Investigative Report Preliminary Research

1. I was walking down the hall of Holmes Hall at 2 AM on a Sunday looking for activity. I heard distinct giggling coming from one of the dorms, so, knowing the kids in the room, I walked right in. Once I stepped in, I saw a group of people who got wide eyed. I noticed a discrete fog in the room. I knew what was going on immediately; they were smoking Marijuana. I quickly stepped in and shut the door behind me. All around the common room of the four-person suite were snacks, drinks, and lighters. The room smelled like Febreeze and chips. There were four faces of students I had already known, and another four who I had never seen before. They all seemed different from each other; two were wearing sports jerseys, one was wearing a Bob Marley shirt, and the rest were wearing casual clothes. One guy put his iPod in a small pair of speakers and put on some music. I immediately recognized the song: it was No Quarter by Led Zeppelin. Everyone in the room seemed to be in deep thought leaning against something since not a sound was made. I broke the silence. I just had to ask; “why does it not smell in here?” I thought the smell from Marijuana was poignant and distinguished. A few of them smiled at my naiveté. “We didn’t smoke in here: that’s retarded. We vaporized it,” said the unfamiliar face with a Bob Marley shirt on slowly with a grin on his face. He then explained that the smell is minimized when you vaporize it. It was then that it occurred to me that Marijuana could be smoked without leaving a smell. I left the room before the song was over: I loved No Quarter by Led Zeppelin, but I no longer wanted to be involved in unlawful activities, considering the risks. I went back to my dorm with a slightly new perspective on Marijuana smokers.

2. Craig Aman, an 18 year old freshman at Penn State, says on the subject of Marijuana, “It’s just bad for you. It kills brain cells and I don’t know why anybody would use it. You might as well just kill yourself now if you want to die so badly.” He also said in a later part of the interview, “I used to know a very smart guy who smoked Marijuana. Marijuana got him addicted on harder drugs and now he’s working at Shoprite and living with his parents just so he can feed his addiction.”

A 20 year old junior at Penn State who asked to remain anonymous said “It’s not bad for you. There are plenty of people who can function fine. Just look at Michael Phelps. It clearly wasn’t bad for him; it was the media that ruined him, not the drug.”

3. “THC acts upon specific sites in the brain, called cannabinoid receptors, kicking off a series of cellular reactions that ultimately lead to the "high" that users experience when they smoke marijuana. Some brain areas have many cannabinoid receptors; others have few or none. The highest density of cannabinoid receptors are found in parts of the brain that influence pleasure, memory, thinking, concentrating, sensory and time perception, and coordinated movement.”
“Long-term marijuana abuse can lead to addiction; that is, compulsive drug seeking and abuse despite the known harmful effects upon functioning in the context of family, school, work, and recreational activities. Estimates from research suggest that about 9 percent of users become addicted to marijuana; this number increases among those who start young (to about 17 percent) and among daily users (25-50 percent).”
“Numerous studies have shown marijuana smoke to contain carcinogens and to be an irritant to the lungs. In fact, marijuana smoke contains 50-70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke. Marijuana users usually inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than tobacco smokers do, which further increase the lungs' exposure to carcinogenic smoke.”

http://www.nida.nih.gov/infofacts/marijuana.html

“Marijuana is far less dangerous than alcohol or tobacco. Around 50,000 people die each year from alcohol poisoning. Similarly, more than 400,000 deaths each year are attributed to tobacco smoking. By comparison, marijuana is nontoxic and cannot cause death by overdose. According to the prestigious European medical journal, The Lancet, ‘The smoking of cannabis, even long-term, is not harmful to health. ... It would be reasonable to judge cannabis as less of a threat ... than alcohol or tobacco.’”
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7305

4. My research had lead me to change my direction and focus a little bit. One thing I plan to do differently is to focus the paper on students, rather than the surrounding community. This will help improve my focus and allow me to elaborate on the issue a lot more. I could still get commentary from adults if I see it as necessary, but I will no longer focus it on that. Secondly, through my talking with people for and against Marijuana, I have decided that I may need a third perspective. I will try to get a balanced perspective. I have found several students who are apathetic towards Marijuana, but I have yet to find a student that is fully knowledgeable on the subject yet still neutral.

Party!!!

#1 Party School is titled after a 2009 ranking by Princeton Review naming Penn State the number one party school in America. It discusses the problem of drinking at State College. The reason that the problem is being investigated is because it causes local disturbances, causes damage, and takes lives. The intended audience is primarily those in State College who do not have a holistic view of the drinking situation. This includes students, faculty, residents, and entrepreneurs. The report clearly shows how drinking affects different groups. For example, it affects residents. One resident complained of burning furniture in neighbor’s yards, condoms and tampons in his lawn, and severe noise complaints. He even installed motion detectors to prevent future problems. Alternately, local businesses also have to adjust. McLanahans once had to order extra marshmallows because they became a fad. The report makes a stunning conclusion. It concludes that the drinking problem is so deeply rooted in Penn State culture that it is impossible to remove. Graham Spanier, the president of Penn State, mentioned that he is not hopeful for the future of drinking at Penn State, and that all they can do is try. Graham Spanier actually got booed the first time he made a public announcement scorning the drinking at Penn State. His powers are limited, despite his position. The report concludes that drinking will not and cannot be completely banned from Penn State, and both the administration and the students are uncompromising in disallowing people of legal age to drink. The report included a lot of research and interviews. The journalists first sat on a porch and watched the results of drinking first hand. Then they interviewed students, residents, and business owners. The journalists even interviewed cops and had the cops take them around town. The journalists were also well researched, pulling out information like Penn State is the number one party school but also the safest metro area, and that 1700 students die of alcohol related injuries each year. The journalists employed many powerful narrative techniques. For one, they stayed on topic. I could not find a single instance of when they would deviate from their topic or play a clip that was unrelated to the story they were telling. Their research was very well researched, and they clearly defined any terms they believed not everybody would know, such as the nickname for Natural Light Beer. Their design did need work though; at one point they played a clip that was clearly meant to be seen and not heard. Lastly, the transitions were clear and easy to follow. I never felt lost. Splitting the audio into several chapters also helped me stay on track.

I liked #1 Party School. It was informative and a good listen. What I liked most was how balanced the report was. It did not treat drinking as taboo, nor did it favor it. For the writing assignment that was due Wednesday about Penn State’s Liquid Cocaine, I was able to find a small bias. In this report, I listened carefully and I could not. The narrators were neutral and relied on their sources to tell the story rather than themselves. I don’t know what I would have liked to have heard more or less of; the story was balanced and informative. It felt complete. It was very good and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Bird by Bird Changed my Perspective

Now that we finished Bird by Bird, I can look at the book as a whole and point out my favorite point made in the book. I must say the most important point that Lamott made in Bird by Bird is the idea of writing as a form of giving back to the community. Until this book, I always saw writing as a form of expression and a job. My idea of a writer was a person with their computer trying to make a living by writing and trying to get published. Bird by Bird turned this idea upside-down. I never imagined that writing can be used to give back to the community. This point moved me the most because it opened my eyes and gave me a new perspective on writing. I never saw writing as a selfless act until now. Lamott effectively drives this point home in “Giving” by relating it to a child who thinks he would have to die to save his sister. The child was asked to give a blood transfusion to his sister, who has leukemia. While the blood is being taken, he asked how soon will he die. He believed that they were taking enough blood to kill him. This moment struck home with me. This is a heartfelt moment and a triumph in writing from Lamott. Her use of dialogue and pathos was perfect. Lamott clearly put a lot of time into this moment because I believe it was written perfectly. There was a lot of tension throughout the story, the characters were pure, innocent, and believable. Lamott states that children truly show her the magic of giving. She explains how children are innocent and pure. She makes a direct parallel between the boy who thought he would have to give his life to save his sister and writing. She believes that the characteristics this boy held when sacrificing his life are the characteristics that writers should have. Lamott believes that writers have a talent that should be used for the better of society. This reminded me of the moment in Spiderman when Uncle Ben says “With great power comes great responsibility. Earlier in the book, Lamott also touches on the point of using writing for others. Lamott had a friend with a sick baby called Brice. Brice died very early. Lamott visited him very often. When given the opportunity to write an essay about anything, Lamott choses to write about Brice and his parents. Brice’s parents highly appreciated this act, and Lamott also got satisfaction from it. This is another heartfelt moment in the book where Lamott uses her skills for others. She did not write the essay for money. She wrote it for Brice’s parents who greatly appreciated her kindness. Bird by Bird always wrote about writing as a selfless act that should not be done for money, but it didn’t come out until Part 4. The idea of writing as a form of service is my favorite part of Bird by Bird. It changed my mind about writing and writers.

Drugs for Everybody

My Addicted Son by David Sheff is a story about a boy whose life has been ruined by drugs. The story starts off in a happy family home in 2002. Everything seemed normal until the narrator makes a note that Nick, the son of the author, “was a playful and affectionate big brother to Jasper and Daisy – when he wasn’t robbing them.” It was then that the mood of the story changed. The scene switches to a melancholy mood and the narrator reveals that Nick was supposedly off methamphetamines for 150 days. This didn’t turn out to be the case. His drug habit overwhelmed him and he kept it a secret from his family, even when confronted about it. Nick’s father showed no preference for a lighter drug like methamphetamine than harder drugs like heroin or cocaine. The story continues along this path. Nick’s father trusts him several times, only for Nick to betray his father’s trust. It was not until the end of the story when Nick relapsed and regretted it. He then doubled his efforts to quit, started writing, biked and swam, and became committed to his sobriety.

There was one main conflict and many smaller ones. The main conflict was between Nick and his father. Nick’s father tried to keep him clean and give him a good life whereas Nick kept relapsing and taking more and harder drugs. This conflict eventually got resolved when Nick kicked the habit at the end. There were several smaller conflicts. For one, Nick was in a conflict with himself and his addiction to drugs. His perseverance to drop drugs showed up whenever he attempts rehab or when he tried to go back to college. The allure of drugs was too strong. He eventually won in the conflict against his drug-addicted self in the end. Another conflict was between Nick’s father and his mother. Nick’s father and mother divorced at an while he was still young. This resulted in the coownership of Nick. This conflict was never resolved but it creates a new conflict: Nick’s father is in a conflict with himself. His father blames Nick’s drug addiction on the divorce. He believes that Nick’s drug problem is based on the fact that Nick’s parents were separated, in coownership of him, and distant. The audience is unaware whether or not this conflict is resolved, but more than likely it is when Nick kicks the habit. Lastly, there is a conflict between Nick and his sibling, Jasper. Nick stole eight dollars from Jasper. For a youth, this is a significant amount of money. Jasper, being too young to understand Nick’s drug addiction, was hurt and confused by Nick’s acts. This conflict was most likely solved by Nick’s letter to Jasper with eight dollars and a promise to always be there.

The point of the story was to show how easily an innocent person can get addicted to hard drugs and how, more times than not, drug addicts are victims of the drugs more than themselves. Nick was never a bad guy. He was an interesting youth. He was counter-culture. He had friends and family who loved him. He was simply a curious youth who wanted to try some drugs. This innocent act became Nick’s downfall when he became addicted to them, and took harder drugs like meth, heroin, and cocaine. Nick always cared about his father and family. At one point, he couldn’t even look his father in the eye because he had fallen so low. Nick is not a bad person but he was a victim of drugs, which was one of the points that the narrator was trying to make. This story is relevant to my age group because we are students in college. Many people are experimenting with drugs. These drugs are most likely limited to alcohol, marijuana and nicotine, but the story shows how a seemingly innocent curiosity can be transformed into a debilitating addiction. Due to this, the intended audience of the story is the curious youths who are considering experimenting with drugs, and parents whose children are susceptible to the influence drugs. The author chose to sequence his writing chronologically with occasional flashbacks. He does not sequence it chronologically including the flashbacks because the flashbacks are only relevant at certain points. I plan to use this technique in my writing. The author also chooses to only include pertinent detail that will either move the story along or create rapport with the main character. This came off as effective and I will also utilize it in my writing. Lastly the author chose to use dialogue occasionally. His dialogue was neither excessive nor rare. I will also use this technique in my writing. The author transitions by using dates and times. For example, he would either write the date, or the time of day, such as morning or night.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/magazine/06ADDICT.html