Outside Reading: Editorial 3

1/10/11

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10mon1.html?ref=opinion

(No listed author)

The editorial “Bloodshed and Invective in Arizona” (no named author) addresses the tragic events surrounding the shooting at a public event sponsored by Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-Az) in Tucson, Arizona. Though the tone of this piece is a bit bland and dull, one cannot help noticing some of the controversial topics (such as insanity pleas, border control, and gun rights) that are being addressed by this unnamed speaker’s matter-of-fact voice.

Although this is probably quite stereotypical of me, I feel like the author of this piece is most likely a man. I feel like, as a girl, if I were writing about a topic as tragic as this, I would end up discussing the feelings of those directly and indirectly affected by this atrocity. The voice of this author, although it does lightly address how many people were killed or injured at the shooting, to me, does not seem exactly personable. The author, rather, prefers to focus on the political causes and ramifications of the shooting.

I definitely dislike the voice of this particular author. ‘He’ assumes too much, like when ‘he’ says, “It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge.” Because I am politically independent with a Republican leaning, I take offense to ‘his’ quick reaction to point fingers to the Republican Party.

One thing that I wholeheartedly approve of, however, is the author’s use of structure in this piece. ‘He’ begins with a recognizable event prior to the subject he will be discussing. ‘He’ gives us background information on the shooter. ‘He’ informs us, the audience, of the major increase in threats against Congress members. The author then closes with a laundry list of issues that pertain to not only the southwestern region of the country, but also the United States as a whole. This clean-cut structure gives the reader a sense of comfortable repetition to cling to while reading.

Of all of the outside readings I have completed, I could see this piece as an AP essay the most easily. The speaker’s tone is simplistic, yet well-learned. Informative, yet mildly interesting. In other words, the speaker knows enough about the subject to correctly inform the reading audience of all the relevant facts, while also presenting one person’s “spin” on the causes and effects of this subject.