Analyzing Blue Glass...

Outsourcing: An Indian Perspective

Apurva Bose, a published architect, explores the rise and popularity of outsourcing in Indian, focusing on the outsourcing of architectural jobs from western countries to India in Outsourcing: An Indian Perspective.  She aims to inform and display the advantages and disadvantages obtained by both India and "the West" from the "outsourcing bandwagon".  She explores the degree of labor work produced by Indians as well as the degree to which they are losing their "creativity".  By building her ethos and using effective and rhythmic parallel structure, Bose creates a strong argument to simply illustrate the outcomes of western countries shipping off their projects and designs to poor countries such as India.

Bose integrates her back story on life after graduation to increase her authority on the subject of the architecture industry in India.  She even goes on to saying that she was invited into the world of outsourcing when she was "offered a position by a leading outsourcing architectural firm in Noida, India."  But introducing herself right from the start, she has already won our trust as a credible writer and encourages us to read further.  Further on, she explains why she declined her job, describing her fear of losing her "creativity in drafting plans, making 3D models".  She uses powerful diction when saying it was "killing the innovation" that she "could only give birth to".  Her honesty on the thought of working for an outsourcing firm proves her credibility even more and the confidence in her position exhibits her authority on the subject.

While keeping an unbiased perspective on outsourcing in India, Bose makes many small, explicit claims on how each individual aspect of outsourcing affects both the West (specified as US and Europe) and India.  Her overall point is that outsourcing had grown impressively as the times change in India.  She describes its immense popularity, especially among fresh graduates, such as herself.  To elaborate on the growth of outsourcing, Bose further explains the benefit it has on the West and their need to balance labor work with the actual "conceptual designing".  By shipping off the jobs related to drafting, modeling, and constructing to India, they have more room and time to develop stronger designs and ideas for future projects in their firm.  Later on, however, she mentions the limitations of creativity, once again, that are experienced by Indian workers and the "alienation" of their own identity in their home country when working for foreign corporations.  Despite mentioning their deprivation of creativity, Bose explains that Indians are ready to take on the outsourcing industry.  They are excited to be trained in fields that they are not quite experienced with and it is a learning experience for them.  By exploring the different dimensions of the growth of outsourcing, she effectively gives the essay an unbiased perspective.  Her counterarguments pertaining to how Indians feel about outsourcing despite the limit on creativity and her own personal view of outsourcing gains her more credibility thus, indirectly building her ethos through her claims.

Towards the end of the essay, when Bose concludes her thoughts on architectural outsourcing between the West and India, parallel structure is used to emphasize the importance of outsourcing and inevitability of the position it holds in the future of both economies.  By expressing that "outsourcing is here to stay, to grow, and to flourish", not only does it effectively summarize the prevalence of outsourcing in India, but she also implies that despite the disadvantages it may carry, outsourcing with always remain a part of our economies as long as we ask others to fulfill duties of our own corporations.

Bose's expansive perspective on the effects of outsourcing on Indian economy successfully states how India can gain skills and experience from the jobs shipped  to them from the US and Europe as well as how outsourcing is hindering their growth as talented architects with the capability of designing great structures.

Offshoring in Egypt

As of recently, Egypt has been appointed "Offshoring Destination of the Year" by the European Outsourcing Association (EOA) (2010).  It was ranked 7th out of the Top 50 emerging outsourcing cities in 2008 (currently ranked 12th).  A report by the Yankee Group mentions that Egypt is "by far the Middle Eastern country currently best positioned to take advantage of the boom in outsourcing."  Martyn Hart, a chairman of the EOA said that Egypt "stood out for its multilingual capabilities" and "has proven itself a strong player for European outsourcers and a gateway to the Middle East and Africa."  Egypt is quite strong in their outsourcing skills and have grown to be very powerful in their economy by doing business all over the world, associated with multiple countries in Europe, Asia, as well as with USA.

Egypt has been recognized for having the best average wages with low costs.  The diversity in population as well as language is ideal for many European countries.  Speaking Spanish, German, French, English, etc. enhances communication skills between countries and makes exportation and importation much easier and accessible between Europe and Egypt.  Location wise, Egypt is nested between Europe and Asia, which is their ticket to over 20 countries who they can potentially do business with them.  Because of they are on GMT, they are able to attend to all business in Europe, Asia, and the US.  Major companies have invested in Egypt including Microsoft, IBM, Satyam, Wipro, and Vodafone.

Many of the businesses that offshore in Egypt continue to offshore regardless of the chaos occurring in Egypt currently.  Vodafone is one company that is still committed to offshore to Egypt.  Kelly Moore, director of service says "Disruptions can occur anytime caused by any event. Location is not factor."  Although many staff members have had to return to New Zealand after attacks in Cairo, Moore still insists on offshoring in Egypt.  This proves that Egypt is a rising nation that has enough power to keep having countries offshore their employees and keep doing business with them.  

Businesses don't want to give up on offshore outsourcing in Egypt they are well known for their involvement in IT work with businesses mentioned earlier.  With it's incredible rank, they can do wonders for the economy of many countries including the USA.  

Works Cited:

• Chris, Keall. "Vodafone NZ Committed to Offshoring despite Egypt Chaos | The National Business Review." The National Business Review. N.p., 1 Feb. 2011. Web. 27 Mar. 2014.
• "Egypt." Sourceline. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2014.
• Sutton, Mark. "Egypt Appointed Offshoring Destination of the Year." ITP.net. N.p., 12 July 2010. Web. 27 Mar. 2014.
• Ted, Samson. "Egypt Ranked among Top Global Offshoring Destinations." InfoWorld. N.p., 2 Feb. 2011. Web. 27 Mar. 2014.

            

Is Auto-Correct Effective as a Mode of Language?

Language is a certain template we use in order communication our thoughts and feelings to others.  There are several template we can use to expresses ourselves.  Many times, they what a certain language to be the in language that everyone must fill.   By that isn't always the way it works.  We must accept it her modes of communization.  Over the years, did modes of communicate have been formed, such as using WMO and Alan.  These forms have developed as a useful way to express emotions when there is an absence of tone.  It has become such a Roy toast nobody takes the time to realize what they are writing. Autocorrect can be dangerously unhelpful while talking to someone.  Yet, everybody seems to use it because or is supposed to helpful.  Hence, this is another form of language that is formed in our generation and a way of communicating ideas with others.  It hinders our ability to communicate effectively because it may incorrectly correct our sentences, defeating the entire purpose of autocorrect.  For most, it has become an in convince. So, what's the point?  Why are we still using it after knowing how it truly work?  Is it driven by our lax?  Maybe.

Reflection:

I'll be honest here.  Originally, I had decided that I would write a post in my mother-tongue, Gujarati.  However, there were a few issues with that.  There is no easy way to transfer the characters of Gujarati onto blogger and even if there was, it would take my entire life to write this post.  When I decided that I would write it in transliteration, it dawned on my mother that some of the words just could not be written with the English alphabet.  Hence, it is obviously not a mode of communication that we write on paper.  

While writing my blog in autocorrect, I was unnecessarily slow and careful.  Obviously, I was supposed to make mistakes for the benefit of autocorrect.  I stopped and tried to figure out my painstakingly slow pace and came to the conclusion that I wasn't comfortable with misspellings and incorrect grammar and especially replacement of words.  But who is?

We grow up learning a certain way of speaking and writing and spelling, period.  We never really look out of the box of our particular language.  We don't realize that within our language, in this case English, there are many dialects and versions, whether it be Black English, autocorrect, emoticons, or even tweeting.  When I send a message and I realize that "communicate" was changed to "immunization", I literally go into panic mode.  And it because I have grown up being very particular about my spelling (well, most of the time) and it seems to be out of my comfort zone to see something misspelled or replaced in a sentence.      

Although autocorrect should not be relied on while sending messages to others, it opens our eyes to the idea that not everything needs to spelled right or have to make sense in order for a message to be conveyed.  Obviously, the above post is an extreme but sometimes, inferences can be made in order to decipher a message.  I don't think autocorrect is effective because it can twist the meaning behind a message but I don't think that it is wrong all the time because if you are able to understand something regardless of the imperfections, why try to change it?

Ukraine: The Role of Visual Propaganda

The recent and tragic events in Ukraine have created a devastating environment and atmosphere for all of the innocent citizens.  After Russia's invasion in various parts of Ukraine, including the capital, Kiev, destruction has been broadcasted all over the world.  Visual propaganda has played a major role in portraying the destructive and cruel behavior in Ukraine (primarily Kiev and Crimea) by Russia as well as using persuasive skills to display a certain message for the viewers concerned about the riots.

At first glance, your attention is drawn in my the joyous toddler sitting on the shoulders of who seems to be his father.  If you look further than the child, you realize that the setting are most probably in the middle of a protest.  So why is a child happily sitting on his father's shoulders in the midst of what could turn out to be an epic revolution?  This is what captures an audience.  A child showing positive spirit for his country appeals to a feeling of pride in a viewer.  It symbolizes the pride of the entire nation of Ukraine in one person.  I think, in any type of argument, using children creates a stronger emotion in the audience and a stronger message.  Without the child, we would still understand the abundance of dignity and honor in Ukraine.  However, we wouldn't FEEL the impact that we do with a young child.  This photo is an effective tool in presenting a persuasive case to audiences who could potentially oppose Russia.  Using pathos is sufficient for he context of this argument, only displaying protests.

This next one is slightly more political and favors the American point of view more.  In December, John McCain visited Ukraine to offer his support to the protesters.  Approaching the protesters with a friendly handshake and kind words created an acceptable reputation for John McCain and even America, as he was representing us as a nation.  If someone from a different country were to see this, they would initially believe that America is the "do-good" country and wants peace.  While that may be true, these photos definitely depict an ideal America that makes us look, frankly, better than we are.  But, nonetheless, it gives us a good reputation among other countries, which never hurts.    

The Bluest Eye: Exploring Gravity and Humor

In the The Bluest Eye, written by Toni Morrison, beauty and the severe consequences of a desire for beauty are written with such ease.  However, although the tone is nonchalant, it creates a massive impact on the reader and makes them question the importance of the event and message behind it.  For example, in the prologue, when we learn about the fact that Pecola's father impregnated her, we seem to skim that over until we reach our senses and understand that Pecola is having her father's child.  The entire novel is extremely serious and so are the events that occur within the story.  But the novel becomes humorous because of Morrison's negligence towards stressing such life changing and consequential events of the book.  

"We thought, at the time, that it was because Pecola was having her father's baby that the marigolds did not grow." (p. 5). 

While reading through this part, Morrison's voice speaks to the reader in a calm voice, almost as if she is trying to ease in the gravity of the situation at hand, Pecola's pregnancy.  But because her tone is so indifferent, it becomes funny, almost ridiculous.  It is almost as if she wants these tragic events to be not taken seriously or sympathetically.  A reader reacts in a humorous way because the tone gives off the feeling that the writer doesn't want us to take it seriously either.  

I was once told that some of the hardest things in life should be laughed off.  What if that is her true motive?  What if Morrison told us this story with no emotion and indifference to show us that at the end of the day, life still goes on and the hardest things should seem ridiculous to ease the pain?  

This also connects with her request to "take refuge in how" and not why.  She implies that knowing why is hard to handle and that the how leaves less room for emotional conflict.  And sometimes the why is not important.  Her nonchalant less appeal in her tone shows that although these events occurred, finding reasons for it won't change the occurrence.  The only thing we can do is laugh about it and minimize the seriousness held on to at the time.  

The tone and hidden motives of Morrison help us realize that although the events that led to Pecola's shame were  indescribably awful and tragic, our mindset should not be fixed on the negative belief towards why it happened and dwell on the sad parts of the story.  Readers should find hilarity and ridiculousness in order for the gravity of the story to be eased off as a heavy burden.  

  

Ad Analysis: Forced to Live in Peaceful Toleration

Handcuffs.  Hands.  Colors.  Denim.

Handcuffs.  Symbolize restraint.  Restriction.

Hands.  Symbolize surrender.  Submission.

Colors.  Symbolize diversity.  Different.

Denim.  Symbolize uniformity.  Similar.

Looking at this ad closely, the first thing I look at are the handcuffs.  They are firmly clasped on each wrist, symbolizing force and demand. Then my eyes move downward, to the hands.  Curled, weak fingers symbolize the reluctance and hesitation.  One white, one black.  Lastly, it moves to the clothes.  Both are wearing denim jeans and denim jackets, showing unity.

Subtlety is an incredibly powerful and important factor in creating a strong argument about racial peace for the general public in the ad.  Words and actions don't crowd the image, creating a simpler and clearer view of the message.  This ad shows the obvious reluctance and hesitance between both races.  The handcuffs show that they may not have to like each other but they must learn to tolerate each other and in order for them to do that, they must be forced through handcuffs.  At the same time, besides the color of the hands, everything else is uniform.  Both individuals are wearing denim.  This depicts the idea that just because someone's skin color is different, doesn't mean they are any different.  Denim proves this idea in the simplest way possible.

Notice that the ad is not promoting love.  You don't see a hug or a kiss, far from it.  Instead, you see surrendered hands in handcuffs.  Toleration is the main promotion.  Toleration of different races and different people.  The ad is, hence, less predictable and draws more attention from the audience.  It plays on a more realistic account rather than a fairy tale version, like a "happily ever after".  The structure of the hands show that neither one of them want to tolerate each other but since they are forced to, they will oblige.  Most influential ads go against assumptions and create an narrow angle of perspective that most of the general public may have never thought of before.  Depicting acceptance rather than perfect harmony shapes a more realistic and believable image in a typical viewer.

"United Colors of Benetton" is in stark green and quite hard to miss.  They have done their very best in letting people know that they endorse this cause.  And in doing that, they have gained more respect from the public and more customers.  Sales tactic?  Maybe, probably.  Creative?  Clever?  Definitely.            

In conclusion...(Final)

Over the course of this project, I have looked at day to day life very closely and analyzed just about anything that comes into hand, which is completely against my nature.  I have absolutely torn apart some of my favorite movies and shows.  But despite all of that, I have learned a lot from the hidden message behind media and daily life.

There is a very strong relationship between daily life and media.  Media influences our lives in more ways than one, whether it be movies, music, TV shows, etc.  This, in turn, influences our daily habits and routines.  It also influences our expectations and views on certain issues.  This in itself is quite risky.  The way media manipulates messages is tricky and can be taken the wrong way.  They can target younger audiences and brainwash them by slipping subtle messages in to cartoons, persuading them to believe a certain value.  And because of that, their entire view on reality changes.  If a majority of the movies shown to children send the message that girls must be skinny and graceful at all times, that is what they will soon believe in reality. 

Are those the messages we want to send to our youth?  Do we want to lead them into a false sense of reality?  Do we want them to start falling for the cruel and illogical stereotypes that media has set up for us?

I believe that we let media make decisions about how things should and should not be.  We let them decide that women should be portrayed as weak, helpless people.  We let them decide that people of color should be looked down upon.  We can't let media decide what our reality is.  Our reality consists of a variety of personalities and people.  Our reality consists of women in all sorts of shapes and sizes.  Our reality consists of people of all sorts of shades and personalities who have become successful, despite their ethnicity or race.  Our reality should not depend on media's judgment.

               

 Media will always be a part of our lives, whether we want it to be or not.  But do we want it to influence our lives as much as it already does?  Do we really want to live with a false sense of reality?  Do we really want to give into the stereotypes and labels?  What do we truly gain by it?  What do we gain by labeling women or different people?  Aren't we all humans, at the end of the day?  Do we really need a preconceived idea of what someone should or should not be? 

So, do we? 

Loitering the Streets on the East Side of Stamford, CT (#3)

Although Stamford, as a whole, is quite diverse and populated, separation of classes are still evident.  It is observed that even though you may see wealthy North side folks exploring the Taco Bell on East Main St. or the lower middle class taking a peak at the Trader Joe's on High Ridge Rd., at the end of the day, they will always migrate back to where they belong, or should I say, where they can afford.

          It's no secret that if you drive through the streets of the East Side, you probably won't find a country club or five star restaurants, but why is that?  

          Well, observations show that most of the public restaurants on the East Side are fast food and take out places.  You won't find a Capital Grille in midst of Subways and McDonalds.  And as I enter these eateries, I can't help but feel a little out of place and uncomfortable with the many eyes staring back at me, judging my "North Side" appearance.  And as I explore further through the streets, I see that the number of eyes do not decrease.  And that is when I realize that this is where they reside.  These cramped apartments hold hundreds of them.  The gas stations and restaurants employ them.  The city buses give them rides.  And that's how you can tell the evident distinctions and differences in different parts of Stamford.

          On East Side, you most likely won't find a Mercedes Benz or a BMW.  On the East Side, you most likely won't find three car garages.  On the East Side, you most likely won't find houses with multiple acres of land.  On the East Side, you most likely won't find country club owners. 

          So, although we preach equality and diverse unity every day, we must not forget where we "truly" belong.  We must not forget that at the end of the day, some of us just can't afford a regular tank of gas or the massive bill at Napa & Company.  We must not forget the unspoken rules and laws in different parts of the city.  We must not forget that some of us will never have the three car garage or BMW.  But don't worry, we are still equal and united and diverse.  But with limits and distinctions.  

Our whole universe was in a hot dense state...(#2)

As a normal viewer, The Big Bang Theory seems to be a witty and compelling show, designed for pure entertainment and fun.  But, under the wittiness lies mistaken views and hair-rising realizations.  

Leonard: Once you open the box it loses its value.

Penny: Ya, My mom gave me the same lecture about my virginity. 

Penny is an aspiring actress who is portrayed as a clueless blonde with no future after dropping out of community college.  And clearly, her features show it all:

As cliche as it looks, you have the entire package right in front you.  Her appearance screams "dumb blonde" to anyone watching and much to our dismay, she lives up to it.  You expect someone like Penny to talk about her virginity or her hair products.  And that is exactly what she is doing.  CBS sells us the old-fashioned stereotype about a woman's place.  As if all woman who have not moved on to higher education and want to be an actress are destined to become waitresses at the Cheesecake Factory wearing skimpy clothing and caking on layers of makeup.  But that is only one end of the spectrum.

At the far end of the other side of the spectrum lies Amy Farrah Fowler, Ph.D, a neurobiologist who graduated from Harvard University.  And, once again, her features show it all:

Amy Farrah Fowler: This is us. Bernadette, you are the analytical, scientific left hemisphere. Penny, you're the creative, spontaneous right hemisphere. And where's Amy? She's right here. The sad little tumor no-one wants to go dress shopping with.

With her thick rimmed glasses, sweater vest, and make-up-less face, her demeanor screams "nerd".  And, as always, she lives up to it.  She is shown many times as the isolated girl that no one wants to hang out with: "sad little tumor".  Proving that if you have achieved the highest of achievements and been successful in life, you will end up still being a friendless loser. 

That's the thing.  There is no in-between.  You either have "clueless airhead" or "lonely nerd".  It gives us a very distorted image of women, as if there are only 2 kinds out there, both giving off a negative connotation.  Who's to say all women with no college degree become waitresses?  Or that women with college degrees become isolated?  Can there not be women who have not received a college education and are still well off?  Or that women with college degrees do have friends?  Why does it have to be one way or the other, black and white? 

While creating an enthralling and hilarious sitcom, CBS has also encouraged unhealthy stereotypes about women, never letting us forget where we belong.     

How to Train Your Dragon: An Analysis on Child Entertainment (#1)

Hiccup Horrendous Haddock III, the lanky, awkward protagonist is portrayed as a weak, useless kid to the Vikings of the Isle of Berk.  Unable to handle the slaying of dragons, he is shoved into the back office to make weapons for the "cooler, stronger, and better" Vikings.  But, like any typical adventure movie, Hiccup bends the rules of staying away from dragons and ends up befriending them, against his father's wishes.  But in the end, he ends up saving his society from getting killed from the vicious, monstrous dragons (non-violently, of course), becoming the hero of the entire village, and getting the prize: a girl.  Somewhat cliché, don't you think?

                Astrid Hofferson, Hiccup's potential love interest, breaks just about every female stereotype in a hero's journey; she is headstrong and independent.  Yet, she is still not realistic.  Her body shape defies nature and in real life, she would be considered anorexic.  Her hair seems to fall perfectly over eyes and she is still graceful while fighting.  Although Astrid is portrayed as strong and capable, her personality is interpreted as mean and rude, almost like a bully.  She doesn't accept Hiccup because of his physic and inability to protect himself.  DreamWorks is sending a message to young girls that you can be courageous and tough but in order for you to be accepted that way, you still need an hour-glass body shape, perfectly tamed bangs, and radiate perfection at all times.  However, in the midst of perfection, you must remember that to be tough, you have to be mean to others.  If you come off as mean, people will take you more seriously as a girl.  What's that all about?  Do we really want girls, between the ages of 5-11, to feel ashamed because there bangs stick up or that they are nice to people?  And why should we lead them on to think that a man's love waits at the end of the tunnel?  Are these realistic messages?  Why are we convincing girls to starve themselves and bully others in order to be taken seriously? 

                Even though Astrid tries to break out of the girly shell and prove her capabilities, her male friends seem to try to push her back in.  Although subtle, there are a couple of moments in the film that prove to hint the true standing of the female stereotype.  DreamWorks, at times, goes against the anti-female stereotype by slipping in sayings such as "girls like flowers" or "watch out babe, I'll take care of this".  So what are they trying to prove?  Are they actually saying that despite being shrewd, clever, determined, competent, rude, and perfect, you will NEVER actually be taken seriously by males?  Are they convincing boys to believe that girls should always be known as the Damsel in Distress?  Are we, women, Damsel in Distresses?  

Apparently we are.

What Does it Mean to Own Something?

            According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of "own" is "belonging to oneself or itself —usually used following a possessive case or possessive adjective" or "used to express immediate or direct kinship".  But this definition seems too right, or correct.  Like many and most things in life, things aren't always black and white.  There are always gray areas.  In this definition, you have a very concrete answer given to you.  It is also objective, not a hint of emotion or opinion.  This makes it hard to find some sort of view on what the word means.  But, like some philosophical words, we must find the definition ourselves.  Ownership means being responsible for yourself and your actions.  Ownership goes much deeper than owning physical objects because owning those physical objects is what defines who you are and your actions.

            Owning your capabilities and actions creates a relationship with your values.  Bill Gates, former CEO of Microsoft, was once known as one of "the richest man alive".  He was ranked number two.  However, instead of using his money for selfish reasons, he created a foundation in 2000 and donated over 20 billion dollars to charity, regardless of all the power and money he had.  In this example, Gates was OWNING his capabilities but evidently doing something for the community with his own money rather than for himself; he was capable of doing something for somebody else and owned that capability.  This reflects on his values and personality because by looking at this, you can tell that he is passionate about not only financial success but also about common welfare of citizens.  Owning the satisfaction of helping others was clearly more important to him than owning billions of dollars. 

            Everyone has heard of the cliché saying "money can't buy you happiness".  But is it all that cliché?  When you go to the mall and buy those new Uggs or a new TV, does it really bring you true happiness?  Once again, the answer lies in relationship with capabilities and values.  No doubt, buying new materials creates a sense of excitement but the duration of that excitement depends on the person.  Someone who has very materialistic values may find permanent joy in having a collection of valuables at all times.  However, there may be someone else who only finds temporary joy in buying a new shirt or a watch.            

            What does this mean, though?  What idea this conclude?  Well, this proves my first point that not everything is black and white.  Through this analysis it has been hard to make a certain judgment on ownership because of the variety of personalities.  And to say that one person is wrong over the other would be incredibly invalid.  So, to conclude this thought process, ownership tends to grow deeper than objects to the  extent of how one person treasures them.  Ownership is more about how someone displays their values, capabilities, and actions when in the possession of these physical objects.