Essay 1

This is the first essay that I want to talk about.

Question: Is it a disadvantage to pay attention to details?Response:

Details are what make up life. Life is not just sixty or eighty years when one gets by only paying attention to the main idea of everything. If that were true, then every person in the world would be seen as just a person; the little details would not matter – the intelligence, the look, the hair color – all the details that make up who a person is. So, the question, “Is it a disadvantage to pay attention to details?” is fallacious. In other words, paying attention to details is an important part in life, whether making an easy decision, or the most trivial. The evidence supporting this fact through history and life is very pervasive.

The first case where paying attention to details proves to be an advantage is in the Chinese battle of Penghu, in the middle of the 19th century. At the time, the ruler of the Qing dynsasty was the omnipotent King, Kangxi. At the time, the King got into a horrible dispute with the leader of Taiwan, in which no discussion or treaty could solve. So, the King declared war, sending admiral Shi Lang with 100,000 men and 600 warships to attack Taiwan. AT first, the attack was deflected, so the admiral split up the trops. One of the generals of the split up troops, Jiang Tzu, played a large role in the decisive victory that later occurred, all by paying attention to details. As he was in Taiwan, he noticed weird occurrences – one man in his troops did not quite add up, and after looking at the details, he found him to be a traitor, and so, capture d him, found out where the enemy was, attacked, and won the battle of Penghu.

The next occurrence where details play a large role is in “The Jungle” by Upton Sinclair. In it, Jurghis, his wife, Ona, and her family travel from Lithuania to America to experience the American Dream, but because they did not pay attention to the details, they soon found out it was the “American Nightmare”. At the beginning, Jurghis, with the pittance of money he had left, buys a house with a mortgage of $12 a month. But because he did not pay attention to the little details in the deed, he soon found out he owed interest, insurance, and other cots, the money for which he did not have. The family was soon evicted, one family member left, Ona and her baby died, and the others dispersed throughout Chicago, leaving Jurghis to become a criminal. As can be seen, little details play large roles.

Finally, the little details played a large role in the life of Donald Cullen, a wealthy and munificent stock broker of the 1920s. His life was good – he made tons of money, and even gave a lot to charity – but then, as the ’30s approached, he noticed the little details, like how many people were buying on a low margin and could easily become in debt, and also how Joe Kennedy ,one accused of insider trading, pulled his money. So when Black Tuesday came, Donald did not have money in the market. The little details helped him to keep his wealth.

+My analysis: At the beginning paragraph, the author makes his point clear by gradually giving reasons proving why the question is fallacious. By giving a lot of reasons, the author indeed makes his idea stronger than just a normal thesis statement. I like this approach to the problem. The second example is very appropriate, for the author explains the bad results for not paying attention to the trip. The trip turns out to be a nightmare, if only the family pays attention to the specific costs that they have to pay. The third example is exactly appropriate for supporting the question, for the example explains clearly that by knowing the information first, Donald can avoid losing money to Joe Kennedy. Therefore, the author emphasizes that knowing the details will save a person from failure.

The author also uses a lot of good but not confusing words too: “pervasive” instead of “well-known”; “fallacious” for “erroneous”;

I find some of the too detailed information that is unnecessary in supporting the point: “The first case where paying attention to details proves to be an advantage is in the Chinese battle of Penghu, in the middle of the 19th century. At the time, the ruler of the Qing dynsasty was the omnipotent King, Kangxi. At the time, the King got into a horrible dispute with the leader of Taiwan, in which no discussion or treaty could solve. So, the King declared war, sending admiral Shi Lang with 100,000 men and 600 warships to attack Taiwan” — why does the author have to include tons of useless information to support a different point? In my opinion, the author should shorten the backgound information into just one sentence or two for the graders to know the information.