english 1102 portfolio
DESCRIPTION
Portfolio of work over the course of Mrs. Redding's summer English 1102 course.TRANSCRIPT
Writing: A Display of Progress
Mrs. Redding’s English 1102
By: John Hawkins
Writing: A Display of Progression
Table of Contents
Analytical Cover Letter............................................................................................1
Quality Comparison………………………………………………………...3
Least Successful Paper (Original)…...…...………………………………...3
Most Successful Paper (Original)..…………………………………………7
“What’s the Difference?” Short Essay…………………………………...10
Revision Samples…………………………………………………………………12
Least Successful Paper (With Mark-Ups)……………………..…………12
Least Successful Paper (Final Version)…..………………………………16
Most Successful Paper (With Mark-Ups)…...……………………………20
Most Successful Paper (Final Version)……………………………...……24
Free Choice Essay (With Mark-Ups)……………………………............27
Free Choice Essay (Final Version)…………………………………..…..31
June 26, 2012 Karen P. Redding, M.A.Assistant Professor of EnglishGainesville State CollegeOconee Campus302 Oconee Classroom1201 Bishop Farms ParkwayWatkinsville, GA 30677 Dear Mrs. Redding, My name is John Hawkins and I am a student at Gainesville State College. As I reflect back to my first writing assignment of English 1102, I realize that I made a great deal of progression as a writer. Over the course of the English 1102 class, I benefited from the reading, the films, and participation in class discussions which all contributed to my growth as a writer. I have come a long way as a writer from my 2011 fall semester English 1101 class at the University of Georgia. English 1101 has given me experience with analyzing articles, but the class still left a vast amount of room for improvement in many areas. Revising my own work has always been an issue for me. You taught me how to review and edit my work effectively and efficiently. By listening to your feedback relating to my papers and utilizing the “38 Picky Rules” packet, I took another step forward as an overall writer. While viewing my portfolio, my improvement as a writer is clear to see. Once you view my portfolio, you will see that I am a more polished and effective writer due to taking your English 1102 course. My least successful essay is “The Chicago World’s Fair of 1893: A Showcase of Technological Progress.” The essay critiques two articles related to the Columbian Exposition’s technology. The use of transitions acts as the weakness of my paper. The transitions between paragraphs are awkward and ineffective for the most part, making my paper more difficult to follow. I also faced trouble in being specific enough when discussing key points in my argument. The paper includes fillers, which are unnecessary in getting the main point across. For example, I write “The designs and ideas implemented to the fair were not utilized for no reason” (Hawkins, Paper 1). After revisiting my paper and viewing your comments, I realize that the unnecessary fillers and weak transitions weaken my paper as a whole. I am now able to take your helpful advice and make corrections necessary to improve my work. “A Presentation of Morality And Goodness” serves as my most successful work. My transition usage in this work makes the paper flow much better than in some of my past essays. For example, to begin a new paragraph, I write “On the other hand, the misfit lives by his own set of principles that are very different from those used by the grandmother” (Hawkins, Fiction Analysis). The transition helps me move out of a paragraph discussing the grandmother and into a paragraph discussing the Misfit. By using your advice from the first paper, I am able to make improvements such as these in the fiction analysis. The use of outlines, the Rules for Writing handbook, and your recommendations are all important in creating the best work possible.
Page 1
I am much improved from a writing standpoint, however, there are still areas that I must work on. Each time you comment on my work, you contribute to my growth as a writer. English 1102 at Gainesville State supplies students with necessary tools in becoming a better writer. Just as the Columbian Exposition served as a symbol for America’s progress as a country, my portfolio serves as a symbol of progress for me as a writer. The portfolio foreshadows the improvement of my writing in the future. Sincerely,
John Hawkins
Page 2
Hawkins 1
John Hawkins
Karen Redding
English 1102
11 June 2012
The Chicago World’s Fair Of 1893: A Showcase Of Technological Progress
As a six-year-old boy, I waited anxiously for the annual county fair to come to my town
in 1998. No ride, game, or funnel cake brought me as much excitement as the Ferris Wheel did
that year. I rode the wheel over and over again without facing boredom. Even though I enjoyed
the ride so much, I had no knowledge about the history of this ride and where it originated. This
changed after analyzing the articles “The Promotion Of New Technology Through Fun And
Spectacle: Electricity At The World’s Columbian” and “Sell The Cookstove If Necessary, But
Come To The Fair,” written by Judith Adams and Phil Patton respectively, I became educated
about the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 and how its elements such as the Ferris Wheel were
important. Both authors point out that the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 effectively displayed the
United States’ technological and industrial progress to that point in time.
The Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 was a brilliant display of architecture. The designs and
ideas implemented to the fair were not utilized for no reason. The architectural designs are very
much symbolic of the advancement of the United States from a technological standpoint at this
point in history (Adams). Adams and Patton make a clear connection between the Chicago
World’s Fair’s architectural features and the industrial development and technological success of
America prior to the time of the fair. Adams claims that while the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893
was a beautiful architectural achievement, the “engineering feats, technical inventions, and
Page 3
Hawkins 2
industrial success” of America that which the fair represented so accurately was the most
excellent element of the fair. Paul Patton states that the architectural designs marked America as
a “great civilization” that had made progression as a country. This is evident in the extravagant
buildings found throughout the fairgrounds, especially in the Court of Honor. Many buildings
located in the Court of Honor contained Grecian style columns, symbolizing strength and power
(Patton). Many of the buildings were much bigger than any of the visitors had ever witnessed in
their lives (Patton). The meaning behind the architecture can be considered as significant, if not
more significant than the designs, ideas, and buildings themselves.
Those who attended the fair were exposed to the Ferris Wheel for the first time. The
Ferris Wheel serves as one of the most prolific symbols of American technological
accomplishment at the time of the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 (Patton). The giant piece of
steel itself represented America’s progression in the field of technology. At the time, the axle of
the Ferris Wheel was the largest single piece of steel built. The magnificent structure stood 264
above the ground while carrying nearly 2,000 passengers (Patton).It is clear that the Wheel
helped foreshadow the importance that steel would have in the near future for America.
At the time of the fair, electricity was not widely accepted by the United States
population (Adams). While many knew of electricity, most did not know what to think about it.
It was complex and unfamiliar to most Americans. Various uses of electricity were put on
display at the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 (Adams). Adams explains how the fair presented
electricity to the public in a way that allowed the people to easily comprehend the ways it could
be useful to the country. The illumination brought to those attending the fair powered by huge
generators left a positive perception of electricity in many of the fair’s visitors (Adams). The
viewers of the wonderful display of electricity at the fair were provided a glimpse into the bright
Page 4
Hawkins 3
future that the field of electricity would experience in America (Adams). Many of the uses of
electricity such as electric cars, moving sidewalks, Ferris Wheels, and a great deal more are still
used today in the United States. The Fair served as a mass advertisement of these new
innovations and discoveries, as many of the fairgoers had never seen these new examples of
technology.
The two authors’ works both display how the fair was a representation of how far
America had come industrially and technologically. The architecture, electricity, and other
elements of the fair made the future of America from a technological standpoint much more
clear. Both authors argue that the Chicago World’s Fair’s greatest accomplishment was its
accurate presentation of the country’s new technology and the ways that it could be utilized to
help the United States. The display of architectural design, steel, electricity, and much more
helped create opportunities for future inventions and innovations, which many are still utilized
today.
Page 5
Hawkins 4
Works Cited
Patton, Phil. "`Sell The Cookstove If Necessary, But Come To The Fair.'." Smithsonian 24.3
(1993): 38. Academic Search Complete. Web. 7 June 2012.
Adams, Judith A. "The Promotion Of New Technology Through Fun And Spectacle: Electricity
At The World's Columbian.." Journal Of American Culture (01911813) 18.2 (1995): 45.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 7 June 2012.
Page 6
Hawkins 1
John Hawkins
Karen Redding
English 1102
18 June 2012
A Presentation Of “Morality” And “Goodness”
Flannery O’Connor once stated, “All my stories are about the action of grace on a character that
is not very willing to support it” (A Study of Flannery O’Connor) . The statement is especially true when
applied to her short story “A Good Man Is Hard To Find.” Through two of the story’s main characters,
the grandmother and the Misfit, O’Connor suggests a difference between “morality” and “goodness.”
Grandmother is a woman with her own set of morals that she constructed around characteristics
that she defines as “good.” She believes that her own moral practices are superior to those of other people
and is quick to criticize anyone’s actions that do not fit in line with her beliefs. When someone’s actions
do fall in line with the grandmother’s moral code, however, she labels him or her as a “good” person. Her
flawed moral code becomes evident when the grandma and her family stop to eat while on the way to
Florida for vacation at a place called Red Sammy’s. The owner of the restaurant, Red Sammy, holds a
conversation with the family and explains to them how he had let strangers charge the gas that they
bought because they “looked all right” (O’Connor) . The grandma commends the action and calls Red
Sammy a “good man” (O’Connor) . Red Sammy’s poor decision of putting trust in the complete strangers
fell in line with the grandmother’s moral principles, making him a “good man” in her eyes. Throughout
the story, the grandmother bends her own morals by deceiving her own family.
On the other hand, the Misfit lives by his own set of principles that are very different from those
used by grandmother and has his own definition of “good.” Despite being a violent murderer, he
demonstrates consistency in his moral code and principles. He is a prison escapee who believed his
original crime did not fit his punishment (O’Connor) . He explains to the grandmother that he was
punished for a crime that he cannot even remember. He states “I found out the crime don’t matter. You
can do one thing or you can do another, kill a man or take a tire off his car, because sooner or later you’re
Page 7
Hawkins 2
going to forget what it was you done and just be punished for it” (O’Connor) . The quotation indicates the
way he goes about life making decisions. While the grandmother’s moral code proves weak when it is
challenged, the Misfit sticks to his and commits the crime of murdering the grandmother and her family.
Before the Misfit killed the grandmother, she pleaded with him. She frantically called him a
“good man” in hopes that it would cause him to spare her life (O’Connor) . She hopes that he will be
aware of her own moral principles and cause him to reconsider taking her life. Despite what the
grandmother says, the Misfit ends her life (O’Connor) . His actions prove that he does not hold the same
moral code as she does and what is “good” to her does not mean that it is “good” in the eyes of the Misfit.
These two characters demonstrate how “good” is indefinable and subjective to every person.
Flannery O’Connor demonstrates through the Misfit how a person with strong, consistent morals
is not necessarily “good.” She shows through the grandmother how someone that has assumed the label of
“good” may not necessarily have a strong moral code. “Goodness” and “morality” must be separated. The
story could not convey its underlying message without both characters being present. Serving as foils to
one another, O’Connor utilizes the Misfit and the grandmother highlight the difference between
“morality” and “goodness.”
Page 8
Hawkins 3
Works Cited
O’Connor, Flannery. “A Good Man Is Hard to Find.” The Bedford Introduction to Literature.
Ed. \Michael Meyer. 445-455. Print.
“A Study of Flannery O’Connor.” The Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer.
438-444. Print.
Page 9
What’s the Difference?
My critique serves as my weakest essay. The paper’s title, “The Chicago World’s Fair of
1893: A Showcase of Technological Progress,” reflects the main idea of the work. I critique two
different author’s works within the article, arguing that both authors point out that the Chicago
World’s Fair displays the United States’ technological and industrial advancement up to the time
period of the fair. I have a supporting argument relevant to my thesis, however, I use
several “fillers” that make the support evidence tougher to understand. For example, I write “The
designs and ideas implemented to the fair were not utilized for no reason.” Sentences like these
are unnecessary and too vague to serve as sufficient support to the thesis. Along with the
unnecessary sentences, I use awkward transitions, making my paper tougher to understand.
The lack of proper transitions and use of needless sentences make my critique my weakest
paper.
Although my critique was weak in several areas, I consider “A Presentation of Morality
And Goodness” my strongest work. The paper contains organization superior to that of my
weakest paper. I transition from each paragraph and idea in this work better than in the first
paper. With the help of Mrs. Redding’s comments and ideas, I am able to support my thesis
much more appropriately the fiction analysis. I begin the paper by using a quote from the author
of the short story that I am analyzing, Flannery O’Connor. The thesis states, “Through two of
the story’s main characters, the grandmother and the Misfit, O’Connor suggests a difference
between morality and goodness” (Hawkins, Fiction Analysis). With my thesis clearly stated,
I move into the body paragraphs and support my thesis clearly without any unnecessary
sentences such as the “fillers” that I use in my weaker paper.
Each of the papers has both strengths and weaknesses. The fiction analysis is a bit
stronger due the organization skills and ideas that I take from Mrs. Redding’s class each day.
With her help, I am able to becoming more advanced in my writing skills and can remember my
Page 10
mistakes in order to help me in my future writing. My advancement in writing is evident when
analyzing the improvement from the weaker paper, the critique, to my strongest work, the fiction
analysis.
Page 11
Hawkins 1
John Hawkins
Karen Redding
English 1102
11 June 2012
The Chicago World’s Fair Of 1893: A Showcase Of Technological Progress
As a six-year-old boy, I waited anxiously for the annual county fair to come to my town
in 1998. No ride, game, or funnel cake brought me as much excitement as the Ferris Wheel did
that year. I rode the wheel over and over again without facing boredom, enjoying a birds-eye
view of my hometown. Even though I enjoyed the ride so much, I had no knowledge about the
history of this ride and where it originated. This changed after analyzing the articles “The
Promotion Of New Technology Through Fun And Spectacle: Electricity At The World’s
Columbian” and “Sell The Cookstove If Necessary, But Come To The Fair,” written by Judith
Adams and Phil Patton respectively, I became educated the authors discussabout the Chicago
World’s Fair of 1893 and how its elements such as the Ferris Wheel were important pieces of
technology. Both authors point out that the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 effectively displayed
the United States’ technological and industrial progress to that point in time.
The Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 was a brilliant display of architecture. The designs and
ideas implemented to the fair were not utilized for no reason. The architectural designs are very
much symbolic of the advancement of the United States from a technological standpoint at this
point in history (Adams). Adams and Patton make a clear connection between the Chicago
World’s Fair’s architectural features and the industrial development and technological success of
America prior to the time of the fair. Adams claims that while the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893
Comment [GSC1]: Unnecessary sentence. (filler)
Page 12
Hawkins 2
was a beautiful architectural achievement, the “engineering feats, technical inventions, and
industrial success” of America that which the fair represented so accurately was the most
excellent element of the fair. Paul Patton states that the architectural designs marked America as
a “great civilization” that had made progression as a country. This is evident in the extravagant
buildings found throughout the fairgrounds, especially in the Court of Honor. Many buildings
located in the Court of Honor contained Grecian style columns, symbolizing strength and power
(Patton). Many of the buildings were much bigger than any of the visitors had ever witnessed in
their lives (Patton). The meaning behind the architecture can be considered as significant, if not
more significant than the designs, ideas, and buildings themselves. The structures represented
and foreshadowed the change in future America architecture.
Those who attended the fair were exposed to the Ferris Wheel for the first time. The
Ferris Wheel serves as one of the most prolific symbols of American technological
accomplishment at the time of the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 (Patton). The giant piece of
steel itself represented America’s progression in the field of technology. At the time, the axle of
the Ferris Wheel was the largest single piece of steel built. The magnificent structure stood 264
above the ground while carrying nearly 2,000 passengers (Patton).It is clear that the Wheel
helped foreshadow the importance that steel would have in the near future for America.
Like steel, electricity was another important element of the World’s Columbian
Exposition. At the time of the fair, electricity was not widely accepted by the United States
population (Adams). While many knew of electricity, most did not know what to think about it
whether electricity was as a positive or negative invention. It was complex and unfamiliar to
most Americans. Various uses of electricity were put on display at the Chicago World’s Fair of
1893 (Adams). Adams explains how the fair presented electricity to the public in a way that
Comment [GSC2]: Needed better transition
Comment [GSC3]: PR 28
Page 13
Hawkins 3
allowed the people fair attendees to easily comprehend the ways it could be useful to the country.
The illumination brought to those attending the fair powered by huge generators left a positive
perception of electricity in many of the fair’s visitors (Adams). The viewers of the wonderful
display of electricity at the fair were provided a glimpse into the bright future that the field of
electricity would experience in America (Adams). Many of the uses of electricity such as electric
cars, moving sidewalks, Ferris Wheels, and a great deal more are still used today in the United
States. The Fair served as a mass advertisement of these new innovations and discoveries, as
many of the fairgoers had never seen these new examples of technology.
The two authors’ works both display how the fair was a representation of how far
America had come industrially and technologically. The architecture, electricity, and other
elements of the fair made the future of America from a technological standpoint much more
clear. Both authors argue that the Chicago World’s Fair’s greatest accomplishment was its
accurate presentation of the country’s new technology and the ways that it could be utilized to
help the United States. The display of architectural design, steel, electricity, and much more
helped create opportunities for future inventions and innovations, which many are still utilized
today.
Comment [GSC4]: PR
Page 14
Hawkins 4
Works Cited
Patton, Phil. "`Sell The Cookstove If Necessary, But Come To The Fair.'." Smithsonian 24.3
(1993): 38. Academic Search Complete. Web. 7 June 2012.
Adams, Judith A. "The Promotion Of New Technology Through Fun And Spectacle: Electricity
At The World's Columbian.." Journal Of American Culture (01911813) 18.2 (1995): 45.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 7 June 2012.
Page 15
Hawkins 1
John Hawkins
Karen Redding
English 1102
11 June 2012
The Chicago World’s Fair Of 1893: A Showcase Of Technological Progress
As a six-year-old boy, I waited anxiously for the annual county fair to come to my town
in 1998. No ride, game, or funnel cake brought me as much excitement as the Ferris Wheel did
that year. I rode the wheel over and over again without facing boredom, enjoying a birds-eye
view of my hometown. Even though I enjoyed the ride so much, I had no knowledge about the
history of this ride and where it originated. This changed after analyzing the articles “The
Promotion Of New Technology Through Fun And Spectacle: Electricity At The World’s
Columbian” and “Sell The Cookstove If Necessary, But Come To The Fair,” written by Judith
Adams and Phil Patton respectively, both authors discuss Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 and how
its elements such as the Ferris Wheel were important in the future of American technology. Both
authors point out that the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 effectively displayed the United States’
technological and industrial progress to that point in time.
The Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 was a brilliant display of architecture. The
architectural designs are very much symbolic of the advancement of the United States from a
technological standpoint at this point in history (Adams). Adams and Patton make a clear
connection between the Chicago World’s Fair’s architectural features and the industrial
development and technological success of America prior to the time of the fair. Adams claims
that while the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 was a beautiful architectural achievement, the
Page 16
Hawkins 2
“engineering feats, technical inventions, and industrial success” of America that which the fair
represented so accurately was the most excellent element of the fair. Paul Patton states that the
architectural designs marked America as a “great civilization” that had made progression as a
country. This is evident in the extravagant buildings found throughout the fairgrounds, especially
in the Court of Honor. Many buildings located in the Court of Honor contained Grecian style
columns, symbolizing strength and power (Patton). Many of the buildings were much bigger
than any of the visitors had ever witnessed in their lives (Patton). The meaning behind the
architecture can be considered as significant, if not more significant than the designs, ideas, and
buildings themselves. The elaborate structures represented and foreshadowed change in future
American architecture.
Those who attended the fair were exposed to the Ferris Wheel for the first time. The
Ferris Wheel serves as one of the most prolific symbols of American technological
accomplishment at the time of the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 (Patton). The giant piece of
steel itself represented America’s progression in the field of technology. At the time, the axle of
the Ferris Wheel was the largest single piece of steel built. The magnificent structure stood 264
above the ground while carrying nearly 2,000 passengers (Patton).It is clear that the Wheel
helped foreshadow the importance that steel would have in the near future for America.
Like steel, electricity was an important element of the World’s Columbian Exposition. At
the time of the fair, electricity was not widely accepted by the United States population (Adams).
While many knew of electricity, most did not know whether electricity was a positive or a
negative invention. Electricity was complex and unfamiliar to most Americans. Various uses of
electricity were put on display at the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893 (Adams). Adams explains
how the fair presented electricity to the public in a way that allowed the fair attendees to easily
Page 17
Hawkins 3
comprehend the ways it could be useful to the country. The illumination brought to those
attending the fair powered by huge generators left a positive perception of electricity in many of
the fair’s visitors (Adams). The viewers of the wonderful display of electricity at the fair were
provided a glimpse into the bright future that the field of electricity would experience in America
(Adams). Many of the uses of electricity such as electric cars, moving sidewalks, Ferris Wheels,
and a great deal more are still used today in the United States. The Fair served as a mass
advertisement of these new innovations and discoveries, as many of the fairgoers had never seen
these new examples of technology.
The two authors both display how the fair was a representation of how far America had
come industrially and technologically. The architecture, electricity, and other elements of the fair
made the future of America from a technological standpoint much clearer. Both authors argue
that the Chicago World’s Fair’s greatest accomplishment was its accurate presentation of the
country’s new technology and the ways that it could be utilized to help the United States. The
display of architectural design, steel, electricity, and much more helped create opportunities for
future inventions and innovations, which many are still utilized today.
Page 18
Hawkins 4
Works Cited
Patton, Phil. "`Sell The Cookstove If Necessary, But Come To The Fair.'." Smithsonian 24.3
(1993): 38. Academic Search Complete. Web. 7 June 2012.
Adams, Judith A. "The Promotion Of New Technology Through Fun And Spectacle: Electricity
At The World's Columbian.." Journal Of American Culture (01911813) 18.2 (1995): 45.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 7 June 2012.
Page 19
Hawkins 1
John Hawkins
Karen Redding
English 1102
18 June 2012
A Presentation Of “Morality” And “Goodness”
Flannery O’Connor once stated, “All my stories are about the action of grace on a
character that is not very willing to support it” (A Study of Flannery O’Connor) . The statement
is especially true when applied to her short story “A Good Man Is Hard To Find.” Through two
of the story’s main characters, the grandmother and the Misfit, O’Connor suggests a difference
between “morality” and “goodness.”
Grandmother is has a woman with her own set of morals that she constructsed around
characteristics that she defines as “good.” She believes that her own moral practices are superior
to those of other people her family and is quick to criticize anyone’s actions that do not fit in line
with her beliefs. When someone’s actions do fall in line with the grandmother’s moral code,
however, she labels him or her as a “good” person. Her flawed moral code becomes evident
when the grandma and her family stop to eat while on the way to Florida for vacation at a place
called Red Sammy’s. The owner of the restaurant, Red Sammy, holds a conversation with the
family and explains to them how he had let strangers charge the gas that they bought because
they “looked all right” (O’Connor) . The grandma commends the action and calls Red Sammy a
“good man” (O’Connor) . Red Sammy’s poor decision of putting trust in the complete strangers
fell in line with the grandmother’s moral principles, making him a “good man” in her eyes.
Throughout the story, the grandmother bends her own morals by deceiving her own family. She
Comment [GSC1]: PR 25
Comment [GSC2]: Don’t use past tense PR 22
Comment [GSC3]: “People” is part of PR 35
Page 20
Hawkins 2
lies to her family about the cat and the house in the woods, contradicting her own moral
standards.
On the other hand, the Misfit lives by his own set of principles that are very different
from those used by grandmother and has his own definition of “good.” Despite being a violent
murderer, he demonstrates consistency in his moral code and principles. He is a prison escapee
who believed his original crime did not fit his punishment (O’Connor) . He explains to the
grandmother that he was punished for a crime that he cannot even remember. He states “I found
out the crime don’t matter. You can do one thing or you can do another, kill a man or take a tire
off his car, because sooner or later you’re going to forget what it was you done and just be
punished for it” (O’Connor) . The statement quotation indicates the way he goes about life
making decisions. While the grandmother’s moral code proves weak when it is her code
becomes challenged, the Misfit sticks to his and commits the crime of murdering the
grandmother and her family.
Before the Misfit killed the grandmother, she pleadsed with him. She frantically called
him a “good man” in hopes that it would cause him to spare her life (O’Connor) . She hopes that
he will be aware of her own moral principles and cause him to reconsider taking her life. Despite
what the grandmother says, the Misfit ends her life (O’Connor) . His actions prove that he does
not hold the same moral code as she does and what the meaning ofis “good” to her does not
mean that it is to grandmother contradicts the meaning of“good” in the eyes of the Misfit. These
two characters demonstrate how “good” is indefinable and subjective to every person to the
characters due to their experiences.
Flannery O’Connor demonstrates through the Misfit how that a person with strong,
consistent morals is not necessarily “good.” She shows through the grandmother how someone
Comment [GSC4]: Needed Support
Comment [GSC5]: PR 25
Comment [GSC6]: Check tense. PR 22
Comment [GSC7]: PR 28
Page 21
Hawkins 3
that has assumed the label of “good” may not necessarily have a strong moral code. “Goodness”
and “morality” must be separated. The story could not convey its underlying message without
both characters being present. Serving as foils to one another, O’Connor utilizes the Misfit and
the grandmother highlight the difference between “morality” and “goodness.”
Page 22
Hawkins 4
Works Cited
O’Connor, Flannery. “A Good Man Is Hard to Find.” The Bedford Introduction to Literature.
Ed. \Michael Meyer. 445-455. Print.
“A Study of Flannery O’Connor.” The Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer.
438-444. Print.
Page 23
Hawkins 1
John Hawkins
Karen Redding
English 1102
18 June 2012
A Presentation Of “Morality” And “Goodness”
Flannery O’Connor once stated, “All my stories are about the action of grace on a
character that is not very willing to support it” (A Study of Flannery O’Connor) . The statement
is especially true when applied to her short story “A Good Man Is Hard To Find.” Through two
of the story’s main characters, the grandmother and the Misfit, O’Connor suggests a difference
between “morality” and “goodness.”
Grandmother has her own set of morals that she constructs around characteristics that she
defines as “good.” She believes that her own moral practices are superior to those of her family
and is quick to criticize their actions that do not fit in line with her beliefs. When someone’s
actions do fall in line with the grandmother’s moral code, however, she labels him or her as a
“good” person. Her flawed moral code becomes evident when the grandma and her family stop
to eat while on the way to Florida for vacation at a place called Red Sammy’s. The owner of the
restaurant, Red Sammy, holds a conversation with the family and explains to them how he had
let strangers charge the gas that they bought because they “looked all right” (O’Connor) . The
grandma commends the action and calls Red Sammy a “good man” (O’Connor) . Red Sammy’s
poor decision of putting trust in the complete strangers fell in line with the grandmother’s moral
principles, making him a “good man” in her eyes. Throughout the story, the grandmother bends
her own morals by deceiving her own family. She lies to her family about the cat and the house
in the woods, contradicting her own moral standards.
Page 24
Hawkins 2
On the other hand, the Misfit lives by his own set of principles that are very different
from those used by grandmother and has his own definition of “good.” Despite being a violent
murderer, he demonstrates consistency in his moral code and principles. He is a prison escapee
who believed his original crime did not fit his punishment (O’Connor) . He explains to the
grandmother that he was punished for a crime that he cannot even remember. He states “I found
out the crime don’t matter. You can do one thing or you can do another, kill a man or take a tire
off his car, because sooner or later you’re going to forget what it was you done and just be
punished for it” (O’Connor) . The statement indicates the way he goes about life making
decisions. While the grandmother’s moral code proves weak when her code becomes challenged,
the Misfit sticks to his and commits the crime of murdering the grandmother and her family.
Before the Misfit killed the grandmother, she pleads with him. She frantically calls him a
“good man” in hopes that it would cause him to spare her life (O’Connor) . She hopes that he
will be aware of her own moral principles and cause him to reconsider taking her life. Despite
what the grandmother says, the Misfit ends her life (O’Connor) . His actions prove that he does
not hold the same moral code as she does and the meaning of “good” to the grandmother
contradicts the meaning of “good” in the eyes of the Misfit. These two characters demonstrate
that “good” is indefinable and subjective to the characters due to their experiences.
Flannery O’Connor demonstrates through the Misfit that a person with strong, consistent
morals is not necessarily “good.” She shows through the grandmother how someone that has
assumed the label of “good” may not necessarily have a strong moral code. “Goodness” and
“morality” must be separated. Serving as foils to one another, O’Connor utilizes the Misfit and
the grandmother highlight the difference between “morality” and “goodness.”
Page 25
Hawkins 3
Works Cited
O’Connor, Flannery. “A Good Man Is Hard to Find.” The Bedford Introduction to Literature.
Ed. \Michael Meyer. 445-455. Print.
“A Study of Flannery O’Connor.” The Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. Michael Meyer.
438-444. Print.
Page 26
John Hawkins
Cynthia Pengilly
English 1101
October 4, 2011
“A Libertarian’s View on Anti-Liquor Laws”
Tradition is a word that most all Americans are familiar with. Most Americans have familiarity
with the word tradition. The country is full of traditional practices that go back all the way to the
colonization of the country. Blue laws are serve as a great example of this American tradition. These Blue
laws laws can be defined as “edicts designed to regulate public activities on Sundays” (Blue Laws, par.
8). They The laws were intended to “keep the Sabbath holy” (Blue Laws, par. 3). Even though many of
the Sunday laws have vanished, some still remain. Michael Boortz clearly expresses his opinion in his
article called Don’t Have To Buy Into Anti-Liquor Rant. He uses both argumentation and persuasion to
display his view on the anti-liquor laws that Georgia has applied for Sundays. Boortz utilizes pathos,
logos, and ethos to appeal to his intended audience. His uses of these rhetorical elements help make his
argument more clear and logical. However, his argument contains many fallacies and misleading
information. Boortz’s goal is to show that there is no rational reasoning behind liquor being illegal on
Sundays. Although it can be legitimately argued that liquor should be available for purchase on Sundays,
Boortz’s misleading evidence and unwarranted logic make a persuading yet unsustainable argument.
Neal Boortz uses personal examples inside the argument and presents certain circumstances that
liquor drinkers may need liquor available on Sundays in attempt to attain his audience’s agreement. Many
drinkers will agree with Boortz in that the restrictions on liquor sales on Sundays are outrageous. Boortz
eventually claims, “I’m not a drinker” (Boortz, par. 9). By him stating this By Boortz making this claim,
he increases his credibility in regard to the audience. Boortz also asks the reader to consider how
“absolutely no ones right to life, liberty, or property [rights] violated” by someone buying alcoholic
beverages on a Sunday. The simple fact that Boortz himself is not a drinker does not drink makes this his
Comment [GSC1]: PR 30
Comment [GSC2]: PR 25
Comment [GSC3]: Don’t use past tense
Comment [GSC4]: PR 30
Comment [GSC5]: PR 30
Page 27
argument much more effective and intriguing to the audience. The facts that Boortz has experience with
blue laws and displays his knowledge about them are examples of his established ethos.
Despite the fact that Boortz does a nice job attempting to gain his audiences agreement, much of
the information he presents is misleading and unwarranted. Many of the examples and explanations used
in Don’t Have To Buy Into Anti-Liquor Rant are verbal fallacies. Jerry Luguire, the president of Georgia
Christian Coalition, has a very different view on the law preventing the sale of alcohol on Sundays. He is
a strong supporter of strongly supports the law and lobbies to keep it the law in place. In several ways,
Boortz takes information and quotes from Jerry Luguire that could lead the readers of the article to
misunderstandings about what Mr. Luguire actually meant. For example, he takes some of Luguire’s
comments about child prostitution out of context. According to the article Boortz, Jerry Luguire addresses
child prostitution by saying “what we have here are girls saying, let’s see if we can make some money”
(Boortz, par. 7). Boortz’s article then addresses Luguire’s statement in a very sarcastic way by saying
“All I could aspire to was a paper route.” This is one example of where Boortz uses false analogy to make
his opponent’s view appear to be incorrect. False analogies and ad hominem fallacies are present
throughout Boortz’s text. For example, he sarcastically refers to one of Luguire’s responses to an email
about the anti-liquor laws as a “gem.” Not only does he refer to Jerry Luguire as an opposition, Boortz
also identifies the Georgia Christian Coalition as whole as an opposition to his opinion. The mission of
the Georgia Christian Coalition is “to serve Christ and the Citizens of Georgia by promoting Christian
values and family friendly policies that will benefit the citizens of Georgia” according to the Coalition
website’s front page. He uses the straw man tactic when referring to the Coalition in his article. He states
that there is “no rational reason” that liquor should not be available to buy on Sundays. He then goes on to
say “that matters not, though, to the Georgia Christian Coalition” (Boortz, par. 6). ThisThe statement, like
the information regarding Jerry Luguire, is serves as a straw man fallacy that more than likely
misrepresents the Georgia Christian Coalition’s complete view. One of the main qualifications of the
straw man tactic is to make opponents arguments much easier to reject. Boortz definitely makes it easier
for his readers to reject the view of Luguire and the Coalition. His claim about the Coalition is very weak
Comment [GSC6]: PR 30
Comment [GSC7]: PR 30
Comment [GSC8]: Again, the ARTICLE does not say anything, the AUTHOR does.
Comment [GSC9]: The article doesn’t say anything, the AUTHOR does.
Comment [GSC10]: PR 30
Comment [GSC11]: PR 25
Comment [GSC12]: Not needed.
Page 28
and is based on very thin explanations of his information. Even though it is not right to take taking
Luguire’s words out of context and makinge blunt statements with no backup about the Georgia Christian
Coalition should not be done, ithis tactics does take an effect on the audiences view. The adequate
evidence and Boortz’s attempts to appeal to the audience with his presented reasoning demonstrates the
use of logos within his argument.
Boortz’s attempt in using pathos to appeal to his readers is evident in the fact that he encourages
the audience to think about certain situations and relate them to themselves. A great example of this
Boortz’s encouragement to think is when he states that no ones rights, liberty, or property is troubled with
someone buying alcohol on Sundays (Boortz, para. 6). Rights, liberty, and property are all part of most
Americans deeply held values (Boortz, para. 6). Boortz later goes on to say “If the voters so choose, the
lights on your beer and wine coolers at your local Publix will burn seven days a week (Boortz, para. 5).
Boortz’s statements like these are intended to make the reader feel as though his or her rights of liberty
are being violated. When Boortz argues that none of these values are interfered with by the purchase of
alcohol on Sundays, he is appealing to the ideology of freedom.
There is no question that lLegality of alcohol on Sundays certainly proposes a great argument.
There is no doubt that each sideBoth sides of the argument to that argument can present decent points
within their arguments. Even though Neal Boortz seems to have a nice understanding of blue laws and a
very firm opinion about the anti-liquor laws, his argument presented in Don’t Have To Buy Into Anti-
Liquor Rant is not defensible or warranted due to the many fallacies and problems with the logic used
within the article. He makes very intriguing statements that are somewhat easy to agree with as a reader,
however, the fact that his reasons or justifications of his claims are so weak greatly limit his argument. He
makes good points that go along with his claim that religious views should not affect the availability of
alcohol on any given day of the week.
Comment [GSC13]: PR 25
Comment [GSC14]: PR 30
Comment [GSC15]: PR 29
Comment [GSC16]: PR 29
Page 29
Works Cited
Boortz, Neal. "Neal Boortz: Don’t Have to Buy into Anti-liquor Rant | Ajc.com." Atlanta Journal
Constitution. Web. 29 Sept. 2011. <http://www.ajc.com/opinion/neal-boortz-dont-have-
819605.html>.
"Blue Laws." United States American History. Web. 29 Sept. 2011.
<http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1164.html>.
Page 30
John Hawkins
Cynthia Pengilly
English 1101
October 4, 2011
“A Libertarian’s View on Anti-Liquor Laws”
Most Americans have familiarity with the word tradition. The country is full of traditional
practices that go back all the way to the colonization of the country. Blue laws serve as a great example of
American tradition. Blue laws can be defined as “edicts designed to regulate public activities on Sundays”
(Blue Laws, par. 8). The laws intend to “keep the Sabbath holy” (Blue Laws, par. 3). Even though many
of the Sunday laws have vanished, some still remain. Michael Boortz clearly expresses his opinion in his
article called Don’t Have To Buy Into Anti-Liquor Rant. He uses both argumentation and persuasion to
display his view on the anti-liquor laws that Georgia has applied for Sundays. Boortz utilizes pathos,
logos, and ethos to appeal to his intended audience. His uses of these rhetorical elements help make his
argument more clear and logical. However, his argument contains many fallacies and misleading
information. Boortz’s goal is to show that there is no rational reasoning behind liquor being illegal on
Sundays. Although it can be legitimately argued that liquor should be available for purchase on Sundays,
Boortz’s misleading evidence and unwarranted logic make a persuading yet unsustainable argument.
Neal Boortz uses personal examples inside the argument and presents certain circumstances that
liquor drinkers may need liquor available on Sundays in attempt to attain his audience’s agreement. Many
drinkers will agree with Boortz in that the restrictions on liquor sales on Sundays are outrageous. Boortz
eventually claims, “I’m not a drinker” (Boortz, par. 9).With Boortz stating he does not drink, he increases
his credibility in regard to the audience. Boortz also asks the reader to consider how “absolutely no ones
right to life, liberty, or property [rights] violated” by someone buying alcoholic beverages on a Sunday.
The simple fact that Boortz himself does not drink makes his argument much more effective and
Page 31
intriguing to the audience. The facts that Boortz has experience with blue laws and displays his
knowledge about them are examples of his established ethos.
Despite the fact that Boortz does a nice job attempting to gain his audiences agreement, much of
the information he presents is misleading and unwarranted. Many of the examples and explanations used
in Don’t Have To Buy Into Anti-Liquor Rant are verbal fallacies. Jerry Luguire, the president of Georgia
Christian Coalition, has a very different view on the law preventing the sale of alcohol on Sundays. He
strongly supports the law and lobbies to keep the law in place. In several ways, Boortz takes information
and quotes from Jerry Luguire that could lead the readers of the article to misunderstandings about what
Mr. Luguire actually meant. For example, he takes some of Luguire’s comments about child prostitution
out of context. According to Boortz, Jerry Luguire addresses child prostitution by saying “what we have
here are girls saying, let’s see if we can make some money” (Boortz, par. 7). Boortz then addresses
Luguire’s statement in a very sarcastic way by saying “All I could aspire to was a paper route.” This is
one example of where Boortz uses false analogy to make his opponent’s view appear to be incorrect.
False analogies and ad hominem fallacies are present throughout Boortz’s text. For example, he
sarcastically refers to one of Luguire’s responses to an email about the anti-liquor laws as a “gem.” Not
only does he refer to Jerry Luguire as an opposition, Boortz also identifies the Georgia Christian Coalition
as whole as an opposition to his opinion. The mission of the Georgia Christian Coalition is “to serve
Christ and the Citizens of Georgia by promoting Christian values and family friendly policies that will
benefit the citizens of Georgia” according to the Coalition website’s front page. He uses the straw man
tactic when referring to the Coalition in his article. He states that there is “no rational reason” that liquor
should not be available to buy on Sundays. He then goes on to say “that matters not, though, to the
Georgia Christian Coalition” (Boortz, par. 6). The statement, like the information regarding Jerry Luguire,
serves as a straw man fallacy that more than likely misrepresents the Georgia Christian Coalition’s
complete view. One of the main qualifications of the straw man tactic is to make opponents arguments
much easier to reject. His claim about the Coalition is very weak and is based on very thin explanations of
his information. Even though taking Luguire’s words out of context and making blunt statements with no
Page 32
backup about the Georgia Christian Coalition should not be done, it does take an effect on the audiences
view. The adequate evidence and Boortz’s attempts to appeal to the audience with his presented reasoning
demonstrates the use of logos within his argument.
Boortz’s attempt in using pathos to appeal to his readers is evident in the fact that he encourages
the audience to think about certain situations and relate them to themselves. A great example of Boortz’s
encouragement to think is when he states that no ones rights, liberty, or property is troubled with someone
buying alcohol on Sundays (Boortz, para. 6). Rights, liberty, and property are all part of most Americans
deeply held values (Boortz, para. 6). Boortz later goes on to say “If the voters so choose, the lights on
your beer and wine coolers at your local Publix will burn seven days a week (Boortz, para. 5). Boortz’s
statements like these are intended to make the reader feel as though his or her rights of liberty are being
violated. When Boortz argues that none of these values are interfered with by the purchase of alcohol on
Sundays, he is appealing to the ideology of freedom.
Legality of alcohol on Sundays certainly proposes a great argument. Both sides of the argument
can present relevant points within their arguments. Even though Neal Boortz seems to have a nice
understanding of blue laws and a very firm opinion about the anti-liquor laws, his argument presented in
Don’t Have To Buy Into Anti-Liquor Rant is not defensible or warranted due to the many fallacies and
problems with the logic used within the article. He makes very intriguing statements that are somewhat
easy to agree with as a reader, however, the fact that his reasons or justifications of his claims are so weak
greatly limit his argument. He makes good points that go along with his claim that religious views should
not affect the availability of alcohol on any given day of the week.
Page 33
Works Cited
Boortz, Neal. "Neal Boortz: Don’t Have to Buy into Anti-liquor Rant | Ajc.com." Atlanta Journal
Constitution. Web. 29 Sept. 2011. <http://www.ajc.com/opinion/neal-boortz-dont-have-
819605.html>.
"Blue Laws." United States American History. Web. 29 Sept. 2011.
<http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1164.html>.
Page 34