What Should Children Read?

The New York Times article "What Should Children Read?", by Sara Mosle, in Wordle format.  Click on the picture to zoom in.

     Teacher, author, and New York Times contributor Sara Mosle presents an interesting and relevant controversy in her New York Times opinion piece as she questions what children should be reading.  To the chagrin of many people who see the value of fictional works and poetry, contemporary English curricula are shifting in focus towards nonfiction reading (much like our 11^th grade AP English curriculum) as part of the Common Core State Standards.  These national standards have been adopted by the majority of states.  Mosle uses the opinions of qualified educators to support both sides of the controversy (ethos), incorporating their opinions through quotes.  She also effectively uses anecdotes to support some of the arguments, illustrating why the change might be necessary.  All of the arguments then culminate in one conclusion that Mosle further supports: the idea that students need not more, but better nonfiction, which can be found in the form of “narrative nonfiction”.  By providing examples of sources that contain narrative nonfiction, and even providing direct links to some sources in her article, Mosle effectively reaches out to her audience.  The audience seems mostly to be American parents and/or educators who are interested in the evolution of English curricula.  I think the piece could be even more effective if the article was directed towards students, who will be directly impacted by this new curriculum.  Even so, I think the piece does fulfill its purpose of conveying some of the controversy surrounding the development of a core English curriculum.

Euthanasia [noun] \youth•in•asia\

The book Me Talk Pretty One Day is a compilation of essays written by David Sedaris.  Collectively, the essays provide an intriguing overview of Sedaris’ life.  However, the essays can be read as stand-alone pieces and still make sense.  Thus, the focus of this analysis is the individual essay “Youth in Asia” from Me Talk Pretty One Day.

     If David Sedaris’ writing had to be described in only one word, that word would undoubtedly be: humorous.  Sedaris’ dry, witty and sarcastic tone provides much entertainment and is an effective way of appealing to the reader.  Sedaris is an American humorist, author, and comedian, and is also known for his frequent contributions to the NPR radio talk show “This American Life”.  That said, the essay “Youth in Asia” focuses on one particular aspect of American life: pets, and their role in the family.  Throughout the essay, Sedaris plows through the complete list of pets owned by his family, supplying funny and often outrageous anecdotes about each pet.  Despite the individual differences between the pets, many of their lives ended in the same fashion: being put to sleep (euthanasia).  Through this word, Sedaris reveals his command of the English language to the audience, as he creates a motif of two Asian boys playing (the “youth in Asia”) to provide visual entertainment in accompaniment with the deaths of several of his pets.  This surprising combination of humor and metaphor work fabulously to engage Sedaris’ audience, which appears to be Americans who are old enough to connect with and appreciate Sedaris’ wit, yet young enough so as not to be offended by some of his language and comparisons.  I think that the interplay of metaphor and humor does accomplish Sedaris’ purpose of providing entertainment and humorous adaptations of everyday problems for the enjoyment of his audience.

All in: The Relationship Between David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (January 2012): Interview with Paula Broadwell to promote her book All in: The Education of General David Petraeus.  Click on the link to watch the interview (first video on page) between Stewart and Broadwell.

     This interview between Jon Stewart and Paula Broadwell was part of Broadwell’s endeavor to promote her book about David Petraeus.  Humor was an evident tactic used to relate with and please the audience throughout the interview, and to help Stewart and Broadwell present themselves in a positive manner.  Stewart asked Broadwell about her interviewing process, and she explained the project’s switch from dissertation to book, and how many of her interviews with Petraeus were conducted during runs.  The interview then focused on Petraeus and how his personality and strength command respect.  Based on audience response during the video clip, the rhetorical style resonated well with the audience. The Daily Show is known to target young to middle-aged adults, who regard the show as a source of news and entertainment.  By alluding to Broadwell’s established background throughout the interview, Broadwell’s reputation as an author was effectively credited (ethos).  Yet, while her comments and insights into her research about Petraeus’ life made her seem like an intelligent and established person, Broadwell’s flirty demeanor and revealing outfit detracted from this respectable image.  Thus, I think the idea of paradox unintentionally entered the interview, something especially interesting in the wake of the Petraeus-Broadwell affair.  When placed within the context of the affair, the interview suddenly takes on an additional meaning as evidence foreshadowing the affair.  Thus, I feel that the interview accomplished several purposes, including the intentional attempt to highlight Broadwell’s book, and the unintentional hints at Broadwell’s affair with Petraeus.

Listening With Your Eyes

The below analysis was based on the last chapter of Blink, Conclusion: Listening with your Eyes: The Lessons of Blink (pages 245-54).

     Blink’s last chapter is a culmination of all the lessons Malcolm Gladwell presented to the reader in the preceding chapters. He uses the story of Abbie Conant, and other female musicians who earned spots in some of the world’s most prestigious orchestras, to show how the powers of the human brain’s rapid cognition can be utilized to their max.  Until recently, at orchestra auditions, most women musicians were judged (“thin sliced”, in psychological terms) negatively based on their gender, not their ability.  However, when extraneous information, like gender and appearance, was edited from these auditions and thus first impressions, men and women were judged equally.  Through this anecdotal example, Gladwell proves to the reader that when the amount of information present in first impressions is reduced, different outcomes can occur.  In addition to anecdotes, Gladwell also used the antimetabole to enhance his writing.  He explained, “Celibidache… [had] definite ideas about how music ought to be played—and who ought to play music,” (246).  Gladwell’s arrangement technique of anecdotes, evidence, and reason, coupled with the presence of the antimetabole, helped him to show the audience his grasp on various issues.  Gladwell stressed the applicability of Blink’s lessons to his audience, which appeared to be a young generation of Americans who could apply what they learned from Blink to their daily lives.  Though at times Gladwell’s conclusions seemed to be a stretch, I believe that overall he effectively accomplished his purpose of conveying the value of first impressions to the reader.