Myth of Doomed Children

Malissa Lisojo
Summary & Response
September 30, 2009
Myth of Doomed Kids
The first paragraph is about how children who live with a single parent are expected to fail and be a delinquent. Second paragraph states that the author took a survey of children with single parent homes and drug abuse and talks how children with single parent homes are the most at risk. Third paragraph the author talks about the fear of children of single parents home being addicted to the substance and not that the children will try it. She talks about the side effects and how it can affect those children’s lives. Fourth paragraph talks about the survey itself. The survey she took a survey was not only of the single family home but also, the mother and father, the mother alone, the father alone, the mother and stepfather, and father and stepmother homes. She shows the percentages of substances abuse of children in each family. Fifth paragraph she talks about how in each family most of the children do not have a substance abuse. Also, even with this being true, children with mother and father homes do better than others. Next she talks about how even though culture has said that children with single family homes do a lot worse with substance abuse she says that it’s not much of a difference. For the rest of the excerpt she basically talks about that even though single parent homes do worst then the homes of both mother and father she believes that it doesn’t mean those kids have no one to care, love, and spend time with them. She says that people believe the kids with single parent homes are neglected and abused and that’s why they have substance abuse but she believes they do have other people who care for them. Though it’s not mommy or daddy they all have a least one other relative or person who cares for them. She says that just because children have a home of a mother and father doesn’t mean they aren’t neglected. That doesn’t mean both mom and dad always have time for them and that explains why the percentage of children between the two homes who have a substance abuse problem is not much less than the percentage of children with a single family home. Basically this author is trying to prove that kids with single parent homes aren’t always doomed. They are to an extent but it isn’t to the extreme.
My Response
I agree with this author. She believes that kids from single parent homes aren’t always doomed for failure regardless of what society may believe. Yes, they do cause some type of problem but, they aren’t as different as kids that come from homes with a mother and father. I believe the same thing because I myself come from a single mother home. I do have a stepfather but he is not someone who has any authority over me. All my life it has always been me and my mother. When I turned 10 my mom got pregnant with my little sister and a few years later, her father disappeared too. My dad left because my mom had an affair, that affair ended with my little sister. Anyways when my sister came along my responsibilities, my life, changed. Even before my sister, when it was just me and my mom I never acted out. I was never a problem because my mom knew what she was doing. After my sister came I took over, and even though my mom wasn’t around much after giving birth because she was working two jobs, my sister was hardly a problem either. We both turned out alright, something statistics say shouldn’t happened. My mother was never on welfare, always took care of us by herself.
The author also states that even children with mother and father homes do badly too. Though not as bad she says being a single parent isn’t the reason why children act up. The author states that “4.5% of them have substance abuse problem, compared with the 5.7% if the adolescences living with only their mom. It’s a difference, but not much of one.” What she means by this is that the percentage of kids with substance abuse of single parent homes isn’t too much more than the percentage of kids with substances abuse of a home of both mother and father. She’s basically saying that it doesn’t matter that much if your from a single family or a family with both your mom and dad it’s still a chance your end up with a substance abuse problem. I agree with this too. It doesn’t matter if you have either your parents or just one parents, you’re going to have a substance problem regardless. If you choose to be a problem your going to be a problem rather you have one parent or both. Though some children actually do have a problem they do it on purpose just for attention. Most children let that go, now the difference between the two isn't that high.

Images for Response

The picture I picked out is called untitled, by William Eggleston in 1965. It's a picture of a young men pushing grocery carts together at a grocery store. I think this picture was taken to show people how hard it was back then. I think Eggleston took this picture to prove that everybody, even young men such as this, had to work to support their family. The young man looks about 16 or 17, and you could tell he works there. He is wearing an apron, and he is pushing three carts together. Looking at the time of day, you could tell its the afternoon. The young man probaly just started working. He shows a little sense of trouble. His facial expression shows that he is having trouble doing what he is doing. The old lady in the backgroud looks at him, but says nothing. This proves that it is usual to find young men working in those days. The young man is Caucasian. This shows that even white people in those days had to work to earn a living. Segregation had just ended five years prior, so it was still a little unusual to find a find a white man doing what they saw as a black man's job. This could be another reason why Eggleston took the picture. To show how segregation changed the world.
William Eggleston was known for his color pictures. He started experimenting in 1965, so this picture was one of his experiments. By the 1970's, Eggleston began being famous for his work. This all shows how brilliant he was at color pictures. This picture was one of his first color pictures, and it shows so much detail. He loved bringing his pictures to life, and that's exactly what he did in this picture. Just by putting his pictures in color, he bring the story of this young man's life to the surface, it brought anybody who looks at this picture to another world. An American artist Edward Ruscha, said it himself about Egglestons work "When you see a picture he’s taken, you’re stepping into some kind of jagged world that seems like Eggleston World.”

Only Daughter

Questions on Meaning:
1) What do you take to be Cisnero's main PURPOSE of this essay?
I think Cisnero's main purpose of this essay was to let people know how and why she became to be who she is today. She basically says that she felt her father neglected her when she was younger. She says that when her father went out to public places he would tell people that he had seven sons instead of six sons and one daughter. She also says she felt that she let her father down when she didn't get married right away. She says she became a writer to get her father's approval. She says everything she's ever written has been for him. I think that she felt like she had to become someone in order to get his love. She felt that maybe if she was someone important her father would forget the fact that she wasn't married and love her as much as he loved her brothers.
Cisnero's also says that her brothers played a role in helping her become a writer. She says they often left her alone because they didn't want to play with a girl in public. She used this sense of loneliness to write. She says it allowed her to think, to imagine, and to prepare herself. It didn't bother her that they too neglected her, she used what time she could to write to get her fathers love.
Questions on Writing Strategy:
4) Perhaps a third of Cisnero's essay is devoted to a NARRATIVE and DESCRIPTION of a Christmas visit home. Why do you think Cisneros related to this incident in so much detail? What do we gain from knowing what was cooking, what her father was watching on tv, or what questions he asked as he read Cisnero's story?
I think Cisneros related to this incident in so much detail because it shows that her family didn't change. It shows that her family will always be the same no matter how much she, herself, changed. I think she tells what her father was doing and what he was watching tv to also show that he didn't change. Not even after all his daughters done he remains the same man he's always been. I think Cisnero's uses this to give herself confidence. She's about to give her father, the reason why she is who she is, a story that she's written and got translated into spanish. She gives them the story and he reads it. She doesn't expect him to read it, but he does. After he reads it I expect, she expects to be turned down. Instead he finally approves and asks her when can he get copies for his family. After Cisneros hears this you could tell she finally reached her goal. Her goal of getting her father's approval was completed and she was finally proud of herself.

Critical Reading

There are many different methods that I find extremely helpful when reading. For one, I use the method of highlighting important ideas from the text. Usually, when I'm taking an exam and have a reading prompt to do, I would underline, as I read, what I think would be helpful at the end of the story. This is helpful because if I have to answer questions after the reading all the things I underlined would most likely help me answer those questions. I have used this method when I took the SAT and it helped me get a really good score in the reading sections.

Another method that I find useful is summarizing. Most people I know save this part for last but, I like to summarize after I read halfway through the context. I do this because it helps me get a better understanding of what I am reading. I don't like reading the whole story without stopping because it's confusing. Most of the time what I'm reading is something too confusing, or I never heard of it, so stopping halfway through and analyzing what I read gives me the chance to try to understand what the author is trying to say. I use this concept most when doing an exam because it gives me the upper hand in getting all the questions right.

Last but not least, the last method that I find helpful while reading is imagining that I am the author. For example, if the context that I'm reading is a short story I'm able to put myself where the author is. I'm able to be the author sort to say, and it helps me feel the author is feeling and think what the author is thinking. It's pretty obvious how this would help me say past an exam or help me better understand what I'm reading.

In conclusion, these are my three methods that I use when critical reading. These methods not only help me in English, but also in other subjects like Biology, Math, etc. It helps me break down anything I read so I can better understand it.

The Purpose of This Blog

My name is Malissa Lisojo. The purpose for this blog is so I can write all my thoughts. It's so my English teacher can know my thoughts and feelings about curtain assignments that she gives us.