<p>Should we admire heroes but not celebrities?
Each person has a different definition of celebrities and heroes; however, heroes are in a class of their own. The former almost always usurps the throne of justice with negative effects and therefore they do not deserve the admiration of society. Donte Sallworth, an NFL receiver, is a paradigm of the negative effects celebrities bring. Likewise, Michael Vick’s dog fighting scandal proves that celebrities do not deserve our unfaltering attention. History and sports prove that celebrities are normal people that make mistakes, while heroes are people who learn from their mistakes.
Donte Stallworth, former Philadelphia Eagle and New England Patriot, was caught driving while intoxicated. Not only did Stallworth break a law, he committed a crime like no other- murder. Donte did not mean to kill the man but he still committed a crime. Furthermore, Donte was tried and charged with vehicular manslaughter and 30 days in jail. A sentence of only 30 days is not worthy of a man’s life, and he deserves to be incarcerated to this day. Being a celebrity once again outweighed the system of “checks and balances” Montesquie coined which proves that celebrities do not deserve the admiration of society.
Michael Vick, current Philadelphia Eagles quarterback, was charged with running one of the largest dogfighting rings ever. When questioned about the scandal Vick simply stated, “It was my brother, and I had nothing to do with it.” Someone who lies and hurts animals barbarically certainly does not deserve the admiration of today’s generation. Although Vick has apologized and made countless donations to charity his wrongdoings are scarred on the dogs involved forever.
Celebrities like Lindsay Lohan are poor paragons of human beings. She has been in rehab countless times, whether it be for an eating disorder or drug abuse. Lohan wasn’t always this way, she was once a sweet and uncorrupted girl who played a pair of twins in The Switch. Giving celebrities the spotlight at a young age sets them up to meet their demise, an additional reason why they do not deserve the respect of society.<br>
Admiration is a strong verb that means to respect and honor someone who has had a positive impact on the world, and celebrities from sports to the red carpet are not worthy of this honor. Heroes are people like Martin Luther King and Theodore Rosevelt who have the worthiest credentials for the admiration of society. Both King and Rosevelt had the most prestigious hardware, the Nobel Peace Prize for their positive impacts on the world. Heroes are forever, while celebrities come and go, proving that heroes are indeed worthy of admiration while celebrities are not.</p>
<p>bump… come on guys please grade!</p>
<p>i think it’s quite solid. Examples were not basic, and had factual information. I’d say around 10</p>
<p>You might want to check with the colleges you are applying to before getting too caught up on the essay. My son has nailed the essay 12 every time, but none of the colleges even use this as an admissions criteria–unfortunately since many students show up to college not knowing how to write a basic essay and many end up in a “remedial” writing program. Personally not even sure why this portion of the SAT exists. Perhaps LACs apy attention to it, but our experience is flagship state schools don’t care about the essay at all.</p>
<p>Your essay is definitely not terrible. A few suggestions that might improve be generically applicable for essays in the future:</p>
<p>1) If a contrast is set up by the question, it would be good to devote approximately equal time to both halves of the contrast. In this case, you have devoted a large fraction of the essay to celebrities, and very little to heroes. You set up an interesting contrast that celebrities are “normal people who make mistakes,” while heroes “are people who learn from their mistakes.” This point might have been substantiated by the rest of your essay, but you don’t mention any mistakes made by the heroes you cite.</p>
<p>2) Be careful with your word usage, particularly when you are trying to write a catchy phrase. You do not need to do this to score high, and if your usage is imprecise, it will wind up counting against you. A few examples from your essay:
a) “usurps the throne of justice with negative effects” What do you mean by this? To usurp a throne is to seize it illegitimately from the rightful ruler. The celebrities are not taking the place of justice, even if you can make a case that the celebrities are treated too leniently by the courts.
b) “a crime like no other” This phrase will probably grate on any scorers of my age, because the connotative meaning of the phrase “like no other” is generally quite positive to us. You need some other way to indicate the unique reprehensibility of murder.
c) “tried and charged with vehicular manslaughter and 30 days in jail” Here you have a problem with the verb usage, in terms of the sequence and nature of the court system. A person needs to be charged with something before he is tried, so the word order should really be reversed. Also, he was sentenced to 30 days in jail, not “charged with” it, so you need another verb in there.
d) I don’t think you’ve really used “worthy” correctly.
e) The “system of ‘checks and balances’ Montesquie coined” You won’t lose any credit for misspelling Montesquieu (though you might favorably impress the reader by spelling it correctly). However, the usage of “coin” is not right. A phrase can be coined, but a system is proposed or established, rather than being coined. Also, the system of checks and balances refers to balancing the power of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government, and the ability of each branch to act as a check on the other two, not to balance or fairness within one branch (the judicial, in this case).
e) “his wrongdoings are scarred on the dogs” This was a great, vivid phrase that went wrong when you used the preposition “on.” It is likely to be jarring to at least some of your readers. If you had written “his wrongdoings have scarred the dogs” this would be true literally and figuratively, and it would impress the readers. When you say “his wrongdoings are scarred on the dogs,” this would be literally true if someone had actually branded the dogs with phrases such as “cruelty to animals.” Also, you have a bit too quick transition from Vick’s excuse to the statement that he lied. You should not assume that your reader knows that he lied–a transitional statement would have been really helpful here.
f) “poor paragons” This phrase works as sarcasm, but it would come across better in spoken English (where the sarcasm can be signaled by tone of voice) than in written English. A paragon is an ideal model. A normal person is also a “poor paragon,” but that’s not to condemn them–the person is just normal. To make this word choice work, you would have needed to set up the admiration of Lindsay Lohan first, and then bring this in.
g) “sets them up to meet their demise” This phrase is too strong. It would have been better to write “sets them up to meet their downfall.” I am assuming that Lohan is still alive. “Demise” means “death.”
h) The Nobel Prize as “hardware.” This comes across as a rather cavalier attitude to the Nobel Peace Prize, in a context where you mean that the winners are heroes, to be admired. It would be fine to refer to the Heisman trophy or an Oscar as “hardware,” but it carries the wrong connotation here.</p>
<p>3) Generally, in your final paragraph, you should not introduce a new idea that has not been “proven” by the rest of your essay. I think that your essay does a reasonably good job of showing that celebrities “come and go,” but I don’t think that you have supported the statement that heroes “are forever.”</p>
<p>This last point I think reflects the time limits of the essay. With some practice, you can get accustomed to the time constraints, so that you can balance both halves of a “contrast” type question, and provide sufficient support for your concluding statement. </p>
<p>I don’t have a good handle on the scoring of the writing portion, but I’d estimate this essay as an 8 or 9, and possibly a 10. I’d be surprised if it scored an 11.</p>
<p>i think it goes between 11 & 12
Good Work it’s quite nice and well-handed :)</p>