Argument Analysis 2- "Hidden Intellectualism"

Of the essays we have read to date this has been on of my favorites. Gerald Graff takes the classic school smarts versus street smarts argument and presents it in a way that may not have occured to us before now. Being the literary professional that he is, Graff uses typical writing techniques, perhaps for intructional use, but nevertheless it remains pursuasive. Graff uses this opportunity to write an almost perfect template for argumentative writing with balance, style, and of course persuasion.

The first highlight of this essay is the fact that he clearly states his purpose in the first few sentences by relating to the average person- "Everyone knows some young person who is impressively "street smart" but does poorly in school" (Graff). Right at the beginning he ropes you in by describing someone that we all know in some way or another. He explains his purpose in more detail by establishing a connection between Plato, Shakespeare, and nuclear fission and fashion, sports, and TV- once again subjects that everyone can relate to. Graff proceeds to illustrate his concept with a personal story about his past as an adolescent. This is an archetypal essay with a defined statement followed by reasons why or how things are done but then pleasantly broken up by the insertion of a personal experience. He continues with this personable style to prove that anyone can encounter this issue.

Graff uses the perfect balance of pathos, ethos, and logos. He makes it emotional by explaining the post World War II neighborhood he grew up in and the types of people he came into contact with. Even though he is of a different time he applies this to modern day examples which grabs the reader emotionally. For instance the example of having to prove yourself as the toughest guy in school so peers would not assume you were a know-it-all and physically harm you still happens today and readers can associate themselves with that. Graff also uses historical evidence about street smart vs. book smart with the mention of the marriage between playwright Arthur Miller and Mariylyn Monroe after she divorced famed jock Joe DiMaggio.
Finally to end the paper he illustrates the importance of relating nonacademic work by saying students should view it through "academic eyes." This provides a visual for the reader to further understand his argument. Graff then ties it all together in one final comparison that really concludes his point of view by saying, "Give me the student anytime who writes sharply argued, sociologically acute analysis of an issue in Source over the students who writes a lifeless explication of Hamlet..."(Graff).

Graff undserstands the importance of structure within an argument and sticks to a typical template. However this only proves that a formula for writing can be a successful essay. Not only was Graff trying to get the reader to understand the importance of nonacademic topics in a classroom, but I believe he was trying to illustrate the usefulness of a argumentative writing format.