z Smoking ban essay

1. Give an outline of the different positions on the smoking ban which are
presented in the texts.

Text number one which has the title “Benefits of smoke ban will be felt at once” is written by Robin
McKie, the text mentions a lot of benefits which will be felt as soon as the smoking ban takes place
in the English country, the benefits that are mentioned are focused on the health side to the human
body. Throughout the text it shines through the text that Robin McKie is in favor of the smoking
ban. It is as if he is trying to persuade the reader to stop smoking in a country where its legal.
Robin McKie writes cold facts and numbers about the health benefits and involves studies, Robin
McKie uses logos for the most, but he also uses pathos as he mentions a study that says people who
are close to smokers are also damaged by it.

In text number two we see a big shift in opinion on the smoking ban, here A. N. Wilson takes the
ban personally as if it was damaging the English literature or culture. A. N. Wilson has the most
dramatic title of the three texts “Is this the end of English literature”. A. N. Wilson mentions
smoking as an important factor in the English history and connects it to important personalities or
activities, such as poet writing or Oscar Wilde. A. N. Wilson makes it clear that he is against the
smoking ban. Smoking and creative phases are mentioned as a duo which are not to be separated in
text number two, A. N. Wilson is also on the opposing side of the governments decisions on
choosing to invade privacy by trying to decide whether people are allowed to smoke or not in
private homes or clubs.

But the one text that stands out is the last and third text, “Another victory for Britain’s insufferable
paternalists” by Simon Jenkins.
In this text Simon Jenkins appears to be writing a comment article on the smoking ban, while still
adding a flavor of his meaning in the text. Simon Jenkins writes that he thinks it is hilarious that the
politicians decided for the whole living nation of England to ban smoking based on solely their
morale, ethics, and some health facts. In his article Simon Jenkins manages to compare smoking to
everything bad but still okay, such as drinking or swearing, it looks like Simon Jenkins is
motivating people who swear or drink to smoke because they’re equally bad for him.
Simon Jenkins also shows signs of hate for the government or the board that decided on the
smoking ban for the English nation. Simon Jenkins writes about smoking as if it was easily
avoidable and that if anyone wanted to quit, they could do it with the twitch of a finger.
Simon Jenkins also embraces freedom and privacy in his text just as A. N. Wilson does in text
number two.

2. Comment on the use of exaggeration and irony in text 3. Illustrate your answer
with quotations from the text.

Simon Jenkins makes pretty good points when he compares smoking to other toxic things,
“Smoking is unpleasant but reasonably avoidable. Unpleasant too is fuming traffic, noisy
neighbors, swearing youths and cruel parents.”
Here he succeeds in comparing it to inhaling traffic fumes which can cause cancer too, noisy
neighbors are not healthy either, as they might not make you sleep when you want to wake up
early or generally relax. All these things can kill the victim of them in the same way that
smoking does, slowly over time. He makes a strong statement later in that part of text three
z Smoking ban essay

where he makes us question why we don’t ban traffic fumes or noisy neighbors. “All may lead
to death. We do not ban them yet”

“I have boycotted smoking places for years without serious discomfort, and watched
nonsmoking areas expand in response to public demand. Yet to hear some MPs (or
broadcasters) talk you would think smoking was a ricin attack on the nation state.”
Simon Jenkins takes a sigh at the government and has a valid point again, the government could
ban everything bad for people if they wanted to ban smoking whatsoever, it makes it ironic how
he mentions smoking as lethal toxin attack on the nation.

Text 3 could’ve been written more naturally, it appears though the intention of the writer is not
opposing to the smoking ban, the intention is more likely to be opposing the power of the
government and how much they’re deciding for the nation. Simon Jenkins is clearly not happy
about what laws the government is trying to fix in society, as if there wasn’t something more
important than smoking bans.

3. Discuss whether society has a responsibility to prevent people from smoking or

whether it is up to the individual to decide.

Society has no responsibility for anything in the 21st century. Everyone has their own
rights to be whatever they want to and how they want to define themselves. The latest
news from Haderslev Katedralskole (a high school in southern Jutland in Denmark)
are “Natural” bathrooms, bathrooms for she, he or whatever pronoun you have. The
individual must decide whether to harm their body with smoke through their lungs or
drinks through their digestion system. As Jean-Paul Sartre says, “Humans aren’t
anything else then the sum of their actions.”1 If humans damage their body, signs will
show later, and society will probably judge…

However, that’s why society will always have the power to prevent people from
smoking, humans just need to make it something taboo, something from the past
which is forbidden to do. No laws should forbid smoking, but conversations and
social activities should discuss it as suicide or something as dangerous.
Words can weigh a lot if they come from family members, maybe a smoking ban
should be a family-based decision, because after all smoking in your home will only
damage your family members and make the whole house have a bad scent.

1
https://www.sensetik.dk/krop_selv_og_virkelighed