I decided to write fiction instead of non-fiction for three reasons. The first reason is that I wanted the characters to have conversations, and it is difficult, if not impossible, to know exactly what the characters said to each other. Even reviewing primary sources such as letters, and essays by the characters, they will have contradictory versions of events. So I did not want to open myself up to criticism for not being accurate.
And back to the writing in general - poor, at best. I couldn 't take the writing seriously, because it seemed choppy and almost conversational, but not a good kind of conversational. Like a conversational with someone that isn 't telling the story well. It was like the author was trying too hard for this book to be fun and light and cute... but it just seemed silly and poorly written. I hate saying things like this, but when it becomes that big of an issue for me I have to point it out.
It seemed that there was too much information. Due to all of this jumping around, there was a lot of unnecessary repetition made within stories that could have been avoided in cutting down sections. Finally, it seemed that Wilkerson was trying to emphasize the migration too much as she mentioned several times throughout the novel that her parents were a part of this historical event. While these are minor weaknesses, they made the receiving of the information difficult to comprehend. This novel is important because it enlightens readers about how modern society was formed and how injustices and inequality were still faced by migrants despite journeying far away from the Jim Crow
Both Lavanya’s article and Ashlie’s article appear to be equally weak as they fail to understand the potential readers, to have an efficient style of writing and to provide credible evidence to substantiate their claims. Although Ashlie’s article is written in vernacular language, readers still find it difficult to understand and relate to it. It’s mainly the changing stands of the writer which confuses the readers. For instance, she initially states, “it comes down to recognizing that our attitude towards food from different cultures can in turn inform our attitude about said cultures”
In the essay it seems the author wanted the audience to stop being so wasteful but on the other hand it seems Eighter is trying to explain the way to live out of dumpsters. In a way both purposes counteract each other. One is saying people need to stop being so wasteful and the other is saying that people are always going to be wasteful so here’s a guide to help you make it.
In short, the author is summoning many facts and statistics to establish a strong logical appeal, but is failing to structurally connect these points, clearly deliver her argument to the audience, or effectively utilize the format of a visual essay to her convenience. This is why I believe that “Apples to Oranges” is ineffective in persuading its intended audience. The first impression that I felt as a reader after reading this essay was confusion. This is largely caused by the ambiguous nature of the infographics.
To be sure, there are some weaknesses in the book. The book is a collection of ideas that the author had jotted down so, the contain in the book are not related to each other which make difficult for the reader to grasp what the author want to say. There is no proper beginning and proper ending in the book which makes the book a bit incomplete. Nevertheless the book provides a valuable and absorbing window into aging. Although, the author discusses more about dependence, disability, loneliness, ageism, it is the thing most of the old people face.
Daisy is a victim of denying what is below the surface. This is seen in many different aspects throughout the novel. By approaching reality in a deeper way, everything will automatically become more complicated in countless ways. Even as readers, we do not know everything there is to know, especially when dealing with Jay Gatsby, but what we do know still manages to be contradicted by the complicated character of Daisy. It is recognizable that Daisy continually denies reality for her own convenience within her individual relationships mainly involving Tom and Gatsby, which deal with Tom’s affair, the situation of Gatsby, the feeling of regret following the realization of her first love, and her past of loving Tom.
Author Veronica Stafford’s article “Texting and Literacy” claims that text messaging is detrimental to education, schoolwork, reading, literacy, as well as personal relationships and social communication. Stafford deduces that “Due to the prevalence of text message communication versus face to face social interactions or phone calls, a considerable number of nonverbal cues are lost and some essential (things) are not being conveyed properly” (Stafford). Additionally, she recognizes that the shorthand form of communication that text messaging not only accommodates but advocates, is hindering students’ capability to form and convey a coherent thought in schoolwork and eventually the workplace or lack thereof, if Stafford’s prediction holds true.
In the textbook Discover Sociology by William J Chambliss and Diana S. Eglitis, they explain in more debt why suicide occurs where it does. In the book Suicide by Emile Durkheim, he explains his theory on suicide. And in the vast list of websites there is more information about suicide and the unhappiness
The Synopsis that I gathered from Haas and Flowers’ “Rhetorical Reading Strategies and the Construction of Meaning” was none the less another interesting read. Experienced readers might come to understand that both reading and writing can be “context-rich, situational, and have constructive acts”. Though a large number of students may find reading and writing more or less to be an exchange of valued or non-valued information. Continuing on, multiple studies that have been conducted have also found that on average 77 percent of experienced readers tend to use content strategies to expand their knowledge of the reading. These strategies usually include vigorous annotations of the reading/writing that have been shown to improve the readers/writers’ comprehension of the material.
While reading is something used in everyday life the author of “Why Literature Matters” ; Dana Gioia discusses that this is not the case for modern young adults. Gioia builds the argument that the amount of reading is declining and such a change will bring negative consequences on American society. To sway the audience the author uses persuasive techniques such as diction, statistics, reports and world to reading
In my spring semester of English 1301, I was required to view reading and writing in a drastically new way. This steep learning curve highlighted my weaknesses as a writer and textual analyst. I have learned a great deal in my time as an English student, however I have much to learn about professional and colligate writing. The work I conducted on brief assignment two showed me that I had to work on understanding the difference between summary and paraphrase.
In the article by Hass and Flower they discuss how important rhetorical reading is in the way we construct meaning. I agree with them I believe it is important to have a better understanding of what you are reading. While I am someone who is guilty of just getting through a reading to paraphrase I do sometimes struggle with reading between the lines. Something Hass and Flower mentioned that I feel is important in this article is how reading is connected with the way we write. Hass and Flower go on to say that experienced readers understand both reading and writing are context-rich, situational, constructive acts and many students see reading and writing as information exchange.(Pg426)Therefore
The “Nothing-to-Hide Argument” Analyzed: In this rhetorical analysis, I will be taking a look at Daniel J. Solove’s essay “The Nothing-to-Hide Argument,” which is about privacy in the context of personal information and government data collection (Solove 734). Solove’s main argument in his essay is that the general public has a narrow perception of what privacy really is. The purpose behind his main argument is to expose the problems with the nothing-to-hide argument while presenting a way to challenge it for his target audience, government officials. Solove’s argument to his target audience is effective through his exemplary use of substance, organization, and style in his essay.