Reading Response 2

An Experience in Acronyms and Why Do People Tan? were both great examples of discovery essays as opposed to research papers. They provided us as the readers with great information and factual evidence for all the varying viewpoints of their topic while not trying to convert us to their opinion. Both authors did an excellent job of providing evidence and opinions from the different arguments, leaving the reader to make their own decision.
In Why Do People Tan? the controlling idea is the issue of tanning and at how society still wants the same look, but doesn’t want to work to earn it. Amy Garrett-Brown is discovering why it is more attractive for people to be tan than just pasty white and why people would rather lie in a cancer bed then go play outside in the sun. Brown does a great job of going through the topic and exploring all the different angles. She provides excellent factual evidence from sources varying teenage magazines to scientific articles. She provides statistics from surveys as well as opinion statements from well-respected journalists.
Brown also does a great job of employing her own voice, while still employing research. For example, she writes about her reactions to some of the research she had found, “It struck me as I read the last lines of this sardonic critique of society that I don’t necessarily wonder why people tan….” She also adds her personal thoughts throughout the paper, not to influence the reader, but to show how her own opinion swayed as she researched the topic.
In Experiences in Acronyms, the controlling idea was whether or not recreational or “party” drugs were wrong. He focused his discovery paper on the three most popular party drugs, LSD, MDMA, and GHB. The author, Jay Holmquist, does a very good job of showing and supporting his controlling idea by recounting personal experiences, both positive and negative, and including research from scientific journals and studies, both for and against recreational drug use.
Holmquist did a really good job of including his own voice by telling personal stories from when he was involved in the rave scene. His stories put you in his shoes and he did an excellent job of making you feel what he felt. His paper wasn’t just a list of facts for and against recreational drug use, he added faces, names, and very descriptive imagery to it. It was easy for me to see that he had an emotional connection to this topic and it wasn’t just a bland, boring assignment that he to do for a class.
These essays helped me a lot in my approach to my research essay. They were both great examples of how to weave your personal opinion and voice into the paper, but at the same time leave the overall voice of the paper unbiased to either side. I could see how these essays were about discovery and furthering the knowledge of both the author and the reader, instead of the author preaching the same viewpoint at the reader over and over. The essays also incorporated Ballenger’s “Features of the Form” really well and provided excellent examples of how to employ them in my own essay.
In the past, I have always written papers that were to prove a specific point on a topic. We would do research for our particular viewpoint, not the different viewpoints for the topic as a whole. These essays, and Ballenger’s suggestions, have really helped me understand better how to write a discovery paper. It’s not about converting our reader. It’s about providing the most appropriate facts from the different viewpoints and letting the reader decide for themselves.


Possible questions for my essay:
Should college football use a playoff system instead of the bowl game format?
Should the United States adopt a 2 year mandatory military service?
Why is climate change so controversial?