USED WITH PERMISSION RETURN TO JULIE FREEMAN April 21, 2007 Prof.

Freeman W140 WRITERS STATEMENT Purpose & Audience: (for students paper) This essay analyzes Ehrenreichs Nickel and Dimed to convince readers to value her study without being distracted by her politics. Im targeting readers who refuse to take her work seriously because of her liberal views. During the peer review workshop, the students in my group thought I might develop my ideas better, so I went back through my draft and added more supporting details. They also thought some of my word choices could have been more specific, but vocabulary is something Im still struggling with. Its the Book, Stupid The book, Nickel and Dimed, by Barbara Ehrenreich, is a journey through the lives of low wage workers trying to make ends meet with what they have. This journalist allows herself a small amount of money to start off with and travels all around the country working in jobs that only pay $6-7 an hour, struggling to come up with next months rent and adequately feed herself at the same time. The only thing that sets her apart from anyone else doing this kind of a study is the fact that she is a self-declared Marxist, feminist, and atheist. There are spots where these things become clearer in this book, but the overall tone has little to do with religion and politics. She was merely trying to illustrate the conditions of life at the lower end of the spectrum. For those of us who have been in that position in life, her insights into corporate America are fairly amusing and true. Its easy to relate to her troubles and concerns because the same things run through our minds on a daily basis. When I say our, its important to exclude the conservative Christian student group from the University of North Carolina. They call themselves the Committee for a Better Carolina.

The Committee for a Better Carolina has portrayed her as an anti-Christ. They took out ads in the local paper that were full of slander against her. In America, everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions and values. However, with this right also comes the issue. When there are conflicting sides, whose voice should be heard the loudest? In this case, it was the student group. The University of North Carolina chooses a book each year for incoming freshman to read upon arrival to school in the fall. This particular year the book, Nickel and Dimed, was chosen to read. To me, it is a good selection. There are several ways to apply it, and encourage discussions. Many issues are within the contents of this small book. However, because the authors values did not fall exactly in line with this group, the book was opposed. Allow me to back up a little, though. The previous year, the Koran was chosen. I believe that is the reason why this book even stirred up any conflict at all. When the Koran was chosen for the summer reading program the year before, it began a controversy so large that it was taken to court. According to the reporter, Kate Zernike with the New York Times, Just hours before the talks were to begin, the United States Court of Appeals was still considering an appeal from a conservative Christian group that had sued to stop them, (1). Zernike went on to say that, In the courtroom, lawyers for the university had spent the weekend arguing that the discussions were not, as the Christian group charged, forced Islamic indoctrination (1). While I can understand their concern a little bit, they missed the whole point of the activity. The book was to promote discussion and to give students a look at something in a new perspective. It was to open their minds to the learning process that they were about to embark on in their college experience. Being taught the exact same thing all of a persons life does not

make him or her smarter. It is the exposure to different ideas that creates the opportunity to learn. Zernike also points out that, In discussions and interviews today, students said that the debate had been overblown, and even some students who said that they were opposed to the assignment said that they were glad to have read the book. If they objected to the book, they said, it was generally because they found it boring, not because of any belief that it proselytized. (2) In fact, she also notes that students were stunned to find that Islam and Christianity share many links (2). Whether the Committee for a Better Carolina was right or wrong, did they take it too far? Their goal backfired, and instead of getting it banned, it only sparked more curiosity about Islamic tradition (Zernike 3). With the history part out of the way, we can focus on the real issues of the controversy over Nickel and Dimed. The Committee for a Better Carolina should not have tried to ban this book for several reasons. The concerns boil down to the fact that the book is not about religion and politics, readers know little, if anything, about the author of a book, and that she had a worthy goal and purpose that she accomplished. This conflict is not about the book itself, it is about the author. While the Committee for a Better Carolina doesnt agree with the ethics of the author, Barbara Ehrenreich, this piece of literature should be judged on its own merit. First, religion and politics are only slightly touched upon in the book. The article by the BrothersJudd bashes her experiment and says that, equally maddening is her refusal to take advantage of the easiest opportunity that exists to find friendship and

social assistance: church, (1). However, the paperback says straight out that she is an atheist when she attends a tent revival for amusement on a Saturday night (Ehrenreich 66). I believe that the only reason that religion was even brought into the subject was because the event that occurred the previous year with the Koran. Emery Dalesio, a writer with the Associated Press, included an important quote from a student at the university in his article. He noted that, Treadwell said as a Christian conservative, her views on religion and drugs differed from the author Barbara Ehrenreichs. But reading the book didnt compel Treadwell to make those views her own, (1). As far as politics go, there is a little more evidence, but she does not blatantly flaunt her associations throughout the entire book. The only section I recall even mentioning her political affiliation was in the very beginning where she was stating her terms of the experiment. Rule number two was that I had to take the highest paying job that was offered to me and do my best to hold it; no Marxist rants or sneaking off to the read novels in the ladies room (Ehrenreich 4). Putting these incidents aside, her leanings are merely subtle. And seriously, how much do we usually know about the author besides the fact that they wrote the book? Unless I happen to enjoy the style of the particular writer, the author is simply another person that wrote a dull book that Im forced to read if I want to get a passing grade in a class. In the book review that the BrothersJudd did on Nickel and Dimed, their very first sentence was laying the accusatory tone of the paper. The BrothersJudd say, Barbara Ehrenreich is that rarest of breeds, a 21st century American who still clings to the tenets of socialism, (1). They are already singling her out for being unique, which is the only good reason they have to criticize her. They might as well put on some rubber gloves while handling her book because she must, obviously,

have some form of an infectious disease. To get a perspective on the real author, a person must go to actual quotes from the author. Barbara Ehrenreich herself wrote an article about the controversy on her personal website. I had been looking forward to a discussion of the issues raised by my book; instead I was greeted on North Carolina radio talk shows by hosts asking, What does it feel like to be the Anti-Christ in North Carolina (3)? Im sure that must do wonders for someones self-esteem. Barbara Ehrenreich, your work is completely worthless because you dont participate in the mobs religion. Most importantly, we must not forget that she had a worthy goal and strong purpose that she accomplished. She gave up everything to do this study. She worked hard for minimum wage and lowered herself for the purpose of research. She didnt have to go through the struggle herself. She could have lived comfortably, crunching the numbers in her own home. However, then her work truly would have been easier to tear apart on the grounds that its insignificant. Ehrenreich proclaimed in her book that, even though I suspected from the start that the mathematics of wages and rents were working against me, I made a mighty effort to succeed, (6). It takes backbone for someone to drop everything and detach herself from life as she knows it. The most significant purpose of her book is to enlighten people. Some people have no clue what the little person goes through everyday while they are taking their lives for granted. Dalesios article quotes a student at the UNC campus who participated in the summer reading program. Hanin Khasru, 17, of Fayetteville, said she had never before had a reason to think about the lives of workers at hotels, restaurants, or Wal-Mart, (1). This student in Dalesios article verifies that Barbara Ehrenreich achieved her goal when

she says, I guess it was a really good eye-opener, (1). Dalesio also backs up this with more supportive quotes such as, I got a glimpse of a world I had never seen before, having been fortunate enough to live comfortably all my life. I was amazed by the way that some people still live even in an industrialized nation such as America, (1). Unfortunately, there will always be those in life who try to keep the public blind and ignorant for as long as they can manage. I think the real issue these students had was that they didnt want Ehrenreich digging around in their business. I say that because upon reading the article Ehrenreich wrote, I concluded that these workers were probably being mistreated. Ehrenreich said, We agreed, after some discussion, that the students ought to apply the books concerns to their own campus, where workers have been trying to organize against heavy administrative opposition, (2). This was to be the topic of discussion at orientation for fresh new students coming into the university that fall. When all of this is wrapped up together, I cant help of being reminded of the book, The Jungle, in which a reporter goes undercover and exposes what is really happening to everyone who never even suspected it. Actually, that was a very controversial book, too. Whether people like it or not, I think everyone should evaluate these things for themselves. This society relies too much on what some random person said. We all have functioning brains with the ability to rationalize things. Its time to use them! Forget about the author and the critics. Its the content of the book that makes it valuable or not.