I found this picture today and it really sums up my views on hunting. I love to duck hunt and it is one of my favorite hobbies to participate in. However, not every time I go out to the lake, do I get any ducks. Nonetheless, I still enjoy it even when I do not see a single bird. Duck hunting takes a lot of preparation and you have to learn where the ducks are flying. You will have hunts that are just about watching were the ducks are flying and you may not even get a chance to get a shot off. For me duck hunting is more than just shooting birds, it is about being out in nature and appreciating the God's creation. Watching the sun rise over a lake at seven in the morning is the most beautiful and relaxing thing I have ever seen. Hunting is a great activity for me to relax and take a break from my crazy, stressful life as a college student. Therefore, even if I do not get a single shot off, I still enjoy being out on the lake and hunting. However, I have truly never experienced an adrenalin rush like the one I receive when I hit a duck flying overhead. Nonetheless, duck hunting is one my favorite hobbies even when I do not bring any ducks home from the lake.
I really like the way you connect this visual to your personal experiences. When doing rhetorical analysis, however, how could you account for the effects of the specific text, pictures, and colors on the audience? What effect does the simply, black and white duck picture have on audiences, as opposed to a more colorful, intricate picture? What audiences does this cartoon appeal to specifically--and are any audiences excluded?
ReplyDelete