From the essay "Why Bother?"
What kind of tone does Pollan set up with the title, "Why Bother?" Does he carry this tone throughout the essay? Give me proof from the text. I need at least two instances from the essay. Is the tone appropriate for the argument? Why or why not? How does his tone affect his credibility with his audience? Lastly, if you have seen An Inconvenient Truth, what did you think of this response to that documentary?
Answer the questions in 1-2 paragraphs.
When you first read the title, it makes you feel like the essay is going to be bashing something or just saying that something is not important. Like why is it worth doing? I do think that throughout the essay, the author keeps going with the sarcasm that was used in the title. ON page 559, Michael Pollan says this, "But what good is that when virtue itself is quickly becoming a term of derision?"In this quote you can get a sense of what he really believes about the issue. He knows that people are worried about it but he really doesn't see the point in freaking out over it. You can also sense his feelings toward the subject by looking on the next page. "According to annalysis, if walking to work increases your appetite and you comsume more meat or milk as a result, walking might actually emit more carbon than driving"(560) This quote shows how he is poking fun at the topic of global warming and how the things that are supposed to be benificial to our enviorment might not really do much. I actually really enjoyed reading this. I liked the tone that he used and I thought that it was appropriate.
ReplyDeleteI have seen the documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. I watched it in 9th grade so some of the details are a little fuzzy but I think that this essay is entertaining. I think that after watching the movie, it got me to thinking about what I could do to try to help make this global warming stop. But Pollan seemed to have the complete oppisite response to this. He seemed to think that it was bogus and that the things that Al Gore recomended doing really didn't seem smart to him, which was an interesting take.
When I first read the title, I thought I would be reading a very sarcastic piece. It seemed like it would be about something that was not an important issue and just a fun read. However, as you continue reading, Pollan becomes more serious--in an easy to relate to way--then goes back to being more sarcastic. For example in the beginning of the essay, Pollan talks about changing his own ways in order to decrease the size of his carbon footprint, "Let's say I do bother, big time," (559).
ReplyDeleteLater on he adds facts about the subject, "A handful of studies suggested that in certain cases under certain conditions, produce from places as far as New Zealand might account for less carbon than comparable to domestic products," (560). The inclusion of this statement allows readers to acknowledge that Pollan does care about the topic he is writing about. It also tells his audience that he is informed, adding to his credibility. This makes readers actually want to read more of his writing.
Lastly, he ends his essay returning with his original tone, "will you get a load of that zucchini?!" (565). Because Pollan mixes the different tones, he is reaching out to a larger audience. If someone is not interested in the matter, then he/she won't want to read about it. However, if it is a more interesting read, then more people will take the time to read it.
When I first started reading this essay, I thought it was going to be a scarastic piece. It didn't really seem like it would be a writing piece that had a important point. When I read more and more the essay went into a fun way to talk about the essay. He said on page 559 he states " Let's say I do bother, big time." This shows that he really does care and that this is his opinion on the essay.
ReplyDeleteLater in the essay he talks about the following he says " A handful of studies suggested that in certain cases under certain conditions, produce from places as far as New Zealand might account for less carbon that comparable to domestic products," (560) I think that from this he means that He really does care about the topic that he choose to write about. I also think that he means he is trying to tell us how accurate his writing is and how it makes people actually want to read the piece.
The last quote that I found was " Will you get a load of that zucchini?!" (565). I think that Pollan put this in the essay because he wanted many types of tone, and voice. He also wants to reach out to more than just the expected audience.
When I started reading this essay I thought that it was a satirical artical. I was not able to take the piece seriously at all. When I read the essay it was very fun and easy to read. Such as "Let's say I do bother, big time." The words were easy to read and very easy to understand.
ReplyDeleteAlso in the essay he talks about places that are being carbon compatable with the world. I think this means that you can totally tell he does his research before he started to write his essay. It makes the reader want to read more about his opinion. he also wants to rach out and try to get to different audience intrested in the things he says.
When I saw the title of the essay I thought of it being very sarcastic and intertaining. The tone made me feel like it was going to be a relaxed essay and would keep the reader interested. I think the author does carry this tone within his essay, like on page 560 the first complete paragraph Pollan says "So do you still want to talk about planting gardens? I do." This quote is kind of light hearted like he wants his audience to think about what he said previously. It gets his readers thinking. Another example is when Pollan says "Rip out your lawn, if you have one," Pollan is making a joke about something he seriously believes in, but he uses this tone to catch the readers attention so they would look closely at what he is talking about.(564)
ReplyDeleteI would say his tone is appropriate for this essay because it seems that he doesn't believe that an individual can change the world, he thinks it's kind of a joke and that's how he writes his essay. People may not be as interested in the information in his essay because the tone of his essay is more of a joking tone and people may not take him seriously.
The tone of the article's title seems very sarcastic. When I read the title I thought it would be a very biased article about the author's own opinion. I also think it will have a lot of questioning of the opposing side to try to get his own arguement across. An example is on page 559, third paragraph. The authro asks the question, "But what good is that when virtue itself is quickly becoming a term of derision?" Another example is on page 564, the bottom paragraph, first sentence. It is just a very sarcastic tone the author uses.
ReplyDeleteI think his tone is okay for this essay. He is taking a side and has a sarcastic opionion on the topic of climate change. Since he is taking a side, it seems like it would be okay to use the tone he is using to try and pursuade the reader. I think he wants people to conserve energy to help the climate, yet he knows it is almost impossible if only a few people do it.
Pollen sets up a very pessimistic tone with her title “Why Bother?” He does an excellent job of following through with this tone, saying things like “So what exactly would I have to show for all my trouble?” and “…replace every pound of CO2 I’m struggling to no longer emit.” I personally found that the tone of the essay was very appropriate for the point he was trying to make. It shows the feeling he has had concerning the issue of conservation more clearly than most other tones could manage. It does, however, take away from his credibility, it comes across an unscholarly and opinionative. I have seen the film An Inconvenient Truth, and I felt very similarly about the end of the movie, changing light bulbs seemed like a waste of time with the end of the world coming faster every year.
ReplyDeletePollan sets up a very sarcastic and ranting tone with his title, “Why Bother?” As well, the title leads the audience to believe that maybe the essay behind it is going to be somewhat biased, but overall the essay tried to stay as objective as possible. This tone is carried throughout the entire essay as shown on page 562 with the quote “Specialists ourselves, we can no longer imagine anyone but an expert, or anything but a new technology or law, solving our problems.” Pollan goes onto talk about how Al Gore probably thinks all we can do is change a light bulb to help our environment, and so that is all he dares ask of us. Basically his tone portrays the idea of “why bother” when we as a society are capable of so little. As well, on page 563, Pollan says “What I’m describing...is a process of viral social change...Who knows, maybe the virus will reach all the way to Chongqing and infect my Chinese evil twin.” His sarcasm is shown clearly here regarding his doubts about just how effective this “social change” is or can be. I think this tone is appropriate for this essay because it gets readers to think outside of the box when it comes to “going green.” It is not just another long and boring essay chalked full of facts and statistics regarding the environment. This ranting tone might not give Pollan the most credible appeal, but it does get readers interested from a more personal perspective.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading the title of this essay I thought that the author strongly disagreed with something. He carrys this tone through out the whole essay. Its going to take a worldwide help to save our environment. One country cant do it alone or their work will get cancled out. On page 562 Pollan says “Specialists ourselves, we can no longer imagine anyone but an expert, or anything but a new technology or law, solving our problems.” This means that there would have to be some sort of law passed around the world to enforce saving our earth. Also on page 559 "Let's say I do bother, big time," He wants to change his carbon footprint but yet he does not believe everyone can change, some dont have the resourses. The tone works well because its his opinon. It doesnt mess with the credibiltly of the essay because he has facts to back his thinking up.
ReplyDeleteWhen I first read the title of this essay, I thought the author was going to talk about a topic that wasn't important or about something that we shouldn't care about and it would be biased or even sarcastic. I think the author does carry his tone throughout the essay with quotes like "Let's say I do bother, big time" (559), and "So do you still want to talk about planting gardens? I do" (560). Both of these quotes are very sarcastic but they are appropriate because they get his point across that he is trying to make. Although he is opinionated throughout the whole essay, the author is credible because he uses facts from sources such as, Al Gore in his movie, An Inconvenient Truth, and Michael Spector, who wrote in the New Yorker about carbon footprints.
ReplyDeleteThe title Why Bother has a sarcastic tone and a tone that concludes why do something if it wont make a difference. I think that through out the essay he keeps sarcasism as the tone and the question of why do it. For example, on pg.559 "I could theoretically do all that, but what would be the point when I know full well that half way around the world there lives my evil twin, some carbon-footprint doppelganger in Shanghai or Chongqing how has just bought his first car, is eager to swallow every bite of meat I forswear and who's positively itching to replace every last pound of CO2 I'm struggling no longer to emit." In this quote he shows how his work and effort don't matter because somebody else will do double the damage, so why should he do it? Also on pg.560 it says, " if walking to work increases your appetite and you consume more meat or milk as a result, walking might actually emit more carbon than driving." This shows that people who are trying to make a difference and help really aren't, and that what they think is helping might possibly be worse. I don't think this tone was affective because it shows people that what they are doing isn't helping, and that w can't do it alone everyone has to help and do their part and we know that not everyone will do their part. This shows that what people are doing to help the enviroment really isn't doing anything. If sacrifices aren't helping than why should we bother sacrificing for nothing?
ReplyDeletePollan starts out the essay with a sarcastic tone. The title, “Why Bother?” leads the reader to automatically question what is going on in the essay. The sarcasm presents itself continuously throughout the essay. He states, “Have you looked into the eyes of a climate scientist recently? They look really scared” (560). This sentence uses sarcastic tones to make the reader question people who are very involved in the topic. His sarcasm is to scare people and get them to think about how the world is being affected. He does not mean in a literal term that these scientists show that they are scared but that if the world continues to throw away objects and pollute the air as people are doing right now, the world will not survive another thousand years. He reiterates his thesis when he says, “The reasons not to bother are many and compelling, at least to the cheap-energy minded” (563). He allows the reader to connect to others and still be reminded of the duty the people have to the world. His tone affects the credibility a little bit, however it mostly makes the reader think that this is written by a nonsense writer.
ReplyDeleteKevin Dawson
ReplyDeleteThe author of Why Bother, carries a desperate tone throughout the essay. While he knows that people can't make a huge impact individually, they definately can make a difference in large groups. For example on page 563 Pollan says "if you do bother, you will set and example for other people....if enough other people bother each one influencing another in a chain reaction of behavioral change ,green products will perhaps prosper and expand." This means that people can affect each other, which in turn can make an impact on groups of people.
Another argument that Pollan has a deperate theme is on page 563 where he says that "it is doubtful that it will be sufficient or that it will be pollitically sustainable before we've demonstrated to ourselves that change is possible." What he means here is that people don't care that much even on a small level so, it is doubtful that they will have a global impact. If people can start to make a difference in the small things, it will grow into a global impact.
Pollan carries a sarcastic tone throughout the essay while also showing desperation. He responds to the movie, An Inconvenient Truth by pointing out that we as Americans are pathetic by saying, "Al Gore asks us to change the light bulbs because he probably can't imagine us doing anything much more challenging." (562) This example is sarcastic and shows that Americans just are not interested in changing and do not have what it takes to change things in our daily lives even something as little as the light bulbs we use. He also states, "Virtually all of our needs and desires we delegate to specialists of one kind or another." (561) This example goes along with the first but just clearly states that we are lazy and would much rather delegate someone to fix our problems than do something ourselves. He points out how desperate we are to avoid changing and to just not care. He is being sarcastic in how we are pathetic. Yet he also points out how important this issue is and how desperate measures need to be taken. He says that planting a garden could change everything. Gardens are not necessarily simple to just start and maintain but he simply says that planting a garden will save the world. His view point may be sarcastic yet he makes good points about how if we just bother and care, improvements can be made.
ReplyDeleteIn Michael Pollan’s essay “Why Bother,” he uses fear and a condescending tone to influence the readers concern about the environment in order to encourage them to start working on a solution. After Pollan describes the detrimental impacts that holding off on legislation regarding the environment has had, he goes on to say, “Whatever we can do as individuals to change the way we live at this very late date does not seem utterly inadequate to the challenge.” (560) In that sentence, he implies that nothing we can do will really help. He elaborates further on page 563; Pollan says “If you do bother, you will set an example for other people.” The author’s use of the word “you” immediately makes the writing more personal to the reader, and makes them think about how little they may have done.
ReplyDeleteI don’t believe that this tone is appropriate for the argument he is trying to make. His goal is to inspire others to do something, but his voice comes off as if everything being done is too little too late. A more optimistic tone would have served the essay’s purpose more adequately. His condescending tone also makes the readers regard him as a less credible source.
While reading this essay I found a couple things that I thought were weird about it. I didn’t have a problem reading this essay with being confused because he found a way to explain to the reader what he was talking about in a way that the reader could understand. The one part of the essay that I didn’t like was his conclusion; I didn’t feel that he restated the reason why we should “bother”. I felt that he just ended talking about the gardens and never really finished the essay the way that it should have been done.
ReplyDeleteIn this essay I felt that the tone was very conversational. Throughout the essay I found that Pollan asked a lot of questions. I felt that he was asking these questions because these were the questions that he thought the reader would be asking while they were reading it. I found that in almost all of the paragraphs he at some point puts a question in and then explains the answer. On page 559 he asks, “But what good is that when virtue itself is quickly becoming a term of derision?” Also on page 559 he asks, “So what exactly would I have to show for all my trouble?” These two questions are two of the more serious questions I also found that some of his questions he asks were sarcastic like on page 560 he says, “So do you still want to talk about planting gardens?” Then he answers that questions with “I do.” I felt that showed some sarcasm in his essay.
The tone that the author sets up with the title “Why Bother” is kind of sarcastic and makes the reader assume it’s not an important issue he will be discussing. I do think the author carries the same tone throughout the essay. For example, he asks a lot of questions like “So do you still want to talk about planting gardens? I do” (Page 560). When you read this quote it sounds sarcastic but I think the way he says it helps him get his point across. They are good hooks to the topic and help the reader stay engaged while reading. Another example of a question he asks in the essay is “But what good is that when virtue itself is quickly becoming a term of derision?”(Page 559). This quote shows the authors thoughts on the topic. When he asks these questions, it forces the readers to think and answer the questions for themselves. The author is fairly opinionated in the essay but uses good examples and sources to back up his thoughts. For example he uses An Inconvenient Truth as a source to help explain carbon footprints.
ReplyDeletePolan sets a tone of sadness with the title of his piece,"Why Bothjer?" He carries this tone throughout, by using examples of how useless it can be, to be enviormentally responsible, when others undo all your good work to stop global warming. Such as when he said,"but what would be the point when I know full well that half way around the world there lives my evil twin, some carbon foootprint doppleganger" (Pollan 559). He makes this point again when he said,"Whatever we can do as an individual to change the way wwe live at this suddenly late date seems utterly inadequate to the challlenge" (Pollan 560). This gives the reader the sad feeling that it is to late for an individual to make a difference in stopping global warming. I do not think the tone helps his cause because he says that even though individual acts may be virtuous in them selves, they are nothing more than l"liberal softheadedness"(Pollan 559). The tone makes enviormental responsibility seem a pointless act on an individual basis.
ReplyDeleteThis blog is closed.
ReplyDelete