Omnivore's Dilemma (2,6,7) + They Say I Say (1-3) response

Chapters two, six, and seven of "The Omnivore's Dilemma" (Pollan) gave insight into the present state of American health and dietary affairs through events unfolding for two centuries, accumulating into the current ironic issue: a plague of ever-over-bountiful corn. It was explained that this has been an problem in America since the nineteenth century (when cheap corn led to cheap corn-based alcohol, inciting great public drunkenness), simply now rearing more devastating harms (to the American body and people) than ever before.

A self-perpetuating cycle has developed in Iowa and other major corn states; one that keeps the price of corn spiralling down, along with the worth of the farmers. By stabilizing growing conditions better with new fertilizers and technologies, corn has been assured to always grow successfully, and grow in abundance; with that abundance, the price of corn drops, and the farmers recieve less for their yields. Thus, they must grow more corn to stll make a living, and more corn drives the price lower in turn.

If more corn was bought by consumers, the price would rise by the simple concept of supply and demand, but that same concept is doing the corn farmers in: people, though buying more corn-based foods (and growng fat and unhealthy from them) from cheap price, cannot buy enough to stem the tide of cheap corn. The corn supply grows faster than it can be consumed even by a gluttonous population, and the price falls, initiating more corn growth and consumption, ruining corn farmers and consumers alike.


Chapers one, two, and three of "They Say, I Say" (Graff) describe in detail how to properly formulate a convincing arguementative paper: by having in it a main point (with smaller others branching out), evidence from outside sources to support it, and a conflicting arguement with supporting evidence, all blenging together coherently. A counteractive point is needed to not only acknowledge conflicting arguements, but to show them wrong in their opposing view to the paper's major point or theme. In addition, these provide interst, which is bred from conflict. "Yes, yes, yes, yes" style will likely turn readers away; "yes, no, Yes, No, YES, NO" paper style will entice them (yes must somehow be victorious, though).

Of course, a paper must have backup in its fight to prove its point from outside sources; not only that, the sources must relate to the topic significantly, and formatted that the outer views and main paper focus are one and the same, not two entities. "I say the earth is round. Galileo said the earth is round 500 years ago. Here's why" keeps readers looking back and forth across a paper to tie points together. Instead, "I say the earth is round, drawing upon the .... evidence known since Galileo's time" creates a cohesive and interesting case.