Outside Reading
In Losing the Midterms, there may be winning by Peter Baker
Published on Oct. 23. 2010
Published on Oct. 23. 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24 /weekinreview/24baker.html
In this article, Peter Beaker states that it might be beneficial for Barrack Obama to let House of Representatives take over by Republicans. He also argues that it may be even better for him if Senate falls to Republican. Baker starts his paper by saying that people should not make mistake of assuming that Obama do not want Democrats to win both House of Representative and Senate this year’s mid term election. Then he goes on by saying that if he were to lose both houses, he might have a better chance of reelecting as a president on 2012. He uses many quotes to accomplish his position.
One of the quotes that he put was “If the Republican capture both house and Senate, the odds of Obama winning in 2012 go up”; said by Steven M. Gillon, who is a professor of University of Oklahoma
Then he uses historical examples to further support his argument. He said that Bill Clinton managed to win the reelection in 1994 because Republican took over the Congress. Also, he said that Harry S. Truman managed to get elected as the president by blaming his Republican congress for not making any progress toward reform.
One of the strengths that I see in this piece is strong diction. For example, he uses the word “hoarse” instead of “raspy” or “dry”, thus making the sentence more vivid for people. Another strength of this piece is many examples. Baker uses historical examples as well as quotes from educated people.
I see variety of sentences in this piece. He uses coordinate conjunctions as well as complex sentences. He also uses different punctuations such as semi colon and comma other than adding periods continuously.
One weakness that I witness in this piece is using many examples. It seems that he use many examples and quotes, but he rarely adds his own opinion, thus making this paper a bit more confusing. It is difficult to understand his position.
He seems to create his narrative voice by putting many quotes and dictions. He also put his own opinion about this issue rather than just putting quotes. He also seems to use syntax such as using variety of sentences and active voices. He rarely uses passive voice in this paper.
I laud him for using this element. It has clearly impacted my response. I praise him for using many intellect vocabulary words and variety of sentence structures.
If this were an AP Essay, speaker would be appropriate for Baker uses 3rd point of view, which is essential for AP essay. In addition, he uses variety of sentences and good diction.
Jae, I think your entry can focus more on rhetoric, and less on thoroughly explaining what the article was about. So overall, your analysis of rhetoric was pretty good, but could use some more work. I also think you could’ve done a better job of explaining the narrative persona that you see in the piece, but good job explaining how the piece has impacted you! I also liked the way you explained if the article would’ve worked as an AP essay. So pass.
답글삭제I'm sorry, but I am going to have to give this a fail. You spend a lot of this actually telling what the article is about rather than the techniques used for it. Also, like Wendy said, use more rhetoric: when you did analyze techniques, it was usually what the strong points were and what the weak points were, rather than what he used throughout to create his voice.
답글삭제Good job making connections to yourself. You also analyzed the rhetoric very well, or though you could have elaborated on strong points such as, "He uses coordinate conjunctions as well as complex sentences. He also uses different punctuations such as semi colon and comma other than adding periods continuously." But overall a good job. Pass
답글삭제