English 1102 Portfolio

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




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.








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






Page 15

Hawkins 1

John Hawkins

Karen Redding

English 1102

11 June 2012




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.








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






Page 19

Hawkins 1

John Hawkins

Karen Redding

English 1102

18 June 2012


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 [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 [GSC6]: Check tense. PR 22


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




438-444. Print.

Page 23

Hawkins 1

John Hawkins

Karen Redding

English 1102

18 June 2012


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




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 [GSC3]: Don’t use past tense



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 [GSC8]: Again, the ARTICLE does not say anything, the AUTHOR does.

Comment [GSC9]: The article doesn’t say anything, the AUTHOR does.



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.





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

English 1102 Portfolio

Documents

Transcript of English 1102 Portfolio