Ashley Liger

Professor Weidner

Writing 2

28 November 2021

This essay is written from the perspective of a dietitian writing an autobiography

New York City 1999

My life was somewhat indifferent to those around me. I followed a much similar pattern as my
peers: high school, college, and then off to grad school. Studying in New York City felt like a
dream to me. The hustle and bustle of the city made me feel alive and even in its imperfections,
I learned to love every inch of it. From the snowfall in the winter, the sunny summer days, or the
way the sun sparkled off the glass of some of the tallest buildings I’d ever seen, I had never felt
more alive. Not every part of the city was perfect, but I think that’s what made it so beautiful.

Having grown up in a household that felt structured and whole, there was an emphasis on
perfection. The perfect friends. The perfect grades. The perfect colleges. But moving to the city
made me realize that perfection doesn’t exist. Our society emphasizes perfection which is
achieved through prestige, money, and success, those who achieve success don’t really feel
authentic joy. I had to watch too many coworkers, old friends, or previous bosses drown in the
sorrow of a life that didn’t necessarily give purpose, rather felt like a mission. What many seem
to miss is that true beauty doesn’t lie within perfection, rather it is the imperfections of the world
that make life so beautiful. And when I realized this, it clicked that this idea of perfection that I
had been brought up in was merely a facade. And I didn’t want to study accounting after all. I
wanted to serve a purpose. To help others. To make my name known. I didn’t want to be
ordinary anymore. I wanted to be extraordinary.

Even though I loved New York, I knew I had to go. I needed to grow, and I knew I couldn’t do it
there.

Los Angeles California 2000

Many said I was naive and silly when I moved to LA. I received a particularly large amount of
criticism from my parents, but I knew I needed a change of pace if I wanted to change my life.
Things obviously didn’t go so smoothly when I arrived. I had very little money left over from New
York, but I was convinced that this is where I needed to be. I thought I would find familiarity in
this new city, but I found that everything about it was completely foreign. However, one thing
about Los Angeles fascinated me; the obsession with eating healthy, exercising properly or
looking a certain way. Obviously, this concept exists everywhere, but it was overwhelming how
many people I met were completely obsessed over their physical appearance. Keto diets, juice
cleanses, they all claimed would give you the “perfect body” or a beautiful physique. I soon
found out that this idea of perfection was impossible to achieve, and in reality didn’t exist either,
but it baffled me how many of my peers had succumbed to the lies of diet culture. That’s when I
realized I knew what I wanted to do with my life.

San Francisco California 2002

Once I decided that I wanted to study nutrition I applied to many programs in Los Angeles but
was rejected. However, I waited a few more months and was accepted to a program in San
Francisco, which I thought would be a much better fit for me anyway.

My first courses were the usual general education, nutritional classes, and biological courses
that aligned with my chosen major. I arrived at my first class, which was biological sciences in
concurrency with nutrition and psychology. In front of me lied two articles, which was particularly
odd for a large lecture hall, yet I was absolutely fascinated by their components. I didn’t know it
then, but that lecture would forever change my life and my career.

The professor introduced the articles. The first was called “The Biology of Human Starvation”
which was taken from multiple studies done at the University of Minnesota. It was a lengthy
article consisting of multiple sources, studies, and interviews, while the other was much more
concise. Focusing primarily on the biological and psychological impacts of starvation on patients
with Alzheimer’s disease, this article was a much less rigorous read. I was confused why the
professor would give out two articles that studied the same topic but approached the method
much differently. The first article was written by Taylor Henschel and Andrew Mickelsen , while
the second was written by Amalia G. Diaconeasa, Luiza Spiru, and Ileana Turcu. We were
prompted to read, reflect on, and discuss the components of both articles.

Upon completion of both articles, I was fascinated and completely drawn into the topic. I was
particularly fascinated by the discussed topic of the second article; “Population History,
Starvation and Alzheimer’s Disease” I listened to my peers discuss around me, finding that
many others agreed. The professor proceeded to silence the murmur of my classmates and
called upon two volunteers to come to the front of the class. He prompted them to pretend as if
each of them were the article and to communicate the components of the article according to
how it was written through a dialogue. They were instructed to speak to each other as if they
were both representing the articles themselves, utilizing names of their own choosing.
Essentially each student would become the article.

The students were hesitant, but proceeded with the dialogue:

Student A: (The Biology of Human Starvation)
Student B: (Population History, Starvation and Alzheimer’s Disease)
Professor: Theodore

Student A: Hello Anthony it is a pleasure to meet you

Student B: Nice to meet you Jack
Student A: Do you fancy a cup of tea while we wait for Theodore to arrive
Student B: Sure
Student A: Great it will be right out
Professor: Hi I’m here!

Student B: Hey, what’s up!

Student A: Welcome in, make yourself at home
Professor: Have you guys seen the news?
Student B: Not yet
Student A: Haven’t had the chance to myself
Professor: There is a new season of survivor. Apparently, some of the contestants that dropped
from the series are very ill due to malnutrition, yet some are refusing to be compliant with the
refeeding process.
Student B: How awful!
Professor: As professionals what do you believe would be the leading cause of this?
Student A: Well, from my professional experience I have found that many of those suffering from
malnutrition face psychological changes. I would definitely expect there to be a great change in
their moods and personalities. These changes are often accompanied by psychological
disorders like depression, anxiety, and body dysmorphia. This could heavily impact their
willingness to comply.
Student B: I’ve studied a lot of stuff too. Did they mention any pre-existing medical conditions or
dietary restrictions?
Professor: They did mention one patient with diabetes and another with dementia
Student B: Interesting. It reminds me of a time when I did a study on dementia and diabetes. I
was looking into how the two could be related in terms of different variants within-population
history. Knowing that each population had different sources of nutrition, I found that levels of
cholesterol from carbohydrates correlated to those two diseases. Pretty interesting right?
Professor: Fascinating, did those studies show any behavioral or medicinal patterns?
Student B: Yes, there was evidence of psychological changes in the populations with the food
poor in quality but I would show you the data, but we decided not to publish that formally
Student A: How could you publish an article without including visual images of your studies?
That doesn’t make sense
Student B: I thought that incorporating that information into the writing was the best way to
explain the outcomes of the studies
Student A: But visual data is important to the reader as well you need to….
Professor: Alright that’s the end of the dialogue thank you for your participation

The professor called the dialogue to an end. He emphasized that the argument between the two
students was essentially the purpose of the assignment. With some final thoughts and
concluding questions, he dismissed the class

New York City 2010

I was back in the city I loved with a drive to finish schooling. At the time I was in the final year of
getting my P.H.D. in nutritional sciences and having had made the decision to become a dietitian
was preparing for internships. In my thirties, it felt like life was beginning all over again.
Ashley Liger

Professor Weidner

Writing 2

28 November 2021

Explication Essay

When deciding how to form a conversation between two authors within the same

discipline, I found it difficult to properly approach the topic of malnutrition, as it is difficult to

comprehend. Gearing towards a more analytical and educational genre seemed like a logical

option, yet there isn’t as much freedom within those forms of writing. So I decided upon a

written narrative that would captivate the reader’s interest while also emphasizing the necessary

elements from both articles. The protagonist of the narrative writes a self-narrative, describing a

specific lecture that she attended where the professor asked the students to read two articles, both

on the same topic, but tackled from a different standpoint. The article taken from The Biology of

Human Starvation uses dialect heavy in scientific jargon and complexity, while the “Population

History, Starvation, and Alzheimer’s Disease,” takes a less formal approach. In my narrative, the

professor asked two students to volunteer to act out a dialogue for the class. Each student would

represent the article through their choice of dialect, jargon, and formality. They would represent

the article from their points of view, conveying the information in a similar manner as to which

the articles themselves emphasized the same topics. I found that utilizing the freedom of a

narrative allowed for creativity to unwind, adding appeal to the piece and interest to the reader,

and therefore I believe this was an effective means of communication.

I came to the conclusion that while the authors agreed on the same topic, they disagreed

in terms of rhetoric. The article taken from The Biology of Human Starvation utilizes images,
graphs, and formal language to emphasize the idea of psychological changes in malnutrition. The

following quote provides the results of a scientific study: “the direction of the changes resulting

from the semi-starvation coincided with that expected of the basis of clinical observation . . .

there was a statistically highly significant increase in scores on the scales of social introversion,

depression and cycloid tendencies . . . ” (Keys, A., Brožek, J., Henschel, A., Mickelsen, O., &

Taylor, H. L 865). This quote uses dialect and jargon such as “clinical observation” and “cycloid

tendencies,” which are specific to the genre discipline of a scholarly research article. It fits well

within its discipline as does “Population History, Starvation, and Alzheimer’s Disease”.

However, they are arguably both within different discourse communities. With a stronger

emphasis on population history, this article would belong to a different discourse community

than The Biology of Human Starvation because of its lack of information on the psychological

impacts of malnutrition. However, even in their differences, both authors take a scientific

approach detailing studies and research to validate their reasoning. In this way, they are a part of

the same discipline of a scholarly research paper, although they disagree rhetorically and in some

ways, conceptually. In his paper written on discord communities, Dan Mezcler states, “that even

similar types of courses within the same discipline may have very different discourse community

expectations depending on the instructor, department, and institution,” (Mezcler 112) which

perfectly demonstrates the relationship between the two articles I studied. While both articles are

scholarly research papers written on the biological standpoints of malnutrition, one gears more

towards a psychological discourse community, while the other is a population history

community.

The Biology of Human Starvation utilizes images, graphs, and formal language to

emphasize the idea of psychological changes in malnutrition, while “Population History,

Starvation, and Alzheimer’s Disease” gages towards a more concise, and less formal tone. I was

able to represent this in my essay by using personification, where each student from the dialogue

would mirror the formality of their assigned article to represent the disagreement between the

scholars. Since The Biology of Human Starvation holds a tone more formal than “Population

History, Starvation, and Alzheimer’s Disease”, Student A spoke in a far more official manner

than Student B, utilizing specific jargon and dialect such as, “do you want” versus “would you

like”. The length of time in which each student was speaking also correlated to the formalities of

each essay. In this way I was able to represent the differences in the rhetorical elements of each

essay through the characters themselves.

The more simplistic form of communication provided by “Population History, Starvation,

and Alzheimer’s Disease,” can be shown in the following quote: “Populations exposed earlier to

agriculture (e.g, Europeans), i.e, to a diet rich in carbohydrates for a longer time . . .”

(Diaconeasa 16). This article does not include the same complex scientific jargon as The Biology

of Human Starvation and chooses to use a more simplistic and straightforward word choice. It

also includes examples such as “(e.g, Europeans), i.e,” which isn’t as prevalent in The Biology of

Human Starvation. This quote taken from the chapter discusses findings of recent studies: “a

decrease in those on the scales of ascendancy self-confidence and freedom from the nervous

tenseness” (Keys, A., Brožek, J., Henschel, A., Mickelsen, O., & Taylor, H. L 865). The tone in

which the author writes is far more formal and includes a heavier emphasis on scientific concepts

through the use of complex dialect. While both articles study biological malnutrition, they have a

great difference in their methods of communication.

The authors of “Population History, Starvation, and Alzheimer’s Disease” also choose to

provide the reader with written descriptions of their studies as opposed to graphs and charts: “the
variant e4 (ApoE4) of the apolipoprotein ApoE, associated with a higher LDL level, could play

such a role” the authors also specifically state their methods and results with labeling: “Methods:

In order to test the hypothesis above, the average cholesterol level and the relativeApoE

frequency . . . Results: The inci-dence of e4 variant varies between 10-20% in general . . .”

(Diaconeasa 3). As shown, the case study information is embedded into the essay itself with their

methods and results of experimentation specifically outlined. With a far less formal tone, this

article provides a more simplistic form of communication from author to reader. On the other

hand, The Biology of Human Starvation utilizes graphs and tables to communicate research

results to the reader. This can cause conflict between the two authors as one may argue that

visual imagery is essential to the proper communication of the information to the reader. I

represented this conflict through a short dialogue where two students argue that one form of

rhetoric is more effective than another, but in reality, the scholars are both correct in their own

ways. Differences in writing, and the arguments of both authors, are what aid in further growth

of a writing genre and when writing my piece I found that integrating my own viewpoints on

disagreements helped to build a more effective conversation between the authors. In her paper

titled, "Finding the Good Argument OR Why Bother With Logic", Rebecca Johnson discusses

modern day arguments, “It is important to see that we don’t just talk about arguments in terms of

war. We actually win or lose arguments.” (Johnson 157). Arguments in the modern world are not

simply a conversation, rather a competition of who is right or wrong. Although disagreements

tend to lead to dead ends, they bring out important aspects of the topic being discussed, and they

are still an important part of our culture. They help us to continue to grow and acquire new

knowledge. When thinking about the ways in which my two articles disagreed I decided I wanted

to integrate the idea of how pointless arguments can actually lead to cultural growth within my
narrative essay. I believe that I was able to represent this effectively through the consensus

formed between both students in my narrative as well as the professor’s role in dismissing the

discussion. In reality, one author may argue graphs and tables are essential to research articles,

but a proper paper can still be written without them. In the end, there is no right or wrong way to

write an essay.
 Bibliography

Keys, A., Brožek, J., Henschel, A., Mickelsen, O., & Taylor, H. L. (1950) . The biology of human

starvation. (2 vols) Univ. of Minnesota Press, Oxford. Retrieved from

https://www.proquest.com/books/biology-human-starvation-2-vols/docview/615193240/s

e-2?acc ountid=14522

Diaconeasa, Amalia G, Luiza Spiru, and Ileana Turcu. “Population History, Starvation and

Alzheimer’s Disease.” Alzheimer’s & dementia 6.4 (2010): S466–S466. Web.

Ashley Liger. Buildr 1b assignment. 1-3

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1v12CZoyZhmizrSbMjjlH-jMxK147swxEPauy4u1

LXk0/edit

Dan Melzer, “Understanding Discourse Communities” 114 (Mezcler 24-26)