Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Pollan Part 2
I really enjoyed the thoughts that Pollan’s essay got me thinking about. It was contradiction after contradiction, confusing yet clearing things up all in the same sentences. I also thought he did an extremely good job at sparking up both sides of the issue, almost bickering back and forth with his own ideas, and it is very present in the work. Like some people mentioned in class it was almost like he makes people angry just to answer they’re angry questions to throw off the skeptics. His organization definitely is inspiring I hope I can achieve that in my own argument paper, how he brings up the questions just to answer them. Or how he skillfully moves from topic to topic but the transitions are completely smooth. It seems as though he effortlessly glides from story to fact to statistics back to personal opinions without the slightest bit of problems. I feel that his level and writing style is key to how easy he can transition and jump from topic to topic, proving his point and raising questions the entire essay through. I thought the comparisons that he chose to use were what made the essay work so well. For example when he’s talking about the treatment of animals in the traditional slaughter houses versus the treatment of animals on the Polyface Farm, where all the animals are allowed to “live” their lives, free roaming chickens that fertilize the grass for the sheep who eat everything that the other animals won’t, just proves the point that he shows both extremes and finds a happy medium where people are still aware of how animals are treated but also realizes that the whole world isn’t going to stop eating meat just because of an essay.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi Sadie- I liked how you analyzed Pollan's essay, and how you emphasized his transistions, I hadn't thought about that.After reading your response, I noticed how well his transitions are combined with his work. His style is very effecetive and I think that it does strengthen his crediblity even further when he uses those thought provoking techniques, like the ones you wrote about- how he'd write purposely for the angry people and answer the type of questions the would be asking. I think he;s doing this so whatever his future point maybe,the readers are as unbiased and opened minded as possible. He is realting to everyone so that later they know that he is credible and has thought this out in all aspects, some even that maybe the average reader wouldn't consider.
I also wonder if I can have the same effect on my argumentative paper as pollan did! He did a great job of arguing both sides. Yes it was confusing to tell what his opinion was, but it helped clear up the arguments that popped into my mind. He does have very good topic transitions; he matched up his opposing arguments well so that when paired together they really made the reader think! I like how he first described the animal cruelties in the industrial farms then he showed us the example of the Polyface farm. This free roaming farming made me feel a little better about what I had just read about the industrial farming. This also shows that there is a positive compromise if you still want to continue eating meat, but don’t want to be a part of industrial farms.
Post a Comment