Anti Smoking Essay
In Florence King's “I'd Rather Smoke than Kiss”, King introduces some strong points about how smoking, but more so smokers, are attacked by “smokists” in society today who don't really care about the well being of others. King first describes how she started smoking and then goes on to to her first point about how misanthropes (someone who hates people) love to hate smokers and how they do everything in their power to discriminate against smokers. King calls these misanthropes “smokists” and goes on to say that smokists don't hate the sin but hate the sinner. Her first point provides an excerpt from an article about how one smoker is criticized by a non-smoker. King interprets the article as saying that the non-smoker wouldn't care if the smoker would die and puts her notes in italics following the article.
King goes on to mention another term in her second point called Schadenfreude, meaning pleasure in the unhappiness of others. King states the fear of being physically disgusting and smelling bad is an American's worst nightmare, which is why smokists are like health Nazi's. King then goes on to say that smokers have become the new greenhorns in the health world and how it is America's desire to punish the undesirable. Finally, King points out that the anti smoking campaign shows statistics in which most smokers are Caucasian females, uneducated, and between the ages of 18-24. In other words, some of them smoke because they don't have enough education to understand the health effects of smoking.
King's article provides some interesting insight into the world of smoking. It provides great controversy over smoking and individual rights and the essay's tone really helps King persuade the intended audience. King uses the first few paragraphs to describe how she started smoking. The way she came to smoke was purely an accident, which helps her argument that not all smokers choose to smoke from a young age just to be cool. Her story could be considered a form of pathos because she is trying to get an emotional response from the reader. Her next few paragraphs talking about misanthropes and smokists are leading up to her first point and narrowing down her topic. In my opinion, her thesis is introduced here too when she states “I believe life should be savored rather than lengthened and I am ready to fight the misanthropes among us who are trying to make me switch.”
King's headline “Smokers on the Run” talks about how passive Americans respond in a disgusted manner to smoking. She even tells a story about how she didn't go to a woman's home for dinner because the woman refused to let her smoke in her house. The purpose of this point is to show her readers she believes strongly that non smokers don't care at all about smokers as people. She uses exaggeration to add to this in the next part of the essay talking about a response a non-smoker wrote to a smoker. She said that this act was a form of “sadistic brutality” and mentioned how it would have made Vlad the Impaler proud. Also, she suggests that the non-smoker in the article was implying that he didn't care if the smoker died as long as it didn't affect him. King's tone throughout the entire essay is very sarcastic and this in fact contributes to the argument King is trying to make about how smokists are only concerned with ruining smoker's lives. King's next few paragraphs serve as another point trying to convince her intended audience that the government actually wants smoker's to die because there will be more money since smoker's won't live to collect social security. King then suggests how misanthropy involves pleasure in the unhappiness of others also known as Schadenfreude. Her second point is based somewhat on opinon and assumption because she talks about how fear of being physically disgusting and smelling is America's worst nightmare. She obviously doesn't know this is a fact but she incorporates many of her opinions into the essay. King's last few paragraphs talk about the stereotypes of smokers and how campaigns and statistics are wrong since not a lot of people fall into the stereotype. King implies that there are a lot of people that smoke and just because they smoke doesn't mean they are uneducated or women. Her conclusion is there to restate her thesis and get across her argument. She concludes with a strong statement saying “Hating smokers is also a guiltless way for a youth worshipping country to hate old people, as well as those who are merely over the hill-especially middle-aged women.” To a non-smoker, King could come off as an extremely cynical person who is critical of everything. Even to a smoker she could come across as this. King's intended audience for this essay is non-smokers because she is trying to express the way she feels about smokists and what they do. The purpose of the essay is to persuade non-smokers to see smokers' side of the story. Even though she can seem pretty cynical, I personally thought this essay was effective specifically because of her tone and the examples she provides. If readers all look at her essay in a sarcastic sense they would probably find it effective because in a way I think she wants it to sound a little cynical and ridiculous to get her point across. I personally enjoyed the essay because I knew the tone was sarcastic right from the start and it actually made me think about how smokers must feel sometimes. I liked some of the evidence King used to support her argument because she mentioned facts first and then incorporated her opinion along with the fact making her argument more believable. For example, in the beginning of the essay she mentioned how a misanthrope is someone who hates people. This is obviously a fact. She then says how hatred of smokers is the most common form of misanthropy in America today. Another example of when she does this is when she mentions how Schadenfreude is pleasure in the unhappiness of others. She then talks about how smokists take pleasure in trying to eliminate smokers' pleasure. Because of the way she did this, her points seemed more convincing and believable. Due to this, the essay is in fact effective because it persuades the reader to see a different viewpoint of smoking from someone who actually smokes. The author's main points are very varied, appealing to the reader's logos. The author's angle of vision is from the viewpoint of a smoker so the author somewhat excludes the viewpoint of a non-smoker, perhaps someone who is against smoking because of health reasons. The good thing about the essay is the author includes the reactions of non-smokers, showing she is not ignorant or oblivious of what is going on around her.
All in all, King's essay provides some strong points about smoking that really tries to persuade the reader and get them to think about a different side of the story. The essay is quite enjoyable because it is effective by the way she communicates her points with her sarcasm. Also, the points she uses are strong ones with good evidence to support her argument. King's argument allows for the reader to take a side, which is what a rhetorical piece of writing is trying to accomplish.