The author of the email uses specific word choice that communicates their tone as highly dismissive. Specifically, the word "pretending" characterizes the opposing view as irrational and on the basis of no fact. The author takes this a step further by flat out calling those possessing the opposing view "delusional".

Here, the linguistic mode is employed by the author of that email and Keegan himself. By characterizing the email as hurtful prior to the audience reading what was said, Keegan influences the perspective they would have on the content of the email.

By linking transgender sexual assault to the anatomical possession of a vagina... after introducing statistics supporting the fact that transgender individuals have a higher rate of experiencing sexual violence than cisgender women, Compton emphasizes Keegan's argument.

This highlights the rhetorical power word choice has in presenting a point of view. By making this an "if, then" statement, Keegan implies that those who support the pink 'pussyhat' in the name of "reproductive rights" aren't actually being sincere in their claim to inclusion of transgender individuals.

The placement of this quote directly after Suh's explanation that the hat is a metaphor for "any person or group who can relate to feeling marginalized" is an example of spatial mode. By doing this, Compton exposes the paradox in having an item that physically represents a pink vagina be a metaphor for "any person or group who can relate to feeling marginalized".

The abruptness of the first sentence was intentional on Compton's part, contrasting the description of The Pussyhat Project's success at the Women's March and presence on the cover of Time Magazine.

Compton employs the spatial mode here by having this quotation stand alone. This was likely done in an effort to emphasize Suh's argument.

By using the word "captured", Compton implies that the president was caught doing something wrong by his comment being made public. One who believes the president was not in the wrong would find this to be problematic. This would be an example of linguistic mode through the means of word choice.

This quotation from the co-founder of the Pussyhat Project highlights the influence of the gestural mode on rhetoric. By pausing after the word 'feminine', the speaker is trying to build anticipation towards the next point she's about to make with the purpose of emphasizing it.

This introduces the reader to the issue Compton will be tackling in this article. It is a clear example of the linguistic mode Arola/Ball describes. Specifically, Compton's delivery of both sides of the "pussyhat" argument help to develop the purpose of this article-- to inform readers of the recent critiques of the "pussyhat" and the reactions to it by supporters of the "pussyhat".

add extra spacing or a line or something

make 1-5 an actual paragraph.

put in alphabetical order

add in those questions

make it "sound better" for extra points.

Overall, this panel sounds great! You really just need to build on the basics you have here and show what about the individual characteristics of the panel gives it a "further meaning".

Instead of culture, the word 'heritage' may be clearer. A great research idea could be on the popular American and Puerto Rican culture while Laureano was alive. This is another opportunity for deeper research into the panel and material culture.

This is just a simple grammatical error. "The panel makes up 6 x 3 feet on a 12 x 12 feet block. This is the size of all of the panels--no more no less"

What would make Marilyn Monroe inspirational to Laureano? What cultural influence did she have at the time of his death? You could probably add some research on that in a separate section specific to that detail on the quilts.

This would also be a great place to do some secondary research. Why is there a baby chick by the palm tree? Why is the American flag and Puerto Rican flag separate, since Puerto Rico is a part of America? (I'm Puerto Rican and there's definitely political information that would explain why.)

For each of these, you may want to cover them individually so that you can have more description.

I like how you touch of the effect the color/font of the words on the viewer. Maybe you should add a close up photo here to let the viewer see the lettering themselves.

Since the study of material culture involves interpreting the significance of an object's role in one's life, the resulting conclusion will vary from person to person. Though Woodward does not directly state this in Material Culture, it is a given considering the subjectivity involved with interpreting an object's cultural importance.

By following Prownian analysis, one would gain as much understanding through writing about a particular object as they would observing it. Woodward never mentions writing as a part of the process of understanding the cultural significance of an object. Because of this, I believe Haltman's approach would lead to a much more accurate interpretation of an item's significance.

This suggests every object studied in material culture is significant, but in order to find its significance we must thoroughly understand the object at question. Aristotle's philosophical concept of teleology, the belief that every object in reality has its own nature and purpose in the world, is highly relevant here since the study of material culture rests on the presumption that teleology is true.

This highlights the importance of contextualizing an object in order comprehend its significance entirely. Woodward agree's with this, emphasizing how the study of material culture combines the natural and social sciences-- allowing us to understand an object's influence within its historical and cultural context.

Through the concept of objectification, Woodward describes the relationship between people and objects as an interconnected, dialectic one. This description implies a kind of constant dialog between an object and person where an object has an equally influential role in its owner’s life as the owner does in the object’s metaphorical life.

Here, Haltman digs deeper into description and advises us on the critical role vocabulary and language has on our ability to accurately interpret an object. In Material Culture, Woodward does not mention the effects of our language on the interpretation of an object considered to be material culture. In fact, she never advises the reader on how to study material culture themselves. Instead, she explains the meaning and history of the study of material culture

Woodward does not explore how/why we choose an object to study in Material Culture like Prown does here. Overall, Woodward does not offer her own opinions or theories regarding material culture, instead her piece reads as highly objective. This is unlike Prown, who offers his personal thoughts and attempts to define abstract concepts throughout the reading in companion to objective concepts as well. For this reason, I prefer the Haltman reading.

The study of material culture is centered upon analytically and methodologically exploring an object's physical properties and evaluating it in the context of the time and space it occupied to determine its cultural significance.

This is evident in philosophy, as metaphysical doctrines after Aristotle leaned towards materialism. Material culture reminds me of teleology, Aristotle's' belief that every object in the universe has its own nature, place in the world, and purpose. Material Culture is similar to this in that it is concerned with how a specific object has influenced people in a certain cultural space and time.

Material culture studies, at its core, is concerned with the relationship between people and objects. This relationship can look differently from person to person, since every persons relationship with a particular object way be different.

This shows how the characteristics of an item and its meaning are interconnected. Material culture studies are concerned with more than how an object was used within its cultural time period.