Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Cardinals Rule but how about those Mets
The article that I chose to read is Cardinals Rule but how about those Mets. The title is just a little misleading. The writer opens up the article by talking about neither the Cardinals or the Mets. Instead, he opens it by talking about the Detroit Tigers. The cartoon of the Tiger's manager and Cardinal's manager Tony LaRussa is the only thing that makes the beginning relevant. The overall tone of the article was pretty straight-foward and down right BORING. The diction also needed great improvement. The choice of words through me for a loop in certain parts. I feel that sports articles do not need as many enormous words to get the point across. Although Roger Angell seemed a little A.D.D, the voice was right on target for the most part. He added many facts into this article. Some were not as relevant as others, but never the less, he did get the point across. The structure is one of the only high points for me. The transition from one element to the next was absolutely spectacular. Overall, it was a mediocre effort that could have used a little bit of improving.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Good start Ricus. I'd like, very much, to see some examples of what you're referring to in your blog, though. SHOW us how the diction loops (great word choice on your part, by the way). WHAT words/phrases made you think that Angell was ADD? Talk a bit more, also, about the structure, especially if that is what worked for you the best.
Even if your blog didn't have any examples it was pretty to the point. So at least I know how you feel about the article. I had a hard time with examples, especially on diction (just read my blog), but you seemed to understand that part of the article really well.
Post a Comment