Never Let Me Go Post

Link- https://www.ted.com/talks/ed_gavagan_a_story_about_knots_and_surgeons

This Ted Talk by Ed Gavagan was a story about his life when he was stabbed by some gangbangers and luckily survived. He used his story to make the argument that everything that happens in your life happens for a reason and shapes what happens in your life later; and all the moments and people in your life help shape who you are. He starts by describing the predictability of life. He then talks about one of his common subway rides. One night on his subway ride there were these two college age students practicing tying knots on some string. He was a little confused by this until a man came over to help the two college students. He later found out that these two kids were medical school students practicing the latest and greatest suturing knots, and the man that came over to help them happened to be the professor of the seminar the students were on their way to see. The idea sent Gavagan into a flashback of his story about how he was stabbed. It brought him to his time in the ambulance after he was almost killed by the gangbangers. He then describes his surgeries he had to go through and the chances he had at survival. He was lucky to survive and the doctor tells him that he had about a %2 at living. He is now back on his subway train thinking about showing his scars from surgery to the med students and then he thinks that he probably shouldn't. He uses this story to highlight his main thesis on life to connect is first ever scar from his umbilical cord and his other scars connecting. His brush up with the gangbangers is what lead him to his medical team and his medical team helped him push back against the chaos.

Gavagan uses many different types of emotional appeal to portray the meaning of his talk to the audience. He first uses the predictability of life to connect with the members of the audience who often experience the same predictability. He then uses emotional appeal through the story of the two med students trying to learn suture knots on the train before their seminar. He also uses his story of facing death after he was stabbed to really draw emotion from the audience and allow them to connect with him as he is telling the story. Gavagan use of emotional appeal in multiple circumstances was effective at driving home his point that the experiences we have in life and the people in our life shape us into the person we are because without his scuffle with the gangbangers he would have not met his medical team. He also uses the example of the two med students. If they had not been practicing suture knots on the train they would never receive help from the professor who taught them in the future.

The title of the ted talk is what really grabbed my attention. I wanted to be an orthopedic surgeon one day so I thought I could relate to this story very easily. I hope that one day I can make differences in my patients lives like Gavagans surgeon made a difference in his life and helped shape him into the person he is today.

Blog Post #8 - Double Indemnity

Question 3 - Double Indemnity has been called “a film without a single trace of pity or love.” Do you agree with this statement? Think about the motivations that lie behind the actions of Walter Neff and Phyllis Dietrichson when you consider your response.

Double Indemnity is outlined very well with the quote that describes the film as "a film without a single trace of pity or love". I have to agree with this statement to a great extent. I agree with this for a couple of reasons. They relationships between the characters in the movie show the lack of pity or love that is present in the movie. The interaction between the main characters is the prime example that classifies Double Indemnity to not have a trace of love or pity. The main female character Phyllis Dietrichson takes advantage of both her husband and the main male character Walter Neff. Phyllis came up with the plan of getting life insurance for husband and then having her husband killed so she can gain access to the insurance money. She puts her plan into action when the insurance man Mr. Neff comes by her house in hopes to see Mr. Dietrichson in order to sort out the insurance for his vehicles.  Mrs. Dietrichson starts to flirt with Mr. Neff to gain his attention and his trust. Once she gains his trust she convinces him to be her accomplice to the murder of her husband. The willingness of Mrs. Dietrichson to kill off her husband just so she can receive the insurance money is the first example that shows how Double Indemnity is "a film without a single trace of pity or love".

Another relationship that fuels to the lack of pity and love within Double Indemnity is the relationship between Mr. Neff and Mrs. Dietrichson. The relationship starts when Mrs. Dietrichson manipulates Mr. Neff by appealing to his emotional side to become her accomplice in killing her husband in order to obtain the insurance money. There is not pity or love shown to Mr. Neff by Mrs. Dietrichson when she decides to use him to get her way. At the end of the film Mr. Neff goes back to the Dietrichson house when he finds out that Phyllis has been sneaking around with her step daughters boyfriend Nino and there is an investigation in the death of Mr. Dietrichson. Phyllis shoots Mr. Neff in the shoulder when he gets there. He is still standing and he urges her to do it again but she can't. Mr. Neff then goes on to kill Phyllis. The ability of the two to be able to shoot the person they supposedly love is a prime reason that Double Indemnity is considered "a film without a single trace of pity or love". The commonality between all the relationships within Double Indemnity is that at least one person is taking advantage of the other if not both of them. The presence of characters using others is why I believe to a great extent that Double Indemnity is "a film without a single trace of pity or love".