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? Is it the topic? The language? Something about the style?
15 comments:
For this post, we're going back in time to August 2015, as Mr. Friedman has not yet posted this week's article.
Article: "My Question for the Republican Presidential Debate," Thomas L. Friedman, August 5, 2015, New York Times Op-Ed
Friedman's main method of involving the reader in this and all his other articles is the set of pronouns he uses to refer to the country as a whole. While many political writers might use "the United States" or "the nation" to refer to the country and all its citizens collectively, Friedman uses "we." This is demonstrated several times throughout the article; for example he concludes with the sentence "We're paying a huge price for the way the Tea Party has marginalized the center-right." By using "we" and "our," Friedman blatantly includes the reader in his writing. He reinforces the idea that political decisions made now will affect all of us – his readers and other American citizens – in the future. I think his ultimate objective in his column is to raise awareness of domestic and foreign political developments in order to prompt discontent and action among average citizens, since he understands that this is the only way to truly make a difference in the function of the country.
In addition to his pronouns, Friedman also makes sure to use a diverse set of issues when he talks about the stances of the Tea Party and the far right. By referring to their positions on immigration, climate change, gay marriage, taxation, and the role of government, Friedman increases the likelihood that he draws a reader in by mentioning something he or she cares about.
Article: "Hillary Clinton's Opportunist Solution!" by David Brooks, October 9, 2015, New York Times Op-Ed
In this piece, I think Brooks does an excellent job of engaging the reader by inserting a dry sense of humor in a few places throughout. For instance, when describing Clinton's volatility with regards to what she supports, Brooks included a casual comparison intended to make the reader chuckle: "When she announced her opposition to Judy Woodruff on the “PBS NewsHour” she was performing a flip-flop of the sort that leaves gymnasts gaping and applauding." This approach is also apparent earlier in the article: "She’ll say what she needs to say now to become Bernie Sanders in a pantsuit (wait, Bernie Sanders already wears a pantsuit!)." Especially given the serious nature of the presidential elections, I think Brooks does a great job of engaging the reader throughout this piece by inserting small lines of humor here and there. This makes for an overall more causal, personable, accessible and enjoyable article to read.
Article: "Boxer Wladimir Klitschko is a heavyweight deep thinker" (October 14 2015)
As I have stated many times before, Dwyre's column is full of straightforward sports stories, therefore it is the content that engages the reader for the most part. In this piece in particular, however, Dwyre uses a lot of dialogue from the boxer during a press conference. By doing this, the reader is able to get a better perspective of the boxer. Dialogue, alone, attracts the reader and engages them further. It provides them with more background and information coming straight from the source.
Professional Wrestling Has Been Ruined By Ego and Bureaucracy
MY COMMENT DELETED I JUST WROTE THE BEST COMMENT EVER
Here goes round two.
Nolan write mostly personal pieces and opinion pieces. In his personal piece about his mother, the topic is very relatable to his demographic. His demographic is Vice readers, who tend to like slightly odd material. He writes about deeply personal things and makes them slightly humorous and very feel-able. In his article about wrestling, his goal is more to paint an opinion and formulate an argument that his readers will agree with. He does this very well by choosing topics that come out of left field and that shock the reader. Reading his articles is slightly like reading his diary that he only updates every once in a while: we get snapshots of different times of his life and different opinions he has. Nolan's writing is relatable because he is a slightly below average guy and so are most of us.
Article: Joe Queenan’s Dream Forecast: Different Weathermen
Subtitle: After a season of wrong forecasts, recommendations for changes
The best aspect of Joe Queenan's writing is the way he uses humor. Queenan's articles are essentially rants about whichever topic he chooses, but he always chooses a topic that most people can relate to (like the tendency of some people to be late or the fact that weathermen always seem to be wrong). He also has a conversational writing style; he uses fancy words but always addresses the audience with questions or uses the pronoun "we" to group himself with the rest of the common people. There was a sentence that I really liked from this article, where he was essentially arguing that we should fire all the weathermen because they keep predicting the weather incorrectly.
The sentence: "Whether it’s developing the atomic bomb or whipping inflation or stopping Paris Hilton’s acting career dead in its tracks, this country can turn things around in a hurry when it puts its mind to it."
Article: Will Hillary Clinton Be Pilloried by the Benghazi Scandal? by Maureen Dowd
Dowd engages her readers by keeping her articles topical and interesting. Dowd brings her own opinions into the article fairly and without being polarizing. In this article, Dowd balances criticisms of the Benghazi committee with legitimate concerns about how Hillary handled the situation. This (mostly) balanced view invites all types of readers. In addition, Dowd poses questions throughout the article, which causes the reader to think and often comment on the article itself.
Article: "Drake appears as Oprah and other stars in Energy video"
(July 10 2015)
The experience of coming up with a concept and producing a music video can be an action that is hard for the average ready to relate to. Bakre tries his hardest in the piece to involve the reader in the experience. When questioning the unrealistic shape-shifting makeup in the music video, he poses these two questions: “But maybe that was the point, right? Perhaps the haterz can’t see Drizzy?” Once again, this author uses interrogative sentence to his advantage. In this article, he doesn’t answer the questions in the article, but leaves it up to the reader. The goofy questions he presents makes the content of the article much more tangible for the reader.
Article: "49ers' victory over Ravens brings confidence, momentum" by Paul Gutierrez
In this article Gutierrez does a great job of keeping the reader's attention. As he describes the niners' lucky breaks due to a result of the Ravens's mistakes. The seemingly endless list containing the niners's luck is crammed into a dense one paragraph sentence. This intentional run-on engages the reader forcing him or her to fully grasp the great extent of the luck the niners's were afforded. This sentence flows smoothly and causes the reader's pace to increase as he or she searches for the end of the sentence, but continues to stumble upon more examples.
Article: "In defense of tipping" by Richard Cohen
Cohen uses personal anecdotes to be relatable to the reader. He immediately tries to bring you to his side, using humor and common "American" subjects. He states that every American has experience with the subject of tipping not only because we eat at restaurants, but because everyone has apparently worked as a waiter at one point or another. At one point he addresses the reader directly, using the phrase "I grant you" to acknowledge a problems with tipping that we all have encounter. Cohen attempts to make the article personal by using generalizations that we can't disagree with.
Article: The Misunderstood Maurice Pialat by Richard Brody for The New Yorker, 10.16.15
I suppose it’s true that most columnists/regular writers write for an audience, but for some reason Richard Brody’s film reviews and analyses seem more reader driven than others. This isn’t specific to “The Misunderstood Maurice Pialat,” but the fact that I actually had no knowledge of Pialat’s films and came away knowing more than just a general overview of the director’s work shows the Brody knows what his job really is. As a film critic, his duty is to break down pieces for his readers so that they don’t have to. Everything he’s doing is an explanation of something, convincing his audience to go see a film or to stay home because it’s not worth it.
The easy part of Brody’s job is his audience; he’s writing for people who enjoy film and want to be talked to or written to about it. It’s a perfect one-way street that Brody has set up with his readers.
Article: "Two geeky charts show why we have no clue how much snow will fall in Washington this winter" by Jason Samenow
The title in itself engages the reader, especially shown in the language. For example, the word "geeky" is not a very professional word to use in journalism, so this shows a casual tone, welcoming the reader. This is also shown in the pronoun "we." The term "we" refers to both the journalist and the audience, which further invites the reader to read on.
Article: Anyone can be a white supremacist. Just ask Raven-Symoné by Steven W Thrasher
In this article the author engages the reader through his choice of topic. By choosing race, the author picks a topic filled in which there is a lot of controversy and many different opinions. This hot issue keeps the reader engaged especially if they have a particular opinion on the subject. Also he has a current issue/social media tie in that further connects the reader to the piece.
Article: Why We Shouldn't Hate Hipsters
I always just kind of assumed that I loved Caitlin Moran's work because of how transparent, bunt, witty, shicking, and humorous she was, but this week I believe that I realized why I truly love reading her work. Being from the UK originally and living in London currently, Moran has adopted a voice and tone that feels extremely British to me. Not posh British or "chav" British, but rather a specific type of straight-forward humor that I've only heard in London. I believe this makes me extremely involved and engaged because I always feel as if I have insider knowledge, or that I am right there with her hearing her speak this lines. Even though I only lived there for three years and I would never identify as British, there is something extremely comforting about being in the presence of that tone. This became apparent to me when reading this article because she begins it by explaining a protest that had occurred at a cereal café in shoreditch. Instantly I knew the place that she was speaking about and felt very connected to the article because I had eaten their over-priced American cereal a few times. That café was actually the only reason my friends and I began going to shoreditch, which we fell in love with de to how you could really sense it was up and coming. I realize that I've diverged a little from the question but what I am trying to say is that, while her tone and humor make me enjoy her pieces, it's that comfort of feeling as if I'm connected to her that keeps me coming back for more.
Article: "Rupert Murdoch Is Deviant Scum"
Taibbi's pieces are so enjoyable to read because of the familiarity he conveys in his work. He uses mostly casual tones and writes about subjects in a way that makes the reader feel like a friend having a conversation with him (as long as you agree with his points). He insults people a lot, usually Republicans, which most people would not do around a stranger. This can have two effects. Either the audience agrees with Taibbi in his insults and feels like they've been made part of a group with him, like they're his buddy that he's sharing a joke with, and this makes Taibbi's pieces feel familiar. On the other hand, if the audience is offended by Taibbi's points, they would view him as an unlikable jerk. It just depends on the reader's feelings towards the purpose of Taibbi's article.
Article: "Phone in sick: it's a small act of rebellion against wage slavery"
Suzanne Moore has a distinct sarcastic tone in all of her writing. If I were to perfectly describe what I think she'd be like in real life, it would be a Sex & the City-esc character dishing to you about the latest political gossip with a glass of red wine and Norah Jones. Her topics are usually easy to relate to for the young or generally angsty reader, and her tone emphasizes casualty which can make tough subjects into easy reads. Overall, her essays are more of a conversation, like a long spiel that she's just waiting for you to respond on in the end-- not unlike I'm doing here.
Post a Comment