Monday, November 11, 2013

Food Dilemma

After watching Food, Inc., I felt sort of betrayed by my own food industry as well as government. People tend to believe that their government and industries within his or her country were supposed to protect them, but it seemed as if these industries as well as the government were taking advantage of their own people. This was my third time watching this film and after watching it this time, it made me really view my food industry differently than before. I had to admit that the first two times I saw this movie, I did not fully comprehend the severity of the food issue of the manipulation and power of these food companies and the government. But after watching it a third time, I sort of gained more knowledge on how I should eat, what I should eat, and why I should eat differently. I had to admit again that this movie, when watching it for my first time, scared the hell out of me. The reason why this movie terrified me was because if everything in the movie was true, then how could I trust my own government in protecting my health? But more importantly, what was in my food that I just ate? These two questions were still left unanswered after watching the movie.

Several food issues that stood out to me the most after watching Food, Inc. were the issues on the poor, the control over farmers, and the government's relationship within the food industry. In the first food issue, poor families or individuals have the worst results when purchasing food products. In the film, a Hispanic family was interviewed and stated how it was cheaper to purchase fast food products than to purchase healthy food products. For example, buying three cheese hamburgers and a side of french fries could equal to a pound of broccoli. From this, one could assume that the portion of the foods were significantly different, since the fast food products could had fed the family instead of the pound of broccoli. In the second food issue, many food companies were controlling those that produce the food, the farmers. Many of these food companies demanded newer equipements and technologies for producing the products, which costed heavily since these farmers do not necessarily make that much. In addition, many of these food companies do not want their farmers revealing information to others. For example, based on the seed farmers, farmers were not allowed to talk to one another because of the fear of being fired, sued, or hunted down by private investigators from those companies. In order for farmers to attempt to make a living off of what they do, they have to abide by the food companies' rules, or face their consequences. In the last food issue, the government's relationship in the food industry was terrifying. Many former chief executives and presidents of food companies were introduced into government jobs, such as being head of the FDA or Supreme Court justices. How could I trust in my government now if the government and food industry were working together against their own people? It was daunting.

I enjoyed watching Food, Inc., even if this was my third time watching the film. It really portrayed a daunting yet truthful segment into the food industry and their cynical ways. This film was basically an educational film on how we should eat and what we should eat. In addition, this film revealed the curtain of what was in our food and how these food companies were controlling everyone.

According to Mary Maxfield, "Trust yourself. Trust your body. Meet your needs." According to Michael Pollan, "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants." These two food advocates have their own food formulas that they abide by. Their food formulas could and could not be necessarily followed, but were presented for people to try to follow in order to live healthy lives. My own food formula would be, "Avoid fast food. Consume a reasonable amount. Drink water." The purpose of my first rule "Avoid fast food" was simple, do not eat fast food. Fast food was just an illusion of quality food, since it was just the most processed of foods out there. Fast food was high in calories and since it was cheap, many could consume these products nonstop. The purpose of my second rule "Consume a reasonable amount" was to explain how eating a good amount of food was healthy. Eating too little and eating too much was detrimental to one's health. But consuming a reasonable amount, based on that person's health and weight, could be healthy. It was up to that person to think what was considered a reasonable amount to eat. The purpose of my third rule "Drink water" was interesting and unique. The reason why some individuals were hungry or were craving some sort of food was not because he or she was hungry, but because he or she was thirsty. For example, the next time you are hungry, try drinking a glass of water or two. This way your body does not have to consume healthy and/or unhealthy food products. By drinking water instead of eating, one was able to lose weight. Now this could be for those trying to lose weight or trying to maintain their current weight. This third rule should not be followed by those that are eating too little as they are already.

Monday, November 4, 2013

What We Eat

In "What We Eat", Eric Schlosser's argument was that the fast food industry was dominating smaller food businesses, the consumer's health, and the way society eats and acts. These fast food chains, especially McDonald's, have become powerful enough to the point where nothing seemed to stop them. McDonald's was considered a powerful icon of American economy, where it was the nation's largest purchaser of beef, pork, and potatoes. In addition, McDonald's is the largest owner of retail property and was even more invested in advertising and marketing than any other franchise (Schlosser 668-669). Basically, the fast food industry has had an effect on our lives, whether we liked it or not.

Schlosser's main concept was that fast food chains, much like McDonald's, has become an issue for the way people live. We could not escape what was inevitable, which was the fact that fast food restaurants were controlling how we ate, acted, and lived. "Fast food and its consequences have become inescapable, regardless of whether you eat it twice a day, try to avoid it, or have never taken a single bite" (Schlosser 668). We could fight back by ignoring fast food all together, or even by encouraging others to look away from fast food. On the other hand, we could stop resisting and join the conformity with society. Either way, the fast food industry would impact us somehow.

In "What We Eat", Eric Schlosser used several methods in explaining his argument on fast food's dominance over society. Schlosser used cause/effect and compare/contrast to prove his point. In relation to the method of cause/effect, Schlosser gave my interesting examples of cause/effect throughout his article. The main cause could be the foundation of McDonald's and its ways. Various effects could be that Americans were becoming more obese, smaller businesses were collapsing, etc. However, McDonald's "...basic thinking behind fast food has become the operating system of today's retail company, wiping out small businesses, obliterating regional differences, and spreading identical stores throughout the country..." (Schlosser 669-670).
McDonald's had become powerful enough to control everything in its path. Not only was this company spreading its ideology to other franchises, McDonald's controlled the workers as well. Besides the low wages for workers, "Farmers and cattle ranchers are losing their independence, essentially becoming hired hands for the agribusiness giants or being forced off the land (Schlosser 672). McDonald's could make millions every week through its sales, but would not even raise their workers' salaries so the head people could make an extra dollar. Is this the new definition of greed?

In addition to cause/effect, the method of compare/contrast was used to enhance the intensity of the issue on fast food. Schlosser compared American McDonald's workers to migrant farm workers (670). This was to show how both classes were roughly making the same amount of money while doing practically the same amount of work. Well, not the "same amount of work", but the stress behind the work was basically the same for both fast food employees and migrant workers.

The benefit of combining these two methods was that it enhance the intensity of the issue. Personally, I felt more interested in reading about this article because of all the information, examples, and analysis Schlosser presented. Combining two methods into one article definitely helped me in understanding the issue of fast food's dominance. Schlosser's writing style was also unique in the sense that it was very educational and impressive. At times, Schlosser would be serious by proposing facts and examples on certain topics he brought up. Then every once in awhile in the article, Schlosser would make his reading interesting by presenting something good. For example, Schlosser stated, "The early Roman Republic was fed by its citizen-farmers; the Roman Empire, by its slaves. A nation's diet can be more revealing than its art or literature" (668). In addition, he stated, "The Golden Arches are now more widely recognized than the Christian cross" (669). These statements ever so often were sort of funny and interesting to me. I would not expect him to state these things, but then again, Schlosser was a true nonconformist in revealing the truth in society.

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Comparing and Contrasting

The point of comparing and contrasting is to distinguish the similarities and differences of two distinct subjects. When comparing and contrasting the two subjects, one must keep in mind that the two subjects should be relatively similar, but not entirely the same. If the two subjects are completely different, then there is no point in finding similarities in the subjects. For example, a pair of ballet shoes is different from a pair of running shoes. The style and purpose of these shoes are significantly different, but the similarity is that these shoes are made for one's feet.

In "The Meaning of Life" by Roger Cohen, there are several possible comparing/contrasting subjects the author proposes. One comparing/contrasting topic Cohen brings up is the lifestyle of two rhesus monkeys, Canto and Owen. Another possible comparing/contrasting topic is dieting and consuming whatever one desires to eat. Finally, the last possible comparing/contrasting topic that Cohen brings up is happiness and boredom.

In my perspective, there is an even balance for all three possible comparing/contrasting topics. In the first topic on comparing and contrasting Canto and Owen, the similarities are that Canto and Owen are both rhesus monkeys and that both are fed by the scientists. However, a difference is that Canto is on a restricted diet while Owen is not. In addition, Canto's physical features are different from Owen's features, since the two are experiencing different eating habits. 

In the second topic on comparing and contrasting dieting and consuming whatever one's heart desires, the similarity is that the people dieting or consuming anything are at least eating something. The only difference is that dieting causes rapid loss of appetite due to the caloric restriction (Cohen 293). An example Cohen uses to describe this topic is the resveratrol in red wine, where scientists are trying to "...produce a chemical like it in order to offer people the gain (in life expectancy) without the pain (of dieting) (Cohen 293). 

In the final topic on comparing and contrasting happiness and boredom, the similarity is that a person can experience both feelings and have some kind of effect from both, whether it is being happy or miserable. The difference between the happiness and boredom is the feelings, as mentioned earlier. Throughout the essay, Cohen brings up the topic of boredom when he states, "...boredom definitely shortens life spans" (291), and when he later states, "I suspect those dissenting scientists I didn't bore you with are right" (293). From these two quotations, Cohen stresses the idea that boredom negatively affects one's life, while happiness does not. Towards the end of the essay, Cohen states, "Laughter extends life" (293). According to Cohen, experiencing happiness can positively affect one's life, while boredom does the opposite.

The argument of this essay is that happiness extends one's life span, while boredom reduces the number of years one has left on this world. After reading this article, I agree with Cohen's argument on happiness versus boredom. If we do not or cannot experience happiness in our lifetime, then what is the point of living? In order for individuals to be truly content, they must experience happiness. That's just common sense. On the other hand, we must also experience boredom to actually realize the difference between happiness and boredom.

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Lying is a Hobby

In "The Ways we Lie" by Stephanie Ericsson, she explained how lying as had an effect on society throughout the years. After reading her article, I would have to agree with her idea of lying and the various ways one could present a lie. The reason why I agree with her was because Ericsson gave ten different ways a person could lie that stayed within the boundaries of the definition she gave. Ericsson's definition of a lie was that it was either a false statement or action especially made with the intent to deceive or that it was anything that gave or was meant to give a false impression (Ericsson 121). The ten ways to lie stayed within the boundaries of lying because these ways gave false impressions or deceived people no matter what. However, I do not think there was any other type of lying, since her ways of lying pretty much covered everything.

Ericsson's purpose of writing this essay was to inform society of the actions everyone constantly does, which was lying. Similar to breathing, lying was something a person does out of habit. Ericsson wanted her readers to acknowledge the fact that everyone has a tendency to lie, whether it was a white lie or delusion. The reason why this article was able to be published was most likely because this article revealed the truth about society. Another possibility of why this article got published could be that this article opened the minds of many in that everything he/she did could be a lie. What was scary about reading this article could be that people could be lying without him/her noticing it. This was how lying has become an imprinted code in people's systems. It was in people's nature to lie and society would not stop.

Overall, I really enjoyed and liked reading Ericsson's article. i liked how she introduced the article with an anecdote that seemed to be something everyone would do when someone has a rough day. Later on in the article, I also liked how Ericsson gave the negative outcomes of telling the truth if she were to tell the truth about why she lied to the IRS, her co-worker, etc. In addition, I was satisfied with the fact that she included the proper definition of lying from Webster's definition of a lie. As a side note, my view of lying has changed because I did not realize that a lie consisted of anything that gave or was meant to give a false impression (Ericsson 121). I assumed lying was just giving a false statement to someone, but lying could also mean that a person could deceive the truth in general. 

Another aspect from Ericsson's article that I enjoyed was the out-and-out lies she described. I thought it was funny in how people could lie to a person's face where the lie was completely ridiculous and false. On the other hand, I did not believe stereotypes and cliches was a lie. Stereotypes was just a way people could identify others as, based on prior knowledge on those types of individuals or experience with them. In the end, I was content with Ericsson's article because it gave me a new perspective on what lying was and how we always lie. 

Monday, October 21, 2013

Robert Connor's Essay

Robert Connor's essay "How in the World Do You Get a Skunk Out of a Bottle?" was about the narrator helping a distressed skunk that had its head stuck in a jar. This essay started out with a question to the audience because Connor wanted to make the readers ask themselves first or after reading the essay on what they would have done if they were in his position. On the other hand, having this type of question as a title could also be a way to inform the readers that Connor had no idea of what he was doing and was sort of asking the audience for help.

Most individuals would never encounter a situation of pulling a skunk out of a bottle, let alone any animal for that case. But the reason why Connor developed this process analysis essay was most likely because of the idea that people should do the right thing. By this, I mean that if a person has an opportunity to do good, whether for another person, for the world, etc., then he/she should take that opportunity seriously. Connor did the right thing in saving that poor animal's life by risking his own life in the process of retrieving the jar from its head. Now I am not saying one should risk his/her own life for a small good deed. I am rather saying that if given the opportunity to be good, people should do good for others, the world, and even themselves.

The point and purpose of Connor's essay was to explain how an unlikely and awkward situation could turn into something great. Towards the end of the essay, Connor stated, "I hear it splash as I run on up the hill into a sunny morning whose colors are joy, joy, joy" (3). After saving the skunk's life and throwing the jar into a swamp, Connor probably felt satisfied with the fact that he saved an animal's life. Going back to the big picture of this, anyone could do something great in their lives, whether it is helping a neighbor out or giving spare change away to those in need. The world is full of good and bad, where sometimes the bad is more frequent than the good nowadays. But every once in awhile, someone does good in the world and the balance between good/bad is now equal. Be the one to make a difference in doing good.

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Effects of Advertisement


The image above is from an anti-smoking advertisement by Chilean Corporation Against Cancer (CONAC). In the image, a child is seen crying while a cloud of smoke surrounds the head of the child. This cloud of smoke not only encompasses the child's head, but seems to resemble a plastic bag covering the head. In addition, the child inhales the smoke through his nose and mouth.

The purpose of this advertisement is to inform society about the dangers of smoking. Although smoking can negatively affect the individual that is smoking cigarettes, it can also affect those around that individual through second-hand smoke. The way the advertisement portrays the child being suffocated in a sort of smokey-plastic-bag is terrifying for most people. The media reveals ideas and concepts in ways that could possibly terrify society because of either the fact that the images are very explicit or that the situation could be real. 

Nothing can horrify people than something that can actually be turned into reality. For example, if a person watches an advertisement where cartoon characters promote the products of McDonald's, that person might just ignore the entire message because of the fact that the advertisement is shown through cartoons. However, if a person watches an advertisement that depicts an individual being beaten due to certain clothes he/she is wearing, that person might focus on the idea of not buying specific clothing brands because of the fear of being beaten. Through the media, this fear that people have, whether it is the fear of dying, the fear of losing, etc., is influencing people to act differently from what they normally do. 

Back to the anti-smoking advertisement with the child, the company that sponsors this advertisement, CONAC, wants to reveal the truth about tobacco in cigarettes. This truth is that tobacco causes cancer, which is something mostly everyone knows about. However, this company will do anything in its power to reduce the amount of people smoking cigarettes, such as promoting a horrifying advertisement of a child being suffocated by a cloud of smoke. 

Thursday, October 10, 2013

Depression

Depression, much like a parasite, is something that spreads throughout one's life that could soon be fatal in the end. In terms of depression, some individuals that do experience this feeling are attending college, which should actually be the best experience in their lives. 

Alissa Steiner who was once a college student at the University of California at Davis wrote "Depression in College Students". Her essay focused in on the aspects of depression and how it could lead to suicidal thoughts if continued. According to Steiner's thesis, "Depression and suicide are major issues not only here in Davis, but also at college campuses nationwide." Steiner was able to support her thesis from a study by the American College Health Association in 2005 that "...showed that 15 percent of college students around the country have been professionally diagnosed with depression..." (Depression in College Students, 163). In addition, Steiner used the testimonials from doctors and teachers, such as Diana Hill, who was a UC Davis member of the Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS, and Phillip Clay, the chancellor for Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). 

In my opinion, Steiner's response to the issue of depression in college students was excellent. Steiner was able to present her thesis with reliable and credible sources. Adding on to her sources, Steiner used testimonials from doctors and teachers to have a better understanding of how others feel about the topic. But before Steiner went into detail on the issue, she explained what the definition of depression was and how it was caused, which I thought was very informational on her part. 

Towards the end of her essay, Steiner proposed counseling for those going through depression to reduce the level of depression and stress for an individual. This part was my favorite because Steiner tried to encourage those depressed or stressed to attempt to receive help from others. In addition, I enjoyed her ending section of "Looking out for Each Other", where she explained what students should do if they have friends going through difficult times as well as explaining her own experience with someone that had depression. If I were to write an essay on this issue of depression in college students, I would not do anything differently from what Steiner wrote. Her essay was an excellent essay and I would not know what else to talk about, since Steiner wrote everything that was necessary to know and realize about.

Monday, October 7, 2013

Book Smart and Street Smart

Geral Graff's argument in "Hidden Intellectualism" was that many schools and colleges were not encouraging students to use their street smarts towards academic purposes. Graff felt that the education system disregarded street smarts as another type of intellectualism. According to Graff, "What doesn't occur to us, though, is that schools and colleges might be at fault for missing the opportunity to tap into such street smarts and channel them into good academic work" (Hidden Intellectualism, 380).

In my opinion, street smarts should not be looked down upon as something less than book smart intellect. Based on Geral graff's experience as a child, he was forced to either be book-smart or street smart when he faced the neighborhood kids. In addition, Graff was fascinated by the concept of sports, which was his primary topic in writing articles about.

If individuals were able to distinguish the difference between going down a shady alley at night or strolling through a more lit environment, wouldn't this be considered as having intellect? Although this might seem obvious enough that some might not even walk through that dark alley, there could be a slight possibility that a few individuals might be foolish enough to do that. However, other examples that would be more likely to happen would be avoiding contact with certain people or dressing in a specific way in a particular environment. For example, a person might see a lonely child on the street in the ghetto and comfort the child. On the other hand, several individuals could even ignore the child, fearing the child might have some sort of disease or might pickpocket him/her. (Or they might just be heartless.) And a person would not wear a bright pink tutu in Harlem, New York or in downtown Chicago. Whatever the reason might be, people have different perspectives on what intellect is all about. Personally, being book smart and street smart should be equally accepted as showing signs of intelligence.

Thursday, October 3, 2013

Society vs. Social Media

Technology has a significant impact on society. Whether it is the social media one uses to express his/her feelings or the electronic gadgets for entertainment, technology is important. Peggy Orenstein, a journalist and author, explains how countless individuals use the social media, such as Facebook or MySpace, to communicate what they are doing or feeling to others. Orenstein continues to clarify the idea that individuals are too informative on their lives. People are too revealing on certain topics, such as their love lives or actions they might have committed. All of this makes Orenstein question the difference between private and public life styles.

However, Steven Pinker, a psychology professor, has a different view on the use of technology. Although the use of technology might have a negative effect on one's attention span, it can be useful in other fields of work. Scientists need technology to progress forward in their line of work. Using the media is not as bad as it is criticized to be, if individuals are able to have self-control. The use of the media is good every once in awhile for work or for relaxation, but too much use of it could be unhealthy. Society can be too dependent on technology and the media, where if the world somehow lost its ability to retain this technology and media, society will collapse.

In Peggy Orenstein's reading, her use of Ethos and Pathos is clear. Orenstein is able to connect to the readers by using an anecdote in the beginning on her reading. In addition, Orenstein uses outside sources to support her argument from Sherry Turkle, a professor from M.I.T., and Erving Goffman, a sociologist. In Steven Pinker's reading, his use of Logos is clear. Pinker explains how the use of technology and the media helps scientists progress forward with science. However, unlike Orenstein, Pinker lacks the use of Ethos and Pathos, which could have made the readers more interested in his reading.


In my perspective, the use of technology is a love and hate situation. I love using the social media from time to time as well as playing my games on several game consoles. On the other hand, I have been too dependent on these medias and technologies to the point where if I am unable to use them, I will go crazy. When it comes to work and school, society should focus more on doing things the old fashioned way, which is the basic pen and pencil. If we continue the path on depending on technology and the media for everything, we will soon be in the same position from the movie "Terminators 2: Judgment Day", where technology has overrun everything and everyone.

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

Obesity on the Rise

While walking to McDonald's, David Zincenko spots Radley Balko in a restaurant and intentionally sits at the same table as him...

David Zincenko: Hello, Radley Balko. I'm David Zincenko.

Radley Balko: What are you doing?

David Zincenko: The fast-food chain is the primary factor of obesity in the United States, since it sells numerous unhealthy products to the American people.

Radley Balko: Oh jeez, not this conversation. Okay, I agree and disagree with what you just said.

David Zincenko: How can you agree and disagree? Can you please explain your reasoning?

Radley Balko: Well, I do agree with the idea that eating fast-food products can increase one's body mass index, or BMI. But I do not agree with the fact that fast-food companies are solely
responsible for one's obesity.

David Zincenko: How is it not the fast-food company's fault that made one's health at risk of obesity. These companies promote food products that are significantly high in calories.

Radley Balko: I agree with the products being served in high calories. But isn't it also the consumer's responsibility to eat the product or not? The consumer can choose to eat a meal that is healthy and nutritious or a meal that is unhealthy and unwholesome.

David Zincenko: I can see your point, but most consumers do not have the luxury in eating healthy food products. Some healthy food products are way too expense for people.

Radley Balko: How so?

David Zincenko: Well for example, a pound of apples might cost between three to four dollars at a regular grocery. This might not be as sufficient as a fast-food meal consisting of a hamburger and large fries, which could even cost around three to four dollars as well. So poorer families have the disadvantage in this case because they are forced to purchase these kinds of products.

Radley Balko: Couldn't the consumer learn to exercise more often if he/she is going to eat unhealthy food products in order to keep a balance?

David Zincenko: That's not the point. It isn't even relevant to the topic at hand.

Radley Balko: Actually, it is.


Thesis:

            Obesity is on the rise for various reasons. One reason could be that people are eating large amounts of fast-food products, such as McDonald's or Burger King. A second reason could be that people are just eating too much food in general. Another reason could be that people are not exercising as much as they are supposed to. Whatever the reason might be, the fact is that obesity levels are increasing at an alarming rate. David Zincenko is somewhat accurate in that big fast-food companies are knowingly serving their customers fatting food products. However, it is technically the consumer's responsibility and decision in eating the food product, which was what Radley Balko was referring to.

Monday, September 23, 2013

"Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell

After reading Shooting an Elephant by George Orwell, I could sense the narrator's struggle of helping and despising the Indian natives at the same time. Orwell hated his government as well as the irritating Indians that make his job more difficult than it already was. On the other hand, Orwell was surprisingly for the people and against the natives' oppressors. In essence, this situation was more of a love-hate scenario in that each side, whether it was his British empire or the Indians, was complicated. However, I felt as if Orwell was being a bit hypocritical on the topic of hating his British empire. Orwell shot and slaughtered an elephant because he felt that it was necessary for the animal to be killed to impress the Indians. To Orwell, this act of killing was a way for him to express his dominance as a white man with a rifle to the natives, much like a tyrant expressing his control over the people. If Orwell disliked his government for oppressing the Indians by conveying their authority over them, wouldn't this situation be hypocritical because Orwell did not approve of tyranny but also communicated his influence as if he was a tyrant? One cannot hate something or someone but can have the ability to have that something or be that someone.

Throughout Shooting an Elephant, several elements of narrative would include the details on the description and word choice. Even though there was no dialogue in the reading, Orwell was extremely descriptive throughout the reading, such as when he illustrated the image of the dead man's body that was stomped on by the elephant or the scene where he slaughtered the elephant. In addition to his attention to details, Orwell used a specific yet unique word choice in different parts of the reading. Besides using two Latin terms "saecula saeculorum" and "in terrorem", Orwell used uncommon words like "must" or "mahout". Perhaps the use of these words would force the readers to pay close attention to the details and plot of the story. Personally, these words, without having any prior knowledge on their definitions, made me read more thoroughly than other readings.

Other than the details on the description and the word choice, there was a use of figurative language throughout the reading. Some examples of figurative language were: "The friction of the great beast's foot had stripped the skin from his back as neatly as one skins a rabbit", "If the elephant charged and I missed him, I should have about as much chance as a toad under a steam-roller", and "...for as his hind legs collapsed beneath him he seemed to tower upward like a huge rock toppling, his trunk reaching skywards like a tree."

In order for Orwell to have authority and respect from the Indians, he shot the elephant. The last sentence from the last paragraph stated, "I often wondered whether any of the others grasped that I had done it solely to avoid looking a fool." Orwell wanted to impress others, especially the natives since he had more love for them than his British empire. The purpose of impressing the natives was to achieve respect from them, since they tend to enrage his hatred over everything.

Orwell's feelings about imperialism was that he truly hated oppression. Imperialism is the policy or concept of a country enforcing their power and influence to other countries. Even though Orwell hated the idea of oppression, he did express his authority by killing the elephant. Towards the middle and end of the reading, it stated Orwell's act and reason for killing the elephant. Without thought of what he did, Orwell became what he hated, a tyrant.

Thursday, September 19, 2013

Descriptive Event - St. Thomas

As I laid on my sandy towel, I tried to contemplate on what I should do for the next several hours. A combination of the salty sea air with the smell of cheap suntan lotion suffocated my nose. All these individuals sun tanning in this basket of heat reminded me of chicken and pork being roasted. Grilled to perfection, as some would call it. These scorched individuals either continued baking in the sweltering sun or laid motionless under their umbrellas. I can hear them laugh and chatter about life, money, the weather, etc. Aside from their mindless conversations, I can also hear the tide splashing in and out on the delicate sand. The tide was creeping up on me like a stray cat stalking its next meal in some back alley. As soon as the ice-cold tide touched the tip of my toes, I shifted backwards, as I would assume that this would be a common reaction from anyone coming into contact with frigid water.


None the less, my mind started to thrift away again like algae floating within the ocean. However, this particular beach did not have that. The water was clear-through and cold to the touch, as if one was about to swim in a frozen lake. I could feel the soft sand crumble through my fingers as I try to pick up a handful of it. The more I try to grab hold of it, the more it tends to disappear through the cracks on my hand. This sand was technically my mind in that my train of focus tended to weaken as I tried to think of what I should do next. One possibly was that I could swim for the fourth time, but the taste of the sea water was too much to bear since it had the flavor of gym socks and vinegar. (Do not ask me why I know that). On the other hand, I could just suntan and be as unproductive as these other chickens being cooked next to me. Either way, I was going to relax and bath in the moment. Welcome to St. Thomas.

Monday, September 16, 2013

View on "The Clinic" by Jeff Gremmels

Narratives are created to amuse others, generate a specific idea or meaning behind the story, or to even enlighten those with events that may or may not have happened. All narratives have one common yet specific trait in that they are basically the definition of storytelling, whether the story is interesting and funny or dull and depressing. Looking back at Back to the Lake by Thomas Cooley, a good narrative requires a thorough chronological order of the events, the plot of the narrative is recognizable and clear for the audience, and the readers are able to identify the who/what/when/where/how/why of the story. In addition, explicit details to the events and/or characters is helpful for the readers in understanding the story overall.

After reading The Clinic by Jeff Gremmels, I understand what the boy in the narrative was going through when he went to the hospital with his mother. When I was younger, I received multiple injuries, such as tearing my left ligament, fracturing my right elbow, breaking my nose, dislocating my right shoulder, and even undergoing several concussions. Much like the character of the boy that had to go to the hospital, my mother acted the exact way the mother in the narrative did.

As a writer, I liked how Gremmels used dialogue and details to enhance the experience of the story. Unlike some writers that would not use dialogue, Gremmels used dialogue to express the opinions and actions of the characters in the narrative. Adding onto the dialogue, details to the events helped in describing what was going on and how these events affected the characters and future occurrences. On the other hand, the one aspect of this narrative I somewhat disliked was that the narrative was too short of a story. I mean I understand that it is better to have less, in terms of writing, because it focuses on the overall message/purpose of the narrative. But I just wanted to acknowledge the ending of the medical student's case on this boy and his self-destructive behavior.

The Clinic is about the medical student's story. Throughout the entire narrative, the medical student was speaking from his perspective of the case on the boy and his mother. The medical student was expressing his view on this case to the audience by describing what was going happen, who was involved, why the boy was injuring himself, etc. This narrative in not from the boy's viewpoint because the boy was only mentioned by the doctor as a case and not necessarily as a character like the medical student or the mother.

Gremmels' purpose in writing this particular narrative is to explain how this one case taught him more about life than his experiences in lectures or labs. In the end of the narrative, Gremmels stated, "Years of lectures, labs, and research could not match the education I received in five days with this single boy" (The Clinic, Jeff Gremmels). Based on the text, Gremmels experience as a medical student has changed in that he faced cases that are more of a psychological matter rather than physical problems. Also, a key note was mentioned to the right-hand side of it, stating that it was the narrator's main point in informing the narrative. Gremmels chose this genre of a medical detective story because he wanted the narrative to have the character solve the issue of the case for the readers than having the readers attempt to understand the meaning behind it. It was most likely easier for Gremmels to explain the purpose of the narrative through the use of the medical student's views.