Category Archives: English 3113 Posts

The Main Principle to Maintain Animal Welfare

After reading two additional animal entries by book or article, the assumption that both animal pieces have many similarities and differences between them has been confirmed. Temple Grandin, writer of “Animals Make us Humans,” and Vicki Hearne, writer of “Can an Ape Tell a Joke?” both bring across an interesting message providing details and explanations deriving differently. The content of each text has the greatest variation between the two pieces, although, there is some similarities in the structure of the pieces, as well as in the voice. Picking apart the similarities and differences between two different writing pieces of any kind can be tough, but by doing so, the reader can develop a deeper understanding of the different ways to approach writing and progress in their writing techniques, to enhance their own writing pieces.

Although there weren’t too many similarities between the different texts provided by Temple Grandin and Vicki Hearne, they both readily enforced the idea of animal welfare, which was a huge similarity. In both writings, each author contributed their time to ensuring the reader that animals must be treated correctly, giving each point on animal welfare in a different manner. Grandin focused a huge amount of his writing based on what it takes to make an animal happy, by describing the different stereotyping that goes along with each. Grandin later went on to suggest the use of enriched environments in order to provide the animal with better welfare. Similarly, Hearne makes a huge plunge for animal welfare in discussing the importance of how the apes are treated, and the mutual relationships they must have with a human, trainer specifically, in order to perform and act appropriately, all while maintaining “fair” grounds. Furthermore, both authors agreed on the basis of behavior being a huge determining factor contributing to the focus on animal welfare.

Both authors share the above views and similarities within the context, but there’s more similarities found behind the context, in the main structure of both writing pieces. The main structural similarity is the use of describing personal experiences incorporated with facts to provide a personal level, but then backing up the personal experiences with facts to ensure credibility. Both authors primarily give the feeling of an educational, or informational tone of voice, and approach the audience in a semi-formal manner.

Grandin and Hearne each focused on completely different aspects of animals, as well as the differential focus on the wild and domesticated animals, bringing forth many differences in the context. The main difference between these two pieces was Grandin’s use of the Blue Ribbon Emotion System. It’s an interesting system, which primarily focuses on seeking, rage, fear, panic, lust, care, and play, suggesting that the emotional state of an animal is an important contributing factor to their overall welfare, and happiness. Hearne primarily focused on the different apes and the intelligence an animal had to obtain in order to develop such a relationship with humans as shown in the multiple shows, or comical events put on by the animals with their trainer. Although both pieces focused on wild animals, Grandin focused more on the environmental and behavioral contributions (stereotypes) an animal has and how it affects them, while, Hearne focused on the intelligence a wild animal has, and the correct and fair treatment they deserve even at a higher level of performance, or use.

Grandin and Hearne both provided reader’s with an interesting, informational piece which brought forth strong thoughts, as well as an idea of how to structure and piece animal writings together. They both approached the writing in a different manner, and focused on wild animals, with different aspects and usages making the pieces very different. Both author’s brought their ideas and thoughts across in a successful manner, and seem to be reliable sources for the understanding of different species and the problems that they face in today’s society, as well as how far they’ve come from the past.

Animal Essays

When writing an English essay, there’s a multitude of different ways to go about the content in the paper, as well as the actual structure of the text. Since there’s no absolute “correct” way to write an essay of choice, grasping the reader’s attention plays a huge role in how successful the piece of writing may turn out to be. Gopnik and Kingsolver both wrote two incredible, very different essays “Dog Story” and “Making Peace,” respectively, with striking features, but the content, structure, and meaning contained both many similarities and differences that made them work as complete, successful writings.

Gopnik and Kingsolver both used many features in their writing’s, but the one that stuck out the most was comparisons by the use of metaphors and similes used by both, however, more so by Gopnik. Gopnik tied many of his comparisons within the text, making them harder to identify, but still making vivid images, while Kingsolver provided a few comparisons, using less metaphors and vivid images. The most vivid simile provided by Kingsolver appeared towards the end of the text describing thoughts on human societies, comparing to animal relations.

More features used in both essays included the audience, complexity of the text, as well as the precision in each written essay. Gopnik and Kingsolver both wrote in a conversational, informal manner, as any audience could appreciate the particular animal essays. While both texts contained complexity, Kingsolver’s essay seemed much more complex, with many more ideas, rather than just stories, flashbacks, and evidence of evolution. The feature of precision must be very important, as it will make a huge effect on whether or not the information is reliable or not in the reader’s mind. Both essays contained great precision, as they backed up any idea or theory with evidence from particular scientists, or another reliable source.

The features used by both authors allowed the story to elevate into a well-rounded, reliable, and visual essay. Each feature used actually enhanced the essays in different manners, while the important feature in both was that which maintained reliability. Interestingly, Gopnik and Kingsolver provided a huge difference in content, when Gopnik focused on a particular relationship with a dog, or domesticated animal, while Kingsolver focused on a relationship with wild animals. Through the great difference, evidence was provided that relationships do actually follow the same trend in a few ways, while they also differ. The features added together in a different manner created structure by which the author chose to create the story.

Although features in an essay are important, the structure of an essay must be plausible as well. When terms of structure arise, both stories by Gopnik and Kingsolver contained similarities, with a few differences between the two. The main similarity of both essays was the detailed incorporation of stories. Gopnik grabbed the reader’s attention right away, providing a flashback of him and his wife giving in, buying their daughter her very first puppy, with reluctance. He then went to discuss the thoughts he had before and after buying the puppy, as well as many of the adventures the family underwent during a time with huge adjustment. After many adventures, Gopnik broke down into Darwinism, biological evidence, and evolution theories about human nature, dogs specifically. While Gopnik started by grabbing the reader’s attention, Kingsolver began with a story evolving into the realization of animal territorial diversity when compared to humans. After the realization, Kingsolver provided evidence to many different evolution beliefs, and reasons as to why animals perform the way they do. Structurally, Kingsolver seemed to remain on the same topic as the original problem, whereas, Gopnik strays from the original story, creating ideas of dog evolution. Kingsolver structurally arranged the paper straight forward, to the point, while Gopnik deterred from the original thoughts many times, but still appropriately resolved all ideas and thoughts.

In conclusion, the many different features that both writers used in their papers developed insightful, clear, and meaningful essays. The main similarity, comparisons made in both essays, by use of metaphors and similes created vivid images, as well as understanding, of the exact message the writer was trying to pursue. Although both writers provided the essays with comparisons, the setup, or structure of each essay was of utmost difference.