Great choice of article to analyse!
Following the incident regarding the release of hundreds of chickens from the back of a truck by activists in Melbourne Like your teacher has already said, this is NOT a complete sentence - always proofread for clarity . There has been ongoing debate questioning if the activists actions were right Hmm expand on this.... . Freelance writer Jo Smith passionately supports the “plight” of these animals in her opinion piece Titled what and in what publication? Refer to background information (January 2009). She criticises those opposing Opposing who and what? Be specific and rallies support for the cause from her online readership of people concerned about the issue with a structured argument seeking to create more empathisers.
Jo Smith Refer to only surname after the introduction in her opinion piece determinately calls for “liberation” of “oppressed animals”. To start with she Use a clearer sentence starter that makes it obvious that you are analysing these specific quotes. It sounds like you are moving onto a new point and the examiner will hate reading back and thinking 'oh you're analysing the quote, not moving on' paints her view of the actions of the activists portraying them as heroes providing “freedom” to the “oppressed”, positioning readers from the start to believe it is a “noble cause” Say more about the intended effect than just believe a quote - talk about how readers would think and feel, discuss the heroic and uplifting connotations etc. Basically avoid saying that the effect of one quote is another quote (if that makes sense) . The activists are glorified in the way they are said to “risk life and limb” to “stand up for the rights of the animals”, further adding to the agreeable image of them being heroes Too superficial . The image accompanying the article is given top of the page placement to draw readers attention Superficial with what appears to be “oppressed” Yet you have not discussed the negative and criminalistic connotations of this word? chickens behind bars almost as if they were in a jail cell. Readers are compelled to feel sympathy with For or with? the animals Explain WHY they would feel sympathetic? And why would Smith want readers to feel this certain way? Why does she want the chickens to be perceived in this light? and in turn any associated opinions on the side of the animals Doesn't make sense .
So as not to appear completely one sided Smith includes the views of “critics”. However she does so after first explaining how the media has “fallen over themselves” to have the “critics” heard, positioning readers to believe she is on the side of the underdog, someone who should be stood up for Expand on this, slightly too general . The crude depiction This is good analysis of how the “radio presenter” is shown to be “sneering” and referring to the activists as “idiotic… clowns” and “anti-social” as well as trying to “whip up… a frenzy”, demonises him and leaves readers to consider him to represent the side of those opposing the activists Sentence is too long, break it up. Also change up your wording to make it very clear who you're referring to when you say 'him' - I know you're referring to the radio host but you want to make it obvious, don't make the examiner think too much basically . Use of strong demonstrative What is this? language such as “injustice”, “inhumane” or “abominably cruel” is used to further vilify those not in support of the rights of the “oppressed animals” leading those who do not agree with her views to feel guilty. You have slapped on a general effect statement at the end of 3 or 4 strong quotes that could've been analysed in far more depth, do not generalise effect! It is like saying 'All of these quotes intend to...' which is not true because every piece of language works differently.
Furthermore Comma to instil a feeling that something must be done by all Smith includes her readers Syntax . He She!!! Joe is the guy version, Jo would be short for Joanne begins to talk about what “we believe” and repeats the word “we” several times at the beginning of each of her points as if listing what readers “must” be doing. Smith also goes on to refer to animals as our “fellow inhabitants” as if they were our “friends” and have the “same rights” as us positioning Avoid -ing words if possible, change to 'which positions readers, particularly _____, to consider...' - So look at SPECIFIC EFFECT ON SPECIFIC AUDIENCE readers to have concern for ourselves as animal abuse is “but a short step to… human rights abuse”. The juxtaposition of animals to humans allows for readers to not only feel compassion, but also adopt a strong sense of right to understand the way that animals must share our rights to “breathe fresh, clean air and live in comfortable, healthy conditions” Break up this quote, try not to quote in too many clauses as it looks clumsy .
Shifting towards a more reserved tone Must mention what the tone shifted from and then to. Also analyse the tone as if it is a technique - Tone/Example/Effect Smith shares some philosophy with readers. She uses the word of a “philosopher” to clarify her beliefs on “the question” and support her argument in one final push to sway readers’ opinions Way too superficial - avoid techniques tables type analysis . Using argument Use another sentence starter that “sentient beings… have rights that should be respected” to further imbue with readers once more that animals share the “same” rights as us. She argues that understanding them may actually lead to “more humane… treatment of one another” intended to be Weak expression something people who do not share her view on “liberation” can appreciate. Finally in her closing statement she explains the activists’ actions and why they were “justified” to help those “poor creatures” with the resounding statement that “the end defiantly justifies the means” leaving readers with little room to argue against the final retort Extremely lengthy sentence, detracts from flow of the piece. Also once again, avoid overly general comments .
Smith’s emotion filled response to the issue at hand is likely to leave little of her target audience who are already concerned about the issue unaffected. Her activist pro ? article is written to enduringly propagate the thoughts of many others in favour of animal rights and obliges them to agree with her outlook through her well framed article. However her strong bias against those not in support of animal rights, while persuading some, is likely to rile others who do not take so kindly to her narrow outlook on the issue at hand. A good conclusion
Overall comments:
As a whole, I think you are far more capable of a better essay for this section of the course. From what I can see, this analysis is lacking in depth, sophistication and insightful comments about the article. When annotating and choosing your 'techniques', make sure that you are as selective as possible. Do not notice a question mark and tell yourself you have to talk about that rhetorical question, or see the word like and tell yourself you have to talk about that simile - look at the LANGUAGE and look specifically at the meaning, the implications and the connotations behind it. In saying that also, I want to see you move in and out of specific and general analysis - look at how specific words work towards authorial intent, look at why specific words are coupled and paired together and also look at how these connotations etc appeal directly to the specific audience you've outlined.
Also in your essay, make sure you proofread for clarity, watch your sentence structures/length, and most importantly - focus more on the effect (think what ideas, feel what emotions, perceive group/issue/person in what way?) and DO NOT write superficial or overly general comments. I agree with most of your teacher's comments, however I feel you can add a lot more analysis in there - you seem to be quoting a lot (and you are great with your quoting overall) but you have more quotes there to make it look good rather than to analyse. So make sure you have a clear balance of quotes for analysis and quotes to chuck in to impress. Overall a decent effort, but there is a lot to work on.
I would give this a 6/10 - sorry if I have sounded a bit harsh... but you obviously have the potential and the will to improve. Well done and good luck!
Home
Help
Search
Login
