For my close reading, a read an editorial from the New York Times titled "Washington Versus American", by Ross Douthat. The article can be found here, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/opinion/sunday/douthat-washington-versus-america.html?ref=columnists.
With this editorial, Douthat tries to make the point that government programs themselves are unintentionally the cause of unequal redistribution of wealth in America. Many private enterprises are closely linked with government operation, and therefore receive a large portion of government spending, including some of which that should be going to stimulate the economy. Douthat investigates Washington DC as the scene for this. In his editorial, he uses carefully chosen diction, contrasting negative and positive imagery, and a simile to prejudice the reader against the system he describes.
Douthat open his editorial by describing D.C. in 2002. In this description he uses words that suggest decline and decay, describing the parts of the city as "scarred" and "blighted" (paragraph 1).
In the second paragraph, he contrasts the image of the city in 2002 with that of it today as a happy, prosperous place. He describes the city today in pleasant, inviting terms, using phrases such as "[streets] crowded with restaurants and bars." This passage brings to mind an image of nighttime parties and revelry, strongly contrasting the image in the previous paragraph. In addition, Douthat continues to use carefully chosen like "luxurious" to describe the city.
Later in the essay, Douthat established a simile that he refers to several times. He compares Washington D.C. to the "ruthless capital in the Hunger Games" (paragraph 6). I haven't read that story, but I have heard enough to know this isn't a complimentary comparison. Douthat suggests that like that fictional capital, D.C. and the government are draining the fortitude of the rest of the country. This simile is continued in the next paragraph, when he offers the somewhat humorous disclaimer, "There aren’t tributes from Michigan and New Mexico fighting to the death in Dupont Circle just yet" (paragraph 7). The effect of this simile is to make the alleged crimes of Washington seem worse by paralleling it to a capital and government that is an extreme case of tyranny.
All of the literary techniques used in the editorial serve the authors purpose--that is, convincing the reader of his opinion. He does this through contrasting the new, rich capital with the decrepit one of ten years ago, and then investigating the change. Through his explanation and comparison of the capital with a fictional one, he effectively demonizes Washington D.C. and its role in the country's poor economic condition.
This is an interesting topic of an editorial that I feel would cause many differing opinions. The diction you describe in the first paragraph creates two very different images in my head, and I definitely agree that the words he uses cause the editorial to be much more effective. I also agree with your statement about the simile and that comparing it to The Hunger Games creates a more comical feeling to the text and makes people realize what he is trying to describe Washington as. I also think that he might have done this to make the reader think that they can relate more to the text, because so many people have read the book. Since I have read it myself, I feel like I understand what he is saying about our government much more clearly because of this simile, and that it gets his meaning across better.
ReplyDeletePicking out these literary techniques was a great way to describe how the author emphasizes his point and tries to get his audience to agree. I also think it's interesting that he used the simile of The Hunger Games, because not only is that a great comparison to make his point, but the popular book/motion picture reaches out to a younger audience (because that's mainly who is reading those books) which I find particularly interesting being in AP Gov and with the election coming around, and how my teacher as well as the textbook talk about how it is mainly senior citizens who pay attention to political issues. I'm not sure how old the author of the editorial is himself, but he does a good job with that to make the piece more understandable for a larger group of people.
ReplyDeleteThis seems like a very controversial editorial, which would need a great deal of back up to support it. This author does this in several ways, as you pointed out. One interesting way that this author made his point is by trying to appeal to pop culture, such as referencing the Hunger Games. This shows that the author is thinking about his audience, and trying to appeal to a wider group of people. By making the article easier to relate to, more people will understand what this author is trying to convey. The imagery is important for this author as well. In psychology, I learned that people tend to respond positively to positive change. For example, this article describes a negative image, and then describes a positive one. The readers will then associate the positive change with Douthat opinions about government. This is a possible aspect of structure and syntax that Douthat may have been trying to use to his advantage.
ReplyDelete