http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/21/opinion/change-the-list-voter-turnout-hawaii/index.html
The article I chose is titled "Hawaii: The state that doesn't vote." As I'm sure you've guessed, it's about Hawaii having the lowest voter turn out and why. It's insanely long, but the author definitely creates a feeling of understanding of, and even agreement with, why Hawaiians are unlikely to vote.
Diction:
Toward the beginning of the article, Sutter uses words like "apathetic" and "bum" to create (or reinforce) the image of the lazy, happy-go-lucky Hawaiian surfer. He attributes the lack of voting to theses qualities in the people, then goes on to tell how he was wrong. Later, when describing the voter turn out of the leeward side of Oahu, he uses the word "desert", which is generally associated with bad. The lack of water translated to the lack of voters, and the extreme heat translated to the extreme dissatisfaction he talked about earlier in the article. At the end of the article, Sutter's description of the non-voters in Hawaii does a 180. Instead of being apathetic bums, he says the voters were "cared" when it came to political issues. A fairly weak word by itself, cared becomes strong and pointed when it's contrasted with apathetic.
Syntax:
Sutter uses a lot of rhetorical questions in this article. One entire paragraph is made up of questions he obviously doesn't expect the reader to answer. He asks, "That's a lot of pressure, right? On the trip, I definitely felt it. Throughout the journey -- and, let's be honest, pretty much life -- I was plagued with doubt: Is our money-hungry, attack-heavy, non-responsive democracy too far gone? Is apathy too entrenched? What if the choice of candidates isn't good enough? Does one cote out of millions actually matter? And isn't surfing more fun than voting, anyway?" Obviously, surfing is more fun than voting. By using this technique, Sutter makes the article more interesting and humorous, which is good considering its length. He also uses short sentences, set off as their own paragraph, for emphasis. For example, "I wasn't sure how I would react" and "She was outrages" easily could have been tagged onto the end of their preceding paragraphs. But by making them their own paragraphs, Sutter makes the reader think about how they would react or feel.
Imagery:
Let's be honest here, not a lot of extremely vivid images are needed to create the desired images of Hawaii. And Sutter clearly understood that. He doesn't go to a lot of trouble to create images of the islands, but it's still possible to see exactly what he wants the reader to see. In fact, he actually completely relies on what you have in your mind when he says, "The Maui where Elle Cochran grew up is exactly like the one you picture in your mind, especially if, like me before this trip, you've seen 'Lilo and Stitch' but never been to Hawaii." And that's all it takes for the reader to picture the sand, the waves, and the sunshine he was them to see. He describes his trip, simply, as a "romp through paradise", which captures the image of Hawaii and the lifestyle there perfectly, without needing to use strong imagery.
To Ms.Holmes:
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure why half of this is highlighted in white so you can't read it... I tried fixing it, but it won't go away. There is writing under there, but you can, unfortunately, only see it if you highlight the text with your cursor. =/ Sorry!
Hey Bri-
ReplyDeleteYour close reading was great. You gave specific quotes, claims, and warrants. I think you explained each quote very well. I liked how you related your experiences with the rhetorical questions that the author posed. My favorite paragraph of yours was the imagery one. Usually, I write about what the author includes, not what he/she doesn't include. I think that paragraph was a unique twist and maybe I will try to do something similar to that in the future. I think the best thing about responding to peer's blogs is that you can see other people's ideas and use them to enhance your own ideas. I don't really have anything to criticize about this blog post. Good job Bri!
Hi, Brianna--Other people have had the same highlighting problem, so I know about the whole read-it-by-selecting-it trick, no worries! =)
ReplyDeleteYou're doing a good job here responding to your earlier peer reviewers' comments about needing more quotes. Keep working on clarity of your warrants--remember that every piece of evidence needs to have a clear explanation of how it proves what you say it proves, and that you need to keep reminding readers of how all of this impacts your overall argument.
Very well written blog post! nothing to really complain about you gave plenty of examples and you clearly stated the opinion of the reader and connected the evidence to it.
ReplyDeleteEmily Mackson
Overall, you did a great job with this post. I think you could have gone deeper with the paragraph about diction, however. Rather than focusing on specific words, tell us what the author is doing through his diction throughout the article.
ReplyDeleteNoah Symanzik