Who Needs Structure?

I find it ironic how throughout my highschool english career, I have had the rigid structure of formal literature shoved at me from every possible direction. The introduction containing the hook and thesis, followed by three body paragraphs detailing your arguments, always to be complemented by a conclusion summarizing your arguments, re-stating your thesis, and leaving the reader deep in thought.

This year though, we were handed an essay to read, and I did so. As I read, I noticed the extreme lack of “structure” (or what I have always been told structure is to be). After discovering that the thesis could not be found in the first paragraph, I felt myself break out into a cold sweat as the room suddenly went cold. I was confused, I was shocked, I didn’t know what was going on… the regime that had been written and re-written across the chalkboard so many times of how to write an essay had just been broken – and they actually expected me to continue reading this horrific excuse of an essay?

The words on the pages seemed to stretch on forever, with no realistic logical separation between thoughts and ideas. I found no “firstly, secondly, and thirdly” leaving me uneasy about the whole thing… that is until after the class discussed the essay after reading.

My hand was one of the first to shoot up, “this is not an essay,” I stated pointedly. The reaction I got was one of both confusion and disbelief – the teacher’s reply was simply a blank stare…. she didn’t seem to understand what I was saying. I went on to explain that the essay had no structure, it had no order; no thesis followed by a body summarized with a conclusion, it was just wrong, it was just wrong.

It was at that particular moment that three years of highschool english classes came crashing down around me… I was told that structure in literature is not meant to be rigid. It is not meant to be a set of 10 commandments which must not be broken for fear of failure, all along the thing called “structure” was really just a set of vague guidelines to help us out…. seriously?

If this is indeed the case then why do english teachers spend so long forcing strict rules at us and ducking marks for failure to comply… should an english education not be more about the writing itself than how it must be organized, categorized and structured? Who needs a set regime of regulations when all along it was all just really about filling up 120 hours of class time for three years?

Maybe it is time that the curriculum had a change of heart. Perhaps an enlightenment of sorts that would actually allow students the freedom to be creative, to use english as a tool rather than just a pen they pull out when they’re forced to – because really, who needs structure?

-Matt H.

A Modest Blog

Satire has always been an effective and amusing way of getting an opinion across, this much is obvious. There are numerous TV personalities who have made their living providing satire on the news; Rick Mercer, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, each of them offer a humorous commentary of the events of the world. But are they really helping anything?

A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift is a satirical essay that is very well written and gets its point across clearly. But some readers are left to wonder the real point of the essay, whether it is for entertainment, or whether there is a deeper meaning to satire and sarcastic commentaries on real, pressing events. One could easily say the purpose is to poke fun at a serious event, make it a little lighter, perhaps easier to cope with. But I think it is evident in Swift’s essay and in almost all satire that there is a point behind it beyond entertainment.

When you look at television satire, the bias of the host is quite evident. Even Colbert, who expresses an extremely republican view broadcasts his real feelings on political issues by the sheer ridiculousness of what he is saying (suggesting that his real view point is the often the opposite of what it is he is saying.) With A Modest Proposal it is no different. Swift’s suggestion to eat babies to solve the Irish Potato Famine is obviously absurd, however that’s not really what he is suggesting. What he is showing is that the ideas being put forth so far are inadequate, and in fact eating babies is starting to sound like a decent solution to the problem, and if that is the case then people better start thinking of some better solutions soon. He is pressing the population and the people in power to think harder, and to consider the solutions of the unexpected people, by poking fun at the problem, he is at the same time unearthing another problem; that there is no solutions being put forth.

With our own essays this was evident as well. The absurdity of the problem was equaled by, and often exceeded by the absudity of the solution. This expressed different things for each one of us, but all in all they communicated how real solutions need to be considered for these problems, and implemented quickly, because some of the ridiculous solutions are starting to sound real good.

Satire is meant for entertainment, it is a great way of talking about difficult topics because it makes them lighter and easier to deal with, but it also has heavy meaning. It is meant to express the real nature of the problems it is addressing and stir the people to make an impact and start thinking.

Ryan Forneri