http://www.slate.com/id/2291061/
Sorry this is so late. I did the reading and completely forgot I had this due this week until I read the email from Marin.
This is an interesting article that builds tension/suspense/what-have-you surrounding the exoneration of Frank Sterling. I feel that it could be improved by focusing more directly on telling Sterling's story, by giving the reader how he came to be convicted, how he fared in jail, and how it felt for him to attain freedom once more, something along those lines. Perhaps the writer didn't have access to that information, but it might have been a stronger story had this been the case. Additionally, the article seems to have been written by a law prof, not a professional journalist, which probably explains why this wasn't done. A strongly pointed article nonetheless.
Part one of the series is perhaps a better example of the story telling aspect that you felt was lacking, Ellen. In it the writer spends much more time telling the story of a woman and the man who she accidentally sent to prison. I suggest you read the companion piece, "How Eyewitnesses Can Send Innocents to Jail."
I thought that this piece was really interesting and a little unsettling. It's interesting that Jordan mentioned how much he loves _In Cold Blood_. This piece definitely has the legal/victim/convicted vibe going on but throughout the piece I had a hard time sympathizing with Mr. Sterling. I think that's an important point to acknowledge: Mr. Sterling was found innocent while Capote's characters are as guilty as they come, yet I feel as thought I have more sympathy for Capote's protagonists (but maybe antagonists? It's a weird thing; I'm not quite sure what to call them). I think my feelings stem from the way in which Capote writes: in his work I can see the convicted men as men, as humans, whereas I see (unfortunately) Mr, Sterling as an addition to a piece rather than a character possessing human-like qualities. I'm not sure if this point makes sense. Maybe I'll need to explain it more in class tomorrow. Hopefully someone understands what I'm trying to get at!!
I never felt "hooked" by this article. I didn't even really feel "hooked" by the other one that Lindsey pointed out. Perhaps I'm just getting hardened to these types of stories after one too many lectures, news stories, or Law and Order episodes, but I didn't see a really strong story nor did I see a strong link to the big picture.
This is an interesting article that builds tension/suspense/what-have-you surrounding the exoneration of Frank Sterling. I feel that it could be improved by focusing more directly on telling Sterling's story, by giving the reader how he came to be convicted, how he fared in jail, and how it felt for him to attain freedom once more, something along those lines. Perhaps the writer didn't have access to that information, but it might have been a stronger story had this been the case. Additionally, the article seems to have been written by a law prof, not a professional journalist, which probably explains why this wasn't done. A strongly pointed article nonetheless.
ReplyDeletePart one of the series is perhaps a better example of the story telling aspect that you felt was lacking, Ellen. In it the writer spends much more time telling the story of a woman and the man who she accidentally sent to prison. I suggest you read the companion piece, "How Eyewitnesses Can Send Innocents to Jail."
ReplyDeleteI thought that this piece was really interesting and a little unsettling. It's interesting that Jordan mentioned how much he loves _In Cold Blood_. This piece definitely has the legal/victim/convicted vibe going on but throughout the piece I had a hard time sympathizing with Mr. Sterling. I think that's an important point to acknowledge: Mr. Sterling was found innocent while Capote's characters are as guilty as they come, yet I feel as thought I have more sympathy for Capote's protagonists (but maybe antagonists? It's a weird thing; I'm not quite sure what to call them). I think my feelings stem from the way in which Capote writes: in his work I can see the convicted men as men, as humans, whereas I see (unfortunately) Mr, Sterling as an addition to a piece rather than a character possessing human-like qualities.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if this point makes sense. Maybe I'll need to explain it more in class tomorrow. Hopefully someone understands what I'm trying to get at!!
I never felt "hooked" by this article. I didn't even really feel "hooked" by the other one that Lindsey pointed out. Perhaps I'm just getting hardened to these types of stories after one too many lectures, news stories, or Law and Order episodes, but I didn't see a really strong story nor did I see a strong link to the big picture.
ReplyDelete