Lobster

Assignment 9

Parker Wallace

Starting with the very beginning of the article, the author wrote in the tone of a casual conversation instead of an article referencing studies like Unitasker. He does this by using language and sentence structure one would use in a face to face interaction. An example of this comes when he mentions the web address of the festival and when he uses incomplete sentences. This differs from the beginning of the Unitasker because he begins with an anecdote then uses studies and other stories to prove his points. Another way the two articles differ is what type of article they are writing. The Unitasker is an informative article written based on facts in order to tell the reader multitasking is not an efficient tactic to use while accomplishing tasks. The article about the Maine Lobster Festival is more of an advertisement. In order to observe this the reader must consider the audience. The audience of the Unitasker seems to be middle aged adults because it warns of multitasking while at work and in the car. The author tells the reader the dangers of being distracted and the benefits of focusing. The article regarding the lobster festival appeals to an audience of all ages, listing the different activities offered that children and their parents can take part in. I couldn’t particularly pick out any questions in the lobster article but the Unitasker proposed the question: What are the benefits of focusing on one task at a time? While there are no clear questions in the lobster article the answers are abundant. With all the facts about the festival, mostly any question asked by the reader would be answered by reading it. The Unitasker goes on to answer its primary question throughout the story. While the articles have many differences, they are similar in some aspects. Both authors use tones and syntaxes that allow the articles to be easily read, similar to a dinner conversation. This tactic is used among most authors because it allows them to appeal to most readers and get their points across very smoothly. 

unitasker

Assignment 8

Parker Wallace

Talking about this short story, “Unitasker,” as a dinner conversation isn’t extremely difficult because I have often wondered how much time in my life I have wasted because I was distracted. This type of analysis is called Dinner Conversation because the way we analyze it is similar to how a conversation at the dinner table goes. At my table growing up we would talk about our day, ask questions, and talk about plans for the rest of the week. Unitasker does this in a way by providing many personal anecdotes and context to the topic, and builds on assertions in order to make the author’s point stronger. Beginning on the first two pages when he talks about the time he crashed his car because he was distracted, A. J. Jacobs uses a personal anecdote to tell his story about his connection with being distracted by constant multitasking. He builds off of the statement “Consider this: multitasking almost killed me, (147)” throughout the story citing studies and other anecdotes to strengthen his case against multitasking. I personally agree with his argument that multitasking is a subconscious thing all humans do too much. He later references a study made on multitasking and the effects it has on the brain. The study shows that doing a simple task like sorting cards is tougher with a simple distraction like music. This basic distraction strains the brain enough to make the person have to think very hard which has a negative effect on your brain. Jacobs later claims that “multitasking rots your skull (155).” His claims are relatively hyperbolic, but the facts and anecdotes he uses to support the claims bring them back into reality. A major part of dinner conversation involves bring the story back around, and A. J. Jacobs does a great job of this. In the beginning of the story he references his son Zane, and tells the reader he isn’t paying attention to anything going on around him, and attempting to unitask. The end of the story is another anecdote about him not looking at his phone or the news, but simply putting coins into a piggy bank with his son, Zane.  

CRA review

Assignment 7

Parker Wallace

                Before reading my paper, it is very evident it is not long enough. After reading the sample essays I see that in order to accurately get my points across and be precisely comparative, my paper needs to be extended by quite a bit. For the small amount I do have, I think it has some ups and downs. To begin, I think my intro grabbed the attention of the reader and contained necessary information. With a topic like mass shootings, the topic doesn’t need much spice to entice the reader. I outlined each side of the argument and I show how each will be compared later in the paper. My thesis statement is not clearly stated in the introduction, but it is present in the conclusion so I don’t know that I need to change that. Looking at the sample papers made me realize I need to have a title, so in the first paragraph that would be the only thing I change. Moving on to later in the paper, I truly think the sources I used are very valuable to the paper because they show extreme thoughts on both ends of the political spectrum and the last source used is a peer reviewed article that isn’t really biased and disproves ideas given by both parties following shootings. I could incorporate more sources to make the paper longer and strengthen my arguments against both sides. I don’t do a lot of comparing the two sides, just describing the view given by both sides. Since this is a comparative rhetorical analysis paper, I should probably compare the two. It is evident to me that I am very repetitive in describing the opinions of the conservatives and liberals, which is something else I should change. I like my conclusion and I wouldn’t change much in it. It brings together the paper pretty well and includes the thesis statement for the paper. Overall, I can improve my paper by adding some length to it. I can do this by adding sources and comparing the sides of the fight against each other better. 

CRA intro

Assignment 6
Parker Wallace

Nowadays, mass shootings and killings seem increasingly normal each time they occur. With the recent election, gun control has been a major topic of debate, and some people think taking away the second amendment would decrease or end all shootings. While these shootings are tragic and horrific, many observations can be taken on society’s reactions to the catastrophe. Traditionally, the liberal left calls for tighter gun control and policy to be made to keep the shootings from happening again. The conservative right normally goes on the defensive claiming gun control doesn’t fix crazy people and tries to keep the second amendment intact. If the country acted on the thoughts of strictly liberals or strictly conservatives we would be in shambles, so to succeed, policymakers need to act wisely after these shootings and work together to end them.