Firstly: Jane’s response
Exercise 16: Teen binge drinking comparative analysis (pp 62-)
Dr Michael Carr-Gregg is a well known, expert psychologist, especially regarding adolescents. Using his status and authority to lend credibility to his arguments, Dr Gregg draws parents’ attention to the dangerous side-effects of binge drinking. He also criticises politicians and parents for not doing enough to prevent the scourge-like disease. Continuing with his extended metaphor, Dr Carr-Gregg attacks and criticises politicians for their ineffective remedies – “…most of the prescriptions…turned out to have faked code…the virus has kept spreading,” which positions the audience against the politicians, portraying them as lazy and incompetent. However, the author also blames the actions of parents for the trend. Describing their parenting practices as “’tamagotchi” in style – “zero supervision, no limits or boundaries” positions parents reading the article to look at themselves and their actions as the blame. The comparison to a children’s toy also implies that the targeted parents are unsuitable to be raising a child. To compound this point, he uses hyperbolic language, describing teenager’s discretionary income as “atmospheric” in order to depict parents as being irresponsible with their parenting practices – a further criticism. He also further ensures that the audience will sympathise with the sense of urgency with which he wrote the article by appealing to community values, stating that “Victorians are increasingly frightened….,” appealing to the audience as a whole.
In relation to the binge drinking debate, cartoonist Tandberg submitted a picture to the Age depicting an exchange between two authority figures and the parents of a binge drinking child. The image attacks and criticises parenting practices in a similar manner to Dr Carr-Gregg’s article, trying to place responsibility on the parents. The exchange shows the authority figures seeking to counsel parents regarding their child’s binge drinking, but the parents themselves are hung over, attempting to recover from their own drinking spree. This positions the reader to ponder the link between adults drinking to excess and their offspring following this trend. By painting the parents as also being binge drinkers, the cartoon shifts the blame onto the parents as they are seen as role models for kids. This is a similar message to the one Dr Carr-Gregg’s article carries – it is often the actions of parents that lead to, and enable, binge drinking. However, in Tandberg’s opinion, is it the parent’s binge drinking as opposed to their lenience that leads to the problem. (1)
Professor Markson, in his article entitled Time to put a foot down is of a similar opinion to Dr Carr-Gregg. He, too, criticises both parents and politicians for their roles in allowing binge drinking in teenagers. However, Professor Markson contends that the issue in the drinking epidemic is how easy alcohol I to get a hold of, even for those who are under 18. His major target audience is adults whose children drink to excess, whom he criticises for their “laissez-faire attitudes” with reportedly half of parents saying they would “provide alcohol to 17 year olds.” This is on par with Dr Carr-Gregg’s statements regarding current parenting practices, of “zero supervision, no limits or boundaries.” This use of statistics, as well as the author’s title of professor, shows the audience he is a reliable source, positioning them to agree with him in his area of expertise. He further appeals to our sense of health and wellbeing by advising the reader that “alcohol severely disrupts the critical period of development,” referring to late adolescence to the young 20s. Through this, the reader is expected to more fully appreciate the everlasting effect of teen binge drinking – much like Dr Carr-Gregg’s “fatal virus.” (2)
The letter written by Kelvin Mach reinforces the views of the previous articles, and to an even greater extent Tandberg’s cartoon. His position as a teenager enables him to show parents reading the letter the effect of their actions from a firsthand standpoint. Adopting a victimised position, he claims that “naughty party boys” are “scapegoated” for the actions of parents. He criticises their drinking habits – a sentiment shared by Dr Carr-Gregg and Professor Markson – saying parents should have a look at the example they are setting, which is, after work “two or three” and “when the footy’s on it’s four or five or six.” The use of evidence such as this is in line with the carton by Tandberg, which makes the link between drinking in adults and their kids. Having anecdotal evidence to support this lends further credibility to the idea. The notion that parents are largely responsible for their offspring’s drinking habits is one that is shared throughout the previously analysed articles or cartoons.
(1) Good response.
(2) Re: Professor Markson’s article: The cross-referencing and linking sentences set up the comparative discussion quite well. However, the comments relating specifically to Professor Markson’s article read like a list. Explore the connections between each of these techniques/comments so that you can better investigate the implications of the professor’s research. For example, show the links between the research, the depiction of parents and the appeals to health and wellbeing/leadership. These techniques support the main focus — the depiction of parents and their lack of confidence — which leads to complicity in the teenage-binge drinking problem.
This student scored 44 for English (2013).
Suggested response
The increase in potentially fatal binge drinking among teenagers continues to raise alarm bells in the community and provides the backdrop to Dr Carr-Gregg’s article entitled “Teenage binge drinking”. The article was published by Generation Next in its online magazine that deals with significant social issues. Introduce the other authors …
(The detail will depend upon time and word length.)
In a peremptory (dogmatic) tone, Dr Gregg highlights many parallels between Ebola and adolescent binge drinking in order to stimulate feelings of revulsion and horror in his largely teenage audience. Accordingly, Dr Carr Gregg, who is an adolescent psychologist, deliberately exploits the negative connotations of an African virus to conjure the image of a disease that has no cure and that baffles health professionals. Furthermore, the author deliberately uses animal-like qualities to personify the disease — like a lion it “roars into life”. Not only are these deathly, dangerous qualities undermining family life, but the author shows how the virus is an invisible enemy and is deceptively destroying the lives of teenagers. The extended metaphor carries emotional overtones and seeks to elicit sympathy for the victims —teenagers, who seem unaware of the dangers.
Dr Carr Gregg uses the metaphor regarding the Ebola virus to symbolically discredit the ineffective response of both parents and public health officials. The metaphor of the “fake code” reinforces the fact that in the western world our institutions have not been able to solve the problem — a fact that is likely to dismay all concerned citizens and positions them to pressure governments for decisive corrective action. (Hone in on specific word choices and their purpose. What do they imply?) That public officials have, idiomatically-speaking been “throwing” everything at it, and yet have found “no cure” highlights the baffling state of the disease that is “roaring” out of control. In particular, the metaphoric reference to “tamagotchi parenting practices”, draws attention to the surrogate-like habit of parents who are treating their children like cute pets. (Notice two related techniques: depictions and comparisons..) The comparison of teenagers with surrogate pets implies that children are a game of trivia and readers would infer that the lack of leadership and parental guidance contribute to the problem. Behind such humour, Dr Gregg draws attention to an erosion of authority and a sense of irresponsibility. A clever compound adjective, “I just-want-to-be-her-friend”, and the negative connotations of “zero supervision”, have an effect of deriding and shaming parents for not setting boundaries.
(See paragraph and essay plan on p. 65.)
- Return to Arguments; Orange Workbook, Exercise 22, p. 62
- Return to Arguments: Online Study Program