Text 2:
This text is from The Daily Telegraph website. The text is by A. N. Wilson and is named “Is this the end of English literature?” From 20th August, 2007.
He starts out by naming a dozen of old English writers, and asking what they have in common. His answer is, if they lived in Gordon Browns England, and wanted to go out to a club or café, they would not be allowed to do their habit. To smoke! He states that all these old writers got their best and most creative ideas when they were smoking cigarettes, cigars or a pipe. Wilson is appealing to pathos. He is trying to provoke a feeling that if the smoking ban will remain in service, England will lose its once famed literature. He say that he has been racking his brain to find “a single non-smoker among the great English poets or novelists of the 17th,18th, 19th or 20th centuries, without having found any. Maybe except Keats, who had to lay of the pipe after he developed tuberculosis. He thinks that all the old bars and pubs are empty now, because of the ban. The old smokers, still deeply addicted to tobacco will keep smoking till they die, but now they are sitting alone at home in front of the TV with a box of beer, instead of enjoying each other’s friendship at a bar. This ban prohibiting smoking in public areas leaves Wilson with two questions. – Why did the people of England accept a ban on their private pleasures? The other thought is sadder, that along with the smokers, literature will disappear from England.
Text 3:
The 3rd text is by Simon Jenkins, “Another victory for Britain’s insufferable paternalists” a comment from The Guardian website, 15th February, 2006.
Simon Jenkins is very neutral in his appearance in this article. His views on the smoking ban are very ironic. In his opinion the politicians, mainly with the MPs and Illiberal Democrats, are using this to get extra votes. The majority of England’s population is non-smokers, so they will most likely greet this suggestion. His opinion is the government should stay out of private affairs. Like he writes in line 50: “If the people of Rotherdam wish to smoke themselves to death, what business is it of the people in London?”.
2nd question:
Simon Jenkins is using exaggeration and irony much in his article. It gives a feeling that he is “down on the ground” and talking to everybody. He is a non-smoker, but still he feel that the new law is a bit too much. Because as he writes in line 22 – 25, “smoking is unpleasant but reasonable avoidable. Unpleasant too is fuming traffic, noisy neighbors, swearing youths and cruel parents. All may lead to death. We do not ban them, yet…” all of these things can kill you in some way, but as he states, everything in this world can kill you.
3rd question:
In my opinion the smoking bans emerging all over the western world is a good idea. It can’t be denied that smoking every year causes thousands and more thousands deaths. Many of these deaths occur from passive smoking. Personally I also hate to sit in a place where people are smoking, so the small places like pubs, busses, restaurants, etc. are nice to stay in, without passively smoking a pack of cigarettes when eating at a restaurant. What the smokers do in their own homes is their own matter, and shall definitely not be disturbed. Smoking outside doesn’t bother me much either, because the wind will blow the smoke away, or you can step a few meters away from the smoker.
