Forms An Inverse Relation example essay topic

Response for Daniel Harris's article! SSGlamorousness!" In the article! SSGlamorousness, !" Daniel Harris uses the cunning tricks of the manufacturers as an analogy to tell us an inverse relation to what we really experience in daily lives. Describing the cunning tricks of luring consumers, he notes!

SS In fact, just as the! SSwondrously articulated classic sauces!" and the! SS coconut-milk broth [that] smooths the dissonant notes of fiery chiles!" in bon appetite and Gourmet bear an inverse relation to what we really eat-the! SSbig ol! | juicy frozen pizzas!" and the!

SS Bakeless wonders!" of Freezer Queen TV dinners-so the gold metallic catsuits and embroidered Bill Blass mousseline dresses in Vogue and W bear an inverse relation to our Levis and loafers. !" (69) In this quotation, Harris first uses! SS just as!" as a simile to represent an explicit comparison between the! SSbig ol! | juicy frozen pizzas!" .! SSwondrously articulated classic sauces!" and! SSbig ol! | juicy frozen pizzas!" appears to be very dissonant.

This is an analogy he used to show the inverse relation to what they said and what we really eat. Similarly, gold metallic catsuits and embroidered Bill Blass mousseline dresses as an analogy to what we heard and what we really see. Again, this forms an inverse relation. Here, he uses the word! SSg old metallic catsuits!" as a metaphor to represent the embroidered Bill Blass mousseline dresses. By using the cunning tricks of the manufacturers as an analogy to show an inverse relation, Harris continues his play on how exaggerate the visual aesthetic is by using analogies.

He suggests that the cunning ways of luring consumers will be too exaggerated if they cannot satisfy their consumers, then! SS glamour would not be worn!" . (69) In this article, Harris again uses analogies to tell us that glamour is not a tool for aphrodisiacs, but as an aestheticism. To some readers, glamor is just as a form of sex appeal. Comparing food advertisers with glamour, he notes! SS food advertisers avoid mentioning hunger in their commercials to enhance the prestige of their creamed corns and beef stews, which must be!

SS selected!" from towering pyramids of cans for the sake of their deliciousness and not for their ability to satisfy the indiscriminate demands of a growling stomach. Similarly, glamour eschews the whole issue of sex appeal, de emphasizing its utility as a technique for satisfying the indiscriminate demands for lust and turning women into kinetic sculptures, with one form of objectification replacing another, a relentlessly aesthetic one. !" (70) In this quotation, Harris uses the word! SS similarly!" to draw a comparison between these two cases that appear to have little in common. Harris suggests that the audience of glamor is not for men as we expect, but for! SS homosexual-the gay designer, photographer, and makeup artist-who is entirely immune to feminine sensuality and hence judges the latest.

!" Indeed, it supports his statement that glamor is! SS not as aphrodisiacs, the tolls of the temptress's trade, but as ends in themselves. !".