Neat People Vs Sloppy People Analysis

4. The structure of the conclusion is basically the introduction backwards. The thesis is restated at the beginning, and then broadening out to more general statements.

In the essay “Shitty First Drafts”, Anne Lamott addresses aspiring writers on the subject of the dreaded first draft. Lamott uses a disarmingly humorous tone to illustrate the value of putting pen to paper and writing shitty first drafts. Lamott goes on to say, “The first draft is the child’s draft, where you let it all pour out… knowing that no one is going to see it and that you can shape it later” (234). The essay successfully delivers this message by use of its light and conversational tone. This amicability aids the essay by allowing the precise communication of the author’s ideas, by portraying the author personably and empathetically, and by allowing the author to finally advise from a place of authority and practicality.

On February 22, 2016 author John Warner published an article on Just Visiting entitled “Kill the 5-Paragraph Essay.” Warner creatively talks about how rudimentary of a structure this type of essay holds. Writers are locked inside a cage of regulations and guidelines making them unable to write the essay as they please, but rather having to piece together regulated sentences and paragraphs because that’s what they have been told would score high on certain test questions. The article targets people of all kinds, but is more directed towards early college aged students. The purpose behind this article is to get them to expand their horizon, disregard all the regulations they have been previously taught and start to write in a much more open-minded sense.

Whether while writing an essay or a birthday card, we have all struggled to find the proper words to illustrate our thoughts or feelings from time to time. Upholding the occupation of a writer would multiply that struggle tenfold. An occupation that depends on interesting, fluid pieces of writing every submission requires an adequate number of attempts and patience. Lamott expresses that writers “all often feel like we are pulling teeth” (Lamott), which proves the difficulty of writing is still there no matter the level of writer behind the work. Lamott also emphasizes that a writer “has to start somewhere” and shares her friend’s ideas in her writing to simply “get something - anything - down on paper” (Lamott). Lamott, and the other writers mentioned in this piece, carry incredible track records, while still admitting that perfection did not come initially, or even easily. Thus, proving that the Shitty First Draft has a place in any writer’s notebook or Word document. Lamott’s admission to struggling to properly begin a piece of writing surprised me, given of her success. I could not imagine a woman of her accomplishments stressing out over a food review, yet I felt relieved that someone of Lamott’s title relates to an amateur writer like myself. I often put off my writing as well when I cannot articulate a proper introduction. I do every other possible homework, or shy away from homework in general because the

The various approaches to coaching and how much authority parents had depending on how involved they were. Transitions, such as closers or openers most of the paragraphs cause readers to be lost in the in the wrong areas and a quick switch of the setting hurt the initial and long-term meaning of the essay.

In Britt’s essay, “Neat People vs. Sloppy People”, Suzanne Britt criticizes neat people in a humorous way for certain behaviors. Britt creates a humorous tone and a good impression for sloppy people. This excerpt appears in a book “Show and Tell” Britt writes “It is her journey into the awful cave of self” (214). At first, I was offended by Britt’s essay, but after I realized Britt was using humor, I was able to look at my sister and her sloppiness differently.

For example, the author discusses a ‘lite’ dog food and how the most positive part of the meal was that it didn’t make her fat (313). There is also a small amount of irony in the essay through the idea of a taste-testing going on, although it is not the pleasant experience of its connotation. The effect of this hilarity creates a stronger contrast between the subject of the essay and comedic tone of the writer.

Are neat people inferior to sloppy people? This question’s answer will differ depending on the type of person you ask. According to Britt in her essay, “Neat people vs. sloppy people”, the answer is yes. She uses certain qualities, such as oral description to differentiate neat people and sloppy people, how neat people are lazier, and how neat people are wasteful. Her qualities help explain to the readers why she thinks that her answer is true.

For example, Wong explains that the jokes that comedians offer “are dug painfully out of your own guts” (Para. 8). From this statement, it is clear that, to create jokes, comedians go through intense suffering. This depiction starkly differs from conventional views that regard comedians as happy and contented individuals. While reviewing this notion, a reader would pause and wonder why a comedian entertains people if the comedian is not happy. This inquiry would lead a person to conclude that, to create and deliver jokes, comedians make significant sacrifices for the sake of audiences. Such reflection would cause a reader to view a comedian as a vulnerable individual on whose suffering unwitting audiences thrive. A reader would thus ‘see’ that, although they may not be aware of this, people who constitute audiences for comedians are selfish and cruel. This realization is likely to strongly affect readers at an emotional level. Readers would be ‘frustrated’ with the apparently helpless status of comedians. Further, readers would be ‘angry’ at the people who unwittingly ‘help’ comedians to conceal intense internal suffering. Thanks to these potent emotional reactions, readers would gain added interest in Wong’s arguments. Readers would further scrutinize the article to investigate how society can fail to notice the troubled nature of comedians. While carrying

Joey Franklin makes masterful use of rhetoric in his essay “Working at Wendy’s” to construct an entertaining and compelling argument in favor of recognizing that the workers of the service industry are not just undistinguished drones, but rather complicated people, each with their own desires and stories. To this end, the author utilizes the effective rhetorical device of pathos, logos, and ethos. Franklin demonstrates an excellent use of imagery that serves as a conduit for empathy, which is vital for the use of pathos, the emotional appeal. In reference to logos, the appeal to logic, he paints the picture of a hard-working father that needs to provide for his family. This is a clear representation of common logic and ties into ethos, which is the rhetorical appeal to authority and ethics, in the sense that many people can relate to caring about and working to support family. For ethos, he establishes himself as your everyday working man — part of the working class. This shows that he’s clearly apt for speaking of the position he’s in, and allows the audience to relate to him through pathos.

In the writing, “Neat People vs. Sloppy People” Britt focuses on contrasting two diverse people, neat and sloppy. At first glance one would believe that her criteria is what is sloppy and what is neat, rather than how the two think. She concentrates her criteria on moral and sentimentality of the two oppositions. “They have a cavalier attitude toward possession,” Britt wrote about neat people. This explains that neat people don’t care about the sentimental value of an object. Neat people focus on neatness solely. In contrast she writes, “Sloppy people can’t bear to part with anything. They give loving attention to every detail.” This opposes neat people. Sloppy people care about each and every object individually. Sloppy and neat people are

The narrator’s diction on the page can be described as vain due to the fact he doesn’t need an introduction when the narrator says it is “not really necessary” (4). The narrator’s diction reveals that he has a methodical, stone cold personality that puts the narrator in a more superior position then the human race. Achieving

What are the main ideas in each of the two essays? (list 3 for each one)

“In truth, I’ve found that any day’s routine interruptions and distractions don't much hurt a work in progress and may actually help in some ways. It is, after all, the dab of grit that seeps into and oyster’s shell that makes the pearl, not pearl-making seminars with other oysters. And the larger the work looms in my day—is that I hafta instead of just an I wanna—the more problematic it can become. One serious problem with writers’ workshops is that I hafta becomes the rule. You didn’t come, after all, to wander lonely as a cloud, experiencing the beauty of the woods or the grandeur of the mountains. You’re supposed to be writing, dammit, of only so that your colleagues will have something to critique as they toast their goddam marshmallows there in the main lodge. When, on the other hand, making sure the kid gets to his basketball camp on time is every bit as important as your work in progress, there’s a lot less pressure to produce. (232)

Humour and satire are two concepts that are both wide ranging and diverse, from dark, to light hearted, with each producing a different effect. Humour in the main, is something that is used to please the audience, its function is to invoke laughter amongst its audience. Satire is used to create a comical critical view of the subject at hand, this can range from a light hearted comical way, to a judgemental way, with each style giving the text a different meaning, however this does not mean that satire cannot be humorous, which can evident in the use of parody and irony within texts. Within literature both concepts play an important role to how the text is viewed, humour can include word play, grammatical jokes, to even inside jokes with the author and reader, and with satire, including that of irony and parody, with each style and type delivering humour in its own unique way. These differing styles of humour can be found in a variety of forms including Jasper Forde’s The Eyre Affair (2001), with its silly atmosphere, word play and grammar jokes, and the use of light hearted satire and parody to brighten up the text, and Julian Barnes A History of the World in 10 1/2 Chapters (1989), where there is a more serious atmosphere, with a more critical, satirical eye on history and characters, as well as using irony to achieve its comical effect, and the position of the world. Each text is humorous and satirical in its own right, and with each author using different techniques to