Proud to be an American?

     Comparing and contrasting are important elements within writing because they help hi-light the differences and similarities of certain topics. By comparing and contrasting we can make connections between topics or ideas, or instead distinguish them from one another.  When we establish relationships using comparing and contrasting a topic is analyzed. These elements give us a precise understanding of a topic, instead skimming its surface. 

       In Bharati Mukherjee’s essay “Two Ways We Belong in America,” we are given two different views of how two sisters assimilate to living in America. Bharati compares and contrasts her experiences of living in America to her sister Mira’s experiences. Mira viewed America as a place to study and work. She never truly accepted it as her home. Mira preserved her Indian culture and kept close ties with her mother country. “After 36 years as a legal immigrant in this country she clings passionately to her Indian citizenship and hopes to go home to India when she retires,” said Bharati (p.273). Bharati saw America as her home. She left her culture on the back burner in order to assimilate into American culture. Both sisters remained close relationship wise, but were the exact opposite when it came to their opinions. Bharati explained that her sister pitied her for her “lack of structure”, while she pitied her sister for “the narrowness of her perspective, her involvement with the mythical depths or the superficial pop cultures of society.”(p.273). Mira wanted the benefits of provided to immigrants without becoming a citizen,yet Bharati felt that these benefits come from being a citizen.

     The essay predominately focuses on the differences between the two sisters. Bharati opens up the essay by explaining how similar the two of them where when they were younger and how now each sister took her own path as they became older. “When we left India, we were almost identical in appearance and attitude. We dressed alike, in saris; we expressed identical views on politics, social issues, love, and marriage in the same Calcutta convent-school accent.”(p.272). The rest of the essay exemplifies the differences between the Bharati, a citizen of America, and her sister Mira, an immigrant.

     I believe that the argument of this essay is to find which of the “Two Ways to Belong in America” is best. You can legally belong to America by being an immigrant with a green card, or you can choose to become a citizen and assimilate into the country’s culture. Who’s to say what is better? I think it depends on the person. If I was put in the same position as these two sisters I would side with Bharati. This land provides people with an opportunity, and an escape so it should be respected. Even though I have a Greek heritage that I love, I always put America first. I do not forget where I come from, but I live in the moment. The moment is where I am now. This is where I chose to be, so this is the nation that I prioritize first. I feel that if I held my Greek culture to the extent that Mira did I would not be living in America, but instead in Greece. America is a melting pot, so its not like you have to be a certain race or ethnicity to be an American. You choose whether or not you are an American. It’s an internal concept. The choice of how to “Belong in America” is up to you.

Do You Swear to Say the Truth and Nothing but the Truth?

     Stephanie Ericsson manages to categorize the lies humans tell within her essay “The Ways We Lie.” I think she does an exceptional job on categorizing human lie because she discusses numerous types of lies. She breaks down lies into the white lies, facades, ignoring the plain facts, deflections, omissions, stereotypes and cliches, groupthink, out-and-out lies, dismissals, and delusions. I agree with her characterization of lies because she delves deeper into how we lie. I enjoyed her humor, relatability, and sincerity throughout her essay. As much as we try to say that we don’t lie, lying becomes inevitable at times.

   The amount of lies that circulate in our world can not even be fathomed, but it is as if they are part of human nature. Ericsson explains that even though she fibs occasionally, she still considers herself an honest person. “We exaggerate, we minimize, we avoid confrontation, we spare people’s feelings, we conveniently forget, we keep secrets” because its natural. We lie so we can avoid complicating life and because we sympathize with other. I think it is very important that Ericsson also brings up how lies can be harmful. For example with facades, omission, stereotypes and displays, we are running away from the truth. These are different types of lies though because they promote denial. At times they can be more of a detriment than a quick fixer upper. We should not try to justify them. I think the truck driver example definitely resonates. Ericsson says, “I once admitted to a group of people that I had a mouth like a truck driver. Much to my surprise, a man stood up and said, “I’m a truck driver, and I never cuss.” We become so caught up in our preconceived notions that we can jump to conclusions and believe our own lies.

    I think Ericsson’s purpose for writing this essay is to show us how to know where to draw the line on our lies. Getting caught up in lies can lead to us believe them and make rash and false conclusions. We also need to consider if the lies we make to get ourselves out of an awkward situation are paid for at another person’s expense. Besides these points though Ericsson writes this piece to explain that lying is a cycle and how lies can vary. They will only end if all of us do not take part in it. Since we can not be completely honest with one another and want to spare each other’s feelings or connivence ourselves, lying will always be present. We should always expect it. I think that this piece was published because it reveals our humanity and how we always strive to simplify life. I liked that Ericsson makes us be more conscience of our lies through her examples. After reading this essay I started to wonder how much I lie. It really puts things in perspective for me and makes me want to be more conscience of what I say in the future.

     Lies that I think Ericsson should have included would be the “emergency lie” and the “bluff”. An emergency lie is when we lie to protect the well being of someone else. For example we might use an emergency lie to prevent someone from being harmed. A bluff is a lie that can be useful in a game of poker. Sometimes we have to use these lies in order to win, or protect, rather than harm another. Even though we all lie, I believe if we are conscience of the lies we make and when we use them, lying might not be as detrimental.

The Golden Rule

      Connor’s essay grasps his audience’s attention before it even begins with its title. It is titled “How in the World Do You Get a Skunk Out of a Bottle?”. He uses this title to attract attention and make want people to read it. The fact that it is a question provokes thought and a sense of wonder. Will the essay even talk about a skunk, or is this something figurative? The concept is intriguing. It also captures Connor’s emotions. He found himself in a bizarre situation not knowing what to do. Encountering a skunk in a bottle was something out of the ordinary. He was conflicted: he was scared the skunk would spray him, worried for the skunk’s well being, and also unsure on how he would handle such a complicated situation.

     Even though most people will never actually encounter a situation in which they will have the opportunity to pull a skunk out of a bottle, Connor writes this process analysis essay to help raise awareness. Yes, this is a rare situation, however it could happen to someone else. It is something out of the ordinary, so it is worth documenting. Writing in process analysis form helps provide a pace, sequence, and insight on his personal thoughts and experiences throughout the essay. Readers can understand both Connor’s and the skunk’s struggle. “What do you want me to do?”, he says. He is conflicted. Finally, he comes to the realization that he is responsible for the skunk since he found it. This essay shows us how to have compassion. If we have the ability to help someone and we are able to do so we should try to assist, depending on how much we are putting ourselves in danger. The details he uses in the story on the different ways in which he tried to save the skunk, keep a reader engaged and makes the piece somehow relatable. The skunk was helpless and unable to save itself, so sometimes we have to become the aid it needs.

     I think the main point of this essay is an underlying meaning. It is that even though we think we are not directly involved with wildlife, we are. It is important to be conscience of where we dispose of our trash. We can be harming animals without even knowing it. There can be animals, just like the skunk that can become injured from our litter. If we pay attention and dispose of our items properly we can prevent animals from becoming victims of our negligence. It all goes back to the Golden Rule, “treat others the way you want to be treated”,  even if they are not human. We share the world with them too, so they also deserve respect.

Proactiv(E)?

      The following picture affects certain consumers through its strategic advertising. It displays well known singer Avril Lavigne. She wears a confident smirk, has an inviting look, and flawless skin. Her face looks as if it was made out of porcelain. In front of her bold letters state “I’m No Pushover I’m Proactiv.” So what does this mean?
     This ad was created by the well known skin care brand Proactiv. Proactiv claims that their product will help clear acne and provide its user with clear and radiant skin. The company is so successful because they spend so much on advertising. Their commercials consists of success stories which range from everyday people, to a lengthy list of celebrities. The people who endorse this product are constantly in the public eye. They include singers, actors, dancers and more. Some of them include Katy Perry, Lindsey Lohan, Jessica Simpson, Jennifer Love Hewitt, Kaley Cuoco, Naya Rivera, Julianne Hough, Justin Bieber, Vanesa Williams, Kelly Clarkson, Adam Levine and many more. They use all these celebrity endorsers help to grasp the attention of people from various audiences. Almost anyone can relate. So many people idolize celebrities and aspire to be like them. When they hear celebrities speaking about their struggle with acne, they are shocked and think that they have something in common with them, their struggle with acne. If this product can help celebrities and make them look flawless, why can’t it do the same for them? On top of of that the product is even more enticing due to its affordability. 
     I have to admit that I was very skeptical about this product because I have also faced many problems with acne. Acne is something that lowers your confidence. We live in such a society that is constantly fixated on how we look. You think that you will try anything to fix it. Numerous times my acne would be so bad that I did not want to leave my house. I felt as though people were just looking at my acne and not focusing on me. Ads like this toy with a person’s emotions. After being completely feed up, I ordered this product because I thought that if so many celebrities endorsed it, it had to work. I wanted to be what the product advertised, “proactiv and not a pushover”. I needed to take action about my acne, rather than let it take over my life. When I started using the product my acne did not decrease. It actually made my skin worse. I’m not saying that the product is horrible, it just wasn’t my match.
     I did not think that the celebrities that endorse this product are paid to do so, or that their photos are airbrushed and professionally edited. They are not as perfect as we think they are. My acne problem was only solved by a prescription that was tailored to my own needs. It was not some generic product. Just like numerous people I was swayed by strategic advertising. It is easy to get caught up in the appeal of the advertisement without picking it apart. Before buying something we have to evaluate if we are purchasing it for the proper reasons, and not only because we are being compelled by it.

Depression in College Students

     Alissa Steiner takes on a daunting task by delving into the topic of depression. She explores how depression influences certain people, why it is caused, how we can recognize it, what triggers it, what it can lead to, proposals on how to handle it, and what actions are being taken to assist people in need. Her thesis is implied, but I think the closing of her essay demonstrates the main point. “If students are more informed about what depression is and how to detect it, they may be quicker to seek out someone to talk to, and possibly less likely to consider suicide as a solution...Hopefully, as universities come to realize the importance of students’ mental health in academic functioning, they will make funding their counseling services a priority”. In other words we can handle depression in better ways if we are informed about it and if its outreach programs have the proper funding.

     She supports her thesis by providing examples of people with depression, scientific information about the illness, statistics and details about organizations that are trying to lend out a helping hand. I completely agree with how she responds to the issue of depression in college students. I think Steiner does an excellent job of alerting her audience of depression’s severity. Depression should not be taken lightly. She grasps her audience’s attention by mentioning the suicide of one of her fellow classmates, Nima. He was a celebrated student with a wonderful personality. No one expected that this young man, with such a promising future would take his own life. Steiner displays her credibility by by providing important statistics. She states that a study by the American College Health Association found that professional diagnoses in depression in college students were up by ten percent. She then notes how chemical changes in the brain can contribute to depression. By explaining how to identify symptoms of depression she also helps her audience become more active readers. More people are being informed, so maybe more people can help others. Trigger factors of depression can stem from leaving home, balancing academics with work, relationships and more. To reemphasize the seriousness of depression she brings up the tragic suicide of MIT sophomore Elizabeth. Elizabeth showed signs of depression, but is was just to late when they found her. Hope is provided though counseling organizations. Organizations such as CAPS provide counseling and assistance for people that are depressed. Stein’s biggest complaint is that there are not enough of these organizations. They lack funding, and other people do not even know they exist. People do not utilize them enough. By alerting people about these organizations and providing funding to expand them, more lives would be saved.

     This piece definitely strikes a nerve for me because my grandmother suffers from depression as well. She has been battling with this illness her entire life, and counseling organizations like the ones that Steiner mentioned are what keep her going. I completely support her plea. No one deserves to be alone during such a difficult time in their life.

     If I were writing this essay, I would hope that I could include just as much as Steiner. She truly covers all the important aspects from support, to funding, to the scientific aspects of the illness and more. I only would do one thing differently. Even though her central focus is college students, I would expand it to people of all ages. I feel that depression should not be taken lightly and everyone deserves whatever help they need no matter what age. It is truly comforting that there are people like Steiner, addressing important topics that deserve more attention in our world. 

Hit the Books or Hit the Road?

        In “Hidden Intellectualism” Gerald Graff takes on a controversial topic. What is better, being book smart or street smart? Graff’s argument is that being street smart is way more beneficial than being only book smart. A street smart person is liberated. People that are street smart are not confined solely to thinking about topics that they do not like or are not interested in. In his thesis he says, “I believe that street smarts beat out book smarts in our culture not because street smarts are non-intellectual, as we generally suppose, but because they satisfy an intellectual thirst more thoroughly than school culture, which seems pale and unreal.” School tends to focus primarily on curriculum at times so it is easy to become robotic and not intrigued. Street smarts on the other hand allow a person to become a sponge, absorbing whatever they want from the world. Everything that surrounds them is their campus.

     To defend his argument Graff uses his personal experiences as examples to prove why they have helped him become an intellectual. As a child he hated books. He engrossed himself only with things he liked. Graff read sports magazines, sport autobiographies, and sports novels. At times he would debate about who was the toughest guy in school with his friends. Sports and his everyday conversations brought forth the skills of debate, and different types of analysis. He was becoming an intellectual without even knowing it. Street smarts taught him “how to make an argument, weigh different kinds of evidence, move between particulars and generalizations, summarize the views of others, and enter a conversation about ideas.”

     Sports also allowed him to have a sense of community. Book smarts can isolate people at times because the community is just so big. Graff’s examples help reinforce his argument. I personally think his points are quite valid. He enforces how schools can  create grade competitions, while when it comes to street smarts the competitions differ and have the potential to create bonds.

      I have to say that I do agree with Graff. Like Graff, I believe that “we associate the educated life, the life of the mind, too narrowly and exclusively with subject and texts that we consider inherently weighty and and academic” and that “real intellectuals” can turn anything into to something thought provoking. Street smarts allow everyone to contribute. They make us more open minded. Book smarts may make us well educated, but they do not always provide us with lessons on life. There is so much knowledge within what we can learn on the streets. Street smarts help us defend ourselves, and give us new innovative methods on how to live our life. If we found a way to integrate street smarts into schools along with book smarts, society would benefit immensely because it would be cultivated even more.

Mass Media: Beneficial or Detrimental?

     Steven Pinker and Peggy Orenstein both explain the effects of electronic media through their pieces. Even though both pieces have a lighthearted tones each author has a different argument. 

     Steven Pinker explains how “new forms of media have always caused moral panics”. He feels that this is completely unnecessary and that electronic media is good. He uses ethos by incorporating statistics. One example would be when he mentions comic books. In the 1950s crime was falling to “record lows”, as oppose to rising because of comic books. He appeals to the current world by pointing out that today even the most accomplished scientists use programs such as Powerpoint to get their point across. This program does not hinder them, but instead makes them more effective. Pinker uses logos to explain how electronic media is not harmful, and that it depends on how a person decides to use it. “Music doesn’t make you better at math, conjugating Latin doesn’t make you more logical...” He closes off his piece with ethos by offering advice that reinforces his point. “The solution is not to bemoan technology but to develop strategies of self-control, as we do with every other temptation in life.”

     Peggy Orenstein on the other hand uses her personal experiences to state her argument against electronic media. She explains that it is easy to become superficial and over involved in it. Constantly, she grapples with her urge to tweet. Orenstein uses pathos when she describes the outdoor scene of listening to The Trumpet and the Swan along with her daughter. This personal anecdote makes her relatable. Numerous times we constantly fight the urge to tweet about our lives and find some way to make a moment more artistic than what it is. Ethos comes in when Ornenstein brings up sociologist Erving Goffman. He thought that “life is performance”, which can sometimes happen with Twitter. Ornestein demonstrates logos when she explains how when we are constantly trying to expose ourselves over social media but change this around so we can seem more appealing. “The self {is} increasingly becoming externally manufactured rather than internally developed”.

     After reading both these convincing arguments I would have to say I agree more with Steven Pinker. Even though it is easy to lose sight of oneself in electronic media, I feel as though people should have a sense of responsibility and control. It is up to you whether you choose to publicize your life or not. If electronic media is used constructively I think it is more of a benefit than a detriment. It allows us to be informed about current events quickly, become unified with other people, and be creative. If electronic media is used positively, people exercise self control and apply limits it should contribute to society.

Obesity in America

David Zinczenko (a heath magazine editor) and Radley Balko (a liberal magazine editor) discuss their views on how obesity in America should be handled at a magazine convention. They meet each other while siting down for a presentation on the appeal of advertising.

DZ- Hi is this seat taken? I arrived here a little late and everywhere else the seats have already been taken.

RB- Sure have a seat. Wait a second! You are David Zinczenko from Men’s Health Magazine. Would you mind discussing your views on obesity in America with me? It is a topic that greatly intrigues me and I have read some of your work. I personally think this whole obesity crisis stems from our government.

DZ- Of course I will discuss this topic with you. I find it quite fascinating. So you are telling me that you think it is our government’s and our fault that obesity is so prominent in America? 

RB- Yes, I do. I think our government is too focused on dictating to us what is good for us. Deciding what is good should be our own responsibility and not the government’s. 

DZ- I see where you are coming from, but I think the government’s intervention is completely necessary. Numerous consumers are ill informed about what they are eating because the food industry does not provide enough information about their products.

RB- How so?

DZ- You may think that we should know what we are eating, however the nutrition facts can be misleading. A person may see no harm in his or her meal because the nutritional facts about each item are listed separately. Before you know it a meal that you think is 400 calories has jumped too 1,200.

RB- That may be so, but our government should not have to tell these companies to show us what is good for us. We should take responsibility for what we eat. As oppose to taxing unhealthy things, our government should reward us for being healthy. They spend so much money on health care that there are no consequences for being obese. There will just be another pill or medication to fix things. This should not be the case. People that are healthy should have to pay less for their healthcare, and be able to allocate their money elsewhere.

DZ- That is a valid argument, but look how difficult it is for people to be healthy. It is so easy to find thousands of fast food chains, however it is so difficult to find healthy alternatives. These quick fixes are easily accessible and much more affordable. Our government should intervene and require the food industry to provide information about their products and also make healthy choices easily attainable.

RB- I think what you are asking for of the government is just too much. We are in a democracy, however the government’s actions are resembling more and more socialist qualities than democratic ones. Our civil liberties are being limited.

DZ- I understand your point of holding a person accountable of their own health, however it is so difficult for a person to do that when the food industry is creating advertisements that are so enticing. These advertisements target the youth that is less likely to make themselves accountable for their own health. At times they are too young to understand the severity of their choices, so the government needs to intervene. By clarifying why the fast food industry is so bad there is a smaller chance for people to be taken in by it. Therefore, I believe that we should be responsible for our own health, but that we also need the government to guide us in our choices.

...

Thesis- It is completely inconceivable that our government should be able to dictate to us what we should be able to eat. If a person wants to eat a particular item, no matter how well informed they are they will still eat it regardless. We live in a democracy and not a socialist society. The government should not insult our intelligence and tell us what is right for us, it should expect its people to have enough knowledge to do what is best for them. Even though both arguments make valid points, I disagree with both. The problem is not the government getting involved, or the food industry increasing our resources, but America becoming a sedentary society. It is the lack of exercise and movement in America that is causing people to become obese, not the food and not the government.