Hannah Rosin tries to connect to all in “Men Dither While Women Lead in the World”. Although I think that she is being disrespectful throughout this article, she retells Washington’s week in a manner that is understood by many.
By using everyday language she appeals to a greater audience. Her choice in words like “shining” and “macho” demonstrates her want for all to understand the power of women. I support women equality but I think that the words she chose to describe the men were harsh. Obama is trying to fix the issue and of course to news reporters he can only “shake his head and loosen his collar,” he is the person this reflects most on. The women are not as sought out for answers because they are not president and so are not feeling the same pressure.
Rosin’s depiction of men in Washington shows her bitterness towards men as she describes them in an dim light. With descriptions of their faces looking like “... he swallowed a lemon” and “bizarrely smug” it is easy to hate these men who have been running our country for years. Yes, I think that this break in government is stupid and that the men need to get back to work, but I do not think that the image of an egotistical man needs to be shown in a women empowerment work. I think that this imagery would be better used for the description of the women,
Furthermore, throughout this editorial her sentences run long. There are times when one sentence starts and completes a paragraph:
“Oh, and there was one other person smiling in Washington: Christine Lagarde, chief of the International Monetary Fund, who was in the U.S. capital for the organization's annual meeting and who said just about the only sensible thing anyone in town has said all week on the debt ceiling crisis: "I hope that in a few weeks' time, we will look back and say, 'What a waste of time that was.' "”
With syntax like this the reader feels as if Rosin is talking passionately about the situation, which I agree with. I think that the story does need feeling in it and by writing this article with descriptive sentences she does just that.
Rosin’s words and sentence lengths will impact most readers, no matter their education, but I am not a fan of this article. I am not sure why but I get angry reading it, maybe it is the imagery of smug men or the long sentences, but this is not a great editorial. I hope that if she writes another it will be less angry.
Ana,
ReplyDeleteNice job analyzing this opinion piece. I think you began to hit on some good points. However, I think you could have gone further. I agree that the diction used in this piece was fairly basic so as to connect with a large audience. The language used to describe men is indeed negative but I think you could have given some more examples. I think more importantly than some sentences being long is the fact that sentence length was very varied. You provided examples of long sentences but there were also sentences like "For President Barack Obama, this is a daydream." By varying lengths of the sentences the author highlights certain things. Also, next time make sure you address 3 different literary devices used. Overall, you made some great points just keep going deeper with your ideas!
Avery
Ana--From your first piece in September onward, your peer reviewers have consistently mentioned that your written work doesn't reflect your real analytical abilities--that in class you show you can think critically and give great examples and explain your reasoning clearly, but that when asked to do the same thing in writing you don't seem to put forth the same effort. If you'd revised your September pieces and the same problem was evident I'd think maybe there was just a difference between your speaking and writing abilities, but what I'm seeing is just a difference in effort. You know that a well-supported claim has at least three pieces of evidence, but here you give one per claim. You know that a support paragraph begins with a topic sentence, but here I have to back up and really think for a second to figure out where different topics begin and end. Please eliminate first person, use careful organization and thorough support, and thoughtfully explain all of your examples in your November Close Reading post.
ReplyDeleteHi Ana,
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with Avery that you could have done a lot more--because, as Ms. Holmes said, we all know you CAN do a lot more. One thing that will help with Ms. Holmes' suggestion is if you re-think the structure of this particular type of blog post. I'll need to do the same with mine, but basically if we start treating it as a real, thesis-driven essay, then you won't even need to worry about "three pieces of evidence per claim" and "topic sentences come first." It's nice to see you present your ideas as if you were giving a brief overview of what you see in a piece based on a cursory reading in front of the class, but apparently we're supposed to be writing legit essays. Not fun.
Really, though, you do have great ideas! Just get them down, throw them in essay form, and you've got it!
Curtis