The cultural significance behind the machete

The supplemental text I chose to apply was "What is a machete anyways?" by John Cline which an article about the history of the machete across various cultures and time periods

The writer brings a more modern and relatable point of view into the the mix. Since in this day in age almost everybody in America has a smartphone it makes it more easier for the readers to understand the point he is trying to make. Then brings up a controversial point of Arab terrorist using smart phones to act out violence. A entirely different but similar view to take based on the machete argument. It strengthens his claims, the more some isolates different realms of reason the more the topic can handled more circumspectly. (Haltman 7). He broadens his horizons by presented a more relatable topic to the audience instead of just sticking to just a provincial topic of farming tool and weaponry.

Media shapes culture, culture shapes society, and society can shape politics. It is cultural examples such as these that really show how influential media can be. Especially in movies that glorify tools to be weapons. Haltman states that there are metaphysical aspect that embody culture.

The writer bring in the view of revolt which runs deep in American culture since really the foundation of America was based on revolutions. This article was most likely published to feature an American audience so by bridging its emotional and cultural history is a great persuasive tactic. Though it never explicitly said revolts the use of slaves and pheasants using machetes as a weapon can imply such. The writer is trying to discretely imply this notion to the reader in order to make them think and have a deeper and more personal connection with the topic.

It amazing to think that a simple farming tool used for corn can become the embodiment for killing and terror. The machete is not the only " tool" this is happened to. The ever so famous ninjas of Japan were actually simple farming tools before the iconized as weapon for Asia most notorious assassins. Small katana were used for slicing crops but have become a trademark weapon for the group. And even scythes that were used for cutting down wheat plants has become culturally a symbol of death held by the grim reaper to rip the souls out of the living. It just goes to show that an object can have two polar ideas based on culture and significance.

These historical contexts make a strong point of evidence to argument. A lot of times when examining a object its historical meaning comes to mind and bringing up dark historical points in America's history of slavery to argument brings up some emotional feelings to the mix. It goes beyond the scholarly talk of an object and expands the idea of the object to further the readers interpretation of it. By using more of these emotional deductions it serves as a bridge to speculation about meaning for the reader. (Haltman 8)

Tools or weapons can be best described in words and how the reader sees the object after that is all dependent on the writers diction and view. In descriptions "writers generate a set of carefully selected nouns, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, and to effectively determine the bounds pf possible interpretation." (Hatlman 6) Using words such as "violence" or "deadly" will most likely make it seem like a weapon in this instance. More than anything the type of diction that a phrase has can drastically change what the word will mean or what it will mean to the reader.

This section brings up a very interesting point in the argument, though uncommon in the U.S many places outside the U.S use a machete as a tool (especially in tropical rain forrest areas) but in many part of American culture it's depicted as weapons such as movies, video games, and entertainment outlets. This could be what Prown calls a polarity which in turn finds material expression in a language of formal oppositions. That one single object what mean two completely perpendicular concepts. It can be perceived as one or the other depending on point of view of the beholder.

I am applying the "What is a Machete, Anyway" as my supplemental text and the main idea of that article is expressing how there are various interpretations of what a Machete is actually. Some people see it as a tool while others see it as a weapon. Everyone's view on a particular object is not the same because of cultural differences. In the article, Cline says himself, "the machete bears an unusual character. It’s possible to conceive of it as a weapon, yes, but it’s also very much a tool — not altogether different from, say, a shovel."

In relations to the "What is a Machete, Anyway" article where the machete can be described as a weapon but also as a tool, relates to this specific line in terms of how people look at objects differently.

As related to the primary text, the interpretations of what a machete is defined as can be viewed differently from all aspects. From a law standpoint, they see the machete as a weapon because it is a sharp object but others see it as a tool because it can be compared to a table saw or an ax.

This goes back to the primary researches statement of culture having an affect on how people see objects. Some cultures use machetes as actual tools i.e the "corn knife" while others see it as a weapon because they have seen it being used in that way.