For Thursday: Skoeppel’s “How To Fall 35,000 Feet and Survive”
(pp.470-474)
Definitions: look up any words you’re not sure of…I might test you in
class on Thursday! J
Answer TWO of the following…
1. Why do you think Koeppel is writing this article, especially since,
as he explains, “the odds of any kind of accident on a commercial flight are
slimmer than slim and…you will likely never have to use this information”
(474-475)? Does it have a purpose beyond humor or morbid fascination?
2. Surviving a free fall at 35,000 feet is a very tricky situation,
and no one totally agrees on how to do it successfully. How does Koeppel use Naysayers in his
conversation to highlight the different theories of surviving?
3. Koeppel does something very unusual in this essay by employing
second person narration: “You’re 6 miles up.
You’re alone. You’re falling”
(471). Why does he do this, and how
might it be important for his essay?
Why, on the other hand, do you think second person is so seldom
used?
4. Having read the essay, do you feel that survival is more a matter
of skill or luck? What do you think
Koeppel thinks, despite the wealth of evidence he offers on both sides? Does he think he can empower us to survive—or
is this essay simply a way of understanding the odds against us?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteperennial - lasting for an indefinitely long time
ReplyDeleteterminal velocity - the velocity at which a falling body moves through a medium, as air, when the force of resistance of the medium is equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the force of gravity
Zen - To figure out something by meditation or by a sudden flash of enlightenment.
banzai - leading to likely or inevitable death; suicidal
tonus - a normal state of continuous slight tension in muscle tissue that facilitates its response to stimulation
subcutaneous - situated or lying under the skin, as tissue
3. I believe that Koeppel used second person narration for a couple of reasons. The main reason he uses it is probably to make it feel like he is talking directly to whoever is reading the article. The other reason is that something like that immediately catches the reader's attention and keeps it. The importance of second person narration in this essay is the fact that it makes the reader, who has probably just boarded a plane, try to relate or identify with what Koeppel is saying. On the other hand; second person narration is probably seldom used in most writing because it is harder to write like you are literally having a conversation because what we speak is different than what we would write. What I mean is we do not use correct grammar when we speak to people, and what we speak can be taken as something else if written like we spoke it.
4. After reading the essay I believe that survival is both skill and luck, but much more luck. I think that Koeppel believes it mostly luck as well. I think because of the different statistics he shows about survivals and the examples he gives us about the few who did survive. Another thing is what he says about 1,000 feet. He says, "... here's some supplemental information -- though be warned that none of it will help you much at this point" (473). I think that it takes skill to get to where you might be lucky enough to survive. I think this essay is mainly to show us the odds if we are ever in the situation, but also to help the know how to have a chance at surviving the situation.
Great definitions--I might ask these in class!
DeleteYes, the 2nd person creates a direct conversation with the reader: it's easy to imagine him talking to us, and also talking to other people (as he consults other sources). We see that some conversations don't offer an easy solution, or any solution at all. We can simply talk about them and try to learn something useful.
Andrew Jordan Nickell
ReplyDeleteQ1: I think he writes it to help people be better prepared for an event such as this. Although surviving a fall from those heights is unlikely, he writes which ways have been proven to raise peoples survival rate. He shows that being surrounded by debris, or simply staying calm can help to improve your survival rate. There also seems to be a darker, more morbid fascination with this essay. He tells the details of horrific injuries and how people are impaled by trees. He also shows statistics that show just how likely you are to die.
Q4: I think it's all luck if you survive. Even if you are somewhat prepared, you can't wish up for a safe place to land, or dream that a bunch of debris will surround you. You are plummeting to your death and if somehow you survive... You've cheated death. I think he believes it is both luck and skill. If you are lucky enough to have a soft place to land and you have the skills to survive, then you are ready to Rock & Roll. I think he is trying to implement to us the abilities to survive. He is showing us almost every way that people have survived. However, he also shows us the statistics of survival rates and they are not that exciting.
Good responses--it is a little morbid, but that's what keeps us reading! The idea that we could survive such a devastating event is amazing, though of course our hope is dashed when we realize that there's no easy recipe for doing so. It's luck, size, time, weight, and mostly where you land.
DeleteHayden Blakemore
ReplyDelete3. I believe that Koeppel inserts us into his essay to make us look at the situation that most people are in, in those moments! It’s very smart and also a good way to keep readers interested and wanting more of the action. The importance behind it is simple: capture the reader’s eye and keep it till the end. Now, for some stories or essays, implementing the reader is very difficult to do and, yes, is seldom used in most. But Koeppel used it at the right time and perfectly enough to, I believe, grab the attention of any reader who might happen across this essay.
4. I feel that surviving a fall like that takes a wee bit of skill, but also all the luck that you can get your hands on. How many times will there be haystacks or water or even a house close by enough to stop some of the force that you’re creating? Not very often, from what I know. But Koeppel still makes a good point by saying, “… You will likely never have to use this information. But as a courtesy to the next passenger, consider leaving your copy of this guide in the seat-back pocket.” Meaning, we may never have to use this information, but the next person in that same seat might.
Great responses--the 2nd person makes us a voice in his conversation, someone listening and eager to respond to all the stories of survival. Even though we might never have to use it, we can still "use" the idea of being aware of the unpredictability of life elsewhere. As with most essays, it's not just about falling from a plane.
DeleteSavannah Lincoln
ReplyDeleteHypoxia- a condition in which the body or part of the body is deprived of adequate oxygen supply.
Plausible- seeming reasonable or probable.
Fuselage- the main body of an aircraft.
Banzai- leading to likely or inevitable death.
Q3.
Because he wants us, the readers, to put ourselves in that situation. But, he only wants us to put ourselves in that situation in certain parts of the essay. In other parts of the essay, he wants us to grasp the information that he's giving us instead of thinking about what we would do, he's telling what others did.
Q4.
I think that survival is more about luck than skill. What are the odds that someone in that situation has actually read this article? I'm sure they're very slim. I think he would like survival to be about luck but I also think he knows that it is luck. He gave the statistics about plane crash survivors and I don't think there's any way you can think survival is about skill after looking at those numbers.
Good definitions--I might use some of those today!
DeleteAlso, great points here: he offers us no real rules or guides to follow, only a conversation that shows that many have survived, but possibly more through luck than skill, or weight/age than abilities.
Karina Tarpey
ReplyDelete3.) I believe Koeppel uses second person narration because it helps us as the reader imagine that it is truly us in the free fall. It takes our imagination in its grasp and doesn't let go until the last sentence. I think that second person narration is seldom used because it makes the essay less formal and professional.
4.) I believe that surviving a free fall is both skill and luck. You need both due to the fact that we, as humans, cannot control everything. We can prepare all we want but the straight fact is, sometimes it comes down to good timing and luck. I believe that Koeppel thinks that skill would serve the free faller a better purpose. I also believe he believes this essay can help prepare us if ever we find ourselves in the unlikely predicament of a free fall, but he also would like to let us know what the odds are against us. We could also look at this as a way to let us know that no matter the odds against us, we can survive.
Good responses; the essay is less formal, but it's point is no less profound. Even though he has no easy answers and is humorous/satirical throughout, the essay makes us think: could we survive? What could happen to us in the course of a given day? Did any of the survivors ever think this would happen to them? The 2nd person makes us them, for a short space, so we can learn from their example.
DeleteQ. 3
ReplyDeleteSecond person essays involves the reader and allows them to see what the writer wants them to see. “You’re 6 miles up. You’re alone. You’re falling” (471). First thing I thought of when I read this was “well I’m dead.” Which is probably what Koeppel wanted me, the reader, to think and in doing so he brought me into his essay. Then he showed a step by step process as to what will happen to me while I’m falling to my death and how to try and survive this fall.
Many writers, however, do not use second person very much. This is so because, second person isn’t appropriate for formal essays and the word you is also very informal and limits the essay to only a few select people. Like this essay limits its readers to those who are riding a plane.
Q.4
There is no skill in surviving a fall unless they survive more then just once or twice. If someone can jump from a plane or survive a crash it’s a matter of luck and good timing/positioning. Unless this person jumps multiple times, then a person can say “He/she has the skill of not dying from a fall of such magnitude.” As for this essay, it helps give someone a chance of survival (more then the basic odds). But let’s be honest, who will fly with goggles after reading this essay? It is nice to know there is still a chance of living even when u are “falling to your death” and maybe this essay has saved one of the few peoples lives since its been published.
Good responses: while 2nd person limits the audience, it still speaks to anyone who has been on a plane or might one day ride one. It also suggests that any of us could find ourselves in a near-death experience and have to make a snap decision. We can't be truly prepared, but we can learn not to take life for granted.
DeleteFaith Armstrong
ReplyDeletePlausible – seeming reasonable
Terminal velocity – the velocity of an the object when the sum of the drag force and buoyancy equals the downward force of gravity
Fuselage – the main body of an aircraft
1. I think that Koeppel is writing this for humor. He starts off making it sound like someone is really falling 35,000 feet and then we later realize that no one actually fell. The statement “the odds of any kind of accident on a commercial flight are slimmer than slim and…you will never have to use this information” (474-475) is something that I took sarcastically. I imagined him saying it in a very sarcastic manner because at the end of that sentence he stated “but as a courtesy to the next passenger, consider leaving your copy of this guide in the seat-back pocket.” (475)
3. I think Koeppel used second person to make the essay more personal for the audience, as he probably expected one person to be reading it at a time. In my opinion, second person is seldom used because essays are normally your thoughts about certain subjects.
Good definitions--I might ask some of these in class!
DeleteYes, this is very humorous and sarcastic; I think he's poking fun at our love of self-help books that promise us success in any situation. You can't really prepare for this, no matter how many books/websites you read. It's largely a matter of luck--and of being a child, I guess!
Caylin Ballard
ReplyDeleteQuestion 3. I think Koeppel uses second person in parts of this story to grab your attention. He starts the story right off using second person, automatically it makes you feel as if you are the person he's talking about. Reading his words, "You're 6 miles up. You're alone. You're falling." made me visually see that in my mind. Second person to me keeps your attention and you focus in on the story more.
Second person is seldom used because its informal. Usually professors and teachers want your writing to be formal. Second person limits your audience as well. However, Koeppel used it in the right manner, by using it he captured your attention to the end.
Question 4. Survival to me is luck. Falling 35,000 feet, and surviving is a serious thing. Someone must be watching over you if you survive that. Plummeting to the ground without any protection whatsoever and surviving is crazy, you might need to be thanking God and start wondering why you are still alive. I personally think Koeppel believes that if managed and studied properly you might have skill to survive, but I think he mainly wrote this essay to understand the odds against us.
Great point--second person limits your audience, but it also makes it really live for that audience. And if he wants to make you think about something extraordinary, he needs our immediately and full attention. But even so, he offers no real answers--just possibilities.
Delete1. Semi protective-having the quality or function of protecting.
ReplyDelete2. Plausible-seeming reasonable or probable.
3. Zen-To figure out something by meditation or by sudden flash of enlighten.
4. Banzai-leading to likely or inevitable death, suicidal.
5. Tonus- normal state of continuous slight tension in the muscle tissue that facilitates its response to stimulation.
Q1: I think Koeppel is writing this because he is trying to tell us anything can happen in life. You never know what to expect or what life will through at you. It’s all about how you handle it and how you better from an experience. It does have purpose beyond humor. I think he was trying to explain that you can go through a lot of situations in life but it’s all about what the outcome will be.
Q4: I think survival and luck. You need survival skills to live through anything you go through. Luck is also important because some people just get lucky and live through things that they shouldn’t have. I think Koeppel thinks it’s about luck. Luck does help a lot of people out in life. This essay is to learn the odds against us. You hear all the time about a plane that goes down but you still travel by air. You just never know what could happen. There is always going to be an odd against you.
Good definitions--I might have asked several of these!
DeleteAlso, as you suggest, the essay does remind us that anything can happen, and even though we can't really prepare for something so outrageous, we can at least be more prepared for what could happen. It reminds us that life might not necessarily be so predictable (the enigma of the ordinary?)
Q3 : I think Koeppel is writing in second person to put the READER deep into thought. He's is doing it to us to make us stop and think, Holy crap!! What would I do? I think him doing this is very clever because once we catch ourselves deep in thought about it, we get more intrigued, and thus continue reading. It is a hook line and sinker, which I find very effective. Notice how he gave us the time. Falling 35,000 feet in 3 minutes. Putting us in that situation, not only plunges our minds into thought about what we would do, but how well we would be able to execute it in 3 minutes.
ReplyDeleteQ4: In my personal opinion I think survival is both. You're stranded in a rainforest, you know how to hunt, you know how to make a bow. However, are you sure the sticks and vines in this area are sturdy enough. Here is an example of needing both skill and luck. Luck in this situation would be finding a sturdy stick, and a strong but flexible vine to make a bowstring. Koeppel is saying, in my perspective, teaching us the odds of survival at this point in time. I believe if me and him sat down at a table and talked about this, we would both come to the conclusion, you might as well free fall with style, have some fun, and enjoy that spectacular view, because more than likely, it will be the last thing you will see.
Ha, great points--dying with style is better than just screaming to your doom. And heck, you might even make it. He doesn't offer us easy answers or really any answers, but he does make us think about the possibilities.
DeleteQ.2
ReplyDeleteI think that once you reach a certain height it is only luck that can dictate if you live or die at that point. There is a limit to what the human bodies can withstand and falling from 35,000 feet in the air most definitely exceeds this limit. I do like how he uses controversy to make good points in his article. Koeppel will explain what one study says and then show that that is not always true because someone else survived in the exact opposite way. This is another reason why I think that living through a fall of this magnitude is left mainly to luck.
Q.3
Using second person narration does an extraordinary job of causing the reader to feel what they are reading. Implementing this type of narration in this particular article is crucial because without it, reading this would not have near the same effect. Koeppel does this to cause us to feel as if we are the ones falling and not just the ones reading about it. Second person narration is not used as much as other because it normally limits the type subject that you can write about, using this in a fantasy novel would not have the same effect as letting the reader know what all characters are thinking and doing rather than just causing them to want to be inside the book themselves.
Great responses--he offers an answer/solution, and then takes it away. It becomes personal, though, since we briefly imagine we are hurtling to our doom (thanks to the 2nd person).
ReplyDeleteAdria Abella Villafranca
ReplyDeletePART 1:
Plummet: to fall or drop straight downward; plunge.
Plunge: to thrust, throw, or force suddenly (into a liquid, hole, condition, etc.).
Plausible: seemingly true, acceptable, etc.
Haystack: a large heap of hay piled up outdoors.
Skewer: to fasten or pierce with or as with skewers.
Zen: to figure out something by meditation or by a sudden flash of enlightenment.
Banzai: leading to likely or inevitable death, suicidal.
PART 2:
3. Koeppel does something very unusual in this essay by employing second person narration: “You’re 6 miles up. You’re alone. You’re falling” (471). Why does he do this, and how might it be important for his essay? Why, on the other hand, do you think second person is so seldom used?
In my conceit, Koeppel employ the second person narration to emphasize the situation. Probably Koeppel want to express the fear that we could feel when we are falling down and want to incommode the reader. This type of narration keep the readers interested. I think that the second person is so seldom used because implement the reader. This kind of narration is difficult to use but Koeppel used it at the right time.
4. Having read the essay, do you feel that survival is more a matter of skill or luck? What do you think Koeppel thinks, despite the wealth of evidence he offers on both sides? Does he think he can empower us to survive—or is this essay simply a way of understanding the odds against us?
In my opinion, there is a balance between luck and skills. If you know how to do something but you haven't the opportunity to do this thing, you couldn't do the action. If you have a fifty per cent of luck and you know how to do it well, you will have a high probability to succeed. This essay is satiric because you have to be so lucky to Fall 35,000 Feet and Survive.
Macy Ellis
ReplyDelete3. I think he uses 2nd person because it makes the reader feel more involved. It makes it more interesting for the reader to assume it could happen to them. If they get worried about a life threatening situation and realize the author is giving tips, even if it is something that happens very seldom, the readers will pay attention.
4. I believe this essay portrays both skill and luck. It requires skill to do the little tricks Koeppel thinks are necessary to survive, and majority of luck because the chances are slim to none that this would happen to us, and even more of a chance that someone could survive it. But, it seems more surreal to us because it has occurred to people in history.
Amber Simpson
ReplyDelete1.) Koeppel is probably writing this article to be humorous. He does give some good points on surviving the 35,000 foot fall, but he goes about it in a sort of funny way. For example, when he says, “Then, if a feet-first entry is inevitable, the most important piece of advice , for reasons both unmentionable and easily understood, is to clench your butt.” Just by the way he says “unmentionable” and “easily understood” followed by “clench your butt,” how can you not kind of giggle? I think he went about this essay to make good survival points to grab readers, but mainly to be humorous. Let’s face it, if you’re falling 35,000 feet, the only thing saving you is God; not these silly tips.
3.) He probably uses second person because it grabs the reader’s attention and makes an impression. It makes them picture themselves in that situation. By doing that, the reader will want to keep reading to see what happens to “them.” Also, by using second person, it makes the reader probably more interested because they are supposedly reading about something affecting their life, rather than someone else’s.
Authors usually don’t use second person in fiction novels probably because the reader is reading the novel to get a story that isn’t real. By putting the reader as the protagonist, it makes the “fiction” they are reading seem more real rather than fake.
Garrett Dimmitt-
ReplyDelete1). Do I think Koeppel wrote this article for any other reason then sheer comedy and peeking the readers curiosity? No, I do not. This is an interesting article but it is very straight forward with its main point. It is pre paring you for an emergency that's is extremely irregular occurrence. Do I think he presents information that raises questions that could shift this article in a different direction? Sure, but I do not think he is doing that on purpose.
3). Keoppel uses second person in this article for one reason, to add interest. In every article, book, or essay you have to have an attention grabber. Stating a sentence in second person although a lot of the times not correct is interesting. IT grabs your attention and puts you in the shoes of the writer. It is not used very much because it is very informal. There are times when it is appropriate to use second person and there are times it is not. In a comical essay would be a good example to use second person. In an article the is only stating facts would not be a good time to use second person. It is all about the type of information you are writing and the type of literature you are writing.