"Duh, Bor-ing" by Joseph Epstein

        Joseph Epstein writes this essay about the idea of boredom, how it has developed, and what we know about it.  Although he is no expert on boredom, Epstein was the editor and a contributor of essays at The Weekly Standard.  Epstein pulls ideas from some of the best pieces of writing about boredom and formulates an idea about what we can do with this information.  He finds that boredom tells people that their lives need change, and it is also good for us.  It allows us to have time for introspection.  He lets the readers know that they cannot escape boredom, for it will always follow us around.  Boredom shows us that we are all part of the universe for a short while, and then we are gone.  Epstein’s purpose is to show the reader that boredom puts us in our place, and that we should all learn to accept and appreciate it.  The audience that Epstein is writing to is the bored population of the world.  He hopes to change their views on the topic of boredom, and assure them that it is a necessary part of their lives.

            I believe that Epstein achieves his purpose in writing this essay by using humor as well as figurative language.  When explaining his own encounters with boredom, he writes, “After perhaps an hour of driving along the coast between Portland, Oregon, and Vancouver, British Columbia, encountering one dazzling landscape after another, I though enough was enough; Mae West was wrong, you can get too much of a good thing; and I longed for the sight of a delicatessen stocked with febrile Jews,” (Epstein para. 21).  The humor used in his own anecdote shows the reader that he is not exempt from boredom, and he realizes that he struggles with it too.  However, it is his interpretation of that boredom that separates him from the rest.  Epstein uses figurative language and irony when he is describing Heidegger’s thoughts, “Boredom, in this reading, readies the mind for profound vision.  I could attempt to explain how, in Heidegger, this comes about, but your eyes, in reading it, would soon take on the glaze of a franchise doughnut.  Besides I don’t believe it,” (Epstein para. 12).  Epstein’s use of the metaphor about doughnut-glazed eyes gives the reader a laugh, as well as helps to prove his purpose.  He shows how many different interpretations there are about boredom, and contrasts his own beliefs with those of Heidegger.  Epstein chooses to include this in his essay to help the reader understand that boredom is more than what it seems, and instead of dreading it, we can use it as a tool to our advantage.

Boredom at its Finest
Office worker was bored with blank office walls, and created a masterpiece. 

Picure by Zach Noble

"Objects of Affection" by Ewa Hryniewicz-Yarbrough

     Ewa Gronkiewicz-Yarbrough writes about the importance of finding sentimental value in family heirlooms and everyday possessions.  Ewa grew up in Poland in the 1950’s, when communism was responsible for shortages of practically everything in the country.  The author explains that her possessiveness, appreciation, and sentimentality for everyday objects have a direct connection to her childhood lifestyle in Poland.  Ewa also makes a point of comparing herself to her grandmother, who would never replace her furniture or any other household objects.  Ewa moved to America in the 1980’s, and saw many differences in Americans’ behavior towards possessions.  The author’s purpose is to show the readers the importance of finding value in possessions in order to feel a sense of security and permanence.  Ewa writes this essay for those who don’t place sentimental value on their possessions, in hopes to open their eyes to a new perspective.

      I believe that the author accomplishes this purpose because of her use of juxtaposition.  Ewa uses the juxtaposition of Polish and American norms when she writes, “ Other necessities were so hard to get that serpentine lines formed in front of the stores before daylight. A few days after I arrived in the United States, a friend took me to a supermarket on Long Island where she lived… I kept watching people piling item after item into their shopping carts until they looked like elaborate pyramids,” (Hryniewicz-Yarbrough para. 8).  By comparing the lifestyles of the Polish and the Americans, Ewa shows the reader how people may take things for granted.  The author tries to get the reader to understand the reasons behind her sentimentality with objects.  Ewa also uses pathos to accomplish her purpose when she writes, “But with many objects I felt as if I had opened a sluice gate: I was flooded by memories. And once that happened, I knew I had to keep those items, no matter how trifling they would seem to someone else.” (Hryniewicz-Yarbrough para.16)  Many can relate to the feeling of going through old photos or mementos and finding emotional value in those experiences.  Ewa tries to get the reader to feel this attachment to personal objects in order to achieve her purpose.  These two rhetoric devices ultimately help her reach the readers and communicate her purpose to them.

Leverett Family Heirloom
There’s always more to an object than meets the eye.

Picture by Morgan Leverett

"How Doctors Die" by Ken Murray

In the essay, How Doctors Die, Ken Murray points out the surprising number of doctors who choose not to take extreme measure when it comes to their health.  The author discusses that the three main reasons for this are the patients, the doctors, and the system.  Ken Murray is a Clinical Assistant Professor of Family Medicine at USC.  After working in the health care system, he justifies the reasons that doctors do not want to be resuscitated or put through intense treatment when they are ill.  He describes that the doctors can see what the patients must go through, how doctors treat their patients, and how the system disturbs the requests of patients.  Murray’s purpose in writing this essay was to reveal that dying in peace is better than taking extreme measures.  Even though intense treatment may be able to prolong life, it can make a patient miserable.  The author wrote this essay with the intention of sharing his thoughts with anyone who is not a doctor and may be making decisions about emergency treatment for themselves or a loved one. 

Murray definitely proved his purpose in writing this essay using a few rhetorical devices.  The diction used by the author when describing futile care was a strategy that he used to accomplish his purpose.  Murray writes, “The patient will get cut open, perforated with tubes, hooked up to machines, and assaulted with drugs.” (Murray para. 4)  The verb choices that the author uses helps to show the destruction caused by futile care and show the reader that taking extreme measures is violent and invasive.  Another rhetorical strategy used by Murray is the anecdote about his cousin, Torch.  When Torch decided against any treatment for his lung cancer, Murray wrote, “He had no serious pain, and he remained high-spirited.  One day, he didn’t wake up… Torch was no doctor, but he knew he wanted a life of quality, not just quantity.” (Murray para. 19)  Through the anecdote, the author can connect with the reader by showing his relationship with a loved one who chose against treatment.  The quality of his cousin’s life helps to prove his purpose to his readers.  After reading the essay, I believe that most people would reconsider the extremes that they would go to, or make a loved one go through, to live longer.

Peaceful Death vs. Extreme Measures: Is it worth it?

Pitcture by Andy Otto