Video Games and Feminist Frequency (IR)

One of the things that caught my attention early on in this unit was when we looked at one of the tropes. Specifically, it was the damsel in distress trope and how it made video games appear a little gender biased. So I decided to read the IGN article about Tropes VS. Women in Videogames

Link to Site: http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/31/tropes-vs-women-in-video-games-why-it-matters

While I don't really think much into it, I do believe something like the Damsel in Distress Trope is a little sexist. However, completely some people might completely disregard videogames due to this trope and I think that's just wrong. Videogames don't always use the damsel in distress trope, and some videogames have women as the main protagonists like the Metroid and Portal Series. However, I can understand why this trope is used a lot in games.

The Damsel In Distress is mainly used in games like Mario or Zelda. However, one of the main reasons as to why this trope hasn't disappeared is that the trope is crucial to the series. Take Mario for example: the game was created back in the eighties and it has become a tradition that he tries to rescue Princess Peach. The same can be said for Zelda and Link. I'm not saying that it makes the trope right, but it is one of the main reasons as to why the trope is still in use today.

Another reason why videogames focus a lot of their time on these kinds of tropes is to appeal to their target audience; males. I'm not saying that women don't play video games, I know a couple that do. But the main videogame consumers are generally young men. Its impossible to create a game that everyone can agree on, so videogame companies go for the biggest demographic.

However, to say that videogames have gotten progressively more gender biased is completely wrong. Videogames aren't gender biased at all, they are just perceived as that by people who look at very specific games. Videogames are meant to simply be something to enjoy and something to ease the stress off of someone. I realize that there may be some gender bias in some games. However, to me they are just a fun way to relax.

My Reaction to the Bechdel Test(CC)

About a couple of weeks ago, we learned about a famous test known as the Bechdel Test which tests the gender bias of movies. Basically, the test asks for a movie where two female characters have a conversation about something other than an man. At first I didn't think a lot of my favorite movies were that gender biased. But as I applied the Bechdel Test to some of my favorite movies, I began to see almost all of them fail at the Bechdel Test. There was really only one movie that passed the test that is recently came out; Bridesmaids.

After applying the test to many movies, both modern and old, I began to think that almost all of Hollywood is biased and is a little offensive to women (in that specific area). However, the more I thought about it, the more I realized that this test is not perfect and just because a movie fails it doesn't mean that it is offensive. Take the movie Gravity; it fails the Bechdel Test, but only because there is literally three characters in the film. It is solely made up of Sandra Bullock, George Clooney, and some other guy who wasn't around long enough for me to learn his name. Because that movie fails the test, does that make it offensive to women and gender biased? Is it fair to test this movie where it only focuses on one character who is lost in space and has no contact with the world below? I'm not saying that the test doesn't point out some flaws in movies. However, movies like Gravity and 127 Hours are given an automatic fail because there isn't two female characters in it. With something like 127 Hours, the whole story was focused on one man trying to get free from a chasm. Is it fair that it should be failed on this test when it only focused on a guy trying to get free?

What I'm really trying to say is the test itself is somewhat flawed. Yes, it does point out some gender bias in movies, but it's not okay to say that this movie fails only because it focused on a single person the whole film. Even if a film does fail this test, it doesn't make it a bad movie. One of my favorite movies (and one of the greatest films of all time) The Godfather fails this test, yet it still changed the way I thought and provided amazing acting and drama. Although it does point out some flaws, I personally don't agree with the Bechdel Test and even if a movie fails it, I doubt that it will affect me greatly.

Louis CK and his Great Knowledge (TA)

I have had an interest in comedy for a long time, and I especially love watching clips from great comedians like Chris Rock and Sam Kinison. However, I recently watched a little stand up from Louis CK. I've never really heard any of his stand up bits, but I have to say, so far I'm impressed. I watched his idea that the greatest threat to women is men.

The interesting thing is that he doesn't play off stereotypes like most comedians do. Other comedians talk about the downside of women or make fun of them. However, Louis challenges this and actually insults all men, saying how they are the worst thing to happen to women. He even points out how men are responsible for some of the worst things to happen to women. He insults his own gender in a way that people both laugh and agree with what he has to say. Male comedians are always thought of being a little sexist. The unique thing with Louis is that he is sexist in this bit, but instead of having women the target, he attacks men, reversing the role and showing that not all great comedy comes from making fun of women.

ABDC (FW)

MTV has been known for having some of the most questionable shows ever. From 16 and Pregnant, to Teen Mom, and of course Jersey Shore, it is a huge wave of reality TV shows that make us say after its over "what did I just watch?" I've never really been that interested in MTV, as I'm not really interested in reality shows. However, there was one show that caught my attention last year, and it has held my attention since. I'm talking about America's Best Dance Crew.

I know some of you might be thinking "really, a dance competition show. Isn't there a hundred others?" While there may be a bunch of different dance shows, this one is completely different. These crews all dance to some form of hip hop and are given very unique challenges each week, with everyone trying to win the 100,000 cash prize and be crowned "America's Best Dance Crew."

 

There are so many reasons why I like this show so much. One of them is the amazing music. The songs are cut and shortened into one minute "Master Mixes" with amazing beats that make you want to dance. I also found that the theme for each week was very creative, and the challenges were completely unique and difficult at times, making people wonder how they were going to pull them off on stage. However, the main reason that I like this show are the insane performances pulled off by the crews. You think that it would just be perfect choreography with some tricks, but the stunts and performances they pull off would put every single Mock Rock we have done to shame. That's something considering the most they get to dance is between 1 and 2 minutes.

 

Unfortunately, I got into ABDC right when MTV cancelled it, so that's a little bit of a let down. However, the I was still able to watch all seven of the seasons online and every performance blew me away. One crew in particular captured my attention each week with their high flying stunts and mind-blowing tricks; Season 3 Winners Quest Crew. Their Last Chance Challenge performance to hook the voters left me only saying "Wow." If people don't understand why I admire them so much, watch the video below, it'll make everything clear. (I apologize for the crappy quality).

                                     

While I'm disappointed that its gone, I'm glad that it was here and that it was able to supply me with great music and amazing dancing.

Review of Gravity (IR)

Recently, I saw the movie Gravity and it was, without a doubt, spectacular. The story is pretty straightforward, two astronauts (Bullock and Clooney) are stranded in space and are trying to get home, but what was really amazing about this film in my opinion was the way you could feel the emotions coming from Bullock and Clooney without ever actually seeing their faces. This movie was incredible not just because of the acting, but because it was able to elicit so much pathos from just two characters. Except for some voices and dead bodies, the only interactions in the whole movie were between Ryan(Bullock)and Kowalski(Clooney).



I decided that I wanted to see how other people thought of the film, and the review I found mirrors my own. The special effects used in the movie were unreal and at times it felt like you were actually up in space, experiencing it with them. It also is able to capture the audience's attention with its realistic feel. Obviously, what happened in the movie didn't happen in real life, but it makes people think that it could happen, which is not only interesting, it is also chilling. Something like this could actually happen and hardly anyone would ever know about it.

While this reviewer saw the film in 3D, I unfortunately did not and I'm now regretting that decision. It would have been amazing in 3D, seeing all the debris flying at me. However, even though I didn't see it in 3D, it was still unbelievable. The story in itself is amazing and at the end of the film, there is a little bit of symbolism when Ryan gets out of the space suit. Overall, this movie was fantastic and I highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in it.
Link to Review: http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20483133_20721919,00.html

Game of the Century (CM)

One of the greatest breakthroughs in entertainment and technology was the invention of video games. It began with Pong, a simple tennis like game that began the age of gaming. As time moved on, games began to evolve and they began to go from a simple game like Pong, to games with a story like Super Mario and Donkey Kong. Throughout history, video games have gotten better in graphics and game play. Today, there are an uncountable amount of games, all representing the best of their time and many are called the greatest game ever. However, that title is reserved for one game and one game only, the masterpiece released by Naughty Dog in mid 2013; The Last of Us.



It tells the story of Joel and Ellie, two survivors living in a post apocalyptic world. A strain from a fungus mutated the population and turned them into zombie like creatures that destroyed the world.

The last of the population is living under martial law with a group called the Fireflies trying to restore the government. To call this game great is insulting; this game is incredible. The story line is interesting alone, but everything the game does is amazing. The graphics are great and the sound quality is amazing. The gameplay is great too, allowing the player to construct various tools to use in situations like shivs and medical kits. But what's truly amazing about this game is how its told. It actually feels like you're watching a movie rather than a cut scene. The work with sound is also incredible, as it allows the player to almost feel the emotions from the characters. The prologue has elements that makes you feel like you're watching a movie and the emotion felt almost made myself cry.

 

I'm not saying that there isn't great fight scenes or guns in this game, there is. But that doesn't make a game great. To me, a game is great when it has an amazing story and gameplay. This game redefines amazing story with its incredible voice acting, characterization, and writing. I haven't even beaten the game, yet it was able to gain my respect and admiration for it in just 1 hour. This is by far the greatest game ever and I doubt that there is anything that will top it in the future.

 



 

The Greatest Movie Ever: The Godfather (CM)

Yes, this is a post about entertainment again. This will probably be a regular thing for me as I am very interested in TV and movies.

Movies are considered one of the greatest innovations in modern culture. When film was first shown, it set the standard for future inventions, like the television. During World War II, people went to movies mainly for news, as this was the only outlet at the time. However, as the world move forward in 20th century, film began to change and in the 1970s, one film came out that redefined movies altogether. This film centered on the affects of organized crime not just on America, but on the Mob family also. This masterpiece was The Godfather.

The movie mainly focuses on Don Corleone, the head of the Corleone family, and also his son Michael as he enters into the world of organized crime. The plot from this film was amazing by itself, but there was so much more about this movie that made it amazing. It actually looked at a crime family from the inside, depicting their lives and it showed that they weren't monsters like people thought, but actually a modern family. It depicted Don Corleone as an Anti-Hero, a criminal who wouldn't hesitate to kill someone, but was compassionate for his family. The emotion felt by him for his family is breathtaking.

This film goes down as one of the greatest because of its impact on the world. It shed light on a dark time in American history and made it amazing. The acting was also amazing, with Marlon Brando's performance winning him the Oscar. It also set a standard for future films with it amazing acting and writing. What makes it so amazing was that it was so member able, with lines like, "I'm gonna make you an offer you can't refuse" going down in history as one of the most famous quotes of all time. This film also set the standard for future shows and films about crime, like The Sopranos and Goodfellas.

Overall, this movie was incredible just from everything. From the acting, to the plot, and even to the score, this movie brought everything to perfection. There may be amazing movies in the future, but none will have more of an impact than The Godfather did on America.

The World in the Cold; A Review of The Little Ice Age

 

From 1300-2000, the world had seen many events unfold. Wars that destroyed cultures and new nations being formed. However, one thing people never consider was the weather in this time. Many people don’t see the weather as important, but in fact it was a major contributor to this time period and is best described by Brian Fagan.

 

 

Brian Fagan is the author of the book The Little Ice Age, a non fiction book that tells the story of the Little Ice Age; a period in the world where the weather was extremely cold and how it was able to impact society. While the story does show how the weather was a key factor in many historical events, overall it was an average read at best.

             

The story itself is interesting when you look at it from a historical perspective, but the story just wasn’t able to get my attention. It basically droned on about how the weather was cold and there was starvation and death. Now, not everything in this book was uneventful. The sections on how Vikings settled in Greenland and how new innovations in food came, like the introduction of the potato and putting salt on cod to keep it fresh in the pre “refrigerator” era, were interesting and informative The pictures showing the world and the effect of sea currents also were interesting as it allowed the audience to see how ocean currents impacted the world.

 

The problem with the book was that it just seemed to drone on about different statistics and events in history. It kept relating back to important weather patterns and it also talked about the North Atlantic Oscillation, which itself is interesting, but the way it was presented just made itself boring. Now, this is not an attack against nonfiction altogether. Nonfiction is an interesting genre because it allows readers to experience events that actually happened. However, this book just droned on about different events that happened in history with nothing to grab the readers attention.

 

This is an interesting concept and it could have been an interesting story had it been told in a more interesting way. While the story altogether bores the reader, Brian is able to make great use of the rhetorical triangle. The reader is initially drawn into the story from the summary, which allows Fagan to establish his ethos, or character. The audience learns that he is a historian with a great knowledge on this topic. Fagan is also able to establish logos, or logic, almost every chapter, backing up all of the claims he made with hard proof. The only area where he would have to struggle is in pathos, or emotion. He draws on little sympathy from the reader when depicting the amount of death during the Black Plague, but as this is just a recap of 700 years, he is unable to fully develop pathos from the reader, effectively losing the reader's attention.

Overall, the book rates out to be average at best. The information presented in here is credible and it doesn’t seem to contain any fallacies. However, the way its presented causes the reader to wonder if they’re just reading the same concept over and over again. He could have tried and described the citizens freezing from the cold or go more in depth on the volcano that erupted and how its ash affected the ozone. The attention span of a reader is generally weak. In order to fully grab someone’s attention, a writer needs to not only create a good hook, but also to entertain the reader so that they won’t get bored halfway through the book and give up on it completely.

 

 While Fagan’s book isn’t the most eventful read, the way he presented his information was incredible and it allows the audience to view an unknown phenomenon caused the world’s society to shape into what it is today. This topic may interest some readers who have an interest in history or science. However, the endless drone about death and starvation causes this book to be an unpopular read.

 

Fallacies in The Big Bang Theory (CC)

Since we have been studying fallacies and what affect they have in writing, I thought it would be interesting to look at fallacies in one of my favorite TV shows, The Big Bang Theory. To start, a fallacy is an argument that uses poor reasoning, with many fallacies ending up being false. Heading back to The Big Bang Theory the show mainly revolves around the antics of Sheldon Cooper and his friends, I noticed that there are a few fallacies in this sitcom. One was in an episode where Sheldon and his friends return home after living in the Arctic for three months. Sheldon's very religious mother believed that it was the prayers from her church group that brought him back safe. this demonstrates a false cause fallacy, as she believed that the prayers brought him back. Another fallacy that is used a lot in the Big Bang Theory is reductio ad absurdum. It may be unknown to a lot of people, but it is where someone uses another persons argument and extended it to extreme proportions in order to insult the person. This is used a lot against Sheldon by his friends, as he tends to overthink every single detail.


As demonstrated, Reductio ad Absurdum can be useful in the right situations. Basically, its like using sarcasm against someone or something, exaggerating stuff to insult it. This type of fallacy is used a lot in TV shows mainly to blow things out of proportion and give the audience a good laugh.

Fallacies are a very interesting device in writing. When I was initially introduced to this concept, it didn't make a whole lot of sense and it left me confused. However, once we began to look closely at different types of fallacies, I finally understood its meaning and I enjoy them very much. I really look forward to exploring them more in English.

Wow. A post about Sarcasm (Rhetorical Device)

I decided to post about sarcasm mainly because it is used a lot in my family and it is an interesting way to grab attention from the reader. Sarcasm is a type of irony where someone who is praising something is in fact criticizing it. An example is when someone in my family says something really obvious, my dad usually responds with "Nothing gets by you." Sarcasm is a fun device because when it is used, it usually brings enjoyment to the reader and allows the reader to become comfortable with the writing. Sarcasm is mainly used in television shows like The Big Bang Theory with situations that causes the characters to insult a situation in the form of a compliment. However, in the case of Sheldon Cooper, some people may need to be told of sarcasm (or have a sign).


This is done in sitcoms in order to not only get the audience to laugh, but to drag them in. It establishes a sense of humor and allows them to become comfortable with the material. If someone where to use it in a speech, it would humor the audience and create a state of safety; they are comfortable with the speaker because of the sarcasm. While this isn't a very popular device used in formal writing, it is a very interesting and fun device and I enjoy using it in everyday life.

Neil Patrick Harris: Best Host Ever

With the Emmy's less than three weeks away, many people are asking questions already. Who will win best drama series? Will Modern Family take best comedy for the fourth time in a row? And of course, how will Neil Patrick Harris open the show with? Neil Patrick Harris has been one of my favorite actors for a while, not just because of his work in How I Met Your Mother, but also from his many times hosting the Tony's and his appearances on Broadway. I was first interested in him when he sang a Broadway like number in How I Met Your Mother. I then found an article on him on MSN called Neil Patrick Harris: Host with the Most. It talked about how Harris will be hosting the upcoming Emmy's and then showed off his life, highlighting important points in his career as an actor. I had some knowledge of his work before HIMYM (How I Met Your Mother), but I was fully immersed in this article. First appearing on TV at the age of 16, he captivated America as Doogie Howser, a 16 year old doctor in the 80's show Doogie Howser, M.D. He then had a very successful career on Broadway and was reintroduced to Hollywood with his appearance in a Harold and Kumar movie. He then went on to his most famous role, Barney Stinson in How I Met Your Mother. He then went on to become hosts of many award shows, including hosting the Emmy's three times and the Tony awards four times. For me, his best moment was the opening to the 2012 Tony Awards (link to video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqL2PFbgqf0).

 It is sad to think that HIMYM is on its final season and that his breakthrough character is leaving, but this may open up new opportunities for the actors. Overall, Neil Patrick Harris is an outstanding actor and I have no doubt that the Emmy awards will be amazing.
Link to Article - http://t.entertainment.msn.com/neil-patrick-harris-host-with-the-most#image=8

Rhetorical Triangle Assignment

The plot of Devil in the White City is the events surrounding the World's Fair in Chicago. It tells the story of Daniel Burnham, the architect behind the fair and Dr. H. Holmes, a doctor turned murder. Erik Larson must have some interest in the World's Fair to do all the research into the story of Burnham and Holmes. This subject is interesting because the World's Fair isn't a topic normally discussed in history. Really, a lot of people don't even know what the World's Fair was. Larson is able to show the readers the background behind the fair and how it affected America. The audience also experiences how difficult it was to build the fair and also the amazing inventions that came from it, like the Ferris Wheel. He also shows another story that was unknown to anyone for years. The story of Holmes is chilling and provides the reader with suspense. Devil in the White City is a thrilling read and was not only informative, but also had a unique style of writing.

Eric Larson is able to elicit emotion in this book mainly through the crimes committed by Holmes. Not only does the audience feel the emotions felt by his victims, but also the suspense leading up to their deaths. He also draws in shock from the gruesome acts Holmes committed, like burying three children alive. They also feel sympathy for his victims through their deaths and also allowing Holmes to trick them into giving him control of their assets. There is also emotion through Burnham's story. The audience feels sympathy and sadness when one of Burnham's best friends dies, leaving him with the task of taking on the whole fair on his own. Their is also amazement when the fair is finally finished and all the wonders it brought into the world, like Shredded Wheat and the Ferris Wheel.

Larson employ's logos mainly through his style of writing. He switches the story between Burnham and Holmes every other chapter. He begins by introducing the fair and then tells the early lives of Burnham and Holmes. He then tells the story of everything that led up to the fair, such as the finding the sight, working fast to build it, and also showing Holmes build his "fortress." He does this to give the reader two different perspectives of the event. The timeline remains the same, but the perspective on the event is always changing which allows the audience to truly experience the World's Fair through the eyes of both men.

Eric establishes ethos immediately by beginning with the end of Daniel Burnham. The way he begins the novel shows that Burnham is somewhat respected. He then shows the early life of Burnham and continues this idea of respect when Burnham is put in charge of designing and creating the great fair. He also shows the deviousness of Holmes. He shows his backstory and how, even at a young age, Holmes was skilled in deception and Larson also has small stories of architects who were hired to build Holmes' fortress. He immediately shows how Holmes will become the antagonist in the story.

The Devil in the White City Question 10

Final Blog Post
Question 10: What effect does the book have on you beliefs thoughts and theories? Explain.
Reading this book really gave me a unique perspective on the World's Fair. It's amazing to think that the crimes committed by Holmes' would remain undiscovered until years later. It's also amazing to think that an event like this was unknown. Until I read that book, I had no knowledge at all about the World's Fair and had no interest in it. Even when Holmes' was found guilty back in the 19th century, no one knew anything about his work, except for those who read the papers with his story. Erik Larson was able to bring to light this story. After reading this, I now begin to wonder of other crimes committed at events in history that no one knows about. It's possible that at other major events around the world (other expositions, centennials, etc.) awful crimes were committed that no one knew about. This book has opened my eyes to a whole new world of thought. There are incredible crimes that have been committed around the world that no one knows about. The fact that Holmes and his murders went unnoticed is amazing. However, regardless of how the book changed my outlook on the world, it was an amazing book and I enjoyed reading it.

The Devil in the White City Question 9

Question 9: Would you read another book by this author? Why or why not?
There is no question that this was an amazing book. The way Larson was able to transition between the characters was amazing. The story itself was incredible. As a review says, "So good, you find yourself asking how you could not know this already" (Esquire), which I completely agree to. The story of the murders that took place was incredible and the fact that until this book, little people knew about the event is unbelievable. I was impressed by the research Larson must have done to learn all about this event. I probably would read another of Larson's books. The way he was able to portray the event was incredible and his style of writing was entertaining and unique. He was also able to capture the emotions felt by the characters, namely the fear from the women Holmes would murder. I will admit that it took a while for myself to truly enjoy the book. However, it was when the fair finally took place that I appreciated the story. I enjoyed his book very much and would be very interested in reading another one of his stories.

The Devil in the White City Question 3

Question 3: What is the most important event or passage in the text? Why?
This story depicts the lives of Holmes and Burnham throughout the Worlds Fair in 1893. However, most of Holmes' story involves him building a "castle" which he names the World's Fair Hotel. He planed on building the hotel to lure young women to stay there during the fair. Throughout most of the book, it becomes evident that Holmes is murdering these young women with the motivation of having them fall in love with him so that when they are killed, he can cease their assets through the use of aliases. However, due to his wit, Holmes is able to outsmart the police and gets away with the murders. It is not until 1895 that he is finally caught and reveled.

While being held by Philadelphia Police, the story leaves Burnham and turns to a secondary protagonist, Geyer, a detective who begins to investigate Holmes. During this part of the story, the mood turns into suspense as the detectives eventually investigate Holmes' "castle." Upon reaching the basement the passage became lifelike; "The eeriest phase of the investigation began when the police, holding their flickering lanterns high, entered the hotel basement, a cavern of brick and timber measuring 50 by 165 feet. The discoveries came quickly: a vat of acid with eight ribs and part of a skull settled at the bottom; mounds of quicklime; a large kiln; a dissection table stained with blood" (Larson 364). This passage was crucial to the novel because it finally revealed that Holmes was a murderer and had been outwitting the police and other companies, all in the pursuit of money.

The Devil in the White City Question 4

Question 4. What parts distract from the work's overall effectiveness? Why?
Throughout the book, the story flashes between Burnham and Holmes, the main characters. However, during Holmes' part, it branches off from his point of view and instead reveals the lives of the women he is around and how he manipulates them. While these passages are important to the development of Holmes' role, overall they are distracting to the story. I will admit that the passages are interesting as it gives the readers a chance to explore the mind of Holmes' victims and see how he was able to manipulate them. However, it doesn't really have an effect on the novel. The passages mainly talk about their life and how they met Holmes and began a relationship with him.

Personally, the stories on the girls are very annoying. I would prefer to have the story told with Holmes' view and not other people involved with him. The first few chapters gave me insight on Burnham, but not a whole lot on Holmes. Most of his parts in the story have nothing to do with him and focus on other people. Obviously, the ending will reveal why he's killing so many young women, but the mystery and suspense is great. While the passages with him are full of suspense, they only last for a short time and then it switches back to the women's view, and their passages have no effect on the story at all.

The Devil in the White City Question 2

The Devil in the White City has a unique form of writing. The text flashes back and forth between Burnham, the architect and protagonist, and Dr. Holmes, the serial killer and antagonist. In the beginning, I saw the text as interesting, flashing back between Holmes and Burnham. It reminded me of another series, The Lorien Legacies. The second and third books in the series use the same style of writing as this book, flashing back and forth between the protagonists. Upon making the connection, I was compelled to continue on into the book. While the text is very unique, I prefer one over the other. For some reason, I am more interested when in the book when I am reading about Burnham. At times, Holmes' story does strike me with intrigue, I cannot immerse myself in the story. However, I am certain that later in the book, Holmes' role will develop more and I will be able to become more interested in his story.

The Devil in the White City Question 1

When I was first introduced to The Devil in the White City, I didn't think much off it. I had heard about it before, but was confused as to the meaning of the title. However, it did give off a sense of mystery and intrigue that calls to the reader. Before beginning the book, I imagined that the title referred to some sort of mystery. I was also aware that the story took place in Chicago, as "The White City" was a name used to describe a part of the city.  Upon reading the prologue, the title becomes clear. The title refers to the murders that happened at the Chicago World's Fair in 1893. The "devil" refers to the murderer, who compared himself to the actual creature and gave the appearance of it, while the White City was the nickname given to the fair. The prologue also opens the story up to the main character Daniel Burnham, the architect of the fair. The story itself is Burnham reminiscing about the past and remembering the terror that took place at the fair.  While the book doesn't start out as appealing, it eventually taps into the readers interest. I personally was intrigued by the descriptive language that described the crimes committed by the murderer: "Even the street-hardened members of the city's Whitechapel Club, named for the London stalking grounds of Jack the Ripper, were startled by what detectives eventually found inside and by the fact that such grisly events could have gone undiscovered for so long" (Larson 6). The imagery from this passage grabbed my attention and drew me into the story. While the title may not be as appealing to many readers, the content of the book is amazing and provides an entertaining story to enjoy.