Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays about life lessons learned
Personal narrative about life lessons
Life lesson essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Lars Eighner’s essay, On Dumpster Diving exhibits his profound experience of Dumpster diving as a basis of survival of modern society during his period of being homeless. Additionally, he provides an ethical perspective of people about the items that are necessary to reflect upon. Considering this, it proves his credibility of his ideas implemented into his story through differences of materialism and wealth.
For instance, many groups within present society does not exhaust items to their fullest potential and ends up being tossed away that they take for granted without realizing the hardships one may face . Specifically, one of the groups that display this behavior is college students, who “tend to throw everything” away even if they are in a financial crisis(Eightner 110). Considering, college is typically a time where students are desperate for money because of the tuition, yet they don’t give a second thought about what goes into the trash. As a result, Eighner’s opinion on this matter is that they are wasteful and to review upon
…show more content…
it. Dumpster divers face the challenges of scavenging for food everyday and it is difficult not knowing when the next meal is. It comes to display the differences of social classes in society. Furthermore, the rich are usually eager to spend because of their abundance, while the penniless must save in order to eat.
By the same token, these two groups can be easily compared to a similar position of Thomas Carlyle in The Surgeon As Priest of when Carlyle demonstrates the perspective of himself as a “priest” when bestowing patients his medical attention in hopes to not “anger the gods”. That is to say, they cooperate through priest using the ability to “heal” people, a power only of the gods. Similarly, this divine interpretation is functioned homogeneously with the wealthy and the poverty-stricken because poor can only obtain money and items from the prosperous. Eighner is living due to Dumpster Diving, while the rich are the ones supplying them. Eighner, who experience and discover the dumpsters with better items are the rich. It shows that the rich and poor can be compared with his idea that they both function
together. As a final point, readers can agree along with Eighner’s ideas through his reasoning of materialism and wealth. It gives the people a broader idea that people at times can be really wasteful, but there are others that need to live off that trash as a necessity. In the end, it reveals that society is never really equal and, yet they are able to operate very compatible with each other.
He starts by giving a lot of personal examples (Pizza shop example), then talks about other people who try it (The stages of beginning to dumpster dive), and explains how dumpster diving is a lot better than the more accepted picking up of cans (comparison to a wino). He then delves into the ethics behind dumpster diving (looking at prescription bottles and such), and then if one, presumably the reader, wanted to try it how they would do so (pole with hook on it). He ends with some deep insights into dumpster diving and his way of life. I think that the way he organizes his essay, and his overall tone, are to convince the reader that dumpster diving is not as bad as everyone things, and to make people actually interested in trying it. He first
Eighner’s most noticeable persuasive appeal is ethos. He does not ask for the audience to pity him and his lifestyle because he writes that Dumpster diving is, “a sound and honorable niche.” Eighner truly believes that his lifestyle is a good one, and he should not feel bad about it. Lars illustrates his ethos by writing, “Because I knew the Dumpster I knew the source of the pizza, and because I visited the Dumpster regularly I knew what was fresh and what was yesterday's.” The author is conveying that due to him frequenting a particular Dumpster, he began
Although Eighner reveals that his chosen lifestyle was to live on another's refuge, he kept in accordance with his acts of superiority and snobbishness by excluding himself from the term "Dumpster Diving." Instead, he preferred to be called a "scavenger because of its frankness in the term." (Eighner, 1993). Furthermore, Eighner, explains that there are rules to abide by when successfully "scavenging" through dumpsters, "using the senses…knowing the dumpsters of a given area…. [and] Why was this discarded?" It is the explanation of the three guidelines Eighner asserts to be superior to 'can scroungers' (Homeless people who rummage through the dumpsters for money). The author further elaborates his snobbishness by revealing that he has tried the heinous lifestyle of "can scroungers," and deduced that only a few dollars could be obtained. Moreover, Eighner states, "one can extract the necessities of life from the dumpsters directly with far less effort than would be required to accumulate the equivalent of cans." (Eighner, 1993). The author stereoty...
According to Mayberry (2009) Lars Eighner, a graduate of the University of Texas, became homeless in 1988 and again in 1995 (p. 351). Some of the accounts from Travels with Lisbeth (1993), a book by Lars Eighner, depicted what he went through and what he found during his homeless state. A homeless person must eat and sleep but may not know where or when this might happen next. The human will to survive enabled Eighner to eat food from a dumpster, reach out to other for handouts, and sleep in places other than a bed with covers.
The author, Lars Eighner explains in his informative narrative, “On Dumpster Diving” the lifestyle of living out of a dumpster. Eighner describes the necessary steps to effectively scavenge through dumpsters based on his own anecdotes as he began dumpster diving a year before he became homeless. The lessons he learned from being a dumpster diver was in being complacent to only grab what he needs and not what he wants, because in the end all those things will go to waste. Eighner shares his ideas mainly towards two direct audiences. One of them is directed to people who are dumpster divers themselves, and the other, to individuals who are unaware of how much trash we throw away and waste. However, the author does more than direct how much trash
Didion and Eighner have different styles of writing, but they both created writings with an instructional component. In both pieces of literature, they guide the audience like a mother to child, guiding us step by step in order to perfect the outcome. Joan Didion’s “On Keeping a Notebook” teaches the reader on how to keep note of the past through a notebook. “On Dumpster Diving” written by Lars Eighner, teaches the reader how to successfully dumpster dive and survive. However, Eighner’s piece included many details, whereas Didion’s ideas used examples by flowing from one top to another. It could also be said that Lars Eighner’s piece creates a more thorough analysis on how to dumpster dive. In spite of the fact that the pieces of literature
...This is a very powerful article taking his readers into the world of being poor and homeless, and what people experience every day that could never be imagined. Eighner says in one of his last paragraphs that, “many times in our travels I have lost everything but the clothes I was wearing and Lizbeth” (Eighner 724). He also states that he and the wealthy have the same attitudes about knowing there is more where what they came from. Eighner is so powerful and doesn’t care what others think of him. He is just trying to survive like everyone else. To have such a carefree attitude is very moving.
There are plenty of articles that discuss in great detail the conditions and many aspects of dumpster diving, but there is a fundamental difference between diving for survival and diving for profit. Lars Eighner, the author of “On Dumpster Diving”, tells stories of multiple instances of his dumpster diving experience. Eighner also explains exactly what it’s like to be homeless and to rely on scavenging through garbage to survive in order to get your next meal. On the other hand, in the article “Dumpster Divers: Scavenging is About More Than the Trash” by Elana Dure, she discusses that dumpster divers believe to think they are scavenging for treasure, not just for pleasure and enjoyment, but for profit. Both are “making a living”, but one group
Eighner’s most noticeable persuasive appeal is ethos. He does not ask for the audience to pity him and his lifestyle because he writes that Dumpster diving is, “a sound and honorable niche.” Eighner truly believes that his lifestyle is a good one, and he should not feel bad about it. Lars illustrates his ethos by writing, “Because I knew the Dumpster I knew the source of the pizza, and because I visited the Dumpster regularly I knew what was fresh and what was yesterday's.” The author is conveying that due to him frequenting a particular Dumpster, he began to understand that
A) Lars Eighner, in “On Dumpster Diving”, portrays the waste that is accumulated due to modern consumerism and materialism. He also demonstrates the issue of the wage gap. Consumers of the modern age spend too much and therefore waste too much. In the essay, Eighner describes life as an scavenger and demonstrates how people are able to live by the minimal resources. “Scavengers” are able to survive on the waste of the consumer. Eighner presents this scenario as a contrast to the life of a modern consumer, in order to portray it’s unnecessary wastefulness. Mainly, food seems to be taken lightly by society, as Eighner as a scavenger finds “a half jar of peanut butter”,
Suzanne Britt, a teacher at Meredith College and a publisher in essays and textbooks, in her essay “Neat People vs. Sloppy People,” (1983) asserts that people who live cluttered lives are morally better than those who live organized lives. She supports this assertion by using humor and exaggeration to describe both types of people, making generalizations about both sloppy and neat people, repeating “sloppy people” and “neat people” at beginning, and throughout, each paragraph, and illustrating situations in how neat and sloppy people would act differently, along with using her opinion to strengthen her argument. Britt’s purpose is to persuade readers that sloppy, unorganized people are more morally upstanding than neat people in order to encourage
Step 3: 1. Eighner introduces his arguments through the use of narrative stories and his own personal experiences. He uses this technique to let the reader see firsthand how some people are able to survive off what is carelessly thrown away by others who take what they own for granted. Eighner illustrates this point on page 1, “The necessities of daily life I began to extract from Dumpsters. Yes, we ate from Dumpsters. Except for jeans, all my clothes can from Dumpsters. Boom boxes, candles, bedding, toilet paper, medicine, books, a typewriter… I acquired many things from the Dumpsters.”
...stic things in order to live a better, more sound, and overall healthier life. Juxtaposition makes the audience want to follow through with the purpose. Exemplification causes the audience to realize the extent of their materialistic nature. A definition of the average homeless person’s terms allows him to build his ethos and consequently allow the audience to believe and follow his purpose. A majority of people are a part of the middle class, and this majority tends to judge the poor for their lifestyle whether it be through Dumpster diving or begging on the streets. However, as proven by the essay, these people have no right to do so because the poor do, in reality, have a greater sense of self than these middle-class people, similar to the rich. The middle-class citizens must no longer act the victim; instead, they should be working on becoming more sentimental.
Society today is split in many different ways: the smart and the dumb, the pretty and the ugly, the popular and the awkward, and of course the rich and the poor. This key difference has led to many areas of conflict among the population. The rich and the poor often have different views on issues, and have different problems within their lives. Moral decay and materialism are two issues prevalent among the wealthy, while things such as socio-economic class conflict and the American dream may be more important to those without money. Ethics and responsibilities are an area of thought for both classes, with noblesse oblige leaning more towards the wealthy.
It separated the “haves” and the “have-nots,” also known as the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie were those who controlled the economic society from the resources to the civilians. As demonstrated in The Book of Margery Kempe, the bourgeoisie was the “holy” figures such as the priests, the bishop, and archbishops. In Faith and Wealth by Justo L. Gonzales, it described, “Both the rich and the poor, as well as wealth and poverty, have a place in God’s plan...the poor are seen, not only as objects of charity, but also as subjects who have something to contribute to others” (218). This particular belief came from Augustine, an early Christian Theologian, and philosopher, which was adopted into the Catholic culture. The bourgeoisie took advantage of the proletariat, the people that provided for the bourgeoisie and performed the manual labor. Moreover, Margery Kempe explained, “She saw many of the bishops greatly ragged and dagged in their clothing” (80). The Bishop’s men abused their power; they used the money given to the Church in order to benefit themselves rather than to help those in need. They “have” everything at their disposal because they are high ranking clergymen rather than mere peasants. This is ironic because greed is one of the seven deadly sins. Even though these men were supposed to be “Holy,” they abused their power to have a personal gain rather than assisting those in need. Margery Kempe sees this disparity and scolds them for their greed. On the other hand, Margery Kempe takes part of the proletariat when she decided to become a beggar. The novel stated, “After this creature had thus given away her goods and had neither penny nor halfpenny to help herself...thinking and studying where she would have her living as she had no silver to sustain herself” (67). She became poor by the commandment of Jesus. The proletariat believed