<p>Prompt: "Technology promises to make our lives easier, freeing up time for leisure pursuits. But the rapid pace of technological innovation and the split second processing capabilities of computers that can work virtually nonstop have made all of us feel rushed. We have adopted the relentless pace of the very machines that were supposed to simplify our lives, with the result that, whether at work or play, people do not feel like their lives have changed for the better." -- Adapted from Karen Finucan, "Life in the Fast Lane"</p>
<h2>Do changes that make our lives easier not necessarily make them better? </h2>
<p>Response:<br>
Our world is constantly undergoing change. Plants and animals engage in an evolutionary arms race to ensure their own survival; the land itself shifts with every earthquake, flood, or storm. We view such abrupt, uncontrollable changes as catastrophic. It is difficult for us to apply the same logic to the equally unpredictable changes wrought by our own hand. Undoubtedly, technological progress has made our lives easier. It has not, however, made our lives better.</p>
<pre><code>Perhaps the largest leap in technology occurred during the 19th century: the Industrial Revolution. Humans saw the fall of cottage industries and the rise of centralised factories. Output soared; luxury goods became more affordable; inventiveness abounded. Despite this great abundance, this great "advance", quality of life remained surprisingly stable. The poor remained poor, and often were displaced and forced into factory work. The growing cities were squalid vectors of disease. Farming, production, and the purchasing of goods were all made easier, but life itself remained largely the same.
John Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath" excellently demonstrates the gap between ease of living and quality of the same. The prevalence of mechanised plows causes many families of the American midwest-- including the central group of the novel, the Joads -- to lose their livelihoods. The tractors are not inherently bad. They, like the factories of the Industrial Revolution, increase productivity and, thus, ease of living. And, like the working classes before them, most midwesternes found their lives to be distinctly worse than they had been prior to the change.
Change is not necessarily a negative force -- but nor, as many people tend to asume, is it by definition a positive one. Technology will progress as sure as a river will flow. Just as a storm can allow for beneficial flooding, changes can certainly allow for improvement in quality of life. It would be foolishness of the highest caliber, though, to rely on these vast and unpredictable changes.
</code></pre>
<hr>
<p>I'm taking the test on Saturday. This is my first practice essay. It took me 30 minutes (ouch!), and I'm curious as to whether I'm on track for a decent score. Any input about my examples, writing style, or essay length would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!</p>