Saturday, February 5, 2011
Journal 5
Using what you learned about introductions from The Curious Researcher reading, check out the feature article in Beyond Words on page 50, "Watching TV Makes You Smarter." Think about how the opening of the piece is structured. How does the author include a hook? How does the author address the context and background information? What is the thesis? Where is it located? In your response to this journal, I want you to give some thought to the first several paragraphs of this piece. It's a short article, so you may want to read the whole thing, but you will at least need to read up to subheading "Revised Intelligence" to answer this journal effectively. It is important, however, that you reference specifics from The Curious Researcher in your answer.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In the article written by Steven Johnson, it uses a lead that incorporates dialogue to grab the attention of the audience. The dialogue is also a representation that an anecdote is taking place in the beginning of the article as well and is an example of a lead. It is between two scientists that discuss the food choices of an individual. Johnson also provides background information about the topic that he is going to talk about throughout this article. After the background information, examples were given through a brief scene of what the author mentioned prior. Quotation marks were used to indicate that the author was referring to a television show and ensured that the audience knows that and that he is not making it up himself. Profile is used to stay focused on one particular subject which is the show “24.” It also contributes to gaining the attention of the audience. The thesis is in the third paragraph and falls in the second sentence of the paragraph. It states that the “culture is getting more cognitively demanding, not less.” Johnson continues on by backing up the claim that he made and then provides a counterargument with reasons for the audience to read and to understand the topic more. The author’s presence is felt when he begins to use first person to discuss the “Sleeper Curve” which is his idea and used as a reason towards supporting his argument. He also breaks the article up into different subheadings which provide more reasons for his claim.
ReplyDeleteThe article by Johnson is all about how complexity in television is actually making the people who watch it smarter, which is contrary to popular belief. The hook he uses is a short bit of dialogue from Woody Allen's "Sleeper," which grabs the attention of the reader right away, since it is a bit unexpected as the first words in an article. This is a bit intriguing and it inspires the reader to continue on and see what he has to say. He then begins to give a short summary of a controversial episode of the show "24," which is also part of building towards his thesis. This is an example of using profile, since he makes many references throughout the article to the show "24" and how it relates to his argument. The next paragraph is an excellent background paragraph, where Johnson gives a brief breakdown of how complex an episode of the show is and to make the reader think about elements he or she may not have realized lie within a TV show. The third paragraph is where he gives his thesis, in the second sentence where he says "the culture is getting more cognitively demanding, not less." However, even after Johnson states his thesis, the paragraphs that follow are still technically his introduction. He discusses his idea of the Sleeper Curve, giving more background information and discussing how it fits into modern TV shows. His final paragraph before the subheading "Televised Intelligence" introduces the most popular counterargument to what he is saying, which is an example of introducing contrast into his article.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kassandra:
I like how you related the opening dialogue to several aspects from the reading in "The Curious Researcher." I hadn't thought of all those things. I also agree with you on where and what the thesis was, even though I think that was pretty obvious.
In response to Mitch:
ReplyDeleteYou discussed the structure of the introduction thoroughly and you used some of the terms from the reading in the Curious Researcher. Your response to this topic would have been even better if you incorporated more of the terms but the little that you used was just as beneficial. I see that we agree with where the thesis was in this article and you elaborated on the same examples that I used in my comment to the question.
The article “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” has a very strong introduction. It starts off with a lead that really hooks the reader. It is a dialogue between two scientists and uses humor to grab the reader’s attention. The author addresses the context and gives very detailed background information right at the very beginning of the article so that the reader does not have to make assumptions on what the show is about. One example is when the article talks about different form that the show has and explains it’s “story arc” to help the readers understand even better. The thesis of the article is the first sentence of the 3rd paragraph. “I believe that the sleeper curve is the single most important new force altering the minds of young people today, and I believe it is largely a force of good: enhancing our cognitive faculties, not dumbing them down.” I think that the way the article is laid out is very helpful to the reader. It has a catchy hook, presents the topic, gives detail on the background of the show, and then slowly begins talking about the mental cognition of the show until he is able to state his thesis. Once he presents his thesis he gives good examples and even acknowledges the counter arguments such as moral clarity. Overall I think that seeing an intro like this one could really help the direction of my future papers.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Mitch, I think that you could have used more of the terms from the article as well. You could have elaborated more on the setup of the show and maybe talked about the different elements of the show such as the story arc. I agree with where you said the thesis was and overall I think it was a good analysis of the article and I liked how you referenced the counterargument.
The author for this piece notes the significant aspects of the TV show "24", like the common cliffhangers and sheer violence seen on the show as a hook to the readers. Not only is the show "24" a familiar name, but for those who have not had the opportunity to see it, including a few brief details about the show gives the readers a little background information so that the readers don't immediately feel lost and disconnected from the piece. Scene is used in the first paragraph when accounts of the jihad terrorist events are described in "24", providing more of an understanding for the content of the show. The author's thesis can be found at the end of the second paragraph, after he has explained the complexity and the finesse that the writers of "24" have taken to bring forth this intricate show. The author comments on just how complex and interwoven the relationships and personalities of the characters are. I think this author has taken an interesting stance on the time-old argument "TV is bad for you", and instead, reversed the opinion and asking "How is TV good?" I think the author successfully communicates why he thinks what America thinks is "Junk" is actually "Nutritious". While on the surface TV is full of sex, violence, and other awful and raw things, the shows that feature these negative factors sometimes have an underlying complexity in it's story. I like that the author says that not everything in the world is going to be a PSA. TV shows the reality of the world around us. Sometimes presented in a way that we aren't the most comfortable with, or when we least expect it. Nevertheless, television certainly does do it's part in educating.
ReplyDeleteTo rhe10, you mention that a Lead is the hook for this article. I think it would really benefit your post if you elaborated on that statement and make your claim stronger.
In the article, "Watching TV Makes You Smarter" the author Steven Johnson uses dialogue to open the article as well as grab the reader’s attention. This use of dialogue also serves as his lead and hook to open the article. Because the conversation between Scientist A and Scientist B does not tell you right away what the article is about it grabs your attention and interests you to continue reading, making the hook successful. Johnson then uses profile in the next paragraph to provide the necessary context and background information for the topic of his article. He writes a detailed summary introducing the controversial show "24" which builds up to his argument that he will state in his thesis. The thesis of the article is located in the third paragraph in the second sentence and states, "the culture is getting more cognitively demanding, not less." Johnson then supports his claim with details, for example, he says in shows like "24" you need to integrate information and make inferences to understand what is happening. Johnson refers to this as the "Sleeper Curve" and uses first person to make his presence felt when he explains how the Sleeper Curve relates in today's media. Following his argument and support he states the counterargument saying, “what media have lost in moral clarity, they have gained in realism.” Contrast is then used to compare different television shows like "24" and "The Sopranos" to show support for both the argument and counterargument. All in all, I think Steven Johnson’s introduction was very well organized and effectively grabbed the attention of his audience.
ReplyDeleteIn response to rhe10: I think there are more terms from the Curious Researcher you could have referenced to in Johnson's article besides just the lead and dialogue. I also disagree that the thesis is “I believe that the sleeper curve is the single most important new force altering the minds of young people today, and I believe it is largely a force of good: enhancing our cognitive faculties, not dumbing them down.” I feel like that is detailed support. I think the thesis is "the culture is getting more cognitively demanding, not less."
As noted in The Curious Researcher, dialogue is a technique that can be used to open up a hook that develops on into the thesis and body of the paper. The author who wrote this article used that technique effectively, by taking a short scene from the show “24” and incorporating it into the article which uses the show as the prime example. He addresses the background information by using prime examples in the show such as the Muslims and their treatment of prisoners. The thesis is pretty clearly stated in the third paragraph, in the second sentence. Personally, I thought this was a very effective hook. He did not go out and blankly state the thesis. He picked a highly viewed television show that I happen to watch regularly and it drew my attention right away. Many people may not watch the show, but the dialogue used to start the hook was very interesting and it would have drawn me in even if I didn’t watch the show. He also offers a short rebuttal from the other point of view on the argument, but quickly and effectively dismisses the idea and foreshadows on how later in the paper he would argue against it more. The author effectively organized his ideas in small sections of the hook, which shows how he can open the paper further on each topic. He talks about a “Sleeper Curve” and as many people would not know what he is talking about, it makes you want to read the paper further and explore.
ReplyDeleteIn response to what Kassandra said:
The thesis was arguably easy enough to find, and it turns out we picked the same one. Also, I really liked how you talked about the counterargument as well. That part of the opening really caught my eye because you get a sense of honesty if he is going to open the argument by giving a view from the other side as well.
In the article from Beyond Words by Steven Johnson, he begins with a quote from Woody Allen’s the sleeper to slightly hint or introduce his topic. The Curious Researcher says that opening with dialogue is an effective way to introduce a paper using “people involved in your topic.” I wouldn’t consider the quote in the beginning to be the hook though, the authors example of “24” I would consider to be the hook. Johnson uses the television show “24” to support to his idea that we as a culture are demanding cognitive stimuli. I believe that his thesis statement is found at the beginning of the fourth paragraph, “I believe that the Sleeper Curve… not numbing them down.” He states that the Sleeper Curve is the idea that what on the surface looks like violence and mindless entertainment, is actually forcing us to “pay attention, make inferences, [and] track shifting social relationships.” He believes that this is actually beneficial to viewers. Johnson sets up the beginning of his article in which he begins with a scene of which is relatively related to his topic, and then brings in his hook; his hook being an example from an episode of “24.” His hook helps to give background information, like stated in The Curious Researcher. Next he introduces an idea he originated “the Sleeper Curve” which leads into his thesis statement.
ReplyDeleteIn the article "Watching TV Makes You Smarter," The author Steven Johnson starts out with dialogue between two characters of a movie. This opening dialogue is supposed to be the hook in his article, and it does a very good job grabbing the reader’s attention. After reading that, it makes one wonder how that dialogue relates to the article, so they continue to read it. The author then goes on to give background about the television show 24, and how it has been the focus of various controversies of the past few weeks. In the next paragraph, Johnson talks about 24, and how complex of a show it is. In the third paragraph is where the thesis is located. In the second sentence of the third paragraph, Johnson says, “the culture is getting more cognitively demanding, not less.” Johnson is saying that even though most people assume the public wants simple entertainment, shows like 24 prove that is wrong. Johnson calls this the “sleeper curve,” when something you think isn’t healthy turns out to be good for you. In the next paragraph Johnson continues to talk about the sleep curve and give more information on it. In the last paragraph, he mentions a counterargument to his argument and says why he believes it is wrong. Johnson’s introduction was very well written. Starting with the hook at the beginning, it manages to keep the readers attention throughout.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Gary Wong: I think you should have talked about what the hook in the article was. Also, I think it would have been helpful to explain why you think the end of the second paragraph in the thesis.
In response to rhe10:
ReplyDeleteI believe that the quote you noted as being the thesis statement as well. But I think that you maybe could have used more references to The Curious Researcher like noted in the prompt to do so and that it would have made your response a little more clear.
The author of "Watching TV Makes You Smarter" begins the article with dialogue between two scientists. Using humor, a form of pathos, intrigues the reader,or hook if you will, to continue reading the interesting topic the two scientists discuss about. "The Curious Researcher" states that one effective way to begin a paper is to hook the readers with certain dialogue that reflects the topic your paper will be about. He notes the significance of the tv show "24", which adds background information on the topic he is describing. Here is where he uses a technique called profiling. The thesis is clearly written, which definitely helps the reader understand exactly what the author proposes to address in his argument. Him presenting the rebuttal also shows that the author is very conscious of the opposing claim he addresses. This shows he is not narrow minded and is listening to both sides of the story, even though he is pushing for his side.His ideas are organized and understandable for all readers.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Jackie, I agree with you stating the hook as "24". It being a popular tv show, most people can understand the connection with the topic and will continue reading the argument.
This article, Watching TV Makes You Smarter, has a very interesting hook. It incorporates dialogue into the intro from Woody Allen’s “Sleeper” that kind of sounds sarcastic. I’ve never read “Sleeper,” but it sounds like at the end when scientist A says “Those were thought to be unhealthy,” he is implying how things have changed over time. By saying they were “thought to be unhealthy,” Scientist A sounds sarcastic because they are still considered unhealthy today. He may be hinting on how things have changed though, because society today does eat cream pies and hot fudge, something that was not done as much before. This hook establishes a purpose to Steven Johnson’s writing, which is how television has changed over time. This hook does not give away the purpose instantly, but ties into the article as you read further. I looked at the dialogue and kind of questioned it, so it made me want to read more. The Curious Researcher helped me observe the effectiveness of this introduction (page 189). The author also uses background information when writing this article to establish credibility. He mentions different movies and how they have had an impact on society. The author also points out how television is changing drastically on what is acceptable and what is not. And now, audiences are becoming more “cognitively demanding,” and the viewer has to put the pieces of the movie together to completely understand the point. Without paying close attention in movies like “24,” the viewer may not completely understand what the movie is portraying.
ReplyDeleteNext, I read over the article and came to a conclusion that the thesis is “But as that “24” episode suggests, the exact opposite is happening: the culture is getting more cognitively demanding, not less”. This thesis is located in the third paragraph, second sentence. The thesis matches perfectly with the main point of this article, which is that television is becoming more complex and may indeed educate its viewer.
Now moving on to the Curious Researcher. This article in Beyond Words is very original and the author took familiar movies and situations and presented them in his own personal way. I read about this on page 183, “Making your presence felt”. The author of Watching TV Makes You Smarter found his own way of saying things and his own way of seeing things. He also commented on specifics and made his point obvious. The author also used dialogue to open up his article, which is also found in the Curious Researcher. He used dialogue relevant to his article and made it interesting. When reading the dialogue in the start of the article, it made me want to read it because the dialogue was interesting. Using dialogue to start a paper is found on page 186 of the Curious Researcher.
To sum it up, this article was written well; and by examining the elements used to construct this paper I became more educated on how to write my own paper. This was an interesting article and I learned from it.
In response to Nicole Halper, I like how you explained the hook, because that’s what I was thinking when I read the intro. I wanted to read more because it was an interesting dialogue. You evaluated the paper well, and informed me on details I overlooked.
Before I go into depth with this journal, I must say that reading this article had me hooked from the first two sentences. I am a huge “24” fan; I could literally picture the scene that Steven Johnson refers to in his hook. He begins to discuss the moment in “24”, where Secretary Raines tortures his druggie son for answers in a terrorist situation. Johnson effectively brings in his readers by discussing a point that is familiar to those apart of the growing pop culture America is witnessing. What Johnson does, is use this example of a classic TV stereotype of the Muslim religion, and show that TV is something that no longer provides answers to common fictional stories; it is an entity that allows for rational thought, or even the ability to create our own beginning’s or endings. The hook of this very introduction effectively provides this analysis. In building up for his argument or thesis, Johnson compares “24” to a complete counterpart, Bonanza, to show how television has changed from a mediocre drama without intellect, to something incorporating American culture and real time scenarios. In summary, the thesis of Johnson’s research is to argue that television today is symbolism for American news in our country and worldwide, and his claim is that it is making us smarter. Johnson claims that TV is allowing us to become more “cognitively demanding” (Johnson 50). He uses this analysis to argue that this device, once a simple escape from reality is becoming a tool to our growing need for intelligence.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree, while it saddens me, with Garry’s post. Had one not watched the intriguing show, “24”, then one would not be able to understand Johnson’s examples of a very mind boggling show. Garry picks out the hook effectively and also examines the thesis correctly. Had Johnson painted a picture like the one I had in my head of the TV series, his hook would have been more effective than it was.
The article, “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” has a very interesting introduction. Johnson includes a brief conversation between Scientist A and Scientist B (Woody Allen’s “Sleeper”); however, it does not fully describe what the article is about, rather that things have changed over time. The incorporation of an anecdote encourages the reader to continue on with the article, only giving them a small idea of what is to come. He also utilizes profile by introducing Fox network and their hit show “24”. Johnson continues by incorporating background information on his article’s subject. He mentions“24” as a “real time thriller” and notes the controversies it has created. Also, he describes a few scenes from the show, informing the readers who are not familiar with the “gruesome violence”. His thesis can be found in the second sentence of the third paragraph. Johnson states, “the culture is getting more cognitively demanding, not less”. He “finds his own way of seeing things” when it comes to the new topics on shows. By highlighting the loss of morals in TV shows and identifying the implantations of reality, he turns a negative into a positive. Many viewers are upset when they see teen pregnancy or violence, when truthfully those topics are reality. Johnson does state his beliefs on the new “mediasphere”, defending his idea of the “Sleeper Curve”. Instead of focusing on the negativity, he suggests viewers approach it in a cognitive way to make sense of it all. He also incorporates “The Sopranos” which supports the idea of “our fallen state”. I personally agree with what Johnson is stating in his article. Many shows on TV today would have never been considered twenty years ago, but for some reason today are more than acceptable. Violence has become reality and after 9/11 it becomes very easy to relate to these devastating topics. The further these shows stretch away from morals, the more realistic they appear.
ReplyDeleteIn response to rhe10: I think you could have elaborated a little more in your entry. There were many examples in “The Curious Researcher” that you could have expanded on. Your entry would have been much stronger if you would have given more thought into the paragraphs (after reading about Leads pg.185). I also disagree on what you chose as your thesis. I believe it is located in paragraph 3, sentence 2.
In his article “Watching TV Makes You Smarter”, Steven Johnson hooks the reader by opening with dialogue; although the dialogue does not involve anyone in the topic, it does serve as an anecdote due to its relevance to the issue. Johnson uses profile when he introduces “24” as an important example to his argument and provides background information; beginning with a broad outlook of the program and then narrowing it down to a more specific point of view that coincides with the issue question. Johnson speaks with authority over the issue, citing different types of television shows and the complexity of their plot. He compares and contrasts the shows’ plot complexity with that of current ones and past years. Through his examples, he proves to have an extensive knowledge of television shows, an important factor in establishing credibility. Johnson also uses his authority to express his personal opinion when addressing how “The Sopranos” reflects our fallen state with all of its ethical ambiguity. Most importantly, he utilizes his authority to provide a profile that introduces his unique theory of the “Sleeper Curve.” I believe the thesis statement is as the beginning of the third paragraph: “I believe that the Sleeper Curve is the single most important new force altering the mental development of young people today, and I believe it is largely a force for good: enhancing our cognitive faculties, not dumbing them.”
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kassandra:
I think you did a great job of utilizing the Curious Researcher and incorporated well in your analysis of the introduction, although I think the book was referencing to something else when said quotes, maybe experts from a passage or material from an outside source rather than just the quotation marks around a title.
The author’s beginning paragraph is really good. He has a hook, thesis, and some background information. The hook to me is really good because is make you want to read more about the article. I feel that the author has addressed the background information and context. It gives a description of what’s going on in show. I feel that the thesis is in the second paragraph because in the first one is just has the hook and background information. I think that how the first few paragraphs are set up is really good. It gives back ground information and sets everything up really nice. In the reading from curious researcher it talks about all the different beginnings that you can use. I think that the thesis is the second sentence in the second paragragh. I am not to sure but to me it sounds like the thesis. In this article I feel that it is writing a scene. Also I feel he talks a little about the background, because the author is telling you what is happening. Everything in the first paragraph is about the TV show and the background information on it. Thought the way the author speaks he make the reader more involved in the article. The author has made his voice known in this article. The author makes it clear who the audience is because of what the TV show is. He is directing the article toward the people who watch the show.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Gray Wong, I think you should have talk more about how the second paragraph is helpful. Also I think you should have talked more about the hook.
Steven Johnson opens his introduction with a dialogue from Woody Allen’s Sleeper, this does give some insight into what the paper is about but you don’t fully grasp what he I trying to argue until you read the entire introduction. After he explains all of the controversy over the show 24 you begin to understand how the dialogue is connected to the main argument. The dialogue is the hook which wants you to read farther too really find out what the article is about. When I read it I didn’t understand what he was trying to say so I had to read further. The author also does not follow the dry, boring, mundane, structure of a usual research piece. He makes it entertaining by including a T.V. show that is current to our society and one that many people are familiar with. After explaining how the 24 is relevant to current events and issues within our society he explains that the show isn’t so much absurd with its content but realistic. Which makes one think harder about what is going on? By being realistic the viewer must go beyond the surface layer of most television shows and critically think about the content. His introduction already includes support by example in his use of the show 24. He has already begun trying to convince his audience of his opinion. His thesis is located in paragraph three when he talks about needing cognition to fully understand a show such as 24. He entices, shows, and starts convincing in one smooth introduction while not being mundane and boring to the reader.
ReplyDeleteIn Response to: Alex Carmona
I thought your point about symbolism for American news was the perfect way to describe what Steven Johnson was trying to explain. The way the current events are portrayed through our entertainment on television.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSteve Johnson’s article, “Watching TV Makes You Smarter,” has an interesting introduction that catches the readers attention. He inserted a piece of dialogue from Woody Allen’s “Sleeper.” When I first read it, it left me confused as to where the article was going to go, so I kept reading the article to find out. The authors purpose of starting the article like that was to grab the audience’s attention and keep them interested in what they would be about to read. As the article proceeds, the author begins to talk about the show “24” and gives background on the show for the readers who have not had the opportunity to watch the show. He talks about how controversial the show is and how complex the storyline can be. I think the fact that the article talked about a show that nearly everyone has seen or at least heard of it made the article more interesting because it was something that the reader can relate to.. When we get to the third paragraph, the author states his thesis, “the culture is getting more cognitively demanding, not less.” After the thesis statement, he begins to refute his argument when he talks about how television has lost its moral clarity. He also gives other examples by comparing many other shows that have been around in our culture. Overall, I thought that the introduction was successful in grabbing the readers attention and I think that the article was successful in keeping the readers attention.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Hanna Denney, I also agree that the article was not the typical boring article one would normally encounter. It was interesting and the fact that the author used a show that is well known in american culture helped keep it interesting.
ReplyDeleteIn the curious researcher, this section talks about using dialogue to introduce your topic. This not only engages the reader, but also identifies what is trying to be discussed and analyzed in the paper. In “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” the author uses dialogue in the introduction effectively. Even though this title shows a bit of contradictory to what society believes, transitioning from the opening to the hook is smooth a quick. The hook is very short and uses dialogue from “Sleeper” by Woody Allen. This hook automatically engages the reader. Then the article transitions smoothly by giving an overview of an episode from 24. This ultimately builds towards the thesis. Therefore from what I gained from the writers use of techniques is that ever sentence is a building block that leads up to a thesis. After the thesis is established then the writer is able to support details and convince or inform the reader of a given topic. Even though you may be supporting a given topic and supplying details, a counterargument can be given to address any questions or issues to the subjects. Specifically, that is was the article did after it established the thesis. Finally, in the curious researcher it said that you can use dialogue to build up to your thesis but there are other techniques that help as well that will establish a great thesis and article such as the one we read for class. The other techniques may be to profile, use background, contrast, raise a question, or use quotes; all of these were also effectively established in the article.
ReplyDeleteBree Flowers: “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” did effectively address all of the subjects described in the curious researcher. I didn’, however, see the pathos that intrigued the reader initial, yet when I went back I saw from your view of how the writer connected to the reader.
The opening to “watching TV makes you smarter” uses a speech between two scientist, this grabs the readers attention and draws you in to keep reading further. This is used as a hook these makes the reader keep reading further to wonder what the deal is between the two scientist. The author then uses a popular TV show 24 to also grab the reader’s attention. This show is a very popular show and using it to explain what he is trying to get across as an example of what he is stating. The author then uses details like 9/11 to present another example of Muslim terrorist that relate to 24. The thesis to this article is “For decades we’ve worked under the assumption that mass culture follows a path declining steadily toward lowest common denominator standards, presumably because the “masses” want dumb, simple pleasures and big media companies try to give the masses what they want”. This sentence is located in the third paragraph after the two summary paragraphs. These paragraphs are used to state a general claim about what is going on in television today and then they go into the thesis that shows what the author believe the media has come to today. The author then in the subheading televised intelligence uses a strong tone to get across his point of how he feels about the subject of television making you smarter. He talks to you on a person level with humor and understanding so you can understand where he is coming from and relate to him which is what the author of the curious researcher suggests you do to establish a connection with the reader.
ReplyDeleteIn Response to Kassandra Carr’s post:
I like how you touched upon the dialogue that the author uses. Dialogue can make or break a set of words. They establish a connection with the reader dialogue can help the reader establish a urge to keep reading and is used as a good hook.
In the article "Watching TV Makes You Smarter," the author, Steven Johnson, uses dialogue between two scientists from a film called "Sleeper." The Curious Researcher talks about using dialogue as a hook to capture readers' attention. While it did in fact capture my attention, I dislike that the quote is neither explained in context of the paper or the film, which I believe leaves it as a poor introduction for his article.
ReplyDeleteThe majority of Johnson's introduction is discussing the show 24 and the controversy over the show. Although it's good the the background information is given, i feel that it is mostly extraneous information and he gets too wrapped up in the details of the show, which throws off the reader when the thesis finally comes. I personally wasn't expecting the thesis he provided, which appeared in the first sentence of the fourth paragraph, immediately following the background information. His thesis is about how the Sleeper curve is the "single most important new force altering mental development of young people today..." His thesis would be stronger if he did not use "single most important" because it is a very broad, all encompassing term simliar to 'All' or 'Always,' which we were told not to use in our introduction, especially out thesis. I think that claiming that his thesis is the most important new force in mental development is arrogant and would need much more than a four page article to back up.
In response to Bree Flowers:
ReplyDeleteAlthough your post is rather short, it is still very concise and to the point, including a lot of good detail in a small space, which I think is good. I like that you said something about the counterargument being introduced in the beginning. I also think that that was a good way to immediately add more ethos to his thesis. I wish I would have remembered to mention soomething about that, too.