Seeing Things Differently. The Lot by Michael Leunig
Context: The prompt, we believe what those who are stronger than us tell us to believe, draws ideas from every day events and experiences. It poses the idea that reality is contagious and is never true. What we believe in varies, it varies on what people say to us and how we present our beliefs to others. Therefore, the influence of other, stronger civilian’s beliefs manipulates the beliefs of those lower than them.
Purpose: I strive to use Leunig’s persona to challenge the prompt. Michael Leunig is a very strong man, who is not that easily persuaded by others beliefs. I want the reader to understand what it takes to stand for something. I want the reader to also realise what it feels like to stand up for something which you truly believe in and not get pressured into believing things that go against your heart. I want the reader to know that it is okay, to believe what you deem personally appropriate to believe.
Audience: This piece would be aimed at the professional to the trade adults of Australia who show an interest in compressed national affairs. A 60 minute, quick, wrap-up of national issues, with a generally one-sided opinion focusing on the negative, or the incredibly admirable. There will be an assumed relationship between the reader and Leunig as seen in the articles that were published in his book The Lot in Words. 60 Minutes supplements the enjoyment of a Sunday post-dinner watch with the family. The audience would be familiar with and often understanding to the straight-forward nature of 60-minute presenters. In this case, Liz Hayes and this will enlarge the reader’s opinion to automatically be biased to Liz.
Form: By using Leunig’s naturally discursive tone, I attempt to bring Leunig’s ideas, values, beliefs and life experiences into context. I want the reader to realise how Leunig’s strong beliefs and wit, make him an exception to the prompt, we believe what those who are stronger than us tell us to believe. By creating a discussion between two
Purpose: I strive to use Leunig’s persona to challenge the prompt. Michael Leunig is a very strong man, who is not that easily persuaded by others beliefs. I want the reader to understand what it takes to stand for something. I want the reader to also realise what it feels like to stand up for something which you truly believe in and not get pressured into believing things that go against your heart. I want the reader to know that it is okay, to believe what you deem personally appropriate to believe.
Audience: This piece would be aimed at the professional to the trade adults of Australia who show an interest in compressed national affairs. A 60 minute, quick, wrap-up of national issues, with a generally one-sided opinion focusing on the negative, or the incredibly admirable. There will be an assumed relationship between the reader and Leunig as seen in the articles that were published in his book The Lot in Words. 60 Minutes supplements the enjoyment of a Sunday post-dinner watch with the family. The audience would be familiar with and often understanding to the straight-forward nature of 60-minute presenters. In this case, Liz Hayes and this will enlarge the reader’s opinion to automatically be biased to Liz.
Form: By using Leunig’s naturally discursive tone, I attempt to bring Leunig’s ideas, values, beliefs and life experiences into context. I want the reader to realise how Leunig’s strong beliefs and wit, make him an exception to the prompt, we believe what those who are stronger than us tell us to believe. By creating a discussion between two