Analysis of Tone and Introduction

Tone Analysis:

In the longer of the two articles, the author begins the paper by downplaying the role of simple technologies. They then immediately take a closer look at the technology that they started to demean. By doing this, the writer is encouraging the reader to adapt their way of approaching the rest of the information that is going to be presented throughout the rest of the piece. The author is challenging the reader to approach kitchen technology through a critical lens. As they continue their introduction, the author continues to go on about the importance of the wooden spoon as a time capsule of sorts. By adopting this lens of tradition, the author highlights the importance of tradition to technology and human nature. By connecting such a simple technology to history and the evolution of time, the author manipulates the reader into feeling as if the wooden spoon is some sort of hero for withstanding time in the way it has. The point of the whole drawn out introduction is to point out the importance of history to technology. The way that the author describes the wooden spoon immediately makes the new fangled silicone spoon seem like the enemy. The author furthers this making of an enemy by reminding the reader that new spoons just aren’t as good as the ones that have withstood the terrors of time. After the author finishes their in depth description of the spoon, they take a step back and define technology as they will be using the term throughout the paper. This allows the author to manipulate how the reader is approaching the paper. Throughout the rest of the article, the author has an almost formulaic writing style that applies to nearly every paragraph throughout the introduction. The author begins with a generalization or broad overstatement that they present as a fact. They follow this generalization with a real fact and they finish the paragraph with commentary. This method of writing allows for the authors tone to bookend the facts that are being presented. By opening the paragraph with a generalization, the author is able to prepare the reader for manipulation. They then present the fact and they follow it with commentary that solidifies the point they were trying to make within the first sentence.

In Rae Ellen Bichell’s article, “Why The U.S. Chills Its Eggs And Most Of The World Doesn’t,” the author has a sharp, concise tone that moves the paper along at a rapid pace. The first sentence is the classic opening hook. The author slams the targeted reader in the face with an unexpected fact about the way they store their eggs. From there, the author almost immediately delves into the facts behind the great egg storage debacle. Throughout the next few sentences, the author incorporates participatory phrases such as, “We”, and “Our”. By doing this, the author makes sure that the reader feels included and not as if they are being called out. From there, facts are presented with two to three sentences of commentary dispersed throughout. However, as with the opening statement, the commentary is bold and brash, pointing out the reasoning for the differences between The United States and other countries. Bichell finishes her short article with a shocking but true statement. The fast paced tempo and short commentary throughout the article make for a brisk tone that almost leaves the reader feeling as if they have been slapped in the face with opinion and fact.

Introduction [1st Draft]:

In a world where prosthetics were never invented or introduced, amputees would struggle to return to a normal life where they are able to function without assistance. Amputees would require caregivers to look after them twenty four hours a day, seven days a week. Instead of these patients being able to rejoin society, they would become their own social group; a group of dysfunctional, social, outcasts; they would be viewed and treated in a similar fashion to lepers and polio sufferers. However, because prosthesis technology has been introduced and produced, amputees are able to return to a practically normal lifestyle. Many patients find that they become mentally stronger after dealing with amputation and the adaption to a prosthetic limb. But, as technological improvements continue to grow and advance, the newest prosthesis mechanics become increasingly more complex: bionic limbs and nerve sensitive appendages. This increase in technology parallels an increase in price which influences accessibility to patients. It stands true that this inaccessibility to necessary prosthesis inhibits a patient’s mental rehabilitation process. As prosthetic technology continues to advance, there comes a point where progress becomes detrimental to the mental rehabilitation following amputation.

Introduction [2nd Draft]:

In a world where prosthetics were never invented or introduced, amputees would struggle to return to a normal life where they are able to function without assistance. Amputees would require caregivers to look after them twenty four hours a day, seven days a week. Instead of these patients being able to rejoin society, they would become their own social group; a group of dysfunctional, social, outcasts; they would be viewed and treated in a similar fashion to lepers and polio sufferers. However, because prosthesis technology has been introduced and produced, amputees are able to return to a practically normal lifestyle. Many patients find that they become mentally stronger after dealing with amputation and the adaption to a prosthetic limb. However, as technological improvements continue to grow and advance, the newest prosthesis mechanics become increasingly more complex: bionic limbs and nerve sensitive appendages. This increase in technology parallels an increase in price which influences accessibility to patients. It stands true that this inaccessibility to necessary prosthesis inhibits a patient’s mental rehabilitation process. As prosthetic technology continues to advance, there comes a point where progress becomes detrimental to the mental rehabilitation following amputation.

Prosthetics were originally designed to be mostly decorative: a visual replacement for the ease of social acceptance for amputees in other people’s eyes. However, over time, function developed to match form; prosthetics began to become actual limb replacements capable of performing the functions that the original limb was responsible for. As humans, we typically aim to avoid bringing attention to our insecurities. For example, a man uncomfortable with his body might wear clothes that cover up his personal imperfections, a woman who is afraid to be judged for having bad eyesight might invest in contacts. It is simply human nature for a person to want to blend in. The same goes for an amputee, the thing a patient wants most is to return to a life of normalcy, a life where they do not have to be ashamed of the way that they are. In Oatman-Stanford’s article, the author quotes Dr. J. Duffy Hancock who advocates for the use of prosthetics towards the goal of returning to normalcy when he claims, “Putting a cripple back to work ranks next to saving a life.” In saying this, Dr. J. Duffy Hancock is emphasizing the emotional and psychosocial importance of prosthetics. Although they do serve a technological purpose, prosthetics also aid people who have suffered a traumatic experience to recognize that there is still a chance to live a normal life. The conflict in question lies between the boundaries of technological advancement for privileged patients and mental rehabilitation hinderance for individuals. As prosthesis technology becomes more advanced the price of limb replacements increases exponentially. This makes them inaccessible to a large percentage of patients. There is a fair amount of mental rehabilitation that comes from a prosthetic. Limb replacements rebuild confidence and security in many patients so that they feel comfortable reintroducing themselves to the public. By excluding the large portion of financially challenged patients from the newest prosthesis technology, we are ostracizing them more than necessary. While it is true that the technology is assisting a specific group of patients, are these advancements leaving the financially challenged amputees in the dust?  

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s