Author's Note
The most substantial change from my original draft to the final draft is in the argument itself. Originally I had the argument of the comic simply as the effects of supermodels in the media have on children. In my final draft that argument is still intact but I have added to it that it"is a result of the unjustified importance they are given in the media". I have also added that this is shown "by ridiculing supermodels importance in the media". This better covers the argument the comic is actually making.
As a result of that change, the body paragraphs supporting evidence was not altered much, but the conclusions drawn by the evidence were. For example, in my paragraph about wordplay in the second draft the conclusions from the wordplay shown in the comic focused on the fantasy of supermodels and what that fantasy meant to the children, comparing them fantasizing about superheroes and them fantasizing about supermodels. In my final draft however, the conclusion of the wordplay paragraph is stated as "By making this comparison of the fantasy of superheroes to the true fantasy of supermodels, the comic is questioning why supermodels are given a status of admiration, because their fantasy comes from unusual body measurements and extensive editing techniques." Although, when I was talking about how children fantasizing about supermodels I was alluding to the fact it is bad because there isn't a reason to fantasize about, the final draft conclusion of this paragraph makes that more clear.
Also between my first and final draft, within the paragraphs, I added more information and elaborated on the points I was making. From my first to second draft, I focused on making sure to link each piece of evidence back to my argument and to explain how I got from a piece of evidence to a conclusion more thoroughly. Then between my second and final draft, I adjusted that to my new argument. Through the process of revising, the pieces of support the comic provides for it's argument became more clear to me as I thought of them differently. This is what allowed me to add the new information and elaborate on the points.
Unlike last project, where there was a lot of rearranging of the paragraphs, the only rearrangement in this project was to move the typography paragraph. The juxtaposition paragraph was found to follow the paragraph about wordplay better because it specifically mentions the wordplay, linking the two points together. Also, the typography paragraph is a brief reminder that is placed to reestablish the focus of the argument on children.
Through the process of multiple revisions, I was able to find new insight within the comic and its argument resulting in a better supported project and argument of my own. Also, I was able to better understand and explain the “so what?” question of the comic. My final draft is shorter than my second draft, by more than a few words, but it is actually able to say more by being more precise. That was a result of the redirection of my argument.
As a result of that change, the body paragraphs supporting evidence was not altered much, but the conclusions drawn by the evidence were. For example, in my paragraph about wordplay in the second draft the conclusions from the wordplay shown in the comic focused on the fantasy of supermodels and what that fantasy meant to the children, comparing them fantasizing about superheroes and them fantasizing about supermodels. In my final draft however, the conclusion of the wordplay paragraph is stated as "By making this comparison of the fantasy of superheroes to the true fantasy of supermodels, the comic is questioning why supermodels are given a status of admiration, because their fantasy comes from unusual body measurements and extensive editing techniques." Although, when I was talking about how children fantasizing about supermodels I was alluding to the fact it is bad because there isn't a reason to fantasize about, the final draft conclusion of this paragraph makes that more clear.
Also between my first and final draft, within the paragraphs, I added more information and elaborated on the points I was making. From my first to second draft, I focused on making sure to link each piece of evidence back to my argument and to explain how I got from a piece of evidence to a conclusion more thoroughly. Then between my second and final draft, I adjusted that to my new argument. Through the process of revising, the pieces of support the comic provides for it's argument became more clear to me as I thought of them differently. This is what allowed me to add the new information and elaborate on the points.
Unlike last project, where there was a lot of rearranging of the paragraphs, the only rearrangement in this project was to move the typography paragraph. The juxtaposition paragraph was found to follow the paragraph about wordplay better because it specifically mentions the wordplay, linking the two points together. Also, the typography paragraph is a brief reminder that is placed to reestablish the focus of the argument on children.
Through the process of multiple revisions, I was able to find new insight within the comic and its argument resulting in a better supported project and argument of my own. Also, I was able to better understand and explain the “so what?” question of the comic. My final draft is shorter than my second draft, by more than a few words, but it is actually able to say more by being more precise. That was a result of the redirection of my argument.
Second Draft
First Draft
Statement of Purpose
T
he stereotypical idea of a supermodel is a tall, beautiful, really thin woman. This is not off base from the average supermodel, which does not at all represent the average woman. The fact is that supermodels today 
weigh 23% less than average women and often would be hospitalized for this weight if they were to see a doctor (from Our Health, Our Futures). The minimum height to be a supermodel is usually five feet and eight inches tall versus the five feet and three or four inches, which is the average woman's height, according to soyouwanna.com. On top of already being out of the usual, they are airbrushed and edited a lot, to appear even more “perfect” and extraordinary.
Children see images of supermodels on billboards, on television, and in magazines starting at a young age. They are innocent and naïve so they do not understand the absurdity of the idea of a supermodel and often admire them and their looks. They accidentally can get the thought in their heads that these looks are achievable and something they should strive for. In other words, they may think that it will be successful for them to have the supermodel looks when they grow up. This leads to what is called media internalization. “This internalization refers to the extent to which an individual invests in societal ideals of size and appearance (thin ideal for girls and muscular for boys) to the point that they become rigid guiding principles” says a study done by Thompson et al. in 2004.
In the media, supermodels have become fantasy, extraordinary women. Children, who are naïve to the facts, believe that they should admire these supermodels and strive to look like they do. As a result of that, it is argued that these supermodels have a negative effect on adolescents today. They begin the internalization of the “rigid guiding principles” as children, and it continues to progress as they become teenagers and young adults. Media internalization is believed to cause body dissatisfaction leading to dieting, often by means of fad diets, leaving the child with a negative attitude, such as depression, and increases in eating disorders. The comic “Soup to Nutz” by Rick Stromoski uses similar points to argue the negative effects the supermodels portrayed in the media have on children, by ridiculing supermodels importance in the media. Through appeals to pathos and logos, the comic uses wordplay, juxtaposition, abstraction, and typography to provide and support that the way the media presents supermodels has a negative effect on children and is a result of the unjustified importance they are given in the media.
The use of wordplay in this comic is the most prominent appeal to pathos, provoking humor. The wordplay of the comic is the connection of “super” in supermodel and superhero, which is why the boy is asking what powers a supermodel has. By making this play on the word super, the comic compares superheroes and supermodels.
Superheroes are fantasy characters with powers giving them the ability to do things that normal, or average, people cannot. Supermodels on the other hand are real; they are people. However because of their astonishing body measurements, they are not like average people. Also, due to the editing and airbrushing done of their photographs, they are able to look as normal, or average, people cannot. In this way, they become fantasy just like a superhero, because of how they are presented in the media. By making this comparison of the fantasy of superheroes to the true fantasy of supermodels, the comic is questioning why supermodels are given a status of admiration, because their fantasy comes from unusual body measurements and extensive editing techniques.
When the little girl is shown to say supermodels are women who “can live for three weeks on just half an apple”, it is an appeal to logos because it uses a structure of juxtaposition. It is a juxtaposition of her idea of a supermodel versus the stereotypical way models are described, such as really thin, tall, beautiful women. The act of a supermodel starving themselves, which is a typical idea of a supermodel, is then linked to a power, or an ability to do something that normal people cannot. This is done through the wordplay of superhero and supermodel. The joke of the boy questioning what type of powers these fantasy supermodels have is mocking the lack of powers they have, or the lack of ability to do something special. In the comic the boy replies to the “power” supermodels posses by saying “wow” showing the vulnerability of children to see these supermodels in the media, such as in a magazine as seen in the comic, and look up to them as someone you strive to be, just as they would look up to a superhero and dream of being one of them. In the case of the superhero, they eventually learn that the powers they possess are just fantasy and not something one can actually obtain. Opposite of this unfortunately, they learn that supermodels are real people and some of them may continue to be wowed by them, just like the children in the comic. By mocking their lack of powers, the comic argues that there is no reason to admire supermodels.
“Soup to Nutz” uses abstraction in its drawings of the characters, specifically the kids. Due to this abstraction, they look quite goofy, having a weird nose, mouth, and just one tooth. A further technique of abstraction has been used; the children have been caricaturized.
When a person is drawn as a caricature it highlights the flaw, in this comic, that explains the kids having very prominent overbites. They do not look human-like, but they are accepted as humans because that has been normalized in comics. By using abstraction, the characters do not look like any person too specific. Because they are accepted as humans, but do not look like any person too specific, it allows the characters to be universalized. This allows the viewers to relate the children in the comic and the argument of supermodels in the media to any young, white person.
Although, their flaw has been highlighted, and literally blown up, the children are still viewed as universalized. This is because everyone has flaws. Having a flaw is universal, and something everyone can relate to. The stereotypical idea of a supermodel is not thought of as having flaws, because they edit out their flaws. By showing that having flaws is a universal characteristic, contrasting with the “perfect” supermodel, it questions if the fantasy resulting from the editing of their flaws, is something to be admired. As a result of the admiration and general “wow” children feel towards the fantasy of a supermodel, when they see flaws in themselves it sometimes can lead to have the negative effects of body dissatisfaction. Pointing out how flaws are universal is understood by viewers of the comics, but is something that should be taught to children. If they understand this, and embraced their uniqueness, body dissatisfaction could be avoided.
The comic uses a typography that reflects the innocence of children. The type is rounded and is meant to look like it is handwritten, making it look like it could be the handwriting of a child. This matches the idea that the kids shown in the comic are the ones speaking these words, shown by the word bubbles connected to them, and is a reminder of their youthful understandings. This emphasizes that the concern is about the children and the effects the undeserved attention on “glamorous” supermodels can cause.
Comics are read for enjoyment and comedy but can be used to make arguments by using techniques such as abstraction to appeal to an audience of variation. The “Soup to Nutz” comic uses wordplay of the superlative super, the juxtaposition of a child’s idea of a supermodel and the stereotypical idea of one, character abstraction, and childlike typography to question the attention given to supermodels and what this misguided attention can mean for children. It points out that the naivety of children allows them to believe and even admire the fantasy of a supermodel, leaving the possibility of media internalization and body dissatisfaction. It attempts to cause the reader to consider the reasons they allow supermodels to be given such importance that they are admired as a result, and to consider the consequences of that allowance.
Gerber, Charolette, and Debbie Vasen. "The Effects Media Has on Teenage Body Image." Lovetoknow.com. LoveToKnow Corp., 13 Oct. 2008. Web. 21 Mar. 2010.
Margit, and Anika. "Media and Body Image." Our Health Our Futures. Smith College. Web. 21 Mar. 2010.
Raimondo, Marcella. "About-Face Facts about MEDIA." About-Face. About-Face. Web. 22 Mar. 2010.
"SoYouWanna Be a Model?" SoYouWanna. Demand Entertainment, Inc. Web. 27 Mar. 2010.
First Draft
Statement of Purpose
T
he stereotypical idea of a supermodel is a tall, beautiful, really thin woman. This is not off base from the average supermodel, which does not at all represent the average woman. The fact is that supermodels today weigh 23% less than average women and often would be hospitalized for this weight if they were to see a doctor (from Our Health, Our Futures). The minimum height to be a supermodel is usually five feet and eight inches tall versus the five feet and three or four inches, which is the average woman's height, according to soyouwanna.com. On top of already being out of the usual, they are airbrushed and edited a lot, to appear even more “perfect” and extraordinary.Children see images of supermodels on billboards, on television, and in magazines starting at a young age. They are innocent and naïve so they do not understand the absurdity of the idea of a supermodel and often admire them and their looks. They accidentally can get the thought in their heads that these looks are achievable and something they should strive for. In other words, they may think that it will be successful for them to have the supermodel looks when they grow up. This leads to what is called media internalization. “This internalization refers to the extent to which an individual invests in societal ideals of size and appearance (thin ideal for girls and muscular for boys) to the point that they become rigid guiding principles” says a study done by Thompson et al. in 2004.
In the media, supermodels have become fantasy, extraordinary women. Children, who are naïve to the facts, believe that they should admire these supermodels and strive to look like they do. As a result of that, it is argued that these supermodels have a negative effect on adolescents today. They begin the internalization of the “rigid guiding principles” as children, and it continues to progress as they become teenagers and young adults. Media internalization is believed to cause body dissatisfaction leading to dieting, often by means of fad diets, leaving the child with a negative attitude, such as depression, and increases in eating disorders. The comic “Soup to Nutz” by Rick Stromoski uses similar points to argue the negative effects the supermodels portrayed in the media have on children, by ridiculing supermodels importance in the media. Through appeals to pathos and logos, the comic uses wordplay, juxtaposition, abstraction, and typography to provide and support that the way the media presents supermodels has a negative effect on children and is a result of the unjustified importance they are given in the media.
The use of wordplay in this comic is the most prominent appeal to pathos, provoking humor. The wordplay of the comic is the connection of “super” in supermodel and superhero, which is why the boy is asking what powers a supermodel has. By making this play on the word super, the comic compares superheroes and supermodels.
Superheroes are fantasy characters with powers giving them the ability to do things that normal, or average, people cannot. Supermodels on the other hand are real; they are people. However because of their astonishing body measurements, they are not like average people. Also, due to the editing and airbrushing done of their photographs, they are able to look as normal, or average, people cannot. In this way, they become fantasy just like a superhero, because of how they are presented in the media. By making this comparison of the fantasy of superheroes to the true fantasy of supermodels, the comic is questioning why supermodels are given a status of admiration, because their fantasy comes from unusual body measurements and extensive editing techniques.When the little girl is shown to say supermodels are women who “can live for three weeks on just half an apple”, it is an appeal to logos because it uses a structure of juxtaposition. It is a juxtaposition of her idea of a supermodel versus the stereotypical way models are described, such as really thin, tall, beautiful women. The act of a supermodel starving themselves, which is a typical idea of a supermodel, is then linked to a power, or an ability to do something that normal people cannot. This is done through the wordplay of superhero and supermodel. The joke of the boy questioning what type of powers these fantasy supermodels have is mocking the lack of powers they have, or the lack of ability to do something special. In the comic the boy replies to the “power” supermodels posses by saying “wow” showing the vulnerability of children to see these supermodels in the media, such as in a magazine as seen in the comic, and look up to them as someone you strive to be, just as they would look up to a superhero and dream of being one of them. In the case of the superhero, they eventually learn that the powers they possess are just fantasy and not something one can actually obtain. Opposite of this unfortunately, they learn that supermodels are real people and some of them may continue to be wowed by them, just like the children in the comic. By mocking their lack of powers, the comic argues that there is no reason to admire supermodels.
“Soup to Nutz” uses abstraction in its drawings of the characters, specifically the kids. Due to this abstraction, they look quite goofy, having a weird nose, mouth, and just one tooth. A further technique of abstraction has been used; the children have been caricaturized.
When a person is drawn as a caricature it highlights the flaw, in this comic, that explains the kids having very prominent overbites. They do not look human-like, but they are accepted as humans because that has been normalized in comics. By using abstraction, the characters do not look like any person too specific. Because they are accepted as humans, but do not look like any person too specific, it allows the characters to be universalized. This allows the viewers to relate the children in the comic and the argument of supermodels in the media to any young, white person.Although, their flaw has been highlighted, and literally blown up, the children are still viewed as universalized. This is because everyone has flaws. Having a flaw is universal, and something everyone can relate to. The stereotypical idea of a supermodel is not thought of as having flaws, because they edit out their flaws. By showing that having flaws is a universal characteristic, contrasting with the “perfect” supermodel, it questions if the fantasy resulting from the editing of their flaws, is something to be admired. As a result of the admiration and general “wow” children feel towards the fantasy of a supermodel, when they see flaws in themselves it sometimes can lead to have the negative effects of body dissatisfaction. Pointing out how flaws are universal is understood by viewers of the comics, but is something that should be taught to children. If they understand this, and embraced their uniqueness, body dissatisfaction could be avoided.
The comic uses a typography that reflects the innocence of children. The type is rounded and is meant to look like it is handwritten, making it look like it could be the handwriting of a child. This matches the idea that the kids shown in the comic are the ones speaking these words, shown by the word bubbles connected to them, and is a reminder of their youthful understandings. This emphasizes that the concern is about the children and the effects the undeserved attention on “glamorous” supermodels can cause.
Comics are read for enjoyment and comedy but can be used to make arguments by using techniques such as abstraction to appeal to an audience of variation. The “Soup to Nutz” comic uses wordplay of the superlative super, the juxtaposition of a child’s idea of a supermodel and the stereotypical idea of one, character abstraction, and childlike typography to question the attention given to supermodels and what this misguided attention can mean for children. It points out that the naivety of children allows them to believe and even admire the fantasy of a supermodel, leaving the possibility of media internalization and body dissatisfaction. It attempts to cause the reader to consider the reasons they allow supermodels to be given such importance that they are admired as a result, and to consider the consequences of that allowance.
Works Cited
Gerber, Charolette, and Debbie Vasen. "The Effects Media Has on Teenage Body Image." Lovetoknow.com. LoveToKnow Corp., 13 Oct. 2008. Web. 21 Mar. 2010.
Margit, and Anika. "Media and Body Image." Our Health Our Futures. Smith College. Web. 21 Mar. 2010.
Raimondo, Marcella. "About-Face Facts about MEDIA." About-Face. About-Face. Web. 22 Mar. 2010.
"SoYouWanna Be a Model?" SoYouWanna. Demand Entertainment, Inc. Web. 27 Mar. 2010.
