There are many situations that have affected many third world countries. However, not all the situations get to the public. Many of these issues are discussed and tabled among the leaders of these countries. Hence, the opinion of the majority remains unknown. In this context, the paper shall analyze and evaluate the idea in the article; Extinctions: Past and Present.
The writer focuses the article on the issues that regard the well-being of wild life. He begins by narrating his experience in Turkana. The writer seemed to have been with a team of other researchers looking and studying fossils. He noticed a few fossils of wild life, which triggered his imagination of how it had been back in “1.5 million and 2 million years ago”. He proceeds to explain how it would have been if people had taken proper care of the extinct species. He then brings in another issue that affects the African countries, poverty. The writer is discouraged on how the leader’s priorities are in these countries. The leaders should be focused on helping the poor, but have channeled more funds to other issues of less concern.
Buy Evaluating the Arguments of Others essay paper online
The ideas and topic in this writing is well expressed. The depicted idea is clear and can easily be understood from the beginning of the story.
The writer has also employed pathos as a style in his or her writing. As the story begins, the writer captures the attention of the reader by taking the reader for a trip to Turkana, Kenya. He or she explains the details of fossils and the animals that were in the region with a lot of excitement. This shows when the writer talks “of another world” where the ancestors of African mammals lived in rich grasslands and forest. This highlights the enthusiasm of the writer about the trip to Turkana. The writer seems to have enjoyed this adventure compared to all other trips he or she have had before.
The writer has also used logos as a way of posing questions to the reader on the poor management of funds in the country. He highlights the way leaders have not prioritized their goals in the country. The writer asks a question “Is it legitimate to spend” a lot of money to save some animal species. He continues to ask if such can be done in a country where many are living in poverty. The writer does not give the answer, but it is obvious to the reader.
The writer has picked on a topic that applies in current affairs. The writer seems to be steady and sure about his thoughts and idea in this writing. With clear illustrations and facts, he has managed to pass a clear message to the reader. However, the writer has not laid a valid comparison between the two issues. He seems to be supporting wildlife than eliminating poverty.
Critique #2: flow of the story
Writing a story sounds like an easy task to many. It may involve collecting ideas and writing them down. For a writer to have a reputable story, he or she may have to do more than just collect ideas. It involves organizing the ideas and writing in a progressive manner. The ideas should be following one another in a sequential order. On this paper, I will discuss and criticize the flow of the story, Extinctions: Past and Present.
The story begins in Turkana, Kenya. The writer seems to have taken a discovery trip to the outskirts of Kenya. The writer of the story seems to be enjoying the findings they get in Turkana. He even imagines the scenario “1.5 million and 2 million years ago” when the animals were still living. The story then takes a different turn when the writer begins to discuss on matters of mismanagement of wildlife and the surrounding.
The story then takes another immediate turn as the writer puts a comparison on the dying of wild animals and poverty in the country. The story proceeds as the writer highlights on the issue of fund management. He is particularly not impressed about the way leaders have not given much effort to eliminate poverty. He ends the story by suggesting that the country can request for charity funds from the richest nation.
The story has a sound message, but the ideas are not well sequenced. The writer starts well by narrating about wildlife, and immediately changes to poverty. Such a change is through ethos. The writer calls the extinction crisis an easy matter. He then changes the subject matter when he says that “world's biodiversity resides in its poorest nations”. In this passage, the writer has immediately merged the two subjects. He seems to be disappointed about the issue of wildlife and points out another loophole, poverty.
Despite the interruption of the ideas in the story, the writer has employed logos. Logos portray clearly when the writer continually poses questions that involve the reader’s logic. As a result, logos have put a common ground for the writing. By the end of the story, the writer should have had a firm opinion on these issues.
The flow of the story is not consistent. The writer has bright ideas however; he seemed not to have sequenced them well. This is especially when he fails to introduce the second issue in the story topic. He has managed to connect the issues on the basis of poor management.
Related Free Review Essays
- Let the Great World Spin
- Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid
- Summary: Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid
- The Gleaners and I
- Robert Frost: A Poetics of Appetite
- Miss Congeniality 2
- “Wiley and the hairy man” by Jack Stokes
- Interpretation of a Short Story
- Four Months, Three Weeks, Two Days
- Ministry of Magic