We all have heard about the tragic
mass murder in Newtown, Connecticut. A troubled man took his anger out on the
lives of many 6-7 year olds during school, and then himself. A New York
columnist wrote a brief editorial on the subject matter. To help get all of the
vital points across that create his story, he uses language to help relate to
the reader, imagery to make the readers realize how wrong of a thing he did,
and syntax to create a whole different meaning for the readers.
The
author’s use of language makes his article personable and very easy to
understand and relate to. He keeps asking rhetorical questions throughout the
article to help engage the audience and make them pay attention to what is
being said, and in a very setting way that is understandable. When he addresses
how Obama is getting involved in the situation, he brings up a very valid
point. He says “what
about addressing the problem of guns gone completely out of control, a problem
that comes up each time a shooter opens fire on a roomful of people but then
disappears again?” This helps us readers know that he is a normal human being,
and one that doesn’t believe everything will be fixed right away. Things like
that happen, and the killers get all of the fame. As he said, “the more that we
hear about gun control and nothing happens, the less we can believe it will
ever come.” All of these questions and statements help us relate to the author,
because we almost all believe in exactly what he is saying. He isn’t lying in
his article in hopes of promising a bright future that may never come, like
many writers do.
When
we hear about this tragedy, it affects most all of us in a different way. We
don’t know exactly what to imagine. However, in the beginning of this article,
the author opens by saying “what actually matters are the children. What are
their names? What did they dream of becoming? Did they enjoy finger painting?
Or tee ball?” These questions bring us back to our child hood, and they
recreate a picture of ourselves outside playing ball or doing crafts. These
images make us imagine ourselves in the same situation as these children, or
even in the same situation as their parents. “Our hearts are broken for those
parents who found out their children — little more than babies, really — were
wounded or killed, and for those who agonized for hours before taking their
traumatized children home.” This sentence alone makes us feel strongly about
the matter, and it instantly hits us close in the gut.
The
syntax is also strong in this piece and helps create a better build up of
events. In the very opening the author uses a long sentence that describes a
general feeling, then he elaborates by using short and sweet sentences that
state times we have all heard of, very tragic events. The author opens by
saying “each slaughter of innocents seems to get more appalling. A high school.
A college campus. A movie theater. People meeting their congresswoman.” The
short sentences are all that is needed to impact the reader, especially about a
subject matter so serious. After painting a picture in the audiences head about
what these children liked to do, the author begins his next paragraph with
another simple sentence: “All that is now torn away.” By making this statement,
we all feel the same loss that the parents feel, and that is why the syntax
helps make the feeling so strong in the reader.
Hearing
about this event was hard enough, but reading this article helped some of the
reality of it sink in. By being personable through language, by putting
ourselves in the same situation through imagery, and by using short sentences
that contain so much emotion, we are forced to read this article in a less than
hopeful way.
In your 2nd paragraph I think you should extend your analysis more. For example why does the quote "what about addressing the problem of guns gone completely out of control, a problem that comes up each time a shooter opens fire on a roomful of people but then disappears again?” make you feel that the author doesn't believe everything will be fixed right away? Was it a certain part of the quote? I like how you talked about the author relating with readers when he talks about gin control, because that's an issue everyone has an opinion on especially after this shooting. I really like your second paragraph where you talk about the imagery bringing readers back to their own childhood, and that's what can cause a lot of sadness and sympathy towards these kids and their families. In your syntax paragraph what does the long starting sentence mean? How does it impact readers and this piece? How do the short sentences connect? Why are they there? I believe the short sentences are there to make a point, to show how many different shooting there have been recently and that we have to do something about it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Neha that you need to extend your ideas in the second paragraph. I was a bit confused after reading it and I think you should elaborate a bit more on what effect the rhetorical questions have on the paper in general. I feel like that aspect was a bit lacking. I also feel like you did a bit too much talking about the incident in general instead of analyzing the author's use of literary techniques. I thought your second paragraph did a great job at showing how the author used imagery to show that the children were innocent and makes them seem like humans instead of just victims. You showed how the author inserted this imagery to make the reader feel greater sympathy for the children and their families. In your syntax paragraph you said, "the author uses a long sentence that describes a general feeling, then he elaborates by using short and sweet sentences that state times we have all heard of, very tragic events". I think you need to describe what the general feeling the opening describes as I was quite confused as to what you were trying to say. I also think you need to elaborate on HOW the sentence length effects the presentation of the author's ideas. Don't just say that there was different sentence length. Your ideas are good but they need a little more explanation to get the point across. As for you conclusion I think you should speak a little less personally on how the paper effected you but instead focus on the author's effect on the reader. Ms. Holmes told us to avoid speaking in the first person so instead of saying "we are forced to read this article in a less than hopeful way", say "the reader is forced to look upon the shooting in a less than hopeful way due to the author's use of literary techniques". A third person sentence like this would rap up the paper better and would come of a little bit less like your personal opinion. I thought you had great ideas in this paper but you just need to work on the presentation of them a bit more!
ReplyDeleteI agree with the others, going into the details more would be great!! It seemed like you kinda began with the opening paragraph and then jumped to the conclusion. But you chose a great article. I think there was maybe a bit too much in the way of explanation of the tragedy, and not enough on the DIDLS part of the assignment. I think you used your quotes from the article well, though.
ReplyDelete