Green If Not Clean Analysis

1532 Words7 Pages
Jim Tarter and Pamela Paul both constructed similar essays on the topic of chemicals within our environment that prove to be harmful to humans and their lack of regulation. However, each writer gathers their research in a different type of way this creates a contrast between essays enabling the reader to determine which argument is more persuasive. For example, in Pamela Paul’s ‘Green If Not Clean’ she uses her own primary research in order to argue her viewpoint. Whereas in Jim Tarter’s ‘Some Live More Downstream than Others’ essay the research is mainly derived from other sources (secondary research). Although Jim Tarter’s essay may contain valid and strong research, I believe that Pamela Paul’s essay is more persuasive from a reader’s point…show more content…
Paul captures her target audience very well as every mother wants to make sure their kid is safe and sound. She builds up a contrasting character of herself throughout the essay because at the start Paul was portraying her personality as a lazy and unclean mother (Paul 816). However as the essay continues we see the type of ‘purifier wielding neurotic’ Pamela Paul has become, which she criticized initially. This justification for this drastic change in character is due to the repugnant truth of chemicals within cleaning products. As a result of the changing in temperament the reader can see how alarming this topic is, raising awareness of the danger of carcinogens in cleaning products, The origin of the change we see in Pamela Paul is due to the time when she discovers that there are no ingredients listed on domestic cleaning products (Paul 817). Determined to find out the secrets of these products Paul turns to the Proctor & Gamble website, this is where she finds out the FDA do not regulate what enters the cleaners, nor do they require companies to declare all ingredients (Paul 817). Furthermore, Paul also comes across a government run website which consists of Material Safety Data Sheets these disclose information on Mr. Cleans all-purpose cleaner (Paul 817). Disappointingly Paul is informed that this product has undergone minimal research, however one ingredient, which was named…show more content…
Jim tarter focuses on statistics in order to lure the reader in to thinking that Jim is knowledgeable of the topic on carcinogens in the environment. Whereas, Pamela Paul uses her own enthusiasm and persistence for the topic on carcinogens in domestic cleaning products in order to persuade her reader. I feel that both authors managed to construct strong arguments and it will depend solely on who is reading the essay. For example if a mother is reading the compositions Paul’s article will be more relatable as she is a mother herself who focuses on the safety of children. This would lead to the reader coming to the conclusion that Pamela Paul’s essay is superior. However, someone who has had a long history of cancer within their family may be more swayed towards Tarter’s essay, this is because a connection will be made instantly resulting in the reader sympathizing with Tarter. In the essay, ‘Some Live More Downstream than Others’ Jim uses Steingraber and Carson’s information as well as his own. From my point of view the use of other sources convinces me that Tarter is not the only one with this theory and it is legit. Whereas, Pamela Paul’s essay contains information provided solely by her, which can be seen as bias to some readers. The reader may see Pamela Paul as an over protective mother, this will then undermine her valid points on the potential carcinogens in
Open Document