Amiri Baraka “Soul Food”, Gore Vidal “Drugs”, Phyllis Mcginley “Woman Are Better Drivers”

The pipeline of fact that Baraka was explaining is how coloured Americans put one across their protest actors line and their shambling characteristic aliment because a young Negro novelist mentions that at that place is a flaw with black Americans. For example, the young novelist proclaimed that blacks neither have their receive characteristic food nor their own language and how umpteen pot do non bop what nous food is. Also, some vulgarism damage have developed the names for disposition food which crrustes the foods own uniqueness.1. Baraka simply is stating some types of food they ate but he wants to turn up his point to the highest degree what slew thought how some of the food was do and prep bed. Also, Baraka argument of fact establishes that some(prenominal) people do not notice anything slightly soul food or its history or how it is served and eaten. Yes, the cause did accomplish his purpose because he explains where people can buy soul food and many d ifferent types of foods that were introduced by black Americans. Baraka feels that much people need to know more than than somewhat soul food and making stereotypes and untimely predictions about the food.Furthermore, if the soul food were lost without their slang terms there would be a loss chapter of history of the African American food and part of their past culture would be missing. People handle the names of the food to remember where it all had came from their despite that the food is attractive and different. The soul food has a history from where it was created and came from. 2. The pen Baraka uses slang in the composition to elucidate the endorser visualize how tasty the soul food was and he used some slang words give the readers attention.Also, the author uses the slang term to keep in creative thinker where the food came from and the values of the term soul food came from. 3. The methods the author illustrates about how African Americans have their own cuisine is that there argon many foods they had came up with. For example, Fried chicken, grits, mustard greens, pig feet, chitterlings, okra, corn meal, neck bones, black eyed peas, etc. The author reference to uptown is that he went to an fastness part of the town to travel to where soul food is made and the federal agency some soul food is to be eaten and made.First, the food is different from different cultures food. Also, many people gaint know how some of the counselling soul food is to be eaten to really know about soul food. Many eaterys uptown do not serve soul food. Baraka concludes that people who be at Nedicks are considered outcast because in every restaurant in Harlem, Nedicks is the only restaurant that does not serve soul food. Barackas argument claims that some African Americans do not know their own food culture, etc. Soul food was made from the slaves.It was food they came up with since the whites only left field them with true scraps and pieces of unwanted food whites would eat and many whites gave the slaves typical type of food such as cornmeal. pierce Vidal Drugs Vidal proclaims that it is possible for people stop most of the drug addiction and make all drugs on sell for people but make the drugs at a certain cost. Also, Vidal explains how United States was created so that any man has the skilful to do anything with their own free entrust as long as it doesnt both(prenominal)er anyone else.But therefore, it makes the United States laws hypocritical because it is a crime to do drugs. 1. The sound reason logic is where he talks about how in the United States has learned nothing from the past. For instance, when the United States prohibited alcohol and by forbidding alcohol it caused thousands of deaths. Vidal claims that if we the United States makes drug use legal at a certain cost there probably wouldnt be many crimes and many drug dealer telephone linees such as the mafia and Bureau of Narcotics. Vidal explains how its the Unit ed States Governments fault because the crime spree would be decreased.Vidal also believes that fighting against drugs is nearly as a big business as trying to stop them because people incessantly want what they cant have. By legalizing drugs go forth enable people easier access to them but also, taking outdoor(a) the thrill of getting them. For example, giving people their wants only makes the person omit less value of their excitement which has to do a big portion in reverse psychology. To confuse people of their wants and needs. 2. Vidal addresses my concerns because drug dealing and the mafia business will decrease rapidly and there would not be as much crimes in the American society.Yes, Vidal does consider both sides of the curve because he there is a combination of sin and money among the mafia and the American people. Both of the combinations of sin and money are cardinal most valuable things because are irresistible and it has been repeated for many centuries. In addition, Vidal claims that forbidding people to do something they allow in in interest of will only cause the person to pursue their interest more. 3. The effect in Vidal last separate is that he tries to persuade the reader for a metamorphose because in time things will only get worse if things dont change.The reasonable solution to Americas drug conundrum is unrealistic because people will pursue things they cannot have or things they hold their interest of and of course no matter what there will always be some people who will be always bring about a drug addict and for the people who are sane will have the choice if they want to do drugs or not. Its up to the person if they want to destroy their biography because it shouldnt be up to another person to decide your own life or your own fate. In addition, prohibition of drugs will be a failure fair(a) like the prohibition of alcohol in the past. . Vidal establishes himself as an authority on drug use because he personalize dly tried them himself. He personally finds none of the drugs appealing and he also proved the Fu Manchu theory wrong because one single sniff of opium will enslave a persons mind and it didnt enslave him. He also thinks certain drugs are really bad for the exception of some people and should be provided with a good thought out reason why they should not do drugs. Vidal argument would be less persuasive if he left out his background because he wouldnt have any personal experience to support his main idea.His personal experience gives the reader to know what its like to be on drugs and how it feels through his point of perspective. Phyllis McGinley char Are Better Drivers McGinley explains how woman are better driver than men. She compares and contrasts both of the subjects and different points. McGinley uses her own life experience to persuade the reader about her perspective. 1. The author illustrates that men are more stubborn and less wary when whimsical especially when they are cosmos told what to do. Men try to be the center of attention in driving or trying to make a good impression to people.On the other hand women are more cautious and are well aware of things and the take advice from others alternatively of taking it offensive. Also, McGinleys major reasons why women are better drivers than men are because women always drive doing many different errands than men. By doing so many errands women get more practice driving around than men. She also explains that the cost of car insurance is higher for man under 25 than women. some other example is that men get distracted easily while driving more than women.2. McGinley addresses her values because she not only gives examples of how it occurs in her own life but also she explains how men and women drive differently. Yes I find her argument persuasive because she compares them with her husband to make her own point of perspective to the readers. Also, McGinley compares how males see there automobiles. 3. The tone McGinley uses is calm and she also is very informative. The arguing assists her thesis because the arguing proves her points about the differences between men and women and how we both are fit out up differently. . The dialogue gave suspense and anticipation in the opening paragraph because when the author McGinley talked about how men are good at many things for example they are brave, talented, etc. And then she talks about what women are good at two things is having babies and driving. But it seems as if she is also being sarcastic about the ways of men and what they are good at. 5. When the author concludes her essay with the comment on what it would be like to drive through the Pearly Gates with her husband.McGinley explains that her husband is more strict and firm about the directions while she is happy to view sites. The author illustrates that the attitudes for men are more demanding and seem easily frustrated and irritated while they are more vulnerable while driving. While women are more cautious, calm, and are more patient when it comes to driving. The mind set for men is that men ignore issues instead of taking advice or either men tend to not trouble what someone else is telling them. Woman mind set are that they are open minded and use advice for their own knowledge.