Read it here!
Frank Bruni's article "One Country's Big Gay Leap" talks about the legalization of same-sex marriage in Portugal, other countries that have legalized same-sex marriage, and why or why not countries are able to do so. He uses diction and detail to create for the reader an idea of what is happening in Portugal and to enforce the idea that the United States should follow in Portugal's footsteps.
Throughout the piece, Bruni uses interesting choices in diction to give an accurate idea of the state of affairs in Portugal and the other countries which have recently legalized gay marriage. He uses certain sensory words in places where they are not commonly found. For example, he writes that he had a "potent case of Portugal envy". The use of the word "potent" is an interesting choice because it is usually used to describe a stong, powerful smell and is instead used to describe envy, a feeling. The use of this word enhances Bruni's envy, making it seem like something palpable and not just an abstract emotion. Of course, his envy is of the great strides Portugal has made toward equality, that the United States has not. He does this in other places to create a stong sense of the positive atmosphere about same-sex marriage in Portugal.
His use of detail is also important in giving the reader an idea of what is going on in Portugal. He begins the essay with a detail about Brenda Frota Johnson and Isabel Advirta, whose family seems to accept their relationship now that they are officially married. Other details like this, including a similar one about Sara and Rita Martinho, demonstrate the positive ways in which the legalization of gay marriage has affected Portugal and its citizens.
By using detail and diction to show just how good the legalization of same-sex marriage has been for Portugal and the other countries that have recently passed similar legislation, Bruni argues that America should do the same. While he acknowledges the differences between our country and theirs, he asks whether it "might be possible for President Obama... to take a lead on the issue" and that he might find out "that it wouldn't make or break him".
Showing posts with label close reading. Show all posts
Showing posts with label close reading. Show all posts
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Close Reading #4 - "And Now... Professor Gingrich" by Frank Bruni
Read it Here!
As the 2012 election draws nearer, the race for Republican nomination is as crazy as ever. In his article for the New York Times, Frank Bruni, discusses Newt Gingrich's recent ascent to the position of front-runner. Bruni's use of diction and detail make it clear that he is not a Gingrich supporter and doesn't take any of the Republican candidates seriously.
He uses diction brilliantly, picking words like "yahoos" to describe the Republican candidates, making it clear that he doesn't support any of them. He goes on to say that Republicans have tended to shy away from any sort of intelligence and intellectualism. He says that even the "less ridiculous" republicans in the recent elections have played "hide-the-degree", never mentioning their impressive backgrounds at Yale, Harvard, and the like. That's why he says that Gingrich's rise to the top is the "strangest". Suddenly, it seems Republicans are willing to overlook his "braininess" and his "ostentatious know-it-all" nature. He uses other negative words to describe Gingrich, making it clear he doesn't support this sudden rise in the polls. Words such as "pomposity" and "flamboyant" make Gingrich seem arrogant and words like "magically" and "abracadabra" make him seem silly.
Bruni's details also make the Republican party seem ridiculous. After calling the candidates "yahoos", he goes on to describe the recent flubs made in the last week. He highlights Bachmann's idea that we had an embassy in Iran and Perry's "delusion" that the voting age is 21, not 18. Details involving Gingrich's arrogance and pomposity are also effective in making the audience see that Bruni is not a Gingrich supporter. He includes many quotes by the candidate that highlight his "knowledge-flaunting", comparing him to the beans one would pick at a salad bar when there is no "baby shrimp" or "chicken strips". These details combined with the diction used by Bruni make it clear to the audience that he does not like Gingrich nor does he take any of this election's Republican candidates seriously.
As the 2012 election draws nearer, the race for Republican nomination is as crazy as ever. In his article for the New York Times, Frank Bruni, discusses Newt Gingrich's recent ascent to the position of front-runner. Bruni's use of diction and detail make it clear that he is not a Gingrich supporter and doesn't take any of the Republican candidates seriously.
He uses diction brilliantly, picking words like "yahoos" to describe the Republican candidates, making it clear that he doesn't support any of them. He goes on to say that Republicans have tended to shy away from any sort of intelligence and intellectualism. He says that even the "less ridiculous" republicans in the recent elections have played "hide-the-degree", never mentioning their impressive backgrounds at Yale, Harvard, and the like. That's why he says that Gingrich's rise to the top is the "strangest". Suddenly, it seems Republicans are willing to overlook his "braininess" and his "ostentatious know-it-all" nature. He uses other negative words to describe Gingrich, making it clear he doesn't support this sudden rise in the polls. Words such as "pomposity" and "flamboyant" make Gingrich seem arrogant and words like "magically" and "abracadabra" make him seem silly.
Bruni's details also make the Republican party seem ridiculous. After calling the candidates "yahoos", he goes on to describe the recent flubs made in the last week. He highlights Bachmann's idea that we had an embassy in Iran and Perry's "delusion" that the voting age is 21, not 18. Details involving Gingrich's arrogance and pomposity are also effective in making the audience see that Bruni is not a Gingrich supporter. He includes many quotes by the candidate that highlight his "knowledge-flaunting", comparing him to the beans one would pick at a salad bar when there is no "baby shrimp" or "chicken strips". These details combined with the diction used by Bruni make it clear to the audience that he does not like Gingrich nor does he take any of this election's Republican candidates seriously.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Close Reading #3 - "Letting Go" by David Sedaris
Read it here!
David Sedaris's article "Letting Go" is all about giving up smoking, or, as a German woman he once met put it, "finishing" with smoking. Sedaris is all about the comedy so his anti-smoking message was pretty subtle but his use of certain techniques definitely created one.
His diction and detail created conflicting views of smoking, while he uses syntax everywhere for comedic affect. An example of his use of syntax is when he places the funniest part, or the punch line, at the end of the sentence. For example, he writes "... I went to the world's first elementary school, one where we wrote on cave walls and hunted our lunch with cubs." His use of diction and details demonstrate his feelings on smoking, some positive and some negative. He starts out by using words that contribute to good idea of cigarettes, calling them "wonderful" and a "godsend". He also talks about the bonding that takes place between fellow smokers. Cigarettes, he says, act as a "beacon" that "somehow bring [them] together", calling other smokers "[his] team". Other diction used later and vivid details show the flip side of smoking, the side that ultimately won the argument in Sedaris's mind. He describes the effects of smoking, first on his uncle and later, his mother. His Uncle Dick had a "mucky" cough that was "painful sounding" and ultimately led to his death due to lung cancer. Later, his mother developed the same cough. He said that she would have to stop "every fifth step or so, while she wheezed and sputtered and pounded her chest with her fist" because the smoking had so damaged her lungs. She also died to lung cancer. By ending with these details and diction choices, Sedaris gives them the most weight, much the same way he puts the funniest part of the sentence at the end for maximum impact. He ends the essay with the day he quit smoking, following up the negative sides of smoking, subtly sending his audience an anti-smoking message.
David Sedaris's article "Letting Go" is all about giving up smoking, or, as a German woman he once met put it, "finishing" with smoking. Sedaris is all about the comedy so his anti-smoking message was pretty subtle but his use of certain techniques definitely created one.
His diction and detail created conflicting views of smoking, while he uses syntax everywhere for comedic affect. An example of his use of syntax is when he places the funniest part, or the punch line, at the end of the sentence. For example, he writes "... I went to the world's first elementary school, one where we wrote on cave walls and hunted our lunch with cubs." His use of diction and details demonstrate his feelings on smoking, some positive and some negative. He starts out by using words that contribute to good idea of cigarettes, calling them "wonderful" and a "godsend". He also talks about the bonding that takes place between fellow smokers. Cigarettes, he says, act as a "beacon" that "somehow bring [them] together", calling other smokers "[his] team". Other diction used later and vivid details show the flip side of smoking, the side that ultimately won the argument in Sedaris's mind. He describes the effects of smoking, first on his uncle and later, his mother. His Uncle Dick had a "mucky" cough that was "painful sounding" and ultimately led to his death due to lung cancer. Later, his mother developed the same cough. He said that she would have to stop "every fifth step or so, while she wheezed and sputtered and pounded her chest with her fist" because the smoking had so damaged her lungs. She also died to lung cancer. By ending with these details and diction choices, Sedaris gives them the most weight, much the same way he puts the funniest part of the sentence at the end for maximum impact. He ends the essay with the day he quit smoking, following up the negative sides of smoking, subtly sending his audience an anti-smoking message.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Close Reading #2 - "One Country's Big Gay Leap" by Frank Bruni
Read it here!
Frank Bruni's article "One Country's Big Gay Leap" talks about the legalization of same-sex marriage in Portugal, other countries that have legalized same-sex marriage, and why or why not countries are able to do so. He uses diction and detail to create for the reader an idea of what is happening in Portugal and to enforce the idea that the United States should follow in Portugal's footsteps.
Throughout the piece, Bruni uses interesting choices in diction to give an accurate idea of the state of affairs in Portugal and the other countries which have recently legalized gay marriage. He uses certain sensory words in places where they are not commonly found. For example, he writes that he had a "potent case of Portugal envy". The use of the word "potent" is an interesting choice because it is usually used to describe a stong, powerful smell and is instead used to describe envy, a feeling. The use of this word enhances Bruni's envy, making it seem like something palpable and not just an abstract emotion. Of course, his envy is of the great strides Portugal has made toward equality, that the United States has not. He does this in other places to create a stong sense of the positive atmosphere about same-sex marriage in Portugal.
His use of detail is also important in giving the reader an idea of what is going on in Portugal. He begins the essay with a detail about Brenda Frota Johnson and Isabel Advirta, whose family seems to accept their relationship now that they are officially married. Other details like this, including a similar one about Sara and Rita Martinho, demonstrate the positive ways in which the legalization of gay marriage has affected Portugal and its citizens.
By using detail and diction to show just how good the legalization of same-sex marriage has been for Portugal and the other countries that have recently passed similar legislation, Bruni argues that America should do the same. While he acknowledges the differences between our country and theirs, he asks whether it "might be possible for President Obama... to take a lead on the issue" and that he might find out "that it wouldn't make or break him".
Frank Bruni's article "One Country's Big Gay Leap" talks about the legalization of same-sex marriage in Portugal, other countries that have legalized same-sex marriage, and why or why not countries are able to do so. He uses diction and detail to create for the reader an idea of what is happening in Portugal and to enforce the idea that the United States should follow in Portugal's footsteps.
Throughout the piece, Bruni uses interesting choices in diction to give an accurate idea of the state of affairs in Portugal and the other countries which have recently legalized gay marriage. He uses certain sensory words in places where they are not commonly found. For example, he writes that he had a "potent case of Portugal envy". The use of the word "potent" is an interesting choice because it is usually used to describe a stong, powerful smell and is instead used to describe envy, a feeling. The use of this word enhances Bruni's envy, making it seem like something palpable and not just an abstract emotion. Of course, his envy is of the great strides Portugal has made toward equality, that the United States has not. He does this in other places to create a stong sense of the positive atmosphere about same-sex marriage in Portugal.
His use of detail is also important in giving the reader an idea of what is going on in Portugal. He begins the essay with a detail about Brenda Frota Johnson and Isabel Advirta, whose family seems to accept their relationship now that they are officially married. Other details like this, including a similar one about Sara and Rita Martinho, demonstrate the positive ways in which the legalization of gay marriage has affected Portugal and its citizens.
By using detail and diction to show just how good the legalization of same-sex marriage has been for Portugal and the other countries that have recently passed similar legislation, Bruni argues that America should do the same. While he acknowledges the differences between our country and theirs, he asks whether it "might be possible for President Obama... to take a lead on the issue" and that he might find out "that it wouldn't make or break him".
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Close Reading #1 - "Tasteless" by David Sedaris
Read it here!
Imagery and details are two of David Sedaris' most important tools in his writing. He uses detailed descriptions to create clear pictures in the reader's mind. These help to tell his story in the clever, funny way that is obvious is all his writing. In this article, he creates images relating to food and his inability to taste or appreciate differences between foods. One of his first great uses of detail and imagery is in his comparison of himself to a convict, in the way he eats. He says he eats "how a prisoner might eat", shoveling food into his mouth, not caring what it is as long as he gets it into his mouth. He provide details about how he eats ("one arm maneuvering the fork and the other encircling the plate like a fence") that further his use of imagery. He goes on to say that might be due to his coming from a large family. Then, he brings up the convict simile again when he says he would whisper to his sister, "convict-like, out of one side of [his] mouth" to ask for her food. This comparison and the details he uses to create it, form a very clear picture in my mind of what David must look like when he's eating, which, when you picture it, is laugh-out-loud funny. He uses this same technique of comparison by imagery and detail to make the article witty several more times throughout the work. For example, he compares eating the giant food at a hamburger chain called the Claim Jumper to being "miniaturized, shrunk to the height of a leprechaun or a doll and dropped in the dining room of regular-sized people."
David also uses diction and language to his advantage in order to make "Tasteless" a clever, funny piece of writing. For instance, when he is creating his convict comparison at the beginning of the piece, he uses language to enhance that when he says his arm was "encircling the plate like a fence". When he equates his arm to a fence, I automatically think of a prison yard, furthering the comedy and effectiveness of the comparison. In the way of diction, David often makes interesting word choices. For example, he writes that some French friends who were visiting the states "are floored by the size of the portions". The use of the word, "floored", creates such a clear image in my mind of these shocked, appalled French people. That one word did so much more than the use of "surprised" or "taken aback" could have done. He uses other strong words that have the similar effect of creating strong, clear images such as "giddy" and "mediocre".
Imagery and details are two of David Sedaris' most important tools in his writing. He uses detailed descriptions to create clear pictures in the reader's mind. These help to tell his story in the clever, funny way that is obvious is all his writing. In this article, he creates images relating to food and his inability to taste or appreciate differences between foods. One of his first great uses of detail and imagery is in his comparison of himself to a convict, in the way he eats. He says he eats "how a prisoner might eat", shoveling food into his mouth, not caring what it is as long as he gets it into his mouth. He provide details about how he eats ("one arm maneuvering the fork and the other encircling the plate like a fence") that further his use of imagery. He goes on to say that might be due to his coming from a large family. Then, he brings up the convict simile again when he says he would whisper to his sister, "convict-like, out of one side of [his] mouth" to ask for her food. This comparison and the details he uses to create it, form a very clear picture in my mind of what David must look like when he's eating, which, when you picture it, is laugh-out-loud funny. He uses this same technique of comparison by imagery and detail to make the article witty several more times throughout the work. For example, he compares eating the giant food at a hamburger chain called the Claim Jumper to being "miniaturized, shrunk to the height of a leprechaun or a doll and dropped in the dining room of regular-sized people."
David also uses diction and language to his advantage in order to make "Tasteless" a clever, funny piece of writing. For instance, when he is creating his convict comparison at the beginning of the piece, he uses language to enhance that when he says his arm was "encircling the plate like a fence". When he equates his arm to a fence, I automatically think of a prison yard, furthering the comedy and effectiveness of the comparison. In the way of diction, David often makes interesting word choices. For example, he writes that some French friends who were visiting the states "are floored by the size of the portions". The use of the word, "floored", creates such a clear image in my mind of these shocked, appalled French people. That one word did so much more than the use of "surprised" or "taken aback" could have done. He uses other strong words that have the similar effect of creating strong, clear images such as "giddy" and "mediocre".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)