What made this article most readable, despite the curiosity of one at such an 'unknown' topic, was the author's ability to write the piece without presenting his bias. I know from personal experience how difficult this can be, and I can only imagine the added difficulty brought about by the controversy of such a topic. I feel it is safe to assume that everyone has a strong opinion on religion, let along polygamy. Yet, in refraining from showing any bias, Scott Anderson was able to present the information in a captivating way. It was almost as though he was narrating the story of many peoples' lives. I find his use of language and incorporation of personal stories and opinions from FLDS members to be more than fitting for what I believe to be his purpose in writing this article. I also feel this article to be an appropriate example of when not to use "I" in a research paper. I'm glad to be free of Anderson's opinion as I feel it is almost irrelevant to the piece and would therefore become a distraction or annoyance. Overall, I feel the piece was extremely well written and very captivating as it was indeed still a research paper (which many people dread).
I really appreciate your attention to craft over content in this response, Lianne. I know that it can often be difficult to sidestep opinion (as you observe in this response) when looking at a controversial topic, but it looks as though you found a way to avoid it, just as Anderson did. I find your writing both thoughtful and interesting, and I'm interested to see your developing project throughout this semester.
ReplyDelete