaten afterall. The family viewing the Grand Canyon after the outbreak of typhus solve the previous problem, since there will be no one else to steal their idea; however, Percy questions whether it is better for other people to be absent in order to fully appreciate something in its natural state. The wounded man and the Australian expedition build off the other situations to present a conclusion. Natural disasters help people to appreciate how things were before they were destroyed, and things in their natural state help people to see how they were before man took over and tried to facilitate things. The people in Mexico see this complex issue and try to find their own resolution. They know it is best to see things in their natural state, so they do not stay in an Americanized hotel. They, however, face the question the family faced on whether other people are a negative force. If they worry too much about what their friend, the ethnologist thinks, then they will miss the true experience for themselves. When they see the religious festival, they are convinced that they have found the thing for which they were seeking; however, this is only a preconceived notion. The progression of these tourists to the later-mentioned students, is one of the theme of how to truly see something for what its worth. The islandler dissecting a dogfish with only the equipment he has on hand is far better-off than the laboratory student who is given a dogfish. Similarly, someone who finds Shakespeare’s works on his own has a better chance of seeing them for their true worth than someone at Harvard who is given the works to read. Like the tourists, these students have a better chance at appreciating something when it is in their natural state. The transition from tourists to students is used, because, students are more directly given ways to look at things from their teachers; therefore, it is harder for them to view things correctly and genuinely.

2. Percy continuously writes about what is missing from our society (the loss of sovereignty and the loss of the creature). Because of this, he also mentions the need for a sort of recovery of the appreciation of things in their true and natural element. When mentioning the family that sees the Grand Canyon after it is secluded following the typhus-outbreak, Percy writes, “Is looking like sucking: the more lookers the less there is to see?” (p. 470). Thereafter, the question arises of whether the thing that is lost from our society is the absense of isolation and quiet. Besides meaning a ruling role, sovereign can also mean independent. Society, though, may be using sovereignty against the individual through the use of zoning. The family is enjoying the Grand Canyon for themselves; however, others are prevented from doing so because society uses its caution tape to evacuate the area. Percy goes on to say that perhaps it is people’s own faults that their soverignty is lost. He explains this through the use of the Mexican tourists who pay more attention to what their friend thinks of the surroundings to their own feelings towards them. Planners and theorists take away from the worth of the consumer, or the student, who is receiving others’ ideas, instead of relying on his own opinions. It is, to some degree, though, the consumer’s fault for succombing to such a thing- for looking for “an it,” when sightseeing or learning in a classroom. Cardenas, though he was the first man to see the Grand Canyon, could still be influenced by a higher source. We really have no way of knowing. He could simply be comparing the sight’s beauty to that of another location, for example. Percy writes to point out, therefore, that this loss of soverignty, this loss of creature, is a loss of the individual thought. It affects everyone. The consumer has the worst end of the bargain, since he has no way of thinking for himself. Is the theorist or the “producer” any better-off, though? Is he not basing what he wants the consumer to feel off notions he himself has had preconceived by others? The cycle becomes so vicious that the tourist has to carve his initials into a tree to prove that he has seen it. Things should not have to be this way. People should be able to experience things without having to broadcast this to others. Also, people should not have to live isolated. Other people should not affect one’s interpretation of an event. Percy’s piece applies, therefore, to the interest of the people who want to see things for themselves for what they truly are. Then, and only then, will there be a gain of indepence, a gain of nature, and no more of the so-called “loss” in our world.

Reflection on Percy’s “The Loss of the Creature” September 6, 2006

1. The text, though intriguing, left me with a few unanswered questions. I’m confused about the relevance of the constant mention of the Bright Angel Lodge in comparison to the Grand Canyon. Since I had not previously heard of the Bright Angel Lodge, it was a bit of a struggle for me to see its importance in embellishing Percy’s points. Also, I’m a bit confused by the relevance of mentioning the importance of a biology student reading and an English major dissecting things to the rest of Percy’s writing. I understood his point that first-hand experience is undeniably the best in dealing with any subject, but I was confused as to why he mentioned the switch in subject-studying, in coinciding with his opinions on the matter. I also was confused by his mention of how the archaeologist who puts something in a museum is keeping that something to himself. Does Percy mean to say that this is because the archaeologist is claiming it as his own?

2. I struggled occasionally, when reading this piece, with seeing the connections between Percy’s many hypothetical scenarios. He would jump from the Grand Canyon to Indian tribes to a Sarah Lawrence classroom in a matter of seconds, without thorough transitions. Every now and then I found myself re-reading previous paragraphs and playing “catch-up” to his writing style.

3. I certainly was reminded of our class discussion on cliches while reading this. Percy flat-out used several cliches, such as “he has other fish to fry” (p. 471), and “this is too good to be true” (p. 473). Also, his mentioning of people’s reaction to the Grand Canyon being, “Why it is every bit as beautiful as a picture postcard!” (p. 469) evokes thoughts of cliches in stories and movies having to do with going to see the beauty of the Grand Canyon. Percy’s writing style, in itself, explores cliches, because the whole piece has to do with irony and learning experiences through unlikely situations. For example, this occurs when the people at the Grand Canyon are able to fully experience its beauty once all the man-made trails and other things which are there to help them have the true Grand Canyon experience are destroyed.

September 5, 2006

I never really get what you’re talking about, but I always know what you’re going to say…

Liberal Arts September 1, 2006

This reminds me of liberal arts education, because it represents a Spanish classroom environment. In liberal arts colleges, students are required to explore different languages. As we discussed in English class, learning about other cultures helps people to be more in touch with their own. Oftentimes, students in liberal arts colleges are required to have more years of languages than mathematics, for example. This is because this type of education system is a vehicle used by students to give them a broader sense of the types of people and places around them. These colleges feel that the years the students spend in this educational program should be used to help them explore themselves and the world, rather than solely working on problems. The photo presents a student finding Andalucia on a map; however, we don’t see the rest of the story. Liberal arts programs are not only made to teach students about cultures, but also to give them hands-on experience. The student may be just excited to find the city. She may, however, be planning a trip abroad there for her next semester. I give credit to Lifetimelearners for this picture.
Colleges present students with many options for their futures. Because of this, students can discover many possible fields of study, rather than simply going to a specialized college where they choose to solely focus on theatre or engineering, for example. I chose this picture of students at the library to present this aspect of liberal arts colleges, because they all look curious and interested in the various reading materials. Each book explains something different, either about life as we know it or about life lessons through fiction. In liberal arts colleges, students can pick up a book about any subject and choose to make it their future. I give credit to potsdamlibrary for this picture.
This picture of a small group of people helps to present how liberal arts colleges can be described as smaller, intimate communities. Smaller schools such as these help students to have a closer, one-on-one relationship with their professors and with each other. This way, they can have more direct help with choosing future careers. I chose this image, because it presents young men and women looking out into the distance. You could even go so far, perhaps, as to say that they are looking out into the world, since the photo portrays distant scenery. They are all together in this picture. It is a community. They are all looking at the same thing, as well; however, what does each one of them see? Everyone has a future. No future is the same. I thank monkeycurious for this picture.
This graduation image also helps to present the concept behind liberal arts colleges: students can receive diplomas in many different fields. These educations help the students to be more familiar with many subjects and ideas. Some of the people in this picture could be graduating with honors. Some could simply be thankful just to get out of the college and into the real world. No graduate, however, can bid his liberal arts education goodbye without saying that he was given opportunities to truly explore everything which life has to offer him. Hopefully, these graduates will use their knowledge to add even more careers into our society and to help make our world a more diverse and intelligent one. Thanks to CourtneyMay for this picture.