A Rose for Emily Essay Beyond these two similarities the stories differ greatly. One of the most notable differences between the two stories is the tense with which they are written. Poe takes us into the mind of the main character using the first person. In this way we learn about the insults perpetrated against the main character along with the intimate reasoning he uses to justify his act of murder. On the contrary, Faulkner writes his story in the third-person omniscient voice and defines the main character through a myriad of supporting characters and dynamic imagery. This use of tense functions well and reinforces the writers plot design. The two writers create very different environments in which the action takes place. Faulkner opens his short story setting up a gloomy, dark stage by describing a derelict Victorian home in a denigrated neighborhood. In the case of Poeâ€™s short story the first clear description of the environment comes later in the story and describes the tunnels leading to the cask of Amontillado. This cramped setting appears to reinforce the cramped space in which Fortunato is ultimately entombed. These settings work well to create a mysterious and tense plot. Faulkner uses many characters in his story where Poe restricts himself to just two. In Faulknerâ€™s story the protagonist is defined through the eyes of many characters thus creating an air of mystery that surrounds the main character, Miss Emily. Miss Emily is known only through the minds others. Conversely, Poe restricts his story to include only the aggressor and victim. This minimal cast, combined with the first person tense, keeps the reader focused exactly where Poe intended. This diverse use of characters adds greatly to the tension prevalent in these two dynamic stories. The creative use of tense, environment and characters make these two stories stand out. The first person tense takes you deep into the mind of a killer in one story and 2 in the other a portrait is painted by a diverse group of characters. Two very different settings reinforce an air of mystery. The dynamic use of these techniques makes these two short stories stand out as industry standards. 3
Organic farming began in the late 1940â€™s in the United States, and in recent years it has seen a dramatic increase in popularity (Rubin 1). The sales of organic food have been increasing by about 20 percent a year over the past decade (Marcus 1). That is over ten times the rate of their conventional counterparts (Harris 1). There are 10 million consumers of organic food in the United States, yet organic food represents only one percent of the nationâ€™s food supply.
This year organic food sales are expected to rise to six billion dollars (Rubin 1). So what is organic food? Organic food is that which are grown without hormones, pesticides, or synthetic fertilizers. Also, the soil in which organic food are grown must be â€œcleanâ€ for three years (Howe 4). Nearly 70 percent of the American public believes that the organic label on food products means they are safer to eat and better for the environment according to a survey by the National Center for Public Policy (Cummins 1).
Organic farming does have its advantages: it conserves water and soil resources, recycles animal waste, releases fewer chemicals, improves soil fertility, promotes diversity of crops, and protects farm workers, livestock, and wildlife from potentially harmful pesticides (Rubin 4). But is organic food safer than conventional foods? Not only can organic food be contaminated with bacteria and pesticides, but also they are more expensive than conventional foods, yet do not offer a better nutritional value or significantly better taste.
Sir John Krebs, a zoologist appointed to head the Food Standards Agency in the United Kingdom said that â€œpeople who bought organic food thinking it was safer or more nutritious were wasting their moneyâ€ (Jones 1). Critics of organic farming claim that it is dangerous, environmentally damaging and, above all, incapable of feeding an overpopulated world because crop yields are lower than in conventional agriculture (Jones 2). If you are looking for health benefits from organic food, save your money. Organic food is not necessarily safer than conventional foods.
Eileen White, owner of a health food store that sells organic products, says, â€œI canâ€™t guarantee that organic food is safer than regular foods, but that is just a risk that some consumers are willing to take. â€ ABCâ€™s â€œ20-20â€ reported finding higher concentrations of bacteria on organic produce than on conventional produce (Tierney 1). Organic food can be contaminated with salmonella, Listeria, or E. coli. These microorganisms can cause illness and even death (Rubin 2). Also, since organic food is grown with manure, there is a greater risk of bacterial contamination.
Animal waste is used as a fertilizer instead of synthetic chemicals on organic food, and this animal waste may contain dangerous bacteria (Tierney 1). Although the manure is composted to kill the bacteria, uncertified farmers may not always follow the proper procedure. Dean Cliver, a professor of food safety at the University of California at Davis, states: â€œWe know that animals are shedding bacteria that can make people sick if the manure hasnâ€™t been treated properly. Personally, if I knew something was grown with conventional chemical fertilizers, I would feel extra safe.
But we donâ€™t have any data to show that organic food is more or less safeâ€ (Tierney 2). Many consumers buy organic food because they think that they are pesticide free, but this is not true. Organic farmers can use natural pesticides such as sulfur, copper, nicotine, and plant extracts (Rubin 2). Synthetic pesticides can also be found on organic food. Synthetic pesticides can be carried by wind, ground water, rain, or soil from other farms to organic farms and contaminate the organic food being grown there (Rubin 2).
Eighty-nine to ninety percent of all pesticides drift from their point of application, which increases the risk of nearby areas being exposed (Howe 2). Also, synthetic pesticides used before may not have disappeared from the soil and therefore can contaminate organic crops (Rubin 2). Many people do not notice a significant difference in the taste of organic food and conventional foods. Some organic food taste very different as compared to conventional foods, like organic milk (White). Sue Gebo, author of â€œWhatâ€™s Left to Eat?
â€ explains: â€œstudies do not show a significant taste difference between organic and conventional cropsâ€ (Rubin 3). U. S. News held a blind taste test to determine if organic food tasted better than conventional foods. Winter tomatoes, both organic and conventional, were equally tasteless. Conventional carrots and blueberry yogurt tasted better than their organic counterparts, but organic orange juice tasted better than conventional orange juice (Marcus 3). Agricultural Secretary Dan Glickman states that organic food is no more wholesome or nutritious than conventional foods (Marcus 1).
Although organic food is almost completely free from synthetic chemicals found in synthetic foods, they are no richer in vitamins, antioxidants, and other nutrients. They are not less likely to make a person sick either (Marcus 2). The higher grocery price only buys a person peace of mind, not better nutrition. The cost of organic food can be 20 percent to 50 percent more than conventional foods due to limited supply, special handling, and required certification (Rubin 1). All organic food must be produced without synthetic pesticides and genetic engineering.
The use of sewage sludge as fertilizer and irradiating food to preserve it will be banned also, as will hormones and antibiotics in organic meat and dairy products (Marcus 1). Not using these technologies makes organic farming more labor intensive, therefore making organic food more expensive. Organic food also has other disadvantages. One disadvantage is a short shelf life. Cereals, breads, nuts, seeds, and oils should be refrigerated. Also, meats cured without nitrates and nitrites should be frozen (Rubin 2).
Organic farming also yields fewer crops because insects, weeds, and fungi often damage a larger portion of organic crops than conventionally grown crops (Howe 5). Finally, only about half of the states regulate organic food and little exists to stop organic farmers from labeling any food they wish as â€œorganicâ€ (Howe 4). Recently, the safety of conventional foods has been questioned. The use of pesticides supplies higher crop yields, reduces the cost and labor of farming, and produces relatively unblemished, visually appealing produce (Howe 3).
However, some scientists think that pesticide residues in conventional foods could, over many years, raise the risk of cancer and other illnesses. Hard evidence of this is scarce (Marcus 1). Pesticides are only dangerous if they are present in toxic amounts. Our food supply is safe because the Environmental Protection Agency controls the levels of pesticides used (Rubin 2). A panel of the National Research Council concluded in 1996 that tiny levels of chemicals in the food supply are â€œunlikely to pose an appreciable cancer riskâ€ (Tierney 2).
A similar report released in the same year by the National Academy of Sciences stated that pesticides pose little risk to humans because they are consumed at such low levels (Rubin 2). The health benefits of eating fruits and vegetables such as lower rates of cancer, stroke, and other diseases far outweigh any potential risks. Still, the thought of pesticides on fruits and vegetables may still concern some consumers, so here are some ways to reduce exposure to pesticides. One should choose foods that are free of dirt, cuts, insect holes, decay, and mold.
Also, selecting produce that has thick skins, husks, or hulls (like bananas, melons, and citrus fruits) reduces exposure to pesticides because the skins are harder to permeate. Before eating fruits and vegetables, they should be scrubbed using a hard produce brush and washed under cold water. Cooking or baking foods will also reduce pesticide residues, as will canning, freezing, or drying foods. Finally, one should eat a varied diet to reduce exposure to any single pesticide (Rubin 3). It is foolish for one to believe that just because a product is natural it is better than conventional products.
E. coli and other microorganisms are natural too. Organic food is not any safer than conventional foods. They still can contain bacteria and pesticides, and are no more nutritious or delicious than conventional foods. Yet people are still willing to spend nearly twice as much on organic food. If one wants to buy foods that are more environmentally friendly, then organic food would be a good choice; but if one is looking for immediate health benefits, save your money. An apple is an apple, whether it is organic or not, and people should not have to pay twice as much for peace of mind.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.