Michael Pollan, "Playing God in the Garden,"
and:
For more assignment ideas involving this essay, please
visit the Pollan link-o-mat.
Pollan's Mode of Argumentation
With this essay, Michael Pollan has analyzed the controversial issue
of genetically modified foods, yet his writing does not take the form
a conventional investigative report. What is Pollan doing with his writing?
For your first paper I want you to analyze the language and structure
of Pollan's essay. Where is his essay exposition and where argument? Where
does he seem more neutral, and where more opinionated? Why do you think
he might have chosen to write this way? How effective do you think Pollan's
style of writing is in getting his point across?
Your paper should not primarily be an agreement or disagreement
with Pollan's stance on the issue of genetically-modified foods. I am
not interested in your judgement of his politics so much as your analysis
of his writing.
Before you turn your paper in, make sure this is true:
-
My essay analyzes the reading rather than merely summarizing it.
Craig Eliason, Fall 2000
Back to top
Abram and Pollan: The Relationship between Humans and the Natural World
"We are human only in contact, and conviviality, with what it not human."
In "Playing God in the Garden," Michael Pollan discusses Monsanto's New
Leaf Superior, a biogenetically- engineered potato that is toxic to potato
beetles. What relationship should humans have to the natural world? Is
it possible to have a "convivial" relationship with "what is not human"
in the age of technology?
Back to top
Pollan and Angell: The Business of Science
In "Science in the Courtroom," Marcia Angell has few kind words
to say about scientists who are paid to testify in court. Michael Pollan,
in "Playing God in the Garden," subjects statements made by
the scientists who work for Monsanto to a similar level of scrutiny. What
happens when science moves into the business room? Are the problems that
arise different from those that arise when science moves into the courtroom?
Back to top
Pollan and Drucker: Assessing the Significance of the Rise of the
Knowledge Society
What might Drucker learn from reading Pollan about the best way to explain--or
perhaps I should say, the best way to explore--the changes likely to be
brought about by the rise of the knowledge society? This question already
presupposes that Drucker does not deal with the rise of the knowledge
society in the same way that Pollan deals with biotechnology. Feel free
to argue that they do approach their subjects in much the same
way, but if you feel that they differ in significant respects, consider
the advantages and liabilities of each. I am not asking you, however,
simply to compare and contrast: I'm looking for an argument about the
most useful and illuminating ways to explore the complex issues of our
time.
After making detailed an extensive use of both authors, you might also
move beyond the text to consider some broader questions. When politicians
and media pundits engage in discussion on tv and in Congress, these discussions
generally take the form of debates. In conventional debates, each side
takes a clear "pro" or "con" stand. Is the debate format perhaps outdated--too
one-dimension for many-sided matters, and too closed-minded to do justice
to the open-endedness of life in our time? Do we need to learn to think
and discuss crucial issues in new ways?
Back to top
Pollan and Gould: Biotechnology and the Evolutionary Process
In "What does the dreaded 'E' word mean, anyway?" Stephen Jay Gould provides
an extended discussion of what the word "evolution" means in the life
sciences. In "Playing God in the Garden," Michael Pollan discusses genetic
engineering and the invention of the NewLeaf potato. For this essay, I
would like you to consider the relationship between genetic engineering
and evolution as Gould defines it. Does genetic engineering disrupt the
evolutionary process Gould describes? Does it participate in that evolutionary
process? Does Gould's argument suggest that we should be concerned about
genetic engineering or that there is nothing to worry about? That is,
does the definition of evolution used in the life sciences put to rest
the concerns Pollan has raised about genetic engineering or does it heighten
those concerns? Write an essay where you consider the relationship between
evolution and genetic engineering.
As with your previous drafts, you will want to make certain to cite from
the assigned readings, demonstrating your command of the readings and
your mastery of the conventions of citation.
Richard E. Miller, Spring 2000
Back to top
Petroski, Drucker, and Pollan: Failure and the Making of Society
In many ways, "Why do things fall apart?" is the central question
of "Selections from To Engineer Is Human." As Henry Petroski
pursues an answer to this question, he presents a number of concepts-such
as fatigue, engineering lifetimes, and failure-that tell us something
about the process of creation, or, more generally, the process of making.
At the same time, as the title of Pollan's book suggests, these are not
answers for engineering only. If, indeed, to engineer is human, then these
concepts may have larger implications. Both Peter Drucker and Michael
Pollan are concerned with making as well: making new potatoes, making
a decision about whether or not to eat them, making a new society or making
new means to solve that society's problems.
Write an essay, then, in which you take a position on the costs
or benefits of failure and its relation to the processes of making,
growth, and/or the evolution of cultures, products, or ideas.
One quick tip: a strong project here would not simply say "failure
is good" or "failure is bad." Think of Petroski's own essay
in this respect: failure is a complicated process with risks, costs, and
benefits. Your job in this paper is to stake out a similarly nuanced and
complicated position and then to support that position with Petroski and
one of the other essays.
Roughs should be 4pp. Finals should be 5-6pp. Turn in all peer commented
drafts with the final.
Barclay Barrios, Fall '01
Back to top
|
