The essay had the structure of comparison/contrast but there is also description/reflection. The author described and reflected on his fiancée’s home surroundings when he went to visit her family while comparing it to his own.
“I felt better when I got out of the car and saw the house: the chipped paint, a cracked window, boards for a walk to the back door. There were rusting cars near the barn. A tractor with a net of spider webs under a mulberry. A field. A bale of barbed wire like children’s scribbling leaning against an empty chicken coop. Carolyn took my hand and pulled me to my future mother-in-law, who was coming out to greet us.” “I saw newspaper piled in corners, dusty cereal boxes and vinegar bottles in corners. The wallpaper was bubbled from rain that had come in from a bad roof. Dust. Dust lay on lamp shades and windowsills.”
Now the comparison was not about the houses but the surroundings and what he observed. The author does not go into details about his home but the comparison is there by the tone of the description as he reflected while he standing outside the car. All the description that he detailed reflected on the life of the poor and not necessarily the life of a Mexican or Japanese. There is a lot more comparison than contrast, most of the comparison he was making was based on poverty and how the author connected poverty to being like Mexicans.
The essay was effective because poverty is worldwide; not solely Mexican. The author’s best friend was an “Okie”, non-Mexican, and it seems like the shared a lot of similarities as well. The boys lived