In terms of diction, the author uses very specific set of dismal and aggressive words to create a very critical tone in his writing. He calls the republicans Nihilists repeatedly, attacking their belief in extremely limited government and also there lack of morality when interacting in the political world with the Deomcrats. He also states "In a climate of political rage and economic despair, nihilism plays a lot better", which through his word diction, specifically "rage" and "despair" adds to his very critical tone of the republican party.
The author's detail usage are very obviously reflective of the liberal side of this issue, creating the sense of bias that I picked up when reading this piece. He uses the fact, "the President expressed was a fairly unquiet anger at Washington’s—meaning Congress’—failure to act on those Americans’ behalf", which attacks the Republican controlled congress for getting nothing done to bring relief to the economy. He also includes the statement, "He didn’t waste much time arguing against the Republican idea of solving all problems by cutting taxes and regulations", which isn't a completely true fact, which again creates the sense of bias.
The author's use of syntax is also quite effective in creating a dismal tone for the piece. One part that specifically stood out to me was his question "Do Americans still have enough faith in him, and in government, to give the President a second shot at reviving the economy?" He followed this question with the statement "Im not at all sure." I feel that this longer question, that encompasses many important aspects such as faith in the president/government and the future of the economy being answered with such a short and brief bummer of an answer is an effective use of syntax to create a dismal mood of writing.
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker/2011/09/obama-against-the-nihilists.html#ixzz1XZ7MPmiB
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker/2011/09/obama-against-the-nihilists.html#ixzz1XZ7MPmiB
I definitely agree with your analysis of the syntax involved in those last two example sentences. The longer sentence creates a sense of anticipation and suspense, but then the short precise one following just crushes your hopes for what he's writing about. It was interesting reading how you saw the details as a means of creating bias, and something I definitely didn't think of when writing my response.
ReplyDeleteWhoa, white out. I liked how you clearly say how a technique (diction, detail, syntax) creates effect (tone,mood). Now, just sort out the hidden "so what" question to find the meaning. The idea that details create a sense of bias was great, I think its interesting how writers can do that, sometimes without the reader even noticing.
ReplyDeleteWeird, but I definitely had the same text background issues. When I was copying one of my posts from word, my blog decided to randomly highlight sections of my words. Luckily, I found an easy fix. Just adjust the text background and you should be able to get a background color that is similar, if not the same as your blog background.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, as for your actual blog post. I think it was important that not only did you state technique elements but also included elements of the meaning within your work. Your analysis of details, for example, effectively illustrated how they allowed the author's bias to become unveiled.