Editorial
This editorial, written by Bob Herbert of the New York Times, takes the stance that the lower class is underrepresented in government. He uses a angry tone which is demonstrated through use of strong diction such as "destroy", "absurd", and "desperate". Herbert describes the poverty in the US as "spreading like a wildfire in a drought". Words and impactful metaphors with bad connotations such as these make the most impact and are successful in supporting his argument.
A tactic the Herbert uses is to make the government seem weak to the reader, without really ever saying so outright. Once he says that the "government officials, from the president on down, are too busy kissing the bejeweled fingers of the megarich" which makes the reader believe that the government is too weak to stand up for itself. Also, he says that a new government official is "obsessed with getting Democrats to be more subservient to business." The word 'subserviant' is not something that the people would like to associate with the government, and thus Herbert is painting a successful picture of a frail government.
Another literary technique that Herbert employs is the use of rhetorical questions. They are placed thoughtfully and help create an urgent feel to his essay. Also, these questions keep the reader actively engaged in the writing because it draws their own mind into it, instead of reading about something that might not relate to them specifically. Another good way of keeping the reader's mind active throughout the essay is Herbert's differing syntax. He mixes short sentences with longer ones and also uses the dash. These provide emphasis on certain opinions and make the essay flow effortlessly.
Herbert relies heavily on statistics to illustrate his message. While his statistics do just that, the amount he uses is a little overwhelming. Numbers do not keep the reader as engaged as words. He could have been more impactful having less statistics, because they begin to lose their harshness very quickly.
All in all, this essay was effective. Because of the strong voice backed up with examples and statistics, Herbert writes appropriately for an AP essay.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Reflective Essay
Essay
This essay, entitled "Me Talk Pretty One Day" is written by David Sedaris and is an excerpt from his book Me Talk Pretty One Day. Sedaris is, among many things, a comedic writer and this essay was completely in-keeping with his award-winning satiric style. He is thoroughly engrossing as he explains the horrors of his French class. The reader can understand perfectly what it was like to be in class with his crazy French teacher, which is a huge accomplishment. Such descriptions as "she crouched low for her attack" are simple ways that Sedaris emphasizes the unique personality. It is effective in making a possibly long description to be simple as well as informative.
A literary device that Sedaris employs is a humorous use of diction. He says that he is having trouble picking up the French language, so when he is quoting his French teacher, he uses gibberish in place of the French words he didn't know. For example, he says, “'Were you always this palicmkrexis?' she asked. 'Even a fiuscrzsa ticiwelmun knows that a typewriter is feminine.'" By using this technique, the reader experiences the same confusion that Sedaris did. This way, we understand more of his story while at the same time providing a humorous subtlety that keeps the interest piqued.
Other than his talented use of comedy to relate a story, Sedaris also uses other techniques to keep the reader's attention. One of the best ways he does this is by varying sentence structures. His sentences do not always begin with "I", but rather some with gerunds or prepositions. This keeps the story flowing and keeps it from becoming monotonous. The flow is kept moving. Also, he shows his talent for writing by using advanced punctuation such as colons, semicolons, and dashes. These are used perfectly and help to emphasize important details and break up the writing, without becoming overbearing.
As an AP Essay, this would work perfectly. His syntax and diction are advanced and well-used so as to add to the meaning of the work. The format is flowing and lively and his light, silly tone keeps the reader interested. Even though his tone is less formal, it does not detract from the story. I am impressed with his ability to create a brilliant picture with little to no unnecessary detail. These are all factors that are important on the AP test, and therefore I believe he would get a top-marking grade.
This essay, entitled "Me Talk Pretty One Day" is written by David Sedaris and is an excerpt from his book Me Talk Pretty One Day. Sedaris is, among many things, a comedic writer and this essay was completely in-keeping with his award-winning satiric style. He is thoroughly engrossing as he explains the horrors of his French class. The reader can understand perfectly what it was like to be in class with his crazy French teacher, which is a huge accomplishment. Such descriptions as "she crouched low for her attack" are simple ways that Sedaris emphasizes the unique personality. It is effective in making a possibly long description to be simple as well as informative.
A literary device that Sedaris employs is a humorous use of diction. He says that he is having trouble picking up the French language, so when he is quoting his French teacher, he uses gibberish in place of the French words he didn't know. For example, he says, “'Were you always this palicmkrexis?' she asked. 'Even a fiuscrzsa ticiwelmun knows that a typewriter is feminine.'" By using this technique, the reader experiences the same confusion that Sedaris did. This way, we understand more of his story while at the same time providing a humorous subtlety that keeps the interest piqued.
Other than his talented use of comedy to relate a story, Sedaris also uses other techniques to keep the reader's attention. One of the best ways he does this is by varying sentence structures. His sentences do not always begin with "I", but rather some with gerunds or prepositions. This keeps the story flowing and keeps it from becoming monotonous. The flow is kept moving. Also, he shows his talent for writing by using advanced punctuation such as colons, semicolons, and dashes. These are used perfectly and help to emphasize important details and break up the writing, without becoming overbearing.
As an AP Essay, this would work perfectly. His syntax and diction are advanced and well-used so as to add to the meaning of the work. The format is flowing and lively and his light, silly tone keeps the reader interested. Even though his tone is less formal, it does not detract from the story. I am impressed with his ability to create a brilliant picture with little to no unnecessary detail. These are all factors that are important on the AP test, and therefore I believe he would get a top-marking grade.
Book Review
Book Review
Brittany Brown's book review of The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins was only semi-informative. Brown spends 4 paragraphs of 8 summarizing the plot instead of stating opinions. A good book review could summarize plot briefly, but I hardly call half of a review brief. However, her main critique of the book is how it is targeted to too young of an age group because of its mature themes. So, I can understand how a summary would emphasize this point, but maybe not one this involved.
Brown had two main critiques about the book: that its themes were too mature for the younger audience and that the editing was not perfect. These were backed up well with evidence which was helpful to the reader. Her praises, though, left some to be desired. She stated more than once that she "couldn't put the book down" and had "one of the most enthralling plots" she had ever read. To me, this is a huge compliment to a piece of literature, but Brown did not elaborate much on them. She focussed much on the "enthralling" plot (how many times can one person use the word 'enthralling?!), but not on much of anything else. Since she had already told us all about the plot in the first half of the essay, I was disappointed to find that she really didn't say anything new.
The author's use of argumentative was juvenile. Her most powerful statements and adjectives were used over and over ("I couldn't put it down" and "enthralling") and eventually they lost their strong meaning. A better tactic would be to use such strong language sparingly and spend more time on explaining them. This way, a reader will better understand each individual claim better and therefore understand the strength the whole message.
Also, I found the formatting of the essay to be quite difficult. She begins with a summary of the main themes, then goes into plot summary, then a critique, then a history of the author, etc... This order is confusing to the reader, which is exactly opposite of the intent of a book review. A book review should be clean and have a clear message. It is helpful that Brown begins and ends her essay with her thesis, but the writing in the middle should be just as easy to follow and informative.
In conclusion, while the reader receives a clear opinion of the literature, Brown could have easily written a cleaner, better fomatted, and more persuasive essay to convince the reader that this book is so fantastic. It is interesting that she critiques Hunger Games for not having better editing, because this is exactly what her essay needs.
Brittany Brown's book review of The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins was only semi-informative. Brown spends 4 paragraphs of 8 summarizing the plot instead of stating opinions. A good book review could summarize plot briefly, but I hardly call half of a review brief. However, her main critique of the book is how it is targeted to too young of an age group because of its mature themes. So, I can understand how a summary would emphasize this point, but maybe not one this involved.
Brown had two main critiques about the book: that its themes were too mature for the younger audience and that the editing was not perfect. These were backed up well with evidence which was helpful to the reader. Her praises, though, left some to be desired. She stated more than once that she "couldn't put the book down" and had "one of the most enthralling plots" she had ever read. To me, this is a huge compliment to a piece of literature, but Brown did not elaborate much on them. She focussed much on the "enthralling" plot (how many times can one person use the word 'enthralling?!), but not on much of anything else. Since she had already told us all about the plot in the first half of the essay, I was disappointed to find that she really didn't say anything new.
The author's use of argumentative was juvenile. Her most powerful statements and adjectives were used over and over ("I couldn't put it down" and "enthralling") and eventually they lost their strong meaning. A better tactic would be to use such strong language sparingly and spend more time on explaining them. This way, a reader will better understand each individual claim better and therefore understand the strength the whole message.
Also, I found the formatting of the essay to be quite difficult. She begins with a summary of the main themes, then goes into plot summary, then a critique, then a history of the author, etc... This order is confusing to the reader, which is exactly opposite of the intent of a book review. A book review should be clean and have a clear message. It is helpful that Brown begins and ends her essay with her thesis, but the writing in the middle should be just as easy to follow and informative.
In conclusion, while the reader receives a clear opinion of the literature, Brown could have easily written a cleaner, better fomatted, and more persuasive essay to convince the reader that this book is so fantastic. It is interesting that she critiques Hunger Games for not having better editing, because this is exactly what her essay needs.
Class notes: 11/13 - 11/17
This week we began watching Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.
Theater of the Absurd: plays stressing the irrational or illogical aspects of life, usually to show that modern life is pointless
- In this play, R&G are constantly confused. Throughout all the seemingly meaningless and random dialogue, there are subtle messages about the meaning of life. The confusion that this places on the audience symbolizes the message of the confusing meaning to life.
Theater of the Absurd: plays stressing the irrational or illogical aspects of life, usually to show that modern life is pointless
- R&G is considered Theater of the Absurd
Class Notes 11/29 - 12/10
During this week, we watched several film versions of Hamlet. I was absent in class for the Branagh version, but the BBC version focussed on the strange relationship between Hamlet and Gertrude and dipicted it as perhaps incestual. The Lawrence version seemed to insinuate that Hamlet was gay. This, and the forum we did on "Shakespeare in the Bush" all emphasized the fact that Shakespeare (and literature in general) is subjective and can be interpreted in many ways. We discussed whether or not it is all universal.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)