Reading model arguments provides an opportunity for us to evaluate the methods a writer uses to judge the success and depth of a writer's expression and support of his or her perspective. Such an exercise, carefully prepared, should serve as a guide in helping us to prepare, organize, and present supported, meaningful, and appropriately structured arguments of our own.
With such goals in mind, read Denise Cavallaro's research paper, SMOKING, OFFENDED BY THE NUMBERS, pp. 103-108, focusing on your text's guide questions 1-7, pp. 96-97.
Once you've read the essay, post a detailed and insightful comment in response to Cavallaro's paper, using any of the questions 1-7, pp. 96-97.
A blog simulates a conversation, so successive posts should respond to (add additional support, raise questions, disagree with, etc. -- all in a supported manner, to previously posted responses). Thus, in responding, note questions you're using and indicate to whom you're responding. Remember, YOUR goal is to justify your evaluation of the essay!
Aim for posts to be at least a paragraph in length. Sign post with your name: first name & initial of your surname. Each student must respond at least 3 times by Sunday, January 10th.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I would like to address question number 7 dealing with Cavallaro's paper "Smoking Offended by the Numbers"
ReplyDeleteThe question asks"What is the purpose of this essay?" I believe that the purpose of this essay is to support the author's opinion that smoking is a dangerous habit. Cavallaro supports her opinion by utilizing statistics on deaths and illness that can be attributed to tobacco. Antoher way that Cavallaro supports her position that tobacco products are harmful is by personalizing the issue. By encouraging the reader to picture their loved ones suffering from the effects of tobacco related illnesses, Cavallaro focuses attention on individuals suffering, not just cold statistics. The author also brings to mind the various age groups that are most vulnerable to the marketing ploys of the tobacco industy, specifically teenagers. Cavallaro advances various ideas on how to combat teen smoking, and explores some of the reasons they are so susceptible to the marketing strategies in the first place.
Tony L.
Question 6: How well does the write establish common ground with the audience?
ReplyDeleteAnswer: For one example the writer translates the numbers into an everyday example; such as the Yankee Stadium, it gives the readers the opportunity to interpret the numbers and identify with the writer. In general, the article does not try to establish a common ground with the reader. A majority of the article appears to be written in order to convey the writers' opinions without regard for seeking common ground with the audience.
Phil W.
Question 7:
ReplyDeleteIn addition to Tony's comments. I would like to add that the purpose of Cavallaro's paper was an effort to get adolscent smokers to quit smoking. I think she failed in this purpose due to the fact that the paper was written in perspective without regard to the smoker. She states in the paper with the statement that she is not a smoker and then states that she is struggling to understand what is appealing about smoking. Perhaps Cavallaro could have identified with her audience better by investigating into the reasons why people smoke. If Cavallaro would have done a better job of identifing with her audience they may have been more receptive to listen to her.
Phil W.
Captain Phil unfortunately took the words right out of my mouth in his response to Tony's comments in question 7. As I was reading the paper I was getting a feeling that the writer was conveying a judgemental attitude towards smokers, which will only cause those who smoke to be defensive. Smokers already know that cigarettes are expensive, and that they cause lung cancer. Obviously, the reasons why they smoke are the real issues behind smoking. I was put off by the admission that the author didn't understand why people smoked, because I feel it makes her an inappropriate authority to adress the issues of smoking.
ReplyDeleteCassandra D.
In response to Phil's answer to question number 6, coming from the perspective of a non-smoker, Cavallaro did not put much effort into connecting with differing view points. However, I feel that her target audience was young people who have not started, or who have not become so addicted that the concept of quitting seems impossible. So it seems Cavallaro did a good job of reaching her target audience, but did not put much effort into reaching out to the opposition. Her choice of words such as, "kissing my ex . . . imagine licking an ashtray would be like." obviously displays her bias against smoking.
ReplyDelete1.Locate the claim or thesis statement and summerize the main ideas:
ReplyDeleteI believe that the thesis is "With all of this firsthand knowledge... and as smart as these select people are, how could anyone not be motivated to quit by the numbers alone?" The main ideas are: the medically relevant statistics, identification with audience through personal experiences and emotional references about family members. lowering smoking rates and prevention for youths, the impact of the media and big corporations in America, and the financial costs of such an expensive habit.
To add a personal comment, as a former smoker of 10 years (quit two years ago), I feel the argument is only effective towards neutral and negetively biased individuals. The "numbers" are more or less common knowledge and the other aspects of her essay are nothing new in the cigarette debate. If she was trying to get people to quit smoking this essay is a total blunder. Although well writen, this essay is not unique and is only effective at telling people what they already know and agree with, smokers included.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletetesting
ReplyDeleteQuestion #2
ReplyDeleteComment: this article is directed toward people in general; smokers and non-smokers alike. The paper has the hint of a hostile aura by using such comments as "licking an ashtray" and picturing your family and friends "hooked up to an oxygen tank, struggling to do something as simple as breathing" this demonstrates her prejudice toward smokers.
In addition to the points I mentioned above, question number 4: Do the writers convey a positive attitude toward the audience? Do any of the writers antagonize the audience? How is this done? I think that in addition to the points I mentioned earlier, Cavallaro also displays her bias against smoking by her choice of words in regards to tobacco's impact on people and their choices. Sentences such as, ". . . in that hard-headed American way", and ". . . forking over nearly $10 for a pack. . .". The author's choice of words also clearly demonstrates her bias against tobacco products, which in my opinion seems effective if the reader is in agreement with the author, but looses the segment of the readership that holds the opposing view.
ReplyDeleteQuestion #4
ReplyDeleteComment: This writer does not convey a positive attitude toward the audience. Though using good statistical information, this article is very antagonistic. Instead of giving the reader the information in a "soft pedal" way and letting them make their own decision, this article states good facts in a very harsh environment. Almost making the reader believe the writer is making a choice for them.
Question # 7
ReplyDeleteComment: The purpose of this essay is not persuade people to not smoke. Again, statistically speaking the writer does a great job in presenting the information. The facts are strong and straight forward, although there is not an argument persay. Readers are not given the opportunity to choose; the choice is one sided; against smoking.
Question #1: Locate the claim or thesis statement and summarize the main ideas...
ReplyDeleteThe thesis statement is part of paragraph 6 the paragraph begins" To help lower the numbers (smoking) in America, I propose a national anti-smoking campaign.... The paragrah ends with It starts with the youth of today.
To summarize the main idea in the paper it could be stated that in order to lower the number of smokers we needs to focus in eliminating adolescent smoking.
In response to question number 4, I would also say that the writer does antagonize the audience in that she insensitivelly states that the inability for her grandfather to quit although he had lung cancer made her sick. She also passes judgement on her best friend for paying for cigarettes though her friend is not financially secure. In sum, she seems to find smokers to be disgusting, financially irrisponsible, hard-headed, rebellious, and ignorant.
ReplyDeleteCassandra D.
In response to Phil's answer to question 1, I agree that the thesis is to lower the number of smokers in America, beginning with the youth. Regarding his summarization of the thesis, while I agree with what Phil says, I would like to elaborate further that while the author desires to eliminate adolescent smoking, that in itself is not the entire goal. It is also to get more people, if not all, to quit, but more importantly, the focus is really on an active movement to do something about it. Preventing smoking is the intended result; however, the actual conviction behind the thesis is in the action of taking radical preventative methods. This action means restructuring our culture and economy. Images of smoking would have to be removed from the media and replaced by graphic images of cancerous lungs, and the evil tobacco companies, which are Goliaths in our economy, would need to crumble.
ReplyDeleteIn response to question 3. Cavallaro does not present a balanced picture to the audience. Cavallaro does however, admit she does not understand “what makes cigarettes appealing” and mentions that nicotine is addictive. Yet, her essay presents herself as being unaware of an addiction, not just to smoking. Cavallaro heartlessly lets us know, it makes her sick that her grandfather is still smoking today and exclaiming that her friend would knowingly choose to waste money on a pack of cigarettes instead of using the money toward a dinner at a restaurant.
ReplyDeleteIn response to question 2. In my opinion, Cavallaro thinks she is addressing a neutral audience or at least trying to appeal to the American public. The explanation of the numbers, which she presents in the beginning of her essay, has been presented to the American public as awareness on the dangers of smoking. Cavallaro, then portraits the explanation of the statistics with an American and apple pie appeal. She expresses that the number of smokers who die every year from second hand smoke, just happens to fit in the “Yankee Stadium”, not just any stadium. Cavallaro wants the reader to picture themselves there with family or good friends not acquaintances from an establishment, such as a bus trip filled with bowlers.
ReplyDeleteIn response to question 5. Cavallaro began appealing to a neutral audience but did not present a balanced picture. As Cavallaro stated, she has never smoked. She also addressed that nicotine was addictive and therefore, hard to give up. Unfortunately, comments of prejudice or plain ignorance came through. Comments such as “Licking an ash tray”, “It makes me sick”, and with all the knowledge about smoking, how could anyone not be motivated to stop smoking. Cavallaro failed to seek a common ground. She could have compared dieting, which is common to most Americans, to quitting smoking.
ReplyDelete4. Does the writer convey a positive attitude towards the audience?
ReplyDeleteNo. Ms. Cavallaro does a very good job of not portraying anything positive throughout her entire essay. The negativity begins in the very first paragraph in which she denounces mathematics and numbers. I realize this was nothing more than a ploy to capture the readers attention. However the negative connatation holds strong through the entire essay. In paragraph three and in keeping with the negative tone, she claimns to be repulsed by kissing her ex and she then goes on to bash her so-called best friend for her addiction and bad spending habits. The unattractive theme continues throughout the rest of the essay.
Ms. Cavallaro does her share of antagonizing as well. I felt my own feathers particularly ruffled when she referred to Americans as "hard-headed" and when she goes on to judge Americans for exercising their rights to smoke. I found this interesting, Cavallaro seems to make it OK for her to bash smokers and put herself on a pedastool. I was left asking myself, "Why is it OK for her to bash us as smokers? Do we not have the same rights as those who choose to be "non-smokers"?
6. How well does the author establish common ground with the audience?
ReplyDeleteThis question can be abswered one of two ways. If she is attempting to connect with the non-smoker who detests smoking then yes she connects with the audience terrificly. Although, in order to present a valid argument and possibly convert smokers to seeing her point of view, she was a little over the top. She presented no common ground for a smoker to realate. She instead goes on to bash smoking, addiction, the cost of ciggarettes and the disease that comes along with the habit of smoking. Had she even mentioned the possible reasons for starting smoking, I, personally, might have taken a little more time to listen and attempt to see her side. Her negative attitude, left me no choice but to get angry with her and light up a smoke.
7. Whatis the purpose of each essay? How effectively does each writer accomplish this purpose?
ReplyDeleteThe purpose Ms. Cavallaro's essay was to portray her thoughts on smoking and present the audience with some faint ideas on how to curb adolescent smoking. Cavallaro shows the negative effects of smoking on a person as well as our pocketbooks. For this, I commend her, she does a very nice job of stating some facts. Her ideas to prevent adolescents from smoking seem a little stretched. I cannot imagine the cost of a lung in a high school biology class across the country. I applaud her for the shock tactics that she proposes, I just do not see that happening. Even if it did, I am curious if that would stop children from picking up an extremely bad habbit.
Question #7
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of this essay is to inform and to persuade the reader not to smoke the essay list negative affects about smoking and the reason why a person should not smoke. Cavallaro list facts that are negative and that are to the point. Naiah D
2. What kind of audience is the writer addressing?
ReplyDeleteThe audience is writing to other college students. She is using concepts and a harsh writing tone that is definitely not directed at children. The way in which she ignorantly dogs smokers shows that smokers are not her intended audience. She is definitely writing to like minded individuals who would not heavily disagree with her if at all.
5. Has the author commited any illogical fallacies?
ReplyDeleteyes, she did not remember the "golden rule." Again I take the stand that the views and feelings of smokers are not taken into account. She would not like someone else belittling her eating habits per se. She does not treat the side of the smokers with respect or openmindedness. Also, where is the "positive attitude"? I only sence ridicule, criticism, judgment, and belittling of others who do things that she does not.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 4
ReplyDeleteNo the eassy does not have a positive attitude toward the audience everything in the eassy it negative all her exmaples that she uses are negative even the tone that she wrote the eassy in she negative. Cavallaro is the antagionizer her eassy is judgement about smokers
Naiah D.
Question 2
ReplyDeleteCavallaro essay is adressing a netural audience. She is adressing both non smokers and smokes even though her essay does have a hostile tone she wants people to know the harm that smoking can cause she use her own personal stories pulse the stories of others and gives data and information also.
Naiah D
In response to question 2, I believe Cavallaro is addressing a somewhat neutral audience because she is trying to persuade the younger generation not to start smoking in the first place and trying to persuade those who already smoke to quit. She does this by stating facts about how smoking can negatively affect you such as lung cancer,the cost, etc.
ReplyDeleteIn response to question #4 I think that Cavallaro has made no attempt to convey a positive attitude towards the audience. Not only was she antagonizing, the entire tone of her essay was condescending and patronizing to say the least. Her apathy towards smokers turns me off to the essay completely. The words she chose such as "it makes me sick" (in regards to her father's inability to kick the habit)make it seem like she is so above people who smoke. Her lack of knowledge of why people start smoking and continue to smoke despite knowing the hazaards makes her argument seem incredulous. In my opinion her inability to understand what makes smokers tick and by antagonizing them almost debases her entire argument, making her essay ineffective towards smokers.
ReplyDeleteBrieann F.
in response to question #6, I think that Cavallaro established common ground with some of her audience. The lack of empathy she possesses for smokers causes her to lose that part of her audience. She almost ridicules smokers which as Cassie has said just makes them defensive and unresponsive to the essay. However, for the people who do not smoke or people who are thinking about lighting up for the first time; I think she effectively established common ground. She was able to do this by relating stories of relatives and friends who smoke and how it has badly affected them. And in all honesty who doesn't at least know of someone who has died from smoking? Almost everyone does, and by forcing her audience to imagine their loved ones gasping for breathe or hooked up to an oxygen tank is an effective argument in persuading someone not to smoke.
ReplyDeleteBrieann F.
In response to question #2 I think that Cavallaro is addressing everyone in general. The young, the old, smokers and non-smokers. It is quite obvious that she finds smoking a deplorable habit, and since she finds it so repulsive she attacks every target audience she can think of. She ridicules smokers both young (such as her best friend and ex boyfriend) and old (such as her own uncle and grandfather) in a failed attempt to try and make them see how dumb it is to smoke and to deter non smokers from smoking in the first place.
ReplyDelete