Amy Dillon

ENG 408-301

April 10th, 2016

Response Paper #1

Gore Vidal’s “Drugs: The Case for Legalizing Marijuana”

            The Vidal essay “Drugs: The Case for Legalizing Marijuana” that portrays the problem of drug use seems to be in some instances a parody, and this style of form is what makes it so persuasive and meaningful to the reader.  The opening paragraph is very bold, and it is here that Vidal shows this essay to have a sarcastic and parodied tone, where he proposes that the problem of drug use in the U.S. could be solved by making all drugs legally available.  Although it is obvious that this would make the problem worse, the serious tone is what draws in the reader’s attention to the essay.

            What gives the essay credibility is that Vidal reveals to the audience that he has used drugs also, and here is the first instance where the author’s attitude shifts.  The author’s attitude also shifts from sarcastic in the first paragraph to serious in the following paragraphs.  It seems that Vidal is trying to convince the reader of his argument with concrete facts, and also through the presence of sarcasm that draws in the attention of the reader.  After the first few paragraphs, it is clearer the stance Vidal has on drug legalization, yet he somewhat seems unbiased.  Instead the form and content are more important, the diction and tone, where the author describes the situation and proposes that the problem is important.  It seems that the point is to describe the situation, rather than to propose a solution. 

            Regarding the sentence structure, the style is spoken.  The author is very much present and participating where Vidal says that he is a part of the problem that he is proposing.  The style is informal because of the fragments of sentences and the word choice; for example, in the 9th paragraph, the author uses colloquial language such as “the Feds,” and “pushers.”  The point of view shifts throughout from first person to third person.  In a way I perceived the essay to have a mixed style, because there is colloquialism (through choice of vocabulary), yet it portrays middle style because of the public-monologue like discourse throughout. 

            The style is descriptive because it mimics the way people talk.  One example of this is in the fourth paragraph, in the phrase, “…-a phrase which that underestimated wit Richard Nixon took from Homer who used it to describe the dead.”  There is also descriptive style in the ninth paragraph, in the sentences, “Whose fault?  Evil men like the Mafiosi?  Permissive Dr. Spock?  Wild-eyed Dr. Leary?  No.”  Another example of descriptive style is in the twelfth paragraph, in the sentences “Will anything be done?  Of course not.” 

            There are many instances of style throughout the essay that appear in the Martin Joos’ article “The Five Clocks.”  As for the component of “age” that appears in the Joos article, I’d say the “teenage” style is represented, because the essay isn’t formally perfected.  There is much informal content in the essay, but a lot of the knowledge required to be understood by the reader would be expected to be known in general adult situations.  Having to do with the “style” component in Joos’ article, I saw the style as “formal,” because of the information and examples given to support Vidal’s argument that drugs are an increasing problem in the U.S.  Also, there is definitely cohesion throughout the text in its colloquial and informal style throughout.  I don’t think that the essay is consultative because it is implied that Vidal is speaking to his audience of people of the United States, so the audience isn’t meant to be universal. 

            Regarding “breadth,” I’d say the essay qualifies as “standard,” because all of the language can be understood by the audience it is directed toward; those of the country in which the drug problem takes place.  It’s neither “provincial” or “popular,” in this element because it isn’t particular to a smaller group in diction, and it isn’t “puristic” because a lot of the content isn’t formally correct, such as the colloquial language. 

            My final reaction regarding the style of this essay is that although I argued that the essay is of “formal” style according to Joos’ essay, I think there is still a component of “frozen” style in a way because the form is as important as the meaning of the essay.  Although Vidal supports his argument with a lot of background information and examples of drug and alcohol usage throughout history, the essay is so efficiently strong because of the informal, sarcastic, and parody-like style.  It is for this reason that I took this article to be so influential and meaningful to me.