The author spends a lot of time explaining what seems like the middle part of the story to me and doesn't spend very much time telling us what happened before and after the teachers time with the student. I could see the story being interesting if I were a teacher, because i could learn a lot about teaching styles through reading it, but as a freshman college student at Humboldt I think all i may have learned from this is how not to write a reflective piece aimed at teenagers.
In my mind the article "Simplicity" is a little bit funny in the way that it is al about telling us to simplify our writing and get to the point quickly, yet the essay is quite long. According to what the article is trying to tell us to do, shouldn't the author be able to convey his point in a simple manner using a few paragraphs or even a few sentences? As a journalism student I appreciate what the writer is trying to say, I just cant say that I agree with how that they choose to say it. The idea of simplicity and the appearance of the essay contradict each other.
Reading as a writer often involves simply seeing what NOT to do. I agree. If you think that "General Apache" is not a good reflective essay considering the audience, the question is: Why? Is it simply the subject matter? He wrote about a Vietnam Vet, whose age and life experiences are different from your own.
ReplyDeleteOr is it that the story is told from the point of view of the teacher rather than the student?
Is it the word choices? Structure, length?
I have to wonder if it is any of these. Instead, I think it might be the significance he chose to get out of the experience that does not feel relevant to you. What do you think?
With that in mind, it seems like you could have any story, with any age character, in any setting, and what would really matter is that you made the *significance of the reflection* on the narrative seem as universally relevant as possible.
It seems as if this author has fallen short in that somehow. How did that happen?