Susan
Orlean is an American journalist and she composed an article call
"Lifelike" in an unbiased perspective of her own experience. The competition of taxidermy
is the topic of the article through the purpose of informing that taxidermy is
an artwork people do. Orlean wants to
provide a matter that people may think it is disturbing, but how it may be useful
for the world in certain ways.
Orlean’s tone is neutral most of the time, but there’s
also a serious and shocking tone to the article. She is serious when she wrote,
“To be good at taxidermy, you have to be good at sewing, sculpting, painting, and hairdressing, and mostly you have to be a little bit of a zoology nerd." She wants her audience to know that as a taxidermists you need to have some experience.
In the article, Orlean provided many examples of what a
taxidermist does. She seemed to be surprised by one thing that she saw, " One day, I saw him holding a piece of clay while waiting for a seminar to begin, and within thirty seconds or so, without actually paying much attention to it, he had molded the clay into a little mink0like creature." Before this, she stated that people were wondering how this man created a panda when you couldn't kill it. Through this she is connecting with me that she is learning just like everyone else.
I think Orlean composed this topic as an article because
she can expose this topic to the world faster. This may help her achieve her
purpose of informing that taxidermy is a work of art and people do it to make
people see something that they have not seen before.
I'd like to hear you develop more about her tone. It'd be useful to provide some quotes that you think are neutral and discuss why you think they lack a stance.
ReplyDeleteAnd it's interesting that you say she is neutral but also say that she has "surprised" moments and a "shocking tone" too.
You identify what you think her purpose is, so now I want you to also consider what is at stake for her. Why write about this topic? Why does it matter to her?