The Tipping Point #3

The Power of Context law recognizes that people react differently to the same situation according to the context of the situation. For example, a recent study showed that when a person comes across a person who has collapsed, if they are on their own there is an 85% chance that they will help this person. If they are in a crowded area then there is only a 31% chance of them helping this person. The context shapes the behaviour. This is considered the bystander effect. Epidemics can be tipped by tampering with the smallest detail of the immediate environment. This element suggests that contrary to popular belief, we are sensitive to the context around us. When considering the factors that cause change, I never realized the obvious fact that depending on the situation, reactions will vary, and that it doesn’t take a huge improvement to enhance an impact a message has on a person. This book has really opened my eyes to pay attention to both the big picture, and significant details.

The Tipping Point #2

Another factor that effects change is what Gladwell refers to as the Stickiness Factor. “Stickiness means that the message makes an impact” (Gladwell 36) It is not the information that goes in one ear and out the other, but what sticks in your memory by using specific techniques like repetition. Gladwell compares two popular children’s TV shows, “Blues Clues” and “Sesame Street.” These TV shows were similar in retrospect because one shadowed most techniques used by the other. “Sesame Street” established such a great reputation because it programmed their segments based on children’s cognitive abilities and TV watching behaviours which resulted in aiding toddlers to develop literacy. “Blues Clues” recognized how successful its competition was, and used techniques that can generate improvement in children’s logic and reasoning abilities. Relatively simple changes can be used to enhance the message and impact made on a person.

The Tipping Point #1

Malcolm Gladwell's book, "The Tipping Point," discusses social epidemics, their trends, and how they became so popular. Gladwell also explains how some "wanna be" trends never make it to their point of maximum popularity. He uses the example of the once popular shoe, Hush Puppies. This brand of footwear became popular during the late 20th century. One person with social influence bought a pair of Hush Puppies, then a person saw that person wearing the shoes and bought a pair themselves. This trend continued until the social epidemic had reached a significant point of influence. Gladwell finds connections between case studies involving popular shoes, and a spread of syphillis in Boston. His explanation of why the two are connected can be identified by his rules the Law of the Few, the Stickiness Factor, and the Power of Context.

The Law of the Few generalizes the statement that in all social epidemics, there is a person or a group of people who spread the "disease." The few people that influence more people are called the Connectors. Using the spread of syphillis in Boston example, one person (the connector) had the infection originally, then passed on to another, who passed it on to another.

I have yet to read the importance of the other two laws, but this book has caught my attention from a business perspective as it has made me realize that the obvious connection may not be the correct connection.

something profound

On p.22, Frye suggests that "literature can only derive its forms from itself: they can't exist outside literature." This quote was honestly one of the few things I agreed with in this chapter. Literature can only advance from another form of literature. It is almost as if its forms are caught in a big literature web and they are heavily dependent on literature for survival. Without literature, there would be no similes or metaphors or poetry. It simply would not exist. I also agree with another statement Frye makes on p.23 stating that "everything is new, and yet recognizably the same kind of thing as the old." Literature can be similar at a first glance, but that is because many if not all contemperary readings are just branches off the same tree. Most authors write material based on what is acceptable or popular in their society, and they follow the same trends as other successful writers to be as great as they are. But when an author goes down a different path, whether the writing is good or not, their literature is found on the bestsellers list because it is different than any other piece of writing in the competition.

assignment #1

"One person by himself is not a complete human being" p.6

I think Frye means that people need interaction with others to feel complete. The nature of being a human being is communication and socializing in a society. You can build and create anything you desire but you will not be fulfilled unless you are accompanied by another human being. If you are alone, your monologue will never turn into dialogue and society would never advance. I agree with this statement because i am a very social person. I love being around others and engaging in a conversation with someone other than myself. If i did not have friends, i would definitely feel incomplete. I know there are people who would strongly disagree with this statement, but that is because they are content with being alone for the majority of their life, while I am not.
In McCullough's speech, "The Love of Learning," he mentions advice John Adams gave his son John Quincey. The advice was to always carry a book with you on your travels because "you will never be alone with a poet in your pocket." This is the opposite of Frye's quote. John Adams is stating that even if you are physically and emotionally alone, you can always confide in literature. For some people, this could be inspirational. The way i see it is reading literature will never compensate for the life of another. It can't tuck you in at night, it can't stop wars, it can't stop your tears, and the only feelings it possesses are the feelings of another.