http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/nyregion/28cheshire.html?ref=todayspaper
CRITIQUE/Caleb Waldron 1
CRITIQUE ON NEY
By Caleb Waldron
This article lacks structure, eloquence, and detail, starting with the title. “Death Penalty Tests a Church as it Mourns” is confusing and unnecessarily convoluted. “As is mourns” is superfluous; something like “Death Penalty Tests mourning church” would grab the reader’s attention more, and draw a stronger connection between the death penalty and the church’s morning. Otherwise, they seem to be independent variables.
In terms of eloquence, this article smacks of speculation with questionable support. Phrases like “it might have been expected” and “they think/thought that” litter the work; there’s no sense of the concrete, or of actual facts. The article seems to consist entirely of hearsay and supposition. What’s more, the crux of the conflict within this article isn’t explicitly outlined. There’s mention of parishioners’ reluctance to publicly condemn the death penalty, but there’s no mention of their motivations for doing so.
There isn’t a single sentence in this piece that outlines the basic moral issue involved. As such, there’s no sense of overall context with this piece. The reader’s left stranded with the information that a church is conflicted over issues related to the death penalty, but isn’t given the proper tools to apply that conflict to their own lives or surrounding issues.
In regards to the overall context of the situation, there’s no sense of opposing viewpoints in this article. The sources are all parishioners who struggle with their own individual perspectives on the moral validity of the death penalty. But again, with no sense of larger context, the reader feels stranded from the piece.
Overall, this article relies on supposition and implication in such a way that creates a sterile, alien style.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment