The magazine article “Boxers in Boxes, Danes in Drains” is written in response to the growing concern of animal cruelty
among whom?, more recently with the issue surrounding puppy mills. The article
it's not the article that's conveyed, but the issue is conveyed informatively with the strong contention of discontinuing the atrocities being undertaken in order to produce puppies for sale within the pet industry. The article
this is the third sentence in the introduction that begins with 'The article' - try to vary your sentence structure so as to make your writing flow is accompanied with an RSPCA image of a pregnant female dog behind a wire fence with the slogan “employee of the month.”
no need to go into the specifics of the image in your intro, there are better uses of your timeAs a result of such a topic being close to the heart of many Australians, two opinion pieces
I wouldn't call them opinion pieces,rather comments were submitted the weekend following the release of the article; one supporting the contention of putting a stop to animal cruelty through puppy mills and the other portraying a tone of insensitivity
I know it's hard not to judge when someone writes something so heartless (was this an actual comment from a real person??) but when you're talking about these comments you should be focusing on what they want the reader to think, not your personal opinion on whether they're insensitive or not. This blackburn south guy wants to minimise the accusations levelled against puppy farms and instead proposes that owners are solely responsible for the welfare of their petstowards the predicament.
The headline “boxers in boxes and danes in drains” is a play on words
this is my personal preference, but I think that even if you're choosing to structure chronoligically you should still attempt to qualify themes within an author's argument. As we read the piece, the writer takes us on an emotional journey, the end of point of which is to agree with them - the different sections of their analyses seek to elicit various responses from the reader that all combine to produce ageement. So avoid starting paragraphs with a specific device, but rather try to consider what the section of the text that you're about to analyse tries to make the reader think/feel about the argument. For example, the stuff you've discussed in this paragraph is about eliciting sympathy and outrage from the reader, so you could base your topic sentence around that, referring to the breed of canines known as boxers and danes. The headline is immediately associated with abandonment and cruel living conditions through the words “boxes” and “drains” which is understood to be the condition of which many of the abandoned dogs live in.
what's the effect on the reader?The immediate reference to the RSPCA sets the backdrop of credibility to the reader, with the
m likely to reccognize the RSPCA
asbeing a predominant advocator for the fair treatment of animals.
okay, so readers see that the contention is supported by a credible organization - how does this influence their feelings towards the contention?With the representation provided by the RSPCA of pet stores “selling” puppies like selling objects gives reader a sense of the cold reality surrounding the predicament
I think being specific about the issue would be better than using 'predicament' eg the harsh reality of puppy farms works better by playing on the rationality of the audience,
by being able to understand that the animals have feelings and life, and don’t deserve to be sold like everyday objects under such harsh conditions. clunky phrasing, try 'positioning those readers who view animals as deserving of respected to be shocked and disgusted by the fact that these sentient beings are treated like mere objects, increasing their opposition against puppy farms With the mention of the RSPCA campaign “employee of the month”, the tone of the article shifts from a persuasive tone to an informative one, through the incorporation of behavioural and health issues resulting from cruel breeding.
this is a good overall topic sentenceThe health issues presented to the audience by the RSPCA is further supported through the opinion piece provided by “Jan Robranne” in which a personal anecdote of her deaf Dalmatian is revealed. The personal anecdote provides real life evidence of the repercussions of the issue and moreover
provides a sentimental
you stray from your topic sentence here, because initially you set the scene of your paragraph as if it was going to talk about how an informative tone is used impact which plays on the reader’s sentimentality
overuse, seeks to rouse empathy maybe? and causes them to
avoid maximalism - we don't know if this will cause the reader to do so or not, we can just say it 'positions' them to 'makes them likely to' support the contention
mention the specific contention through a sense of a moral obligation to do what is right. However despite the positive opinions regarding the article, Nick Conan takes an approach proclaiming “a dog is just a dog”, which is perceived as an insensitive response to a clearly sensitive topic which has already effected one family. Nick’s approach to the issue portrayed to be for self-benefit rather than in the interest of stopping animal cruelty. His identification of “ill prepared” pet owners being the culprit of increased numbers in pet shelters, signals the reader that he identifies the issue but however is unable to make the connection that his admission to the act of purchasing pets from a pet store, which directly source their “dogs” from puppy mills, irrefutably causes him to fund such an inhuman practise. This insight conjures within the reader a sense of morality and ethics, to identify themselves as a person like Nick or someone with a sense or moral judgement.
like I said in the intro, it's about what Nick wants the reader to think, not how you can personally condemn Nick. Think about it from his point of view - how do his statements aim to persuade the reader that puppy farms are not that big of an issue and that owners alone should be responsible for the welfare of pets?Further more the image “employee of the month” is a grimm representation of the predicament
overuse - I suggest reading through your practice pieces and noting any important words that appear more than 3 times - then find some synonyms for them and when you're writing and feel that you're about to re-use a word think 'no, I can use this instead' . Its portrayal of a pregnant dog behind a wire fence can be a seen as the symbol of imprisonment and oppression.
effect on the reader? The word “employee” adds a personification to the image, portraying the dog as an employee, rather than “man’s best friend”. This plays on the heartstrings
avoid informal expressions like this of the reader, forcing contemplation into the issue, the “prison like” image plays on the knowledge of right and wrong within, invoking a sense of sadness which immediately positions
too strong, don't make assumptions the reader to want to make a difference.
I think you should talk about the irony in the image, ie the contrast between the usually positive label "employee of the month" and the harrowing image of the heavily pregnant/miserable dog. It captures the reader's attention, because they're likely to be familiar wih the tag employee of the month and associate it with a positive context, so when it's presented alongside an image like that it elicits shock and forces the reader to stop and think as well as portrays puppy farms as being driven by only profit, while being uncaring for the welfare of animals.Good things to talk about in his image are also the gaze of the dog, the hole in the fence, the dark background - think about how all of this makes the reader feel towards
- the dogs
- the owners of puppy farms
- their own ability to address the issue The authors appeals to rationality and moral judgement are deliberately used to persuade the animal lovers and other readers alike to the change of such a grimm practise being inflicted on helpless, innocent
unnecesary to mention your own emotional perception of the animalsanimals, and portrays a sense of urgency to the situation with the inclusion the animals being more of an object rather than a living creature
this was a really minor point in your analysis, no need to mention it in the conclusion, which urges the reader to contemplate the values and moral obligation to the wellbeing of animals, and the environment
I think there are three main things for you to improve on
1) the structure and ideas of your paragraphs. I'm personally not a fan of the chronological approach at all, but it's about what works for you. However, you still have to find ways to make your analysis seem sophisticated - if you're simply going through the piece chronologically and not identifying bigger themes it could come off as simplistic. Before you start writing and during your reading time, consider what the 3-4 major themes of the writers' argument are, or what the author's intention within every section of the article. Use these ideas for your topic sentences and your paragraphs will become a lot tighter and more relevant
2) the way you address the comments. Not enough time was devoted to the two comments, even though they contained just as much if not more persuasive devices that the article itself. When you identify those 3-4 key arguments, see how the comments utilise the same arguments or contradict a particular argument, and integrate your analysis of the comments into that para. Also keep in mind that you have to look at what the author wants the reader to think, not what you personally think about the author and their views.
3) the 'why?' part of your analysis can be beefed up - it's really good that you're constantly mentioning the effect on the reader, but you do miss out on it sometimes, and other times there's not enough explanation of why readers feel this way.
I think you've got a pretty clear idea of what the task is and your identification of reader reactions is good. I suggest reading through some of the language analysis advice threads on these forums or looking at some examples of high scoring responses to see how you can incorporate what they do into your own analysis. Good luck, sorry if this was too harsh - I obviously focused more on the negatives, because that's what feedback is mostly for, improving, but there's positives too, so just work hard and you'll be able to polish your analysis up to a good standard 
Home
Help
Search
Login
