Death in Connecticut
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/opinion/death-in-connecticut.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0
In the editorial, Death in Connecticut, the author discusses the Newton, Connecticut elementary school shooting and the push for gun control that accompanies it. The article appeals to pathos from the reader to emphasizes the importance of gun control through its use of emotional details, rhetorical questions, and dramatic word choice.
The topic of the article, an elementary school shooting, lends itself to a method to draw emotion out of the reader, and the author capitalizes on the fact by emphasizing specific details. The children killed are described as "little more than babies". The parents too who "agonized for hours before taking their traumatized children home." These details provide information that allows the reader to step into the shoes of the parents, waiting to hear about their young child. In this way, the author appeals to the sympathies of the readers and perhaps try to turn them towards increasing gun control.
Rhetorical questions are also used throughout the editorial as a method of obtaining the reader's agreement in increasing gun control and the tragedy of the shooting. The beginning of the article asks questions about the children. "What are their names? What did they dream of becoming? Did they enjoy finger painting? Or tee ball?" These give life to the children, making them less statistics and more living, breathing humans, whose lives were tragically cut short. It makes the reader think of them even more as individuals and not simply names or numbers. In this way, the author appeals still more towards the compassion of the readers and makes his points more understandable.
Finally, the word choice used by the author create a sense of the horrors of shootings and the lack of gun control. Words like "torn away" and "traumatized" emphasize the horror and tragedy in the shooting and may plant the seed in the reader's mind that something must be done to prevent more of such horrors from occurring. The stance on continuing the current freedom of gun ownership is debased, describing the Republicans who support that belief as "mired" in their ideology, a word implying stubbornness and entrenched in something distasteful. Equally condemning is the description of an argument that the teachers would be better off if they had guns as "grotesque". The automatic connotation of such a word is disgusting and unpalatable. Such word choice deeply conveys a disgust of the current system and provides support for the author's argument towards gun control.
Through these techniques, the author discusses the tragedy that took place in Newtown, Connecticut and points out society's need for increased gun control in an effort to prevent future shootings. The editorial argues to push readers to support those who want to make the nation a safer place.
Showing posts with label Close Reading Assignment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Close Reading Assignment. Show all posts
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Sunday, November 18, 2012
Close Reading Assignment 3
How to Live Without Irony
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/how-to-live-without-irony/?ref=opinion
In the article "How to Live Without Irony", Christy Wampole discusses the irony that, according to her, is infecting society today. She emphasizes its negative impact through her usage of sophisticated language, detailed examples, and interesting syntax.
From the beginning of the article, Wampole's sophisticated word choice creates a very disconnected and almost scholarly approach to interpreting irony. When she insists that "scoffing at the hipster is only a diluted form of his own affliction. He is merely a symptom and the most extreme manifestation of ironic living", her usage of medical and scientific terminology, seen in the terms "affliction", "symptom", and "diluted", she creates a practical air to her analysis. In the third paragraph, she dissects the etymology of "subterfuge" for the reader, again creating a scholarly and learned tone. Her language further in the article also indicates a more learned tone. By using words such as "postmodern cynicism, detachment and meta-referentiality" to describe the wide-spread ironic atmosphere, Wampole almost scorns the existence of irony through her own sophisticated language. Her wording throughout the article borders on pretentious, of establishing herself above the irony, which she sees as unsophisticated.
Wampole also emphasizes her views on the pervasiveness of irony through the detailed examples she uses. Her examples all relate to our common lives, referencing advertisements and other commonplace items and events we see and experience. She begins the article by describing the "hipster haunting every street corner and university town", bringing to mind images of the people we see every day. Her later example of the advertisements which laugh at themselves also bring up memories. By being relatively open in her description, she allows her audience to select a memory that fits her example, providing a detailed and vivid image. Her example of her own lack of sincerity also stirs up images that are familiar to many people. "A kitschy painting from a thrift store", "a coffee mug with flashy images of 'Texas, the Lone Star State'", and "plastic Mexican wrestler figures" are all easily imaginable gifts that many people may have seen or interacted with at some point. By explicitly describing them, Wampole allows her audience to get a mental picture that provide memories corresponding to her own views. In using detailed and specific examples, Wampole allows the audience to connect to her article, thus allowing them to perceive her points more clearly.
Aspects of syntax also allow for Wampole's point to be expressed more clearly. Her use of rhetorical questions bring to light different issues and questions the audience may have either her argument, which she then uses to explain her views and refute the opposition or elaborate on an unclear point. Later questions also connect the message back to the reader. By asking questions such as "Do I communicate primarily through inside jokes and pop culture?" and "Do I feign indifference?", Wampole asks us to examine our own actions and thereby determine for ourselves how true her statements are. She seems to rely on the expectation that many would find these questions pointing towards their own ironic tendencies, but it seems like a safe assumption and allows her point to be quite a distance. At other points, Wampole uses parallelism to emphasize points in her argument. At one point, she informs us, "Fundamentalists are never ironists; dictators are never ironists; people who move things in the political landscape, regardless of the sides they choose, are never ironists." Her parallelism emphasize the characters of people who aren't ironic, thus providing emphasis on the particular characteristics of both those who are and aren't ironic. Using such syntax, Wampole furthers her points and more deeply ingrains the overall message into her readers.
Through these techniques, Wampole brings to light the pervasiveness of irony in today's society, pointing out its flaws in being so widespread as to be relatively unrecognized as a threat. Her editorial works to bring the overly sarcastic age to an end and convince the audience to start again with sincerity.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Close Reading Assignment
Mr. Romney’s Version of Equal Rights
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/opinion/mr-romneys-version-of-equal-rights.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
In the editorial, Mr. Romney's Version of Equal Rights, the author (assumed to be female) argues that Governor Romney's approach to equality for women is no equality at all. She denounces his attempts to gain more female voters, and by extension, his campaign for the presidency as a whole, by her use of negative diction, specific details, and syntax.
The author's choice of diction provides a negative tone throughout the article. In the first paragraph, she informs the reader that Romney "bumbled his way through a cringe-inducing attempt to graft what he thinks should be 2012 talking points onto his 1952 sensibility." Using the term "bumbled", denoting failure and incompetence, the author paints Romney into the form of a incapable leader, which then causes the reader to question whether Romney is appropriate to be the next president. Her tone continues in the ninth paragraph, where she writes that "started a slow, painful slide into one of the most bizarre comments on this issue we've ever heard," and sarcastically points out that his comment about finding qualified women was said in a way that made it sound "as if it were a herculean task." The words "slow", "painful", and "bizarre" all have a negative connotation that ridicule the governor's comment. The line referring to the "herculean task" furthers the ridicule by comparing Romney's effort to a nearly insurmountable quest, downplaying Romney's attempt to hire women. Through her word choice, the author brings out the ludicrousness of Romney's stance on women and indirectly jabs at his appropriateness for being president as a whole.
The details given in the article also illustrate the author's view of Romney's equality in the rights of women. She points out incongruencies throughout his campaign in the subject of women. In the second paragraph, she mentions his vow in ending Planned Parenthood and his criticism in requiring employers who are not religiously affiliated to provide coverage for contraceptives. She then contrasts that to his statement that he believes all women should have equal access to contraceptives in the next paragraph. Further examples of his actions which contradict his statement were listed below, as the author explicitly points out "how hard it must be for him to remember where he stands at any given moment." Later, she changes the topic to equal opportunity, another subject in which she has given plenty of details which illustrate his inconsistency. She contrasts his opposition of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act with his line about being given "binders full of women" to have as representatives in his cabinet. By showing his inability to decide on a single stance in his policies on women, the author points out his flawed approach and seems to emphasize his failings as a presidential candidate.
The author's formatting of the editorial also highlight the absurdities of Romney's views of women. In paragraph six and seven, the author uses an anaphora, starting both sentences with "perhaps" to give possible explanations for Romney's changing stance on contraceptives. The parallel structure also emphasize the contradictions between the two different explanations, which she hammers home in the next sentence: "But all those possibilities are just reminders of how hard it must be for him to remember where he stands at any given moment." Later, she furthers her point of his views of equality by the usage of questions. He spoke of flexibility for women in their jobs due to their need to take care of their families. She points out several of his unmentioned but well-known stances on other versions of equality through her questioning of "But what if a woman had wanted to go home to study Spanish? Or rebuild an old car? Or spend time with her lesbian partner? Would Mr. Romney have been flexible about that? Or if a man wanted similar treatment?" By asking questions, the author allows the readers themselves to draw conclusions about how Romney would respond, making the thoughts of the reader's own, even if all the conclusions are, as she intends them to be, similar. In the editorial, the syntax also allows the author to convey her point on the problems surrounding Romney's view of women and equality.
Through these techniques, the author overwhelmingly casts a negative light on Romney's views of women and the lack of equality illustrated by his claims. The editorial points out the flaws in his stance and seems to attempt to weaken his qualifications as a strong presidential candidate for this year's election.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/opinion/mr-romneys-version-of-equal-rights.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
In the editorial, Mr. Romney's Version of Equal Rights, the author (assumed to be female) argues that Governor Romney's approach to equality for women is no equality at all. She denounces his attempts to gain more female voters, and by extension, his campaign for the presidency as a whole, by her use of negative diction, specific details, and syntax.
The author's choice of diction provides a negative tone throughout the article. In the first paragraph, she informs the reader that Romney "bumbled his way through a cringe-inducing attempt to graft what he thinks should be 2012 talking points onto his 1952 sensibility." Using the term "bumbled", denoting failure and incompetence, the author paints Romney into the form of a incapable leader, which then causes the reader to question whether Romney is appropriate to be the next president. Her tone continues in the ninth paragraph, where she writes that "started a slow, painful slide into one of the most bizarre comments on this issue we've ever heard," and sarcastically points out that his comment about finding qualified women was said in a way that made it sound "as if it were a herculean task." The words "slow", "painful", and "bizarre" all have a negative connotation that ridicule the governor's comment. The line referring to the "herculean task" furthers the ridicule by comparing Romney's effort to a nearly insurmountable quest, downplaying Romney's attempt to hire women. Through her word choice, the author brings out the ludicrousness of Romney's stance on women and indirectly jabs at his appropriateness for being president as a whole.
The details given in the article also illustrate the author's view of Romney's equality in the rights of women. She points out incongruencies throughout his campaign in the subject of women. In the second paragraph, she mentions his vow in ending Planned Parenthood and his criticism in requiring employers who are not religiously affiliated to provide coverage for contraceptives. She then contrasts that to his statement that he believes all women should have equal access to contraceptives in the next paragraph. Further examples of his actions which contradict his statement were listed below, as the author explicitly points out "how hard it must be for him to remember where he stands at any given moment." Later, she changes the topic to equal opportunity, another subject in which she has given plenty of details which illustrate his inconsistency. She contrasts his opposition of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act with his line about being given "binders full of women" to have as representatives in his cabinet. By showing his inability to decide on a single stance in his policies on women, the author points out his flawed approach and seems to emphasize his failings as a presidential candidate.
The author's formatting of the editorial also highlight the absurdities of Romney's views of women. In paragraph six and seven, the author uses an anaphora, starting both sentences with "perhaps" to give possible explanations for Romney's changing stance on contraceptives. The parallel structure also emphasize the contradictions between the two different explanations, which she hammers home in the next sentence: "But all those possibilities are just reminders of how hard it must be for him to remember where he stands at any given moment." Later, she furthers her point of his views of equality by the usage of questions. He spoke of flexibility for women in their jobs due to their need to take care of their families. She points out several of his unmentioned but well-known stances on other versions of equality through her questioning of "But what if a woman had wanted to go home to study Spanish? Or rebuild an old car? Or spend time with her lesbian partner? Would Mr. Romney have been flexible about that? Or if a man wanted similar treatment?" By asking questions, the author allows the readers themselves to draw conclusions about how Romney would respond, making the thoughts of the reader's own, even if all the conclusions are, as she intends them to be, similar. In the editorial, the syntax also allows the author to convey her point on the problems surrounding Romney's view of women and equality.
Through these techniques, the author overwhelmingly casts a negative light on Romney's views of women and the lack of equality illustrated by his claims. The editorial points out the flaws in his stance and seems to attempt to weaken his qualifications as a strong presidential candidate for this year's election.
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Close Reading Assignment
Shades of gray for SEAL book 'No Easy Day'
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/story/2012-09-17/shades-grey-no-easy-day/57797934/1
In this editorial, the author (whom I will assume to be male in order to avoid using "he or she" everywhere) addresses the book about the killing of Osama bin Laden, No Easy Day. The book is a best-seller, topping the list of USA Today's best-sellers. The article, however, focuses specifically on the controversy publishing the book has caused; he had signed non-disclosure forms to never reveals classified secrets and some believe the publication of the book broke the agreement. The author of the article addresses and emphasizes this ambiguity through different aspects of rhetoric.
As it is written for the average population, much of the diction in the editorial is casual. Phrases such as "kiss-and-tell" are scattered within the text and there is minimal technical jargon. Such an effect allows readers of most backgrounds to understand the writing, without the need for particular training in specific fields. Since the author's purpose is to share his opinion, this makes the job a lot easier by ensuring that the opinion can, at least, be understood. Other words also emphasize the ambiguity in the author's tone, as if he does not want to commit too heavily to a side of the discussion. The words seem skeptical at times, such as the usage of the term "far-fetched", and fair-minded at others, as is evident in the phrase "but other considerations cast the book in a different light." Such wording reminds the reader that there is more than one side to the tale and both need to be considered.
Figurative language also grace the article. From the very beginning, the title alludes to another book whose name is widely known: Shades of Gray. In the editorial itself, however, the usage of the term has been more of an expression, emphasizing the meaning of the title itself rather than the book. There are continued references to color. The situation is claimed to be "anything but black and white" and the article itself ends with the phrase "'shades of gray''. The references help emphasize the popularity of the book No Easy Day, as the beginning of the article states that the book has passed Shades of Gray, which is perhaps infamously widely known, in the USA Today best-seller list. It also provides emphasis on the ambiguity of the situation which can be sensed through other aspects of the author's writing. The use of understatement in the line "Then there's the inconvenient fact that SEAL Team 6 carved itself a unique place in U.S. history, and at great risk" also illustrates the controversy. The weakness of the term "inconvenient" reminds the reader that it is far more than inconvenient, but it does not help arrive at a solution. However, the situation has no easy way of being resolved.
The formation of the sentences continue to illustrate the controversy of the book's publication. The paragraphs that are not used for description or detail are short. This provides a feeling of almost hesitance, as though there is not much definitive to say on any particular topic. Short transition sentences in the article are placed as separate paragraphs, which points them out to the reader. The sentences themselves remind the reader of the ambiguity in how to treat the book's publication and the formatting of these sentences keep them from hiding in the shadows of other sentences. The usage of questions to move forward the writing also helps highlight the controversy. Lines like "So what to do?" explicitly announce the problem with the situation and asks for a solution. They keep the audience's mind focused on the problem at hand and suggest that there may not be a good idea at the moment.
Through its use of rhetoric, the author of the editorial gets his message across clearly in ways other than simply the meaning of the sentences themselves. Aspects of his language, his diction, and his syntax provide emphasis for the controversy of the publication. This article is effective in communicating the gray area that the publication of No Easy Day resides in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)