When Writer Speak

Maybe all writers are supposed to do is to write well.

Source: Lilley, Kathryn. Writer Using Quill. Digital image. The Kill Zone: Reader Friday: What Kind of Writer Are You? N.p., 26 Apr. 2013. Web. 25 Aug. 2013.

While pondering why a great writer would need notes to participate in a great discussion, Arthur Krystal realizes that writers only need to be writers. Krystal, the author of When Writers Speak, has written for many highly-ranked newspapers and publications such as The New Yorker, Harper's, and The New York Times Book Review among others. He is a published author who has written three books. His essay, When Writers Speak, is about how writers are not necessarily communications experts and should not be treated as such. Anyone could read this essay and draw applicable meaning from it. The audience doesn't have to include the verbally-clumsy writer it was written about. This is a very far-reaching essay with a universal audience. To achieve his purpose, Krystal uses an antithesis-like layout on the second page; he presents Steven Pinker, a Harvard psychologist, who argues that when a professional writer sits down to write, they deliberately have to be clear. Additionally, he reasons that writers generally have editors. Krystal debunks Pinker by saying that he isn't only a better as a writer, he's less boring, too. Since entertainment can't be edited into a paper, Pinker's argument is invalid. Krystal also uses syntactic fluency. The length and complexity of his sentences vary, making him easy to follow and proving that he is a smart writer. He reasons he is not smart "in person" because "different words and phrases would be generated" (Krystal 3). Krystal's purpose in writing When Writers Speak is abundantly clear. He wants to tell the reader that it is unreasonable to ask a specialist to work outside their specialty. The author not only achieved his purpose, he ingrained it in the reader. He made the reader feel appreciated, almost as if anything more than just doing their job was excessive and reward-worthy. Writing in the first person made him very relatable and understandable, which worked perfectly. He didn't try to make the average person into a reader, and he didn't force the reader to do anything other than read. His writing paralleled his purpose.

Irreconcilable Dissonance

With divorce rates so high, Brian Doyle investigates a couple reasons why couples are splitting.

Source: Wood, Sarah. Wedding Cake Split. Digital image. Free Wood Post RSS. N.p., 26 June 2013. Web. 24 Aug. 2013.

Having been happily married to his only wife for years, Brian Doyle witnesses other couples around him getting divorced for what seem like petty reasons. He decides that the spectrum between married and divorced is very large, leaving room for the growing potential for divorce in every marriage. Irreconcilable Dissonance discusses divorces, and why once-married couples chose to get them. Brian Doyle, explores some bizarre explanations for divorce, including one couple that got a divorce "on the grounds of irreconcilable dissonance". Tiny anecdotes like these help Doyle show readers that divorce can happen at any time for almost any reason. They offer glimpses into half a dozen marriages that end in divorce. Also, the author ends the essay with a clever aphorism formed by a contradiction: "The instant there is no chance of death is the moment of death", where divorce is death. It leaves something with the reader to think about and therefore results in them contemplating divorce, and how accurate Doyle's point is. This essay was written for anyone who is married, considering marriage, or considering divorce. Doyle's purpose in writing Irreconcilable Dissonance is to inform readers that divorce is always imminent. Although Doyle shows the reader that divorce is common and can happen for nearly every reason, his true purpose is to convince readers that divorce is a slippery slope and actually not to be taken lightly. At the University of Portland, Brian Doyle is the editor of Portland Magazine. Brian Doyle is also an author who graduated from Notre Dame University before working for various magazine and newspaper companies as an editor. He is currently an editor for Portland Magazine, an award-winning quarterly magazine, at the University of Portland. The author accomplished his purpose using reverse psychology. By writing about ridiculous explanations for divorce, he leaves the reader feeling like divorcing for such a reason would be foolish. Since most people do not want to be considered foolish, they will likely avoid divorcing their spouse unless there's a legitimate reason. Without realizing it, Doyle lets the reader convince themselves of his purpose.

Guy Walks into a Bar Car

David Sedaris's regret is intensified after an encounter on a long train ride.

Source: Luebben, Craig. Andres Marin Escalando. Digital image. 2011 Ice World Cup in Russia. N.p., 25 Mar. 2011. Web. 22 Aug. 2013.

Only David Sedaris can effectively compare instant oatmeal to love; similes like these help him to drive his point home. Also, he writes satirically, in which his ridicule is generally directed at himself. His use of satire proves to the reader how he's a bit foolish, which supports his purpose in writing Guy Walks into a Bar Car: to convince the reader not to make his fear-filled mistake. Sedaris, a young homosexual, writes about a 19-hour train ride in which he meets an alcoholic named Johnny on his way to visit his boyfriend of six years. The ride actually results in their break-up. Regardless, Johnny and Sedaris bond over alcohol and drugs. After they part, Sedaris reflects (with regret) on his previous pseudo-relationship with a Lebanese man he met while traveling in Europe. His purpose in writing this essay was to help others avoid what he believes was a mistake. He traveled, met someone he felt an instant connection with, and when offered a new life with this someone, turned it down. Even years later, he still feels regret. His purpose is to persuade readers to accept what he declined. Although this essay describes a homosexual romance, it's more broadly about regret. David Sedaris discusses how he feels about travel, and the idea that opportunities for relationships are valuable. This essay was written for people who are shy and might have difficulty accepting unique offers due to fear. A humorist, radio contributor, and author, Sedaris was nominated to win a Grammy Award. Five of his essays, from 1997-2008, became New York Times Best Sellers, and not without reason. David Sedaris achieved his purpose brilliantly. His essay is hilarious, heartfelt, and purposeful. Usually,  mistakes are made before lessons are learned. Sedaris uses comedy and regret to eliminate the need for mistakes, since he believes there aren't enough chances to waste one with a mistake. His final message: be open to possibilities.

Gyromancy

Van Gogh, who cut off his ear, serves Ron Rindo's introduction to Ménière's disease since Ménière's involves problems with the ear.

Source: Self-Portrait with Bandaged Ear. 1889. Van Gogh Gallery. Vincent Van Gogh Gallery. Web. 25 Aug. 2013.

Ron Rindo is a middle-aged husband who suffers from Ménière's, in which there is excess fluid in the inner ear. This affects the vestibular system, which is responsible for the body's sense of balance; once thrown off, the body becomes susceptible to vertigo. Ron Rindo's Ménière's symptoms have lasted since his 20s. In Gyromancy, Rindo reasons that Van Gogh might have suffered from Ménière's, and attacks of immobilizing vertigo, through his own personal experiences. Ron Rindo received his B.A. from Carroll College and his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. He currently teaches American Literature, Fiction Writing, and Nature Writing at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh. He was recognized by the Wisconsin Library Association for Outstanding Achievement twice. If anyone is qualified to describe such a disease, it's Rindo. The purpose of Gyromancy is to describe a case of severe Ménière's disease with a particular focus on vertigo through personal experience and a theory about a well-known figure. This essay was written for people with minimal knowledge on Ménière's disease or vertigo. Since uncontrolled vertigo is not something one can easily mimic (and only 40% of adults have experienced it at least once), Rindo must employ various rhetorical strategies to accurately inform the reader about the feeling of vertigo. One technique he uses is vivid imagery. He uses words with very strong, clear connotations such as "chaos" and ""disorienting". Additionally, he uses similes and the phrase "as if" several times to describe otherwise indescribable feelings. I believe Ron Rindo accomplished his purpose. When I began Gyromancy, I had never heard of Ménière's before, knew little about vertigo, and had an average knowledge of Van Gogh. The author built the essay off something I was familiar with: when Van Gogh cut off his ear. From there, Rindo ventured into unfamiliar territory using flawless transitions, making him easy to follow. When he  explored the medical cause of Ménière's, I already understood of what I was reading, so it didn't interrupt my comprehension or interest.

The Murder of Leo Tolstoy

Tolstoy and his wife, Sonya, had a strained relationship, but after he saw her digging through his personal items, he had had enough. He boarded a train and bought tickets as he went to try to lose Sonya. Within a few days, what was once a mild cough became a fever for Tolstoy. Once he reached Astapovo, he became too ill to continue. This is the room where Tolstoy died on November 7. His daughters were the last people he saw before he died, since his wife, Sonya, was not allowed to see him. She waited for him just outside in a train car. She had decided that if Tolstoy dared to try to flee, she would hire a private detective to follow him.

Source: Finegold, Leo. Room in Astapovo Where Tolstoy Died. Digital image. The Last Days of Leo Tolstoy. N.p., 19 Aug. 1999. Web. 20 Aug. 2013.

The Murder of Leo Tolstoy is a memoir-style essay that discusses Tolstoy's life and relationships and how they might have contributed to his death. Elif Batuman sets out to challenge the traditional notion that Leo Tolstoy's death was natural. In the essay, she attends the International Tolstoy Conference in Yasnaya Polyana, where she decides to write a field-research proposal hoping to earn a travel grant of $2,500. Batuman is an American author and journalist who graduated from Harvard University and later earned a doctorate in comparative literature from Stanford University. She also won a Whiting Award; these awards are given annually to ten writers that show remarkable talent early in their career. Elif Batuman is evidently credible. Her pupose was to investigate whether Leo Tolstoy died of natural causes or was murdered. Batuman subtly aims to persuade readers of the latter. Batuman uses various rhetorical devices to investigate Tolstoy's death and to convince the reader that Tolstoy might have been murdered. Several times in her essay, the author uses rhetorical questions to force the reader to come to the same conclusion she came to about a particular piece of evidence. This proves useful because it almost lets the reader convice his/herself that Batuman's idea is correct. With that said, The Murder of Leo Tolstoy was written for people with a particular interest in Tolstoy and his work or for people who appreciate a connection-based analysis of someone's life and death. This essay was thoroughly entertaining and well written in a way that allowed Batuman to accomplish her purpose. She made many conclusions that made sense in light of her evidence and thought process. Batuman did not set out to prove that Leo Tolstoy died one way or another, she simply set out to investigate how he might have died. In that light, Batuman investigated in a way that made her idea that Tolstoy was murdered not necessarily proven-without-a-doubt, but at least leaving some solid reasoning as to why Tolstoy didn't definitely die of natural causes.

Source: 

Finegold, Leo. "The Last Days of Leo Tolstoy: Chapter III." The Last Days of Leo Tolstoy: Chapter                 III. N.p., Aug. 1999. Web. 25 Aug. 2013.