Both “Why do People Tan?” by Amy Garrett-Brown and “An Experience in Acronyms” by Jay Holmquist are really more discovery essays than true traditional research papers because both don’t really reach the point the author is trying to make until the end of the essay. The traditional research paper has “an argument the writer wanted to make even before he started the research” (Ballenger, 430); however, in the two provided essays the reader is taken through a process of research done by the author, where the reader, and possibly even the author, is unclear on where the author is attempting to go with the subject. In “Why Do People Tan?” the author appears on the side of tanning is bad with quotes like “People still feel healthy with their bastardized tan” (Garrett-Brown, 460) and “People passively accepting a degenerating process”(Garrett-Brown 460). Clearly the reader is expecting the author to stand against tanning, but in the end author comes to a 180 when she establishes she still thinks that she disagrees with the critics because she too wishes to look good. This shows how it is a process because Garrett-Brown the author comes to a discovery that despite the research she still values tanning. In “An Experience in Acronyms” the author openly talks about his enjoyment in doing drugs “I like my drugs” (Holmquist, B29) but in the end his “discovery” is that he doesn’t want to do them because he has his “whole life in front of him”(Holmquist, B29) and he doesn’t want to ruin that. Both essays also diverge from the typical research paper because they are both written in first person. The classical paper is written in third.
The controlling idea of “Why Do People Tan?” is a brief overview of the developing subculture of tanning. The essay is based around the question posed in the second sentence is it “why is it cool for white people to be tan” (Garrett-Brown 459) despite the fact that it is known to have poor long-term effects. The main idea of “An Experience in Acronyms” is a look into the “part drugs” LCD, GHB, and ecstasy. It is written from the perspective of someone who has both taken and seen the harmful effects of these drugs. While the author’s stance on the subject doesn’t actually come out till the very end, he is tying to show how these supposedly “harmless”(Homlquist, B25) and “unaddictive” (Holmquist, B27) can and will cause problems eventually.
Like mentioned earlier, both papers are written in first person which really helps the two authors true voice come out. While both are written in first person with both still provide a lot of outside information that helps get their point across. The mixture of the outside information and the personal stories does help get a very good job of getting their message across.
Both essays are “driven by a central question” (Ballenger, 432). In “Why do People Tan?” the question that pushes the essay through out the paper is, why do people fake tan. “An Experience in Acronyms” is driven by the question; is it ok to do these drugs he sees all of his friends doing.
Ballenger says that these types of essays will have a clearly stated thesis. While I think there is a thesis in “Why do People Tan?” I think Garrett-Brown gets away from the idea presented in the thesis. I view the thesis, as “It seems completely asinine on the surface to waste money and time on a prepaid tan that will only result in a prematurely leathered and wrinkled skin and a much higher risk of developing melanoma.” (Garrett-Brown, 459). The key part I see there is the “on the surface” portion because as the author seems to explore the topic more she comes to find that she also to desires the tan more than the possible after effects. The second portion of the thesis doesn’t come till the very end of the essay when the author says, “While I’m not condoning the 1976 ‘Savage Tan’...I think there must be some kind of middle ground”(Garnett-Brown, 460). The thesis statement in “An experience in Acronyms” isn’t actually a statement, but a question, “Is something that the government finds harmful, yet so many people say is harmless, is actually bad for you?” (Homlquist B24).
2 comments:
I agree with your conclusion that a discovery essay is more of a way of taking a reader through research rather than presenting information for a reader in a formal way. I also found this style much more easy to read and get into than the way I've always been taught to write reasearch papers. I liked that rather than writing the thesis at the beginning of the paper, both authors chose to include their "so what" points near the middle or the end. I wasn't sure what to expect, so as a reader I decided to just ride the information out instead of choosing a side early on. I think it's interesting that something as insignificant as first person versus third person can completely change the essay for an audience. I absolutely agree with you that this allowed the writers' personalities to really be evoked. I feel that sometimes when writing in third person it is hard to make myself a part of the essay. In other words, I am telling instead of showing.
I really liked what you said in the beginning of your response, about how they actually discovered something, and that is what sets it apart from a research papers, like how you said, Brown changes her mind about tanning, and Holmquist changes his mind about drugs, through the entire paper. What made this work so well, was the quotes you used to support it. They were quotes from the text the directly related to what you were trying to say, and they made your argument seem much more convincing.
The only thing i disagree with, is how you said the thesis, is a question for Holmquist. The whole point of a thesis statement, is to make a statement. Tell the reader something, not ask them a question. I feel that question you stated is what drove the essay, but it was more his discovery i would say the thesis was more at the end when he is talking about drugs and says, "But the fact is still there- they will kill you." This would be more the thesis because he has made a stand.
Post a Comment