Neat People vs. Sloppy People: How do you respond to her view of neat people?

Home Forums Comparison Neat People vs. Sloppy People: How do you respond to her view of neat people?

This topic contains 24 replies, has 24 voices, and was last updated by  Anonymous 2 years, 7 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #4158

    Anonymous

    Neat People vs. Sloppy People: How do you respond to her view of neat people?

  • #4159

    Anonymous

    I was surprised to read her view of neat people! I think a neat person can be energetic, nice, re-useful, and creative. The process it takes to be neat takes energy, so it is impossible for a neat person to actually be lazy! When she said ” What they want to do is get the whole thing over with so they can sit down and watch the rasslin’ on TV,” shes calling neat people lazy and boring but in reality they think of creative ways to be organized and be the neat person that they are. Neat people often create cool, creative things to store items away and not have to throw as much away and she thinks they do. I believe that neat people are actually more creative than sloppy people because they come up with interesting ways to keep things orderly and neat.

  • #4160

    Anonymous

    I myself am very sloppy, which might make me biased when I say that I agree with Britt’s view of neat people. She clearly supports her view in her essay by comparing them to sloppy people like myself. She uses the organization method of Subject by Subject comparison. Starting with sloppy people, she said “Sloppy people live in Never-Never Land.” I took this to mean that sloppy people have many goals that are never achieved because “they aim too high and wide.” Their sloppiness isn’t due to laziness, it’s due to their overambitious goals and their inability to part with anything that holds even the slightest value. Britt then turned to neat people, assessing them mainly by explaining how they go about doing everyday activities, such as going through mail. They don’t see the sentimental value of things like birthday cards or letters from relatives, so they are thrown away; however, a sloppy person would see the sentimental value and hold on to them. This compassion is what adds to their clutter. Neat people lack this compassion; instead of holding on to sentimental items, they follow their “unvarying principles: Never handle any item twice, and throw everything away.” They take the insensitive point of view and see everything as “just another dust-catcher” while the more compassionate sloppy people see potential in nearly every item that passes through their hands.

    And in response to Christina’s reply, I think that both neat and sloppy people are lazy, but in different manners. Neat people are lazy in the sense that they want everything organized practically and easily accessible because they are too lazy to look for things later, and they get rid of things without much thought because they are too lazy to stop and inspect things for value. Sloppy people are not lazy when it comes to finding value, for they find value in almost everything. Instead, they are lazy when it comes to executing their ideas, which is why they remain sloppy. They have many ideas of how to organize their slop, but they are simply too lazy to follow through on these ideas.

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 8 months ago by  .
  • #4164

    Anonymous

    I was very intrigued by this piece. First off, I was surprised to see her bashing clean people. People are usually bashing slobs because they live in filth and they don’t have a system and it’s not organized and all that. It was quite refreshing to see another point of view, but I couldn’t help but feel a little bad for clean people in this piece. Clean people aren’t malicious, they just have a certain order they like to maintain and they go to certain lengths to ensure their vision is met.
    Secondly, I never would’ve thought that there could be more to being a neat freak or a slob. I never would’ve thought there could be something deeper than “clean people like things clean while slobs don’t care.” Britt writes that “sloppy people carry in their mind’s eye a heavenly vision…that is so perfect, it can’t be achieved in this world or the next,” so she gives more insight into the mind of a slob. It’s not that they don’t want to clean up necessarily, but rather that their plan is so detailed and perfect that it would take forever to achieve. As a relatively sloppy person myself, I can kind of agree with this sentiment. I have a plan, but I don’t have the time to achieve it (or so I like to tell myself). She also writes that “neat people don’t care about process.” Even though I’m not a neat person, I can also agree with that. A clean person doesn’t clean a house because it’s fun or because they want to, they just want it to be a certain way. Whenever I finally decide to organize my closet by color or file away papers where they should go, yes, I am doing it for the results, but I also enjoy the process. I feel like clean people would miss out on this because they’re doing it for the results, not because they want to; it’s more of an obligation.

    • #4183

      Anonymous

      Britt presents a very interesting and novel view on the negative attributes of neat people. Her lack of evidence, and use of judgments and sarcasm, however, weakens her argument. She describes neat people as wasteful and insensitive to family heirlooms and valuable objects. She has no factual evidence of this, however, and cannot generalize all neat people into one category. Actually, neat people are more sensitive to value by cleaning out areas with objects that are not useful and are cluttering the environment. Britt’s sarcasm when she states “neat people will toy with the idea of throwing the children out of the house just to cut down on clutter” weakens her argument by making her claims on neat people seem childish and untrue. Her main argument for sloppy people is that they are creative by putting things off until “someday.” She states “someday they will go through their wardrobes…someday they will file everything on the surface of their desks…” This argument actually supports the opposing side, because people who put things off till a later time are irresponsible and cannot make decisions in the moment. They value short-term satisfaction over long-term by choosing to deal with the mess “someday” instead of helping their future selves by organizing their mess. Britt’s argument would have been stronger if she used more fact-based evidence instead of controversial claims.

      • #4221

        Anonymous

        I agree with what you are saying about how the way the piece is written might not be enough to prove her claims about the personalities of neat people.
        However, when I read the piece, I see that, while she might actually believe that there is a correlation between neatness and certain personality traits, Britt’s main purpose is to entertain more than anything else.
        With that in mind, her use of generalizations and humor/sarcasm actually serves her purpose quite well. For example, her use of overstatements and broad generalizations leads to exaggeration, a tool often used for humorous effect. She praises sloppy people so much that it becomes a step away from mocking. She really doesn’t believe to the extreme she leads the readers to think that “sloppy people carry in their mind’s eye a heavenly vision, a precise plan, that is so stupendous, so perfect, it can’t be achieved in this world or the next” (par. 1). The overstatement in that sentence serves to poke fun at the situation by being over the top. When she says that a neat person is so heartless they would even throw away “the last letter a dying relative ever wrote” (par. 9), she is once again employing exaggeration for humorous effect. Because she is using it to be amusing, rather than persuasive, it does not damage her purpose that she doesn’t use “factual evidence” or examples of this like you mentioned.
        Additionally, her use of jokes such as neat people “throwing the children out” (par. 6) or sitting down to “watch the rasslin’ on TV” (par. 7), don’t actually make her argument seem childish, but rather strengthen her purpose because she is using them to add to the entertaining quality of her piece and making it seem more personable through humor.
        Although there are other ways to interpret the passage, I think that Britt fully recognized what you perceived to be shortcomings in her argument and worked them to her advantage as she aimed to create an engaging and entertaining read.

      • #4270

        Anonymous

        I too agree with you that she needs more evidence in order to turn this from opinion piece to more realistic and factual piece. It would help if she toned down her sarcasm, although I feel as if she doesn’t mind people not taking her piece seriously or as it seeming an opinion piece. She goes into the piece by siding with the messy people, which most people would never dare to do. As children we are taught neat is good and messy is bad. Society as a whole tends to look down on messy people but Britt tries to work around this and convince the reader otherwise. By using subject to subject comparison, sloppy versus neat, Britt makes the one’s society sees as following social norms as really being the unjust ones. She says, “neat people will toy with the idea of thowing the children out of the house just to cut down on the cutter.” which assigns blame to neat people as if they have hurt society. By using negative language such as “wasteful” and “vicious” Britt goes against societies normal thoughts of messy being bad and tries to bring it to a positive aspect. By repeating the word “someday” she shows that sloppy people aren’t making the choice purposely to be messy, but rather are because of their procrastination. She also shows this saying, “sloppy people live in Never-Never Land.” meaning they always set goals to clean or do something but never follow through for some reason or another. I really liked this piece of writing because it showed me a new way of thinking about these two differing and contrasting ways of life. Not only do I not look at messy people negatively, but I don’t look at it as a fault anymore. I can relate to how Britt looks at messy people and see we all have our faults. While some people may think mess people are the one’s that have a problem, one could just as easily argue that neat people are the ones that really do.

  • #4216

    Anonymous

    Britt’s views on neat and sloppy people are interesting, but I do not agree with all of them. First of all she says that neat people are “incredibly wasteful.” I disagree with this. Neat people are not always wasteful. They don’t always “throw everything away,” just to keep their space clean. They simply throw away things that they do not need. Sloppy people sometimes do not realize that they are keeping things that they think they need, when in reality these items don’t have any use to them. The few things that actually do have value can be neatly organized and kept for many years. Sloppiness can cause misplacement of things as well as unsanitary living conditions.

    In a way, I do agree with Britt’s opinion that “neat people are lazier.” They don’t want to deal with cleaning up a whole mess all at once. Neat people would rather do several small cleanings to keep from having to do one giant one. I can see how this is a sort of laziness. I agree with Rory’s thoughts on laziness.

    Also, Britt says that “Neat people never care about process. They like results.” I do not see anything wrong with this. Most of the things that we do are not done because they are enjoyable. Take work for instance. Many people do not get a job because they want to work. They get a job because they want money. The same can be seen in exercise, schooling, and other things as well. There is nothing wrong with only wanting results and not caring about the process.

  • #4218

    Anonymous

    I found Britt’s view of neat people to be misguided and composed of many generalizations. She begins her description of neat people by describing these people as “bums” and “clods at heart”. This is itself a contradiction. One does not refer to a bum as being neat. By using these words Britt alienates a group of people that the reader can assume she does not want to belong to. However, I believe that neat people are neat because they like order and cleanliness. Later on Britt begins her generalizations of neat people. She mentions that “Neat people operate on two unvarying principles: Never handle any item twice, and throw everything away.” These “principles” are very extreme and are not true of a lot of neat people. It is one thing to say that neat people throw away scratch paper, but a throw away everything? This implies that neat people don’t see any intrinsic or emotional value to any item, which just is not true. Finally throughout her section of neat people Britt constantly references “trash”. She says “…throw it in the trash.”, and “Into the trash it goes.” Here she once again gives the extreme generalization that neat people’s solution to all their problems is the trash. This is incorrect. Neat people will move objects to their proper location and not just trash them on a whim. By referring to “trash” so much, Britt seems to be indirectly calling neat people trash. The manner of argumentation employed by Britt does not add to her argument; instead, it alienates a group of people and hurts her credibility through these illogical claims.

  • #4222

    Anonymous

    Suzanne Britt uses many generalizations in the essay to show that people often stereotype and try to place things into categories accordingly. She uses the generalization “the only thing messy in a neat persons house is there trash can” to emphasize the idea that neat people are irrational neat freaks. This is where I disagree with the author. She generalizes neat people into cold hearted thoughtless people whereas neat people actually have more energy and happiness than sloppy people. Neat people take the time to carefully file things away and take the time to make sure they’re safe whereas sloppy people just put a pile of stuff here and there and call it organization and typically forget that it’s even there. The use of generalization is just to stereotype people into categories.

  • #4229

    Anonymous

    I believe Britt is simply trying to defend other sloppy people (I’m assuming she’s sloppy since she’s writing a paper praising them). Sloppy individuals get alot of flack simply because people believe if you’re not neat and organized, you’re a bum that can’t manage to keep their belongings looking nice. Even the word sloppy has a very negative connotation. I don’t feel Britt is trying to bash neat people, I feel she is simply trying to change peoples’ views on sloppy people. Of course she makes many generalizations, but you can’t right a paper on one characteristic without doing so. My family is very neat and organized, but they hold onto many sentimental belongings. In conclusion, I believe Britt is trying to open up the reader to the idea that there is a reason to one’s sloppiness (not just because they’re lazy) and that they are generally good people.

  • #4232

    Anonymous

    Suzanne Britt completely bashes the idea of being neat in her comparison. There are certain points to which I can agree upon however the majority of her claims I do not agree upon. She mentions how neat people “never go through their mail unless they are standing directly over a trash can.” I find this to be relatively accurate because the accumulation of spam mail is worthless trash not worthy of keeping. However along the same line, she states that there is “no sentimental salvaging of birthday cards…” It is to this point at which I disagree with her opinion, as I am a very organized and neat person yet I always save cards that people send me: it’s a thoughtful gesture that they sent it in the first place.

    It is hard to respond to her view as most of her statements are generalizations to the extreme sides of the coin: neat and lazy. More often than not, “sloppy people” and “neat people” share some characteristics. Being sloppy doesn’t necessarily mean being unable “to part with anything” as Britt states. It is possible to have a messy room yet not keep everything in your room; most people aren’t going to keep used Q-tips in their room, as they know it is trash. On the other extreme, neat, Britt generalizes them with two principles, “never handle any item twice, and throw everything away.” This extreme generalization is incredibly incorrect, as neat people tend to look at items twice in order to organize which they will throw away or keep. They have items that they cherish: not everything is trash.

  • #4237

    Anonymous

    I have to agree with everyone who believes that Suzanne Britt is being unfair to neat people. She seems incredibly biased, almost arrogant. It is almost as if she is judging people based on how orderly their houses and their lives are, and bashing neat, organized people, which is generally a good quality to have. She says that neat people “don’t care about process. They like results. What they want to do is get the whole thing over with so they can sit down and watch the rasslin’ on TV”. I disagree with this false claim because it is often not the case; I am relatively neat, but it is because I feel accomplished when I am organized and do not have garbage cluttering my desk. It makes me happier and motivates me to get more work done. Being neat has the opposite effect on me that Britt believes it has on neat people, thus disproving her claim that I am a bum and a clod. I’m sure others can relate to this as well.

    The way Suzanne Britt generalizes neat people and defends sloppy people makes me believe that she is a sloppy person. She says “But while these ambitious plans take clearer and clearer shape in their heads, the books spill from the shelves onto the floor, the clothes pile up in the hamper and closet…”, but isn’t it considered lazy to leave your clothes unattended on the floor of your room? This shows that neat and sloppy people share characteristics, even laziness. I think it is safe to say everyone is lazy from time to time, especially when you have the daunting task of organizing a maelstrom of papers to look forward to.

    I agree with Max when he says that Britt is trying to change peoples views of sloppy people. I know people who are sloppy and still get things done just as efficiently as neat people. It just works for some people. As stated in the essay, sloppy people “save everything, planning someday to file, order, and straighten out the world”. Then sloppy people wish to be neat, to be organized, so that they can accomplish these visions, their “aims high and wide”. That doesn’t make them bums. Are sloppy and neat just two steps after the other in the process of accomplishing goals? Are neat people really sloppy people who have gotten around to starting the process of accomplishing their “visions”?

  • #4241

    Anonymous

    Suzanna Britt has an extremely harsh tone while describing neat people in her essay. I myself, tend to be on the sloppy side, however, there are certain things I have organization with, so I feel as if I do not have a biased outlook on this essay. That being said, her view on sloppy people has some evidence that I find to be inaccurate. She talks about neat people being wasteful by saying, “Neat people place neatness above everything…neat people throw away several toys every time they walk through the den”. I find myself disagreeing with this statement, simply because I never looked at neat people as being neat because they got rid of the majority of the objects they own. I, personally, see neat people as people who can, and actually tend to, own more things, they just happen to have a spot where everything belongs, and all of their items can always be found where they belong. Neat people put everything in place, in a way where it appears as though they don’t own much “junk” or “toys”.

  • #4244

    Anonymous

    Personally, I found her essay very intriguing. I am a very sloppy person and found many of her points of what being a sloppy person means true. I am one of those sloppy people who save stacks of old letters, tickets, souvenirs, and pictures from past memories that I just can’t bear to part with but also cannot find the time to organize it. If I do organize I will do exactly what she stated- sit there for hours reminiscing and just be left with a more organized mess because I will think of something else to do.
    As for her view of neat people being lazy and mean, I can see where she’s coming from and can agree that some people I know that are neat can be very unattached from old memories and throw them out, or are lazy and keep things organized now to avoid having to do it for hours later. She says “A neat person would just bulldoze the desk.” Which I can fully relate to because my mom is extremely organized and there have been multiple occasions where I will come home from work or school and she has thrown out half of my possessions without a second thought. Britt also says “Neat people will toy with the idea of throwing the children out of the house just to cut down on the clutter.” This is another thing my mother would always say to me, that when I move out the house will be as immaculate and organized as a hospital with a 24/7 maid service.
    But, I also know some neat people who are the nicest and most energized people I know. They have so much energy that they will organize or categorize when they are bored or can’t sleep. Some of them value old memories so much that they will spend hours actually finding a nice place to put them, like onto a computer or a scrap book. Showing that neat people aren’t heartless, if anything they have a heart so much bigger that they will find homes for old pictures and notes, unlike the sloppy people who will throw it into a messy pile for eternity.
    I think that her view may apply to some neat people, but be the exact opposite for others. It is all a matter of opinion and person.

  • #4245

    Anonymous

    I agree with a lot of the previous comments about Suzanne Britt’s essay. Though I do not agree with all of her views, I find it refreshing to read an essay where someone’s views were so clearly and easily put across. Usually having to search deeply for the author’s true purpose, (which can be insightful sometimes), I felt relieved when Britt made me so easily understand her views on neat people. ALthough most of her views on neat people were negative and I do not agree with them, what I liked about the essay was the fact that she took a stand at all. Nothing makes me crazier than people who stand for nothing. Even having negative views you have to admit she does come across with strong and valid views. She shows her side and although it may disagree with many, the point is that she was clear and made an obvious point.
    I also feel as though Brit herself may be a sloppy person because of the fact that she praised sloppy people so much. She went straight to their morals and even went so far as to say sloppy people had “a heavenly vision”. She calls them “perfect” and “ambitious” therefore showing her extremely highly held view of people who tend to lean towards the sloppy side of the spectrum. She does this all the while bashing neat people for their preciseness and “especially vicious” mood toward “mail”. This stark contrast especially shows her feelings toward the high and mighty slopp-ies and the low down neat-freaks. Now I can’t tell if this overpraise of sloppy people is intended to be sarcastic or if she really does think disorderly people are hoarding things for “noble reasons”. At first I thought that the extent of praise she gave sloppy people was so great that she almost had to be joking or at least be being a bit sarcastic, but by the end of the piece I conclusively decided she has it out for neat people.

  • #4246

    Anonymous

    I agree with some of her views on neat people. “Neat people don’t care about process. They like results.” This line can be seen as a truth. It makes neat people sound more superficial in a way because they are just looking for the outcome not the substance underneath the results. Besides this comment, the rest of her explanation was quite interesting. She includes irony and strong but somewhat realistic descriptions of neat people. She creates much irony, which makes me think deeply about a neat person’s personality, such as when she stated “Neat people are bums…”. One would not normally think of neat people as such a thing but when you think about the meaning of bum, it could serve another purpose. She doesn’t mean a homeless or unemployed person, she means someone who is not likable or is regarded in a more negative way. It’s also ironic how she mentions that neat people are wasteful. In truth, one would not think neat people to be “incredibly wasteful”. Quite the opposite, one would expect them to be resourceful. People who are neat are also “no good to borrow from”. This clearly gives the impression that they are unreliable and almost unorganized despite actually being neat. She follows up her point by giving examples that give off the feeling that objects belonging to them are too deeply affected by negative results of their neatness to even borrow them.

  • #4249

    Anonymous

    Although Suzanne Britt’s assumptions of neat people ring true for some, the generalizations don’t consider any other reasons as to why they might be neat – they don’t take in account the more prudent reasons for being neat.
    For instance, when she talks about the things neat people throw out, she assumes that they, “Never handle any item twice, and throw everything away” and makes it appear as though they have no feelings for the things they throw out. However, being able to throw away things that can clutter one’s workspace and, in turn, one’s mind is a very valuable skill that will not only keep the worker’s space clean, but it will also free them to do more. A neat person organizes by throwing away the things that aren’t needed, and makes more room for the things that are.
    That being said, there are messy people that, in an odd way, are very organized: their mess is organized. Despite the paradox, it really is possible to maintain a neat mindset, while maintaining a cluttered desk. It’s all a matter of how you view things and what environment you think you’ll work best in.

  • #4252

    Anonymous

    I believe that her view provided a different perspective on what we perceive to be “neat” and “sloppy.” I was a bit confused as to why Britt believed “sloppy” people to be the ironically motivated, driven people she said them to be, especially when she stated “I’ve finally figured out the difference between neat people and sloppy people”, as if it had taken a lot of gathered knowledge to come to this realization.

    The author incorporated personality trait of laziness with the idea of being sloppy or neat. However, I think sloppiness is only showing a side of your character in which one can, for example, write, clean their room,and organize. Laziness is a lack of punctuality for one to complete a certain task. That said, I can agree to the point that Sloppy people can have “a heavenly vision, a precise plan” yet they still are lazy to do it. I think the author would hesitantly agree, too, because she subtly admits that sloppy people don’t complete a job quickly. Neat people, in contrast, are “bums and clods at heart”, but they aren’t lazy, because “they like results”, indicating they like to get things done as soon as they can.

    Therefore, I would disagree with the author’s point of view because it doesn’t describe EVERY “neat” and “sloppy” person. I believe it really depends on the individual and it varies from person to person. No person should be held to this standard of what this author believes. Of course, its her opinion, but i believe it wasn’t well backed up by evidence, making her purpose in the essay come across as somewhat weak.

  • #4253

    Anonymous

    Though I disagree with Britt’s opinion towards neat people, I understand her purpose of writing the essay wasn’t to appeal to every single reader. I disagree with Britt’s opinion because is she basically just trashing neat people (no pun intended) due to the fact that she is more than likely a sloppy person. It’s necessary for me to add that I am, like Britt, a more sloppy person. Unlike Britt, though, I don’t condemn people who aren’t like me as she does in her essay. Why insult neat people for no reason? Why can’t Britt just worry about herself?
    The biggest thing that I disagree with Britt on is that she doesn’t define a neat person the same way I would. She depicts neater people as heartless monsters who “try to decide if [something] has immediate use and, finding none, throw it in the trash.” In contrast, neat people are, in my opinion, organized and have everything in a designated place. Sure, neat people don’t leave sentimental things in piles on their desks, but who’s to say that they don’t have these sentimental items hidden away for safekeeping. My point is that there are so many factors that Britt doesn’t take into consideration. Neat people have neat homes, but that doesn’t mean their homes are empty.

  • #4262

    Anonymous

    I think that the idea that Britt takes at neat people vs sloppy people is almost the opposite of the standard. While sloppy people are usually looked at as lazy and unmotivated, Britt looks at them as people who are trying too much and attempt to do things not doable in this life, as she says. they try to do so much that they never finish a single goal because the goals that they set are too perfect and too vast to complete.
    On the other hand, neat people are normally looked at as very motivated go-getters who are accomplished and always complete their goals. However, Britt looks at them as people who will stop at nothing to accomplish their goals, even if it means throwing out kids. She makes them look cynical and almost over the top with neatness.
    As a sloppy person myself, I can agree with some of the things Britt says, there are times when I try to accomplish too much and I end up failing and accomplishing little to nothing. Though that is not always the case, there are other times when I fit the stereotype and I am simply too lazy to get things done, while that is not always the case, I think both viewpoints are somewhat relevant.
    Overall, I think that Britt takes an interesting viewpoint to sloppy and neat people that is partially true, but not completely true, I think that many viewpoints hold a grain of truth but none make the entire truth.

  • #4264

    Anonymous

    Right away in the first two sentences of this piece, It was oblivious not only the way that Britt feels about sloppy people (favoring them) but also showing her true colors of actually being a sloppy person herself (and a proud one at that) In the first paragraph she states,
    “Neat people are lazier and meaner than sloppy people”
    giving the reader an immediate idea that without sugar coating or using an euphemism, Britt blatantly states that neat people are awful and sloppy people are better inferring that she is sloppy.
    With that, I believe her purpose of writing this piece is because she is a sloppy person (explained above) with past bad experiences with someone who is neat. In the last few paragraphs she goes on about all the flaws of a neat person, for example,

    “Neat people are especially vicious with mail. They never go through their mail unless they are standing directly over a trash can.”

    This very clear image of someone who is a “neat freak” makes me think that maybe she had an incident with someone like a room mate or a spouse who she would watch do this and it once affected her, maybe throwing away an important piece of mail she once needed. Another example where I notice Britt may have had first hand experience thus showing anger in her writing towards neat people is when she states

    “Neat people are no good to borrow from. Neat people buy everything in expensive little single portions. They get their flour and sugar in two pound bags”

    Again, sort of in a way this is being said like this has happened in the past to her before, like she has had first hand expierence with a possible room mate or someone who just HAD to buy a 2 pound of flour when she maybe gave them a coupon for the 1/2 pound bag. I think this is why her response to neat people is so angry and so passionate because she is so fed up with someone who is overly neat.

    I am actually a neat person myself, i like to have everything where i like it and i like to know where everything is, and my best friend is complete opposite, you cannot see her bedroom floor for it is usually covered with clothes food and papers, and it absolutely stresses me out to no extreme and i just want to clean it being the neat type of person i am; so i completely understand why her response on neat people is so extreme because though i dont agree with her in some of her thoughts about neat people, if the tables were turned, i would have endless things to say about sloppy people, im surprised she was able to fit all of what she had to say in the few pages she used.
    To conclude, though i dont nessecaraly agree with all the factors of her description of neat people like “neat people are bums and clods at heart” i find her response and the angry passionate tone perfect for this piece

  • #4266

    Anonymous

    I found this portion of the essay to be very humorous. I believe that through the ironic tone and frequent exaggerations, she is making a humorous and illogical view of neat and organized people in order to justify being a messy person. I thought that the light tone given to this portion of the essay helped to stress the sarcasm that she was trying to portray. Thus I think that her opinion of neat people is not actually the same as the view shown in that section of the essay. I think that she jokingly mocks some of the traits that neat people do in fact display in order to like i said, justify the behavior of messy people.

  • #4278

    Anonymous

    First of all, I would like to say that I found this essay intriguing, yet frustrating. I agree with most people who have responded saying that Britt is unfair in her characterization of neat people. I personally believe that she has a right to her own opinions, but I also would like to add that it is quite judgmental of her to put people into two categories: neat and sloppy.

    It is obvious that Britt favors sloppy people, which would imply that she would categorize herself as someone who is sloppy. However, I think she is just making excuses for not trying to organize herself and I also strongly agree with Taylor that she may have had a bad experience in the past with a neat person like a roommate, close friend, or even family members.

    I would consider myself as a neat person. Maybe that is why I don’t really understand Britt’s views. I really disagreed with her statement, “Neat people place neatness above everything…neat people throw away several toys every time they walk through the den”. Maybe people do throw stuff away, but it could be stuff they simply don’t need or stuff that reminds them of something they don’t like or want to remember.

    Based upon my own experiences and opinions in comparison to Britt’s essay, I can say that I disagree with most of her points because she groups all people into one group and doesn’t consider all the factors that make up a person and their personality. Just because a person is neat, doesn’t mean they are a monster, and just because a person is sloppy doesn’t mean they are better than someone who appreciates organization. Everyone is different and so while she is entitled to her own opinions on this matter, I will say that I strongly disagree with her stance on the subject.

  • #4287

    Anonymous

    I found Britt’s distinct view, established in her essay, very contradictory to typical views. While the majority of people believe that sloppy people are lazy whereas those are neat are considered to be organized and ambitious (or at least that’s what my parents have always told me), in the contrast, Britt negates the obvious trend at the very beginning by stating, “Neat people are lazier and meaner than sloppy people.” I myself am a sloppy person, and I agree with most of the points the author makes when pointing out how sloppy people are not as lazy. I am the type of person who barely throws away anything, keeping everything from ticket stubs to old certificates and even sheets that I have doodled on. However, whenever I try to clean everything up, I just end up with more stacks of papers once again covering my desk. I make goals, but I am unable to accomplish them because I have to much stuff on my list of thins to do. I disagree with the way that Britt portrays neat people because some of the sweetest people I know are indeed neat; in fact, a number of them are pristine about every little thing. And they are not wasteful, they simply have other methods of organizing items that are much more resourceful than making piles.

The forum ‘Comparison’ is closed to new topics and replies.