Against meat is by Jonathan Safran Foer in the New York Times on October 7, 2009. This essay is about a boy growing up eating dinners with his family, more specifically his grandmother. His grandmother survived World War II and had to scavenge for food. Due to her having to scav-enge, she learned nutritional facts on food and knew what was edible and good for consuming. The grandmother was a great cook declared by the children, although she only cooked chicken and carrots. One day, the babysitter told them how the chicken they are eating was a chicken and all the harm and murder the animal goes through just to become a meal. The story told by the babysitter made the author have a change of heart, and he became a vegetarian. However, he would
…show more content…
He explains that if he didn't believe in his decision on being a vegetarian or eating kosher, noth-ing in life would matter therefore there is nothing. Even in his dying days, if nothing matters as much as his beliefs, then there is nothing to be saved.
The uses of epigraph in the beginning when describing his grandmother being a survivor of World War II gives a visual on how hard she had to survive. The author also uses imagery. He paints the picture of his grandmother, the harm that comes to animals, and even describing his love for food and his kids all using explanatory words instead of bashing meat eaters. The author used metaphors as well as similes. Foer states:
Food, for her, is not food. It is a terror, dignity, gratitude, vengeance, joy, humiliation, re-ligion, history and, of course, love. It was as if the fruits she always offered us were picked from the destroyed branches of our family tree. (Foer, …show more content…
The most popular is to maintain a healthy diet and live longer. Also to have more birthdays than people that consume meat. Finally, the most common, to save animals and the eco-system. Although popular it contra-dicts many beliefs, because it is not guaranteed that human life will be prolonged. Vegetarianism in itself does not prove the eco-systems and ozone’s will positively affect the world. The argu-ment that by having a vegetarian diet just means eating food the animals need. Also by not eating meat the population of animals can over populate. Although many people would love to become a vegetarian for the healthy diet it is not ideal. 65% of vegetarians go back to being carnivores for their own personal
He explains that if he didn't believe in his decision on being a vegetarian or eating kosher, noth-ing in life would matter therefore there is nothing. Even in his dying days, if nothing matters as much as his beliefs, then there is nothing to be saved.
The uses of epigraph in the beginning when describing his grandmother being a survivor of World War II gives a visual on how hard she had to survive. The author also uses imagery. He paints the picture of his grandmother, the harm that comes to animals, and even describing his love for food and his kids all using explanatory words instead of bashing meat eaters. The author used metaphors as well as similes. Foer states:
Food, for her, is not food. It is a terror, dignity, gratitude, vengeance, joy, humiliation, re-ligion, history and, of course, love. It was as if the fruits she always offered us were picked from the destroyed branches of our family tree. (Foer, …show more content…
The most popular is to maintain a healthy diet and live longer. Also to have more birthdays than people that consume meat. Finally, the most common, to save animals and the eco-system. Although popular it contra-dicts many beliefs, because it is not guaranteed that human life will be prolonged. Vegetarianism in itself does not prove the eco-systems and ozone’s will positively affect the world. The argu-ment that by having a vegetarian diet just means eating food the animals need. Also by not eating meat the population of animals can over populate. Although many people would love to become a vegetarian for the healthy diet it is not ideal. 65% of vegetarians go back to being carnivores for their own personal