Sec 4 Language Arts SIA Written Portfolio
Item 3 Draft 2: Revised SRQ Block Test Script
Sec 407 Zhang Yangfan 11-5-08
The writer suggests that it is essential and important for a woman to receive a big diamond ring from her husband-to-be when she is engaged. I disagree with the writer because in marriage, it is our loved one who matters and not the big rock.
Firstly, I disagree with the writer that “it’s the rock, not the thought that counts”. It may be true that an expensive diamond will bring women happiness. It may also more or less prove the heart of her future husband because he is willing to spend “a decent proportion of his hard-darned savings” to please her. However, I believe that a woman chooses to marry a man only because of love and not because the diamond ring offered is big. The writer may be too materialistic to put the value of a big diamond ring above that of her husband-to-be. Although “a big diamond ring is forever”, love based on money is not. In my opinion, a long-lasting marriage is supported by true love and not a big diamond ring. Therefore, I think the love between a man and a woman matters much more than the size of “the rock”.
Moreover, the writer tends to view the diamond ring as a tool to show off when describing it as “an object of envy among her single friends”, “which then leads to feelings of smug superiority”. I disagree with her. Admittedly, it is traditional for a man to offer a diamond ring as a token in an engagement. Love between couples, however, should not become a tool for women to manipulate, in this case, to exchange a big diamond ring of envy. Engagement symbolizes closer relationship between the two. It is not solely a traditional occasion for a woman to receive a diamond ring. A woman should treasure the upcoming commitment and promises behind it more, rather than being bothered by the value of a big diamond too much. Furthermore, though not all diamond rings cost an exorbitant sum of money, it would likely cost a lot if the bride-to-be wants a big beautiful rock. The writer suggests that a man should spend “two months of his salary” on the diamond ring. However, this amount of money may be better channeled to other investments. Therefore, I think a diamond ring may not be an absolute necessity in a modern engagement any more. Other forms of token will be acceptable as long as the gentleman has a true heart. The matter is not about how invaluable the token is.
In addition, the writer views a diamond as “the modern-day equivalent of cattle and land” and concludes that it is a societal practice. Nonetheless, I beg to differ. Cattle and land are practical assets in agriculture. On contrary, the writer may overvalue the practical use of a diamond. In fact, a diamond ring has no practical use at all. It is a liability which only brings short term pleasure to the bride-to-be. Ultimately, it will be replaced by a simple wedding band. Therefore, it may not be fair to view a diamond ring as useful as cattle and land. Purchasing a big diamond ring is not as practical as buying a house or other similar assets.
In conclusion, I disagree with the writer that the rock is the most important thing in an engagement. A big diamond ring should not overtake a true heart. Emotions and values are far more important than money. Marriages should base on love and affection and not the size of diamond rings. A big diamond is forever, but a marriage founded on it is likely not to be.
