11
One does not necessarily have to cluck in disapproval to admit that entertainment is all the things
its detractors say it is: fun, effortless, sensational, mindless, formulaic, predictable, and
subversive. In fact, one might argue that those are the very reasons so many people love it.
At the same time, it is not hard to see why cultural aristocrats in the nineteenth century and
intellectuals in the twentieth hated entertainment and why they predicted, as one typical
nineteenth century critic railed, that its eventual effect would be "to overturn all morality, to
poison the springs of domestic happiness, to dissolve the ties of our social order, and to involve
our country in ruin."
Write a thoughtful and carefully constructed essay in which you use specific evidence to defend,
challenge, or qualify the assertion that entertainment has the capacity to "ruin" society.
I chose samples that received a score of 8, which, according to the scoring guide, "recognize the
complexity of the claim that entertainment has the capacity to 'ruin' society and successfully establish
and support their own position by using appropriate evidence to develop their argument." The "8"
papers don't have the sophistication or fluency of the "9" papers, but they are excellent -- in many ways
-- models of argument.*
Yes/No ... Then List Examples
Accumulation of evidence is by far the most common approach, a kind of reverse induction: the writer
agrees or disagrees and cites examples to support that categorical position. Typical is the student who
writes "Gabler's theory ... has been proven true by historical falls of empires, literature, and modern-day
society." What follows are three rather lengthy paragraphs, each developed with an example on one of
the specified topics: the fall of Rome, Shakespeare's Henry IV, and computer video games. It is a four-
page essay with five paragraphs.
Another student challenges Gabler with this thesis: "...in most instances of 'risky' books, movies, and
plays, entertainment ... has something to offer beyond the cover that most people are not willing to look
for." The writer then develops an essay with a paragraph about Broadway plays, specifically The Full
Monty; another on books, specifically Huck Finn; and another on movies, with reference to John Wayne
westerns, Psycho, and A Beautiful Mind. Perhaps somewhat more subtle than the previous response,
this one is also a five-paragraph essay driven by examples.
Of course, we tell students to support their arguments with examples, emphasizing that the most
effective essays are concrete and specific, developed with relevant details. But the responses that follow
this pattern are essentially one-point essays -- the same point, "I agree or I don't," supported by three
different examples or types of examples to make that point. I often tell my students that this kind of
essay strikes me as the verbal equivalent of raising one's voice: with each example, the volume goes up,
yet the same point is repeated. Given the scores, however, it's clear that this approach can work well.
It's a safe one, though the essays lack nuance.
Form and Substance