Overall, it is a well written essay, she uses a lot of strong words and emotion to show how it affected her. She shared her own experience which made her very credible and likeable because she wasn't making any of this up. Even though she could have used a lot of facts on how many women are affected, what age group reports the most, where you most likely to be assaulted and more. There are many sources out there for her to use. The essay was easy to follow nothing was confusing, but there were some repeated words and other experiences.
Espino ensured that the session would be informative by not asking any poor or leading questions. Instead, she inquired about events that elicited a narrative response. Most of Anguiano’s testimony relied on her perceptions, interpretations, and judgments of events like the Watts Riots, the War on Poverty, etc. Although it was clear that the women had developeded a relationship based on mutual respect, the listener is left wondering if the dynamics of the relationship would have been different if the narrator did not have Anguiano’s education and leadership skills. How could Espino effectively communicate and build this same trust with a different kind of narrator?
She provides enough personal experience, and critique of herself, to be able to question the others in the field without coming across as rude. She makes her point of the importance of cultural resources and the need for the better relations between archaeologists and the native peoples, in relation to artifacts. She makes the article easy to read, and covers many different point of views. She proves her thesis by providing personal examples of how she has failed other natives, while also providing other examples of shortfalls, such as the possible misuse of Devils Tower, and Zuni War gods sculptures . The article provides enough information to support her thesis, and while the main theme seems to be toward fellow colleagues, she makes the article interesting for the general
The story is written from an omniscient perspective. Almost as if it was an investigative journal because of amount of detail and information given, such as details of Bennet’s family background, his personality traits, his affiliations, etc. The story started with present court case, went back to before Bennet was born, and worked its way, chronologically back to present. This is much like investigative journalism because it is very chronological and specific The story is subjective even though due to Laskas’ background in investigative journalism, we would expect an objective story This could possibly be because she wanted to switch things up and write in a perspective that she is not used to or that she doesn’t do for a living to make it more enjoyable for
In her article,”Hearing the Lost Sounds of Antiquity”, journalist Adrienne LaFrance effectively uses all of the rhetorical elements in order to appeal to her audience in a specific way. LaFrance applies these elements to thoroughly explain the importance of a complicated discovery about recreating lost sounds. Even though this is an informative article, part of Adrienne LaFrance’s purpose is to intrigue readers and convince them that they are reading something worthwhile. LaFrance effectively reaches her intended purpose, mainly by keeping a balance between information and emotion, logos and pathos. LaFrance begins her article with the one sentence paragraph, “History is mostly silent to us now,” in order to draw readers in right away.
Whenever the characters discuss an event unknown to the reader, Panitch provides information through various flashbacks. She has used them in the perfect way, feeding readers information through Lucy’s memories. This writing technique works so well for this book! And, honestly, it was terrifying. I have never read a book written like this, Lucy's memories were what she wanted you to know - the main character was freakily self-aware.
In this snippet it shows Jacoby’s using her own personal event to demonstrate knowledge about the topic, to show that she has first-hand experience with the relating material. The reason why this is a strength it shows the author has a general understanding of the topic as well as debunking critics who may assume that she has no experience in the matter. According to The Longman Reader Ethos “Refers to a writer’s reliability or credibility” (683). This is needed when trying to persuade your audience, because readers will agree with your point of view if they think that you have some sort of credentials on the matter or
When looking at how that was accomplished, it seems that the statement of intent theme, the author sharing their interpretation of or intention for the text with its reader, was used. This is a good idea because it ensures that the reader has a good understanding of the thought that was put into the text and the author’s intentions. It will indeed, guarantee that the reader walks away with an understanding of the purpose. Now the purpose and the process for the paratexts that make up chapter 1 are completely different. In chapter 1, we see letters from various women who are, in a sense, vouching for Eldridge, her friends, acquaintances, and employers write letters.
The effectiveness stems from how briefly Griffin touches on the oppositions stance when it came to a variety of topics discussed in the book. She followed those little tidbits with statements from the autobiographies that essentially drowned out the oppositions claim and would leave a lasting impression that was in line with her way of
Tim LaRocca Persepolis KPA In the book “Persepolis”, the author Marjane Satrapi, uses excellent diction to help the reader obtain knowledge and gain understanding of her main purpose in a specific passage or chapter of the book. Despite her specific word choice, it is challenging for readers to truly understand her main purpose only through literary terms and devices used throughout the book. Therefore, to help increase the readers ability to understand the main purpose of a certain specific passage, Satrapi uses an extensive amount of precise graphic elements. For example, in the passage “Kim Wilde”, Satrapi is able to express her main purpose that when governments tend to restrict the people too much, and become oppressive, the people tend to resist their law and rebel against the law by using the graphic elements of shading and facial expressions to express her purposes in and easier and clearer visual way. Throughout Persepolis, we constantly see use of shading.
Used numerous times throughout Evidence, questions to the reader give way to the style that Shulz uses when presenting her ideas. “Why is something that is so effortless for a person all but impossible for a machine” (365)? Shulz uses the involvement of the reader to actively engage them in her ideas and causes them to think about other possibilities that are often not thought of. Along with questions, Shulz provides many examples of how an old theory is correct, but soon after Shulz will tell the reader how she feels about the theory. Referred to as the “They Say I Say” method, Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein have written a book based on a method that Shulz uses.
Overall her article brought a type of excitement to me as I read it, almost as if it has given me hope for writing, especially with the thought of a five page paper lingering in the back of my mind. Her method, basically says get everything on paper whether you need it or not, then look it over at a later day to analyze it for the information you need. I agree with her point that getting it on paper is important because, “there may be something great in those six pages that you would never have gotten by more rational, grown-up means.” (Lamott). It is obvious that her approach to writing is different from most writers, just by looking at the name of the article it made me realize, she
In The Triumph of the Yell by Deborah Tannen, she does a great job in showing what her information showed and what it mean to her “I am not suggesting that journalists stop asking tough questions necessary to get at the facts, even if those questions may appear challenging. And of course it is the responsibility of the media to represent serious opposition when it exists, and of intellectuals everywhere to explore potential weaknesses in others '