"Apple's Feud With Google Is Now Felt on iPhone"
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/24/technology/apples-feud-with-google-is-now-felt-on-the-iphone.html?hp
Lately, Apple and Google's break up is the most talked about since Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart split. Because of this, the author of the piece "Apple's Feud With Google Is Now Felt on iPhone", Clair Miller, uses diction, figurative language, and imagery to play up the drama of the two companies' conflict.
If Miller wrote about two companies having a business dispute, the reader would yawn and move on. However, when Miller calls this conflict a "brawl" the reader is hooked. The diction in the article is used to give the reader the impression that the two companies are "warriors" that are going "head-to-head" in a "battle" for the most users. The connotation of the words makes a business conflict transform into something much larger than it is. This exaggeration in word choice is exactly what the writer had the intention of doing to grab the reader and keep them involved in the drama of it for the whole piece.
This drama is also created through the writer's use of figurative language. For example, Miller writes, "Apple's move strikes at the heart of Google's core business." This figurative language makes the companies appear human to relate to the reader, and to appeal to the reader's emotions and sympathy. While most of this piece gives the idea that two warriors at war with each other, another example of figurative language reads, "it's the two big kids kicking sand in the sandbox." The rest of the article attempts to amplify the feud, but this metaphor in the beginning downplays the conflict to remind readers that the companies are not truly at war and will not have a significant impact on the rest of the world. Overall, the figurative language maintains the drama of the altercation.
Lastly, imagery comes about from the use of diction and figurative language. When reading the article, one begins to imagine two warriors on the battlefield fighting for their lives. Many of the examples already used above exhibit this such as comparing Apple and Google's fight to a "brawl" where one "strikes at the heart" of the other. In reality, the two companies are fighting it out in the courtroom but when the right words are used, the reader sees a new setting. To keep the reader's interest, Miller provided exciting images using diction and figurative language that again emphasizes the dramatic side of the scenario.
Your choices of diction are really good. I think that in your choices you captured what the author was trying to do, engage the audience and keep their attention. The example of personification is good because I think that it helps the audience relate to the situation. In addition the example you gave about the two companies kicking sand in a sandbox is good because it brings the audience back to reality and shows them that the dispute isn't anything too serious. However, I also think that it could imply that this dispute is somewhat childish. When I read about sand in a sandbox I think of two little kids fighting over a toy or something. Overall I think your explanations are great and so is your organization.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Caroline about the kids in the sandbox. I think that this quote shows more of the childish side of the feud and I think that is the true meaning that author is trying to convey. Another idea I had was regarding the imagery portion of this essay. In comparison to the rest of your essay, this section seemed to be a little lacking. I would suggest adding a stronger example and description to that section. Overall though, this was very good closed reading. The examples and explanations you use make it very clear what the author is trying to convey.
ReplyDeleteI love your intro sentence. A+.
ReplyDeleteYour essay does a great job of sticking to DIDLS. It's very organized and your points are well-supported. My only criticism is mostly just me: Diction, imagery and language are too closely related in my mind for me to feel comfortable writing an essay on just them. You pulled it off fine, though, so I guess that's irrelevant.