Excellent posts last week. Loved the words you found in your pieces.
This week try to focus on how the writer involves the reader. Good narrative pieces (this is not to say all of your readings are narrative pieces) engage the reader on some level. How do your writers do it?
16 comments:
In the reading I really liked that he gave historic details about Australia. He gave historic context first and then talked about modern day Australia. When he writes about modern day Australia, the sentences flow together. He uses colons and semicolons to to make his sentences clearer and make everything sound like one point.
Seriously, do you think the owners curled into the fetal position when they saw those raised forefingers before the Vikings-Saints Game... And you don't see the owners stomping out of their stadium suites before the game...
A strategy that many authors use to engage is by using the word "you" as if he/she is talking directly to the reader. Gene W. uses this strategy countless times in each article, making the reader (at least me) think that he is talking to me, and making me thinking about the question he is asking
"TO appreciate how much and how unexpectedly our country can change, look no further than the life and times of Judith Dunnington Peabody, who died on July 25 at 80 in her apartment on Fifth Avenue in New York." -- Frank Rich, Angels In America
The author involves the reader with one word: "our". If he had said "the United States", the reader would not have been alerted to the fact that they were a part of the story. Using "our" says "hey, you should care about this. It is happening in YOUR country, and it can affect YOUR life". This word is especially important because it comes in the very first sentence of the essay, instantly engaging the reader in the topic.
World leaders have flown in first class to the United Nations this week to discuss global poverty over cocktails at the Waldorf Astoria.
This is the first sentence in the entire paragraph. He bluntly starts off with this sentence, which got me thinking how serious poverty is to the U.N. He talks about the goals the UN made for global poverty. It is a funny comment to start off with the article.
"To measure the consistency of the responses of those who believe that Obama might be the Antichrist, we have prepared an extension of the poll. Please answer the following questions 'yes' or 'no'..." - Steve Mirsky, from "Scientific American" in his essay "Presidential Harrisment"
To start, a little background: Mirsky is discussing a poll that was conducted by the independent company Harris Interactive "to gauge the attitude of Americans toward" the president. Based on the very amusing results of this poll (which indicate that some Americans believe Obama to be a socialist, a Muslim, or the Antichrist), Mirsky created an additional set of highly sardonic questions that he asks the reader to answer. This turns out to be a very creative tactic in which to engage the reader in the essay as it requires the reader's participation. Also, by making the new questions very sarcastic and presenting them in a satirical manner, Mirsky can clearly provide his own witty commentary. The employment of this other tactic aids him in further capturing the reader's attention and keeping the reader entertained throughout the essay.
"We need to be careful not to corrode the joy and pride felt by blacks in the triumphs of African-American leaders." - Bob Herbert, "Neglecting the Base"
Here, in this last sentence of an article about Obama and varying responses among black Americans, Herbert uses "we" to engage the reader and identify them as involved. Another tactic that I saw Herbert use to involve the reader, was that he identified himself as a part of the American community, and never as a part of the black American community, in order to make it possible for any reader to be able to relate. Whenever Herbert used the word "we," he was always referred to the overall American community, and I was able to read this article and relate to the issue, even though I do not identify myself as black.
"The last time the phrase “lust in your heart” swept through American politics was in 1976 when Carter admitted to Playboy that, while he had always been faithful to soul (and sole) mate Rosalynn, he had committed adultery in his heart."
Truly Madly Purely Jimmy
MAUREEN DOWD
Published: September 21, 2010
This is the first paragraph in her article, and it immediately pulls the reader in. It is engaging because she makes a dramatic statement, but just so dramatic that it is a slightly mocking tone as well. She already is showing that this is going to be a humorous article. She is making fun of both Jimmy Carter, and, by over dramatizing his "adultery", making fun of those who make a big deal out of it.
"Their moon shot and ours"
Friedman includes his reader by using the word “we” in referring to the United States. He says, “We’re out of balance… We need to be in race with China” to get across his idea that we need to be keeping a worldwide focus and consider the fact that other countries are catching up to us. China, among many other things, has decided to make the production of electric cars one of its top priorities. Friedman gives reason as to why this will benefit China, and Europe is also on board with electric cars. He explains the advantages to not being dependent on oil. He ends by saying, “And you’ll import your electric car from China just like you’re importing your oil from Saudi Arabia.” By emphasizing “you,” Friedman shows that we will be at a disadvantage like we are now if we do not join with China and keep up with the rest of the world’s technology. He mentions the fact that you are importing your oil from Saudi Arabia to remind the reader of the dangers of being reliant on another country for a necessity.
In Brown's article, his title immediately brings the reader in: Can someone simply die of 'old age'?
This attracts many readers becuase the title is posed as a question. He begins his piece: "You know the cartoon where a character is driving an old car that suddenly falls apart, every bolt sprung, with the last hubcap rattling in a circle until it comes to rest?
Some people die like that, too. The trouble is there's not a good name for it. "
This clever picture he's painted in our minds implants fear in our minds about death. Many of his reader are probably middle aged or older, and this article may be relevant to them. He takes a serious topic and puts a comical twist on it to make his audience continue reading.
"Even you subscribe to DirecTV's Sunday Ticket package - paying good money for every game on the NFL menu - you still can't watch the Raiders if they're blacked out."--Bruce Jenkins, "Red Zone adds color to blackout blues"
Bruce Jenkins involves the reader by in the first paragraph using "you". When he uses "you" it makes the reader feel like they are being spoken to instead of using "one" or "him" as the subject. Many people subscribe to DirecTV's Sunday TIcket package and they know how it feels to not be able to see the raiders live on T.V because they did not sell enough tickets. As a result, the reader becomes engaged and drawn into Jenkin's article because they are either enraged or because they understand the feeling that he is describing. Therefore, Bruce Jenkins does an efficient job of connecting and attracting the reader to his writing.
Charles M. Blow starts his latest column with "let me be clear." The immediate mental follow-up to this is to ask, "to whom is he being clear?" Given that he does not introduce an audience, I automatically presume the audience to be me, as does any other reader of the piece. By immediately extending an invitation to the reader, Blow draws them in and gives the column a conversational tone. This is an excellent choice because the rest of the column primarily deals with the third person. Blow discusses the shortcomings of various political strategies, which, although understandable, are not easily identifiable topics for most people. By immediately drawing the reader in and also finishing the piece with pronouns such as "you" and "we," Blow keeps the reader's attention, no matter what the reader's political affiliation or political knowledge.
The article starts with a question: "Surely we don’t need another book to tell us how stupid we are?" Starting with a question draws the reader in and makes him or her want to know more. The "we" in the sentence makes the reader have a sense of connection to the article and to the author. This helps the reader's interest level and makes the reader trust and believe the author. The author also uses quotes and statistics to interest the reader. The author also includes her perspective and opinions which helps the audience connect with the information and come up with their own opinions.
The most obvious way the writer engages his reader is by using second person view. "If you look for mushrooms, maybe you'll see other things, but at least you're looking - and then you find something mushroomlike." It's not so much that Mark Vonnegut is giving me, the reader, instructions as to how look for he proper mushrooms (if the situation ever came up) as much as we were with him during the time when he was looking for mushrooms for himself. Throughout the article, although I've never been in a situation even close to the one he describes, I actually found it very relatable. He makes the whole story seem as if your experiencing with him. (By the way, in case any of you were wondering, in the article Mark is looking for some "sweetbread" mushrooms to help him focus more, but then accidentally eats a type of poisonous mushroom called the "sweating mushroom." Its really funny.)
It’s hard to resist faulting Hillary for her many annoying personal tics (the stagy cackle, the general school-marmy vibe)—and, given that so many Americans perceived George Bush to be the “likable” candidate in 2000, we certainly should try to focus on the issues.
I think that this engages the reader because she uses humor at the beginning of her article which makes the reader want to continue reading. She is talking about is a fairly serious subject so by using humor she makes it so that everyone one can relate to the article even if they are not necessarily into politics.
Most of the time, Kathleen Parker does not really "involve" the reader in her political opinion column. Normally, she makes it clear that she is just presenting her own opinion, and not speaking for all Americans. However, she does a very good job of engaging the reader in her column by changing up her sentence structure and paragraph structure.
For example, in her last column, titled, "Can A President Lead with Woodward Watching?", most of her paragraphs are several sentences long, and her sentences themselves are relatively lengthy as well. To engage the reader more, she also interjects a few paragraphs that are one word long, such as "Brilliant." or "Sad". These sudden changes in sentence/paragraph length capture the attention of the reader -- they are almost like a slap in the face to make sure that the reader is paying attention to what he/she is reading.
(Even though at the beginning of this response, I claimed that Parker did not exactly "involve" the reader, actually, the very first sentence of her most recent column is: Question of the day: Why do presidents give the White House keys to Bob Woodward? Posing a question to the readers certainly does involve them.)
(Still in on time!!!!!)
"So what you need to know is that there is no evidence whatsoever to back these claims. We aren’t suffering from a shortage of needed skills; we’re suffering from a lack of policy resolve."
Krugman uses the "I" and "We" in his writing to directly address the audience and to make a connection with his audience. By implying that the problems are ones that we all share, Krugman gives his article added importance and makes his common sense arguments stronger
Post a Comment