4

Devil in the White City takes place in Chicago, during the great World’s Exposition Fair in the 19th century.  The fair was extravagant. The buildings were huge and the architects and fair planners looked forward to an attendance rate of two hundred thousand people each day that the fair would be running, which was about six months. That means that altogether, they hoped that the overall attendance would be at about thirty six million people.
Some may argue that the architects and designers of the fair created it to be overly extravagant, implying that they had an air of arrogance about them. It is entirely true; the designers and the architects even admitted it themselves. The reason behind the extravagant buildings was that they wanted the Chicago Fair to be much better than the Paris Fair held a few years earlier. The greatest monument of the Paris Fair was the tower that Eiffel designed, and it was this tower that architects wanted to top in the Chicago Fair. Multiple designs were rejected that could have easily been better than the Eiffel tower, but apparently they weren’t good enough to surpass it. Until, of course, they accepted the design of a rotating wheel submitted by Ferris.
Multiple other occasions also added to the arrogance of the fair. Buffalo Bill wanted a day where all of the children could get into the fair for free (he was thinking of the orphans at this time), but officials didn’t like that idea because they wouldn’t get any profit from the boost of attendance. This displays the minds of the officials in that they were focused on the financial aspect of the fair, not making the fair better for the civilians of the world.
While these may suggest a darker, destructive parallel, they certainly do not necessarily automatically engender it. The fair does not automatically lead to destruction. While the fair was very arrogant to say the least, there were many positive aspects from the fair. Without the fair, we wouldn’t have had some of the modern everyday occurrences. Some inventions were on the smaller scale, such as Cracker Jack and Shredded Wheat. The most significant invention was probably Ferris’s wheel, which was the symbol of the entire Chicago Fair.
The only destructive parallel was the fact that H. H. Holmes, America’s first serial killer, performed his murders around the fair. He built a hotel near the fair in anticipation of flocking guests from around the United States and around the world as well. His murders were able to go unnoticed because of the hustle and bustle of the fair, so one might argue that if the fair never happened, these innocent lives would be saved. There would also be a counter-argument to that: What if more murders would happen because the fair did not happen? Who is to say that Dr. H. H. Holmes would not have found somewhere else to execute his murders and remain unnoticed?
But ultimately, the fact that many single women seeking employment (his target for his murders) came to Chicago because of the opportunities the fair provided, the fair contributed to a destructive parallel.

3

The ineluctable conflict between good and evil is revealed in the book Devil in the White City by Erik Larson, the story of the World’s Exposition Fair that took place in Chicago in 1893. The story takes two main points, each side taking turns in the chapters of the book. The first is the view of Burnham, an architect who organized the fair, and the second is Dr. H. H. Holmes, America’s first serial killer. Good is represented by Burnham, who tries his best to improve the fair and make it the best that it can possibly be. Evil is represented by Dr. H. H. Holmes, who seems to only think about gaining finances, taking advantage of women, and murdering women or those who get in the way of his plans. While these men are both drastically different, with Burnham helping society and Holmes silently disrupting it, the two actually have a lot in common with each other. Both men are architects. Burnham pursues architectural design as a career, and started up his own business practice. Holmes is also an architecture even though he is a doctor. Holmes planned out a hotel in which he hired many, many men to build parts of. Only Holmes knew what the overall design of the hotel was because he was the only one who managed the overall layout, and went through workers very quickly. Some workers would only build a little bit of the hotel before Holmes fired them to make sure that they didn’t know every intricacy of the building. Both men are ambitious. At a very young age, Holmes became very successful financially. He also finished college and medical school, something that’s not very common among serial killers. During the months before the fair, Burnham stresses how important it is to finish every building in time for opening day.
Good and evil conflict in quite a few ways. There is, of course, the obvious reason that Holmes is murdering those who would attend the fair and thus therefore he is hurting the profit of the fair. But that’s only the surface. The doctor’s activity is chilling and horrific, that it may lead one to question their own safety. Holmes is, after all, the first serial killer in America. Anyone would be concerned for their own safety or for the safety of their family. The fair was created to bring families together in awe of what Chicago could offer. It wasn’t something that just an individual went to; rather, the families were always brought along for the vacation. The murders disrupted the peaceful family ideal by striking panic and fear among those who knew about them. Holmes murdered mainly women. These women, however, were women who were new to Chicago and the idea of freedom. He was able to take advantage of them, something that a typical “bad guy” would do. Unfortunately for these girls, though, Burnham isn’t the typical “good guy” who will save them from the villain. Just who is the “good guy”? Or is there no good guy at all?

2

“A Modest Proposal”, when the reader does not know that Dr. Jonathan Swift is sarcastic, is a piece that questions the sanity of the author. In 1729, he complains that poor women have multiple children that they cannot care for properly. The piece starts out with a serious tone. He is genuinely concerned for the wellbeing of these children. As the reader continues, the tone changes drastically. The previous genuine concern seems fake as Swift brings up the idea that these children should be eaten.  

As I read through this piece, I was concerned. I asked other people if what they were reading matched up with what I was reading because I didn’t know if cannibalism was really what Swift wanted to talk about. I read through it and annotated but it was only after Mrs. Moe told us that it was a satirical piece and that he was only pointing out how inhumane the Irish people were that I understood the meaning of it. I should have known that he was being sarcastic, but I was reading the piece as a surface reading rather than trying to understand the deeper meaning of it. 

I read through the piece one more time to get a deeper understanding of it, and I saw that at points, he was being completely serious. The Irish people were in a time of poverty, and Swift disguised his suggestions to help them with the outrageous idea of selling and eating children. He brought up that this outrageous idea would help the economy. This suggests that there could be other ways that these people could help their economy rather than begging. 

Swift also shows concern toward marriage relationships, towards women specifically. In sarcasm, he writes that husbands will no longer beat their wives because the children they carry during pregnancy are too precious to risk harming before the child-birth. He is concerned about the spousal abuse and believes that husbands should respect their wives. He portrays this in such an absurd way that it presents a good reason to refrain from abuse. 

The absurd idea of eating children is what keeps the reader’s focus. The reader continues to read, hoping that at the end, there will be some form of clarification, and that Swift does not really intend to put forth the idea of eating children. He uses this absurd idea to get his real point across. 

This absurd idea also portrays Swift’s poor image of the Irish people. He uses language that dehumanizes them. These people are so poor that they would listen to the idea of selling their children and that implies that they would consider taking up that practice. Swift turns procreation into a business, suggesting that the Irish are heartless and don’t consider babies worth the title of human. These children are compared to slaughtered animals. Infants are compared to crops when he describes that their flesh will be “in season” throughout the year, but mostly in March. Swift’s language portrays that these people wouldn’t listen to humane ideas of dealing with their economic problems, so solving the issues with such inhumane tactics would be the best way in their opinion. 

I found it interesting that this piece was written in the 1700s. I’ve read literature that was written after this time period, and it all seemed similar in the sense that the authors were very direct and went straight to the point of what they were trying to say. In this piece, however, he is being very sarcastic. I’m sure that it was very uncommon for readers when they picked up this piece. For it being much older than modern prose, it could easily be mistaken for a modern piece of literature. The language is mature, but it’s not outdated, so the reader understands what Swift is saying. While it takes a bit of understanding, the reader understands that Swift is using this type of language to convey his real opinion. 

This work can be effective as long as the reader understands that it’s saturated in satire. If the reader, like myself, only read it at a surface level, they would be extremely confused about what Swift was really trying to say. It’s a piece that should be for older readers - younger readers would not understand his real point and would become confused in the outrageous suggestion of cannibalism. 

Overall, I thought it was a really interesting piece. However, I still really hope that he really is just being sarcastic.“A Modest Proposal”, when the reader does not know that Dr. Jonathan Swift is sarcastic, is a piece that questions the sanity of the author. In 1729, he complains that poor women have multiple children that they cannot care for properly. The piece starts out with a serious tone. He is genuinely concerned for the well being of these children. As the reader continues, the tone changes drastically. The previous genuine concern seems fake as Swift brings up the idea that these children should be eaten.  

As I read through this piece, I was concerned. I asked other people if what they were reading matched up with what I was reading because I didn’t know if cannibalism was really what Swift wanted to talk about. I read through it and annotated but it was only after Mrs. Moe told us that it was a satirical piece and that he was only pointing out how inhumane the Irish people were that I understood the meaning of it. I should have known that he was being sarcastic, but I was reading the piece as a surface reading rather than trying to understand the deeper meaning of it. 

I read through the piece one more time to get a deeper understanding of it, and I saw that at points, he was being completely serious. The Irish people were in a time of poverty, and Swift disguised his suggestions to help them with the outrageous idea of selling and eating children. He brought up that this outrageous idea would help the economy. This suggests that there could be other ways that these people could help their economy rather than begging. 

Swift also shows concern toward marriage relationships, towards women specifically. In sarcasm, he writes that husbands will no longer beat their wives because the children they carry during pregnancy are too precious to risk harming before the child-birth. He is concerned about the spousal abuse and believes that husbands should respect their wives. He portrays this in such an absurd way that it presents a good reason to refrain from abuse. 

The absurd idea of eating children is what keeps the reader’s focus. The reader continues to read, hoping that at the end, there will be some form of clarification, and that Swift does not really intend to put forth the idea of eating children. He uses this absurd idea to get his real point across. 

This absurd idea also portrays Swift’s poor image of the Irish people. He uses language that dehumanizes them. These people are so poor that they would listen to the idea of selling their children and that implies that they would consider taking up that practice. Swift turns procreation into a business, suggesting that the Irish are heartless and don’t consider babies worth the title of human. These children are compared to slaughtered animals. Infants are compared to crops when he describes that their flesh will be “in season” throughout the year, but mostly in March. Swift’s language portrays that these people wouldn’t listen to humane ideas of dealing with their economic problems, so solving the issues with such inhumane tactics would be the best way in their opinion. 

I found it interesting that this piece was written in the 1700s. I’ve read literature that was written after this time period, and it all seemed similar in the sense that the authors were very direct and went straight to the point of what they were trying to say. In this piece, however, he is being very sarcastic. I’m sure that it was very uncommon for readers when they picked up this piece. For it being much older than modern prose, it could easily be mistaken for a modern piece of literature. The language is mature, but it’s not outdated, so the reader understands what Swift is saying. While it takes a bit of understanding, the reader understands that Swift is using this type of language to convey his real opinion. 

This work can be effective as long as the reader understands that it’s saturated in satire. If the reader, like myself, only read it at a surface level, they would be extremely confused about what Swift was really trying to say. It’s a piece that should be for older readers - younger readers would not understand his real point and would become confused in the outrageous suggestion of cannibalism. 

Overall, I thought it was a really interesting piece. However, I still really hope that he really is just being sarcastic.

1

“The fight with Cohn had not touched his spirit but his face had been smashed and his body hurt. He was wiping all that out now. Each thing he did with that bull wiped that out a little cleaner.”
Pedro Romero is the true Hemingway hero. He shows grace under pressure and continues to get up even when knocked down. He certainly proved it when Cohn found Brett in his room and began to punch Romero repeatedly. The reader could see that it was hard on Romero, but he kept standing up only to be knocked down again. When Cohn broke down into tears and asked Romero to forgive him and to shake hands, Romero punched Cohn in the face. Romero shows his masculinity with threats to kill Cohn if Cohn tried to help him, or even if he saw Cohn again.
At the bull fight, he showed grace. He did not show that he was hurt by Cohn while he was fighting the bull. He fought as though he was not injured at all. He fought the bull gracefully. Even before he was injured, he demonstrated grace. He didn’t need to exaggerate the danger of fighting the bull. He fought like a traditional bull fighter. He didn’t have to fake the danger. Everything about Pedro Romero was real. He gave a real show to the crowd. The bull-fight wasn’t faked to look more dangerous than it was. He showed the real danger by fighting the bull the proper way.
Romero is the complete opposite of Jake, the character who would seem like the hero, but he doesn’t quite have what it takes to be a Hemingway hero. Before Cohn went in a rage after Romero, his anger lashed out at Jake. Cohn demanded to know where Brett was, and he believed that Jake had the answer to that. When Jake said that he didn’t know, Cohn didn’t believe him and called him a “pimp”. This was an insult to Jake, who responded by swinging a punch at Cohn. Cohn hit Jake, and instead of fighting back like a true “man”, Jake crawled underneath a nearby table to hide.
It was no surprise that Brett fell in love with Pedro Romero. While it is true that she loved Jake, Jake was not “manly” enough to give her what she wanted the most. Romero is manly. Romero had the ability to satisfy her. Romero could give Brett what she wanted. Unlike the other men, Romero wasn’t used by Brett. He was not one of the men that she destroyed. He was probably hurt that she left, but it didn’t destroy her life. We don’t hear about his reaction to her leaving him.  Most men are damaged by Brett, like Cohn and Mike who resort to violence and drinking. Romero doesn’t show that he is damaged from his relationship with Brett.
Pedro Romero is a hero because he has a sense of pride about him. As stated before, he doesn’t fake the danger in the bull fights. He doesn’t need any handicap for what he loves to do. The other bull fighters change their method because they think that it is what the crowd wants. Romero actually knows what the crowd wants, and it’s not what those other bull fighters are doing. He is real when he is fighting the bulls. He doesn’t need to put on an act or pretend that it’s dangerous. The danger that Romero goes through when he goes up against the bulls is real danger. He doesn’t exaggerate it at all. It actually seems like a dance when he gets the bulls attention and then moves off to the side. He is graceful when he handles the bulls, which is something that normal people would not be able to pull off. He is calm and he treats the bulls “like friends”. He knows how to handle himself and how to handle life better than some of the other characters in the novel.

Semester 2

17

In the 1990s, millions of Americans dedicated their hours watching someone else's drama. The trial of OJ Simpson was the focus of many American lives. This single trial caused such a racial controversy - as the judges announced the verdict in favor of Simpson (the trial was to determine whether he killed his wife or not - and his wife was Caucasian while he was African-American), the two races separated to different sides of the room. Albom further describes the effects of this single trial - from not being able to trust the police to attorneys taking cases in hopes of becoming famous.

I agree with Albom's idea. A single action can affect many lives years after it's been "forgotten". Take for example, the terrorist attack on September eleventh. Since then, those with an Arab background are seen as suspicious - some people refuse to trust them because of what people of the same religion did many years ago. What we do now affects what happens years from now, which affects what happens years from then.

16

Tall, tanned, leather-clad men are the topic of Ehrlich's About Men. According to Ehrlich, the cowboys have been romanticized by those who didn't live in areas where cowboys were. Real cowboys did hard work to get it done, not because it was romantic for them to be strong. Ehrlich's tone conveys that she is serious about the cowboys that she knew. She knew that they did not have pride over their title, but rather their pride was in the work that they did. Her tone is formal and serious. She does not approve of the way that cowboys have been romanticized. Her purpose was informing. She knew that most people did not personally know a cowboy, so she simply informed those who did not grow up the same way that she did.

15

Secrets are evident in every aspect of life. In Sante's essay, there are three main reasons for secrecy: Soviet Union, internet, and confessional culture/media.

First up, the author discusses the Soviet Union. This was the part of the essay that was initially confusing, but I think that the main point of it was that people in the Soviet Union had to keep secrets because they didn't want to get in trouble with the government. This type of secret protects the safety of the individual who has the secret.This is not normally a secret that they would share with their close friends due to the possibility of the government finding out.

Next, the topic of internet comes up. The internet is one of the biggest places where people share secrets. Nobody over the internet knows who "animegirl27" is. These people feel that they are making real connections with other people, and that alone is reason enough to trust them with their deep secrets. However, Sante argues that the internet is one of the places where secrets can spread like crazy. Some people might in fact know who "animegirl27" is. Posting secrets onto a place where the whole world can view it is not exactly a very smart idea.

Sante's last thought is on confessional culture and the media. We live in a place where we feel insecure if we are the only ones feeling a certain way. Confiding in a close friend and letting them know the secret is a way that humans get emotions off of their chest and into the open. Being human, we have the desire to tell something that we know that we shouldn't.

14

I have a friend who is one of the nicest girls ever. I will bet my life on that. She is always so polite, I've never seen her mad or frustrated. She is the definition of a polite young lady.

When I see other people, especially the rude boys (mostly freshmen) I can't help but wonder why they aren't as polite as my friend is. 

The main problem is that public schools don't place as much emphasis on ethics and values as they should. Schools these days are obsessed with raising their test scores by supplying their students with busywork. Class after class, students are just handed the material and expected to learn it. While these are important for their education, this does not necessarily make them a good citizen.

Students should be taught important values. "Respect" is a wonderful value, since everyone regardless of age or status deserves respect. It's a value that is very positive, and it's rare that it can be taken negatively. Along with "respect", "kindness" and "honesty" go along with it. Being "kind" and "honest" is giving "respect" to someone because it is the opposite of "mean" and "lying".

While values are important, it's also important to keep in mind that some believed values can do more harm than good. On the subject of education, the student is expected to turn in their best work. This goes along with consideration, because the student is taking their time to put forth the best effort into their work. This is a good value, as long as it is kept in moderation. If teachers expect good work from students all of the time, and assign a lot of work, students may get stressed and resort to academic dishonesty to be "considerate" to the teacher by continuously putting forth their best work.

13

"Hey, this movie came out this weekend! It looks pretty awesome, let's go check it out!"

"No, it actually sucks. Don't waste your time or your money."

Conversations like this happen on a constant basis. What makes that movie "super awesome" or "absolutely terrible"?

First off, this shouldn't be a generic topic about movies. There are so many different kinds of movies in all sorts of categories. There are funny movies, and scary movies. There are dramas and musicals and romantic movies. 

I personally like the darker movies, especially those associated with Tim Burton. One of my favorite movies from him is Corpse Bride. I would classify it as a good movie because of all the elements it combines effectively. There is always the need for visual appeal, especially in animated films, and Corpse Bride has some great graphics. As an artist myself, I know how difficult it can be to make an art detailed while trying not to clutter it. The artwork in this is very detailed, but it does not give any sense of clutter to it visually. A movie like this also needs a good storyline. While Corpse Bride is a completely fictional tale (there's no way a corpse could talk in real life!), it ties in realistic elements. For example, the corpse bride, Emily, was betrayed by a lover before her death. The betrayal led her to wait for the marriage vows. This is a natural human emotion of hope. I believe that hope is one of the main themes of the movie.

On the contrary, there are elements that can make a movie "terrible". For this, I will use the film The Last Airbender as an example. The Last Airbender is a film based upon an animated series, "Avatar: The Last Airbender". The previews tricked many viewers into thinking that high tech special effects could be the basis for a great movie. Personally speaking, I felt that the special effects were the only part of the movie that was worth watching. This film had many actors that I had never heard of before, and their lack of experience showed. With a film based on a series like this, it leads a lot of viewers to have high expectations, and this movie did not meet those expectations. The Last Airbender's viewers expected the film to move along the same plot as the series, but were disappointed when so much from the series was left out of the film. There were some viewers who were mad about the mechanical details in the film, like the name pronunciation. The names are Asian-based, so it's easy to see how they could be difficult to pronounce, but viewers believed that the actors should have watched the series to get into character better.

The movie industry is a serious business, and there is always a risk involved when making a movie because of the public opinion. However, as long as they put forth their best effort and make the best movie they could make, hopefully the public will appreciate it.

12

I answered the Pink Flamingo prompt, but I could have added more to the beginning of the thesis. I did not really explain my point until the end of the essay. My thesis was there, but it was not as clear as it could have been. My paragraphs were linked, but my transitions were a little off. I think I tried to cover too many ideas, so I was not able to develop all of my ideas as fully as possible. I feel that I included a lot of details and quotes to support my analysis.

I felt more organized during this timed write because I had the experience from the Rodriguez essay "under my belt". My thesis did not go well, so if I had the chance to revise this, I would work more on what my essay would actually be about. If given more time, I would change my essay to incorporate a better-thought-out thesis. The organization went mostly according to plan, but as I wrote it, I changed some of the structure here and there to make the language more vivid. As I wrote the essay, I began to understand more of what the author was trying to say. I saw her point of view more clearly as I wrote this essay. If I had to write a timed essay tomorrow, I would try to organize my thoughts on another sheet of paper before beginning the writing process.

11

Upon entering the class, I've become more aware of how I write almost every time I pick up a pencil. Since August, my writing has changed because I've noticed I've used a more mature voice. I've written with a more formal attitude about my topic, and I haven't used casual sentences. My writing has stayed the same since the beginning of the class by always needing improvement. I am very critical of my work, and almost always feel like I need to add just something to improve it. As a writer, my strengths have almost always concerned grammar, punctuation, and spelling. I read everything I write to myself in my head first, and once more after I write it. If there is a sentence that sounds odd, I take another look at it to see what I can fix about it. However, I still see a weakness of it being too basic. I have not strayed from my "comfort zone" as a writer, and I feel that I need to take a little risk with my writing to improve it. I plan on using more action in my writing to make my words stronger.

If I had time to write another draft of my definition essay, I would organize my ideas and put more thought into making the essay flow more smoothly. I rushed through the essay, and I feel that if I had the opportunity to fix it, I would be able to produce a better essay if given more time. Unfortunately, my essay was not read and given peer feedback. However, I am still revising the essay because I was not satisfied with my grade. So far, my biggest problem is organizing my thoughts to flow smoothly.

So far, through my revision, my biggest success has been a thorough organization of an outline of my topic. I've listed what points I want to keep in the essay and what points I felt pulled me away from my topic. So far, my narrative, descriptive and illustrated elements are not combined all into one, but they are in the essay separately. My best success considering audience is that I understand that not everyone in my audience is as familiar with my topic as I am, so I am careful not to go into a description that will be difficult for an average person to understand.

I was intimidated by the fact that it was the first major AP English essay. In my sophomore English class, my teacher let us read some essays that his AP students wrote, and some of the essays really impressed me! I was always unsure of whether or not my essays could come out as impressive as those did. As we studied methods in class, I was influenced to use more vivid language in my essay, since normally my essays are very bland with a lot of boring simple sentences. After hearing some student examples, I wanted to try to incorporate a story into my essay, which I will hopefully accomplish in my revision. My peers also helped a lot when I asked them if my essay was "good or not". Most of the time, they said that I wrote such a good essay, but they are also my friends. The best advice I received was for me to slow down my writing because it sounded like it rushed too much to get to the point. After completing this writing assignment, I feel that I have grown as a writer, but there are still many writing techniques to learn and incorporate into my essays to come!

10

It's the feeling that everyone in the world ignores your problems. It's feeling like everything in the world can and will go wrong. It's feeling like you don't exist.

This is what it's like to be a "nobody". They are always in the background of life, and unnoticed. Perhaps they don't know how to be noticed. Everyone has been a "nobody" at least once in their life. Some people choose to get away from that status by doing wacky things. We can all remember that one "crazy kid" from middle school who did something insane. Other people get away from being a "nobody" by doing things to make other people like them and know who they are. 

It's our desire to be noticed that makes the idea of being a nobody one of the worst imaginable situations. Humans want people to know that they exist, that they aren't just in the background. Humans want to feel that they have a purpose in life.

9

How should we live? This is a very easy question that Morrie Schwartz would answer. In Tuesdays with Morrie, Morrie is teaching one of his old students, Mitch Albom, about how to live.

"Learn to die, and you learn to live."

My father passed away in 2007 from multiple myeloma, a cancer that affected his bone marrow. Before he passed away, I took him for granted. I always believed that I would have my parents forever, and that in the future, my own children would be able to know their grandparents.

I can remember the morning that my mother told me that he was gone. It was so hard for me to believe. I didn't want to accept the truth. On December first, a part of me died.

As I read Tuesdays with Morrie, I kept thinking back to my dad. Reading what Morrie had to say about spending time with loved ones made me realize that I don't want to make the same mistake. My mom is perfectly healthy right now, but I don't want her passing away at a young age like my father did. I don't want to take advantage of my mom being in my life. I want to cherish every moment that I have with her.

It's only when we lose someone that we realize that we should have spent more time with them. Why is it only after a death that we realize this? It doesn't look "weak" to say "I love you." Loving people can only make you stronger. Material things like laptops and big screen televisions aren't going to be by a death bed mourning. Human beings are the only ones who can mourn.

8

I'd like to meet a child who has not read and loved The Roly-Poly Puppy. What makes this book so lovable to small children? I personally think it is because of the "roly-poly" in the title. Hearing this phrase brings a smile to most people who hear it, even if they don't want to admit it right away. So what makes the phrase "roly-poly" sound so gosh darn adorable? It's a word that can relate to fat, chubby, and even obese, all of which are words that we sometimes cringe at hearing. Roly-poly is a phrase that we've been familiar with from a young age, and with that phrase we've related it to another positive being, a puppy. Other words have been associated with negative subjects; like "unhealthy", "ugly", and "diseased".

Roly-poly, on the other hand, is not used in the medical field, so it has no association with anything that has to do with the concept of unhealthiness. It has sounded and will always sound like one of the cutest phrases a child could say.

7

Money doesn't always mean that you're happy. If you don't believe me, then just pick up a copy of The Great Gatsby and read it. It might not seem like the author is making an argument, but every piece of writing makes an argument because it's telling you something that you may or may not have known previously. 

The Great Gatsby is about a rich man by the name of, you guessed it, Gatsby. He lives in a huge house, no, I'd call it a mansion, and throws big parties on a regular basis. Everybody knows of him, and a lot of people like him, but he's still not that happy. He's in love with a girl, Daisy. Daisy also lives a "good life", with a "good family". Her family would be good if her husband wasn't cheating on her (and to make matters worse, he brags about it to his friends) and if she knew her child. Nontheless, she has quite a bit of money, so that automatically means that she's happy. Right?

Wrong.

Fitzgerald brings the point across very clearly that you can be the richest person alive and still have something missing in your life.

6

From a young age, most of us have dreaded this. Children cry, "No, Mommy! Please don't make me!", only to be set down at the dinner table to face them. Vegetables. They are the definition of evil to almost every child in America. It's as if one bite of them will kill you.
I think I might have been one of the few kids who ate vegetables on a regular basis, and still eat them to this day. It all depends on how the vegetables are served, and how parents act when they serve the vegetables to their children. My parents served up vegetables on a regular basis, and my absolute favourite vegetable is broccoli, when my mom steams it up with soy sauce. It's ironic that I love a vegetable so many young children shudder at the thought of. There's some things in the world that, as the old saying goes, you shouldn't knock it 'till you try it. That saying is absolutely true about vegetables.

5

In the "Box Man", the box man chooses his solitude. His lifestyle choice is against what society   believes should be. Being alone and being lonely are two completely different concepts. "Being alone" is a physical aspect, and only physical. Everyone experience physical "aloneness" every now and then in their life. Being "lonely" is something that is rarely experienced by every single person, and is a feeling that is often forced upon the individual. Loneliness is forced upon a person when they lose their loved ones in their life. They don't choose to exclude themselves from people, but rather, they are no longer able to be near the people they care about. The box man is different. He chooses his solitude, so he doesn't feel any pain about not being near his loved ones. He teaches all of us a lesson that we should appreciate the people that we have with us in our life.

4

Anytime I walk into a restaurant, or a grocery store, or any place where food is for sale, I'm faced with a lot of options that I'm not allowed to have. These options are the meat products. Did you know that Jell-O is one of the foods vegetarians aren't allowed to eat? I've been a vegetarian for a few years now, and the one question that people always ask me is "Why don't you eat meat?"

I still technically "eat" meat, but at the same time, I don't. The food that I eat is made up of soy protein, or if it's not soy, it's a type of other protein. What I eat is ironically similar to meat. I'll refer to it as tofu from now on, not only because it is delicious, but because it is one of the most common foods that come to mind upon hearing the word "vegetarian". 

Tofu and meat are both packed with protein, essential for muscle development and growth. Tofu can be easily substituted for meat in most dishes. Even through their many differences, these two products are very similar.

3

The Secret Life of Bees by Sue Monk Kidd is an inspiring tale about a young girl's journey to learning about who her mother is. Her journey begins with her father, and the horrible living conditions she's in. One aspect that fascinates her are the honeybees that come into her room at night. Her stand in mother, Rosaleen, gets into some trouble when she tries to register to vote. Lily breaks her out of jail and they head to Tiburon, the name of a town written on the back of a picture of Mary that once belonged to Lily's mother. She recognizes the image on a jar of honey at a store, and the storekeeper tells her about the Boatwright sisters, who make the honey. She stays with them, knowing that they had some connection with her mother. While she stays with the sisters, referred to as the "Calendar sisters" because of their names, she learns that she doesn't need her biological mother to experience the love of a mother.