Reading Prompt2

In both essays, the authors make their point while remaining non-argumentative. In Holmquist’s essay, he managed to keep the argumentative town to a minimum and remain mostly unbiased. He does make his stand in the last sentence of the essay “I have my whole life ahead of me still and I don’t want to end up as another statistic or have one of my friends write a paper like this because of me.” In this quote, he reveals to the reader that although he “likes his drugs” he does not support the use of drugs by him or anyone. He gets his point across without being argumentative or persuasive towards the reader. Holmquist’s overall controlling idea is the safety (or lack their off) associated with “soft” drugs. He describes three major drugs: GHB, LSD, and MDMA, each drugs effect on people while they do them, and the side effects/long term effects of each drug. He shows his controlling idea throughout the story, but begins in the beginning with the line “ most users also view party drugs as being ‘safe’.” Holmquist supports this controlling idea with his personal story of taking his friend, Eric, to the hospital after he had taken all three drugs discussed in the story. He also supports his controlling idea on the danger of “party” or “soft” drugs by describing each drug’s short term, long term, and life-altering side effects. He tells the story of his friend Chris, and after a vial of LSD was slipped into his drink, he never came down from the trip, and is forever changed and often talks of Satan chasing him around. Holmquist takes a firm stand against the use of these drugs, but throughout his story he remains unbiased by presenting the reader with facts about each drug, instead of mere opinion. He uses his personal experiences of raves and party drugs along with the facts to make the essay a personal essay.
In Garrett-Brown’s essay the author takes a much more vocal approach in voicing her opinion. I think she might have even voiced her opinion a little too much. While she did present facts like statistics from Seventeen magazine, she still managed to be a little argumentative in her stand on the ethicality of tanning. “I don’t necessarily wonder why people tan, but why they completely gyp themselves of the pleasures of the sun” reveals an argumentative tone in Garrett-Brown’s writing. Her controlling idea is why do you people tan? And what fuels people’s desire to be tan? She shows this controlling idea through rhetorical questions like, “who made it cool for white people to tan?” and “is the fashion industry that powerful?” In the latter question, she is trying to pin-point the desire to be tan on the fashion industry and its influence on society.
In both essays, the authors give formal credit to sources that contributed to the writer’s thinking (as Ballinger states they should). Both authors also use source material (statistics,surveys,ect.) to present their opinions,ideas, and experiences on a factual basis. Holmquist uses the statistic of “51 percent of twelfth graders could easily get MDMAD” to present his case on the danger of “party” drugs. Garrett Brown uses a statistic from a popular teen magazine, Seventeen, “2/3 of teens say they look better with a tan” to support her question of whether or not the fashion industry has anything to do with the desire to be tan. The essays, along with Ballenger’s suggestions help to get two very different examples of voicing an opinion while employing research and presenting facts to support my controlling idea.

1) Do looks affect the way people perceive you?
a. How important are looks?
2) What drives people to get plastic surgery?
a. What fuels the need for plastic surgery?
3) Why is the influence of the media on society such a controversial issue?