Friday, September 17, 2010

SA 2: "One Day, Now Broken in Two"

Anna Quindlen's article, "One Day, Now Broken In Two" speaks to those who were affected by the bombings of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Within this article, she attempts to bring her audience together by recollecting this horrific time by discussing how she and the entire country have worked to live with the devistation. It feels to me that Quindlen is attempting to appeal to her readers by drawing out their strong emotions regarding the attack. She does this by mentioning her son and how the day of his birth, September 11th, will always be joyful and heartbreaking. It seems that Quindlen is expecting those reading her article to share this same feeling due to the loss of a loved one in the bombings.

If we take Ong's chapter, "The Audience is Always Fiction" into consideration and entire new layer is added to Quindlen's piece. I feel that as she was writing her article she was imagining her audience to be those who feel pain and horror when recollecting the bombings of September 11th. It is interesting to thingk about how this article could be changed by simply shifting the tone in which she speaks. While this article feels strong epideictic, a few small changes could shift the focus entirely. If Quindlen had chosen to take a deliberative approach on the issue, she could have imagined her audience to be those who are very bitter about the bombings and wish to take violent action. It may be a stretch, but the piece could be a call for even further revolt from Americans. By asking the question "Who are we now?" she gives the reader a choice as to what type of responder they wish to be. This could also be seen as a mocking statment used to presuade readers into taking action.

This article could easily be shifted by a few simple sarcastic undertones used to enrage Quindlen's already upset readers. Her current article seems to be having a conversation, as well as sympathizing, with those who were beaten down and terrified by the disaster, but she could have writtne it to aim for those who wish to take revenge on the attackers by simply shifting her focus ever so slightly.

1 comment:

  1. Hmm. Bringing a "sarcastic" tone really changes the tone of the article in a manner which I have never heard 9/11 discussed...and that may not be a bad thing! Having a sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek article about something so serious could really bring a mindset of "we are past this" to the reader.

    ReplyDelete