Well, this is my first blog post of the new semester and as I begin my journey through Rhetoric II I am faced with the question, what makes a writing worthwhile to read or "good"? For me it is something that draws me into the reading, what that this I mean by this is that I find it compelling to read. I chose the essay "Entangling Roots" by Jeff Lessard. It happened to be something that I found very compelling because it dealt with one of my interests. It was an essay devoted entirely to how video-games can be addicting to some. This however, has seemed to be an issue that has been beaten to death, but was still compelling to keep reading as I wanted to see what Jeff had to say on the issue. He chose a much different approach in his writing than other articles or essays I have read on the issue. He chose to focus more on the MMOs(Massively Multiplayer Online) than blaming violent games for the behaviors of children and teens.
But I digress. Getting back to the original question asked "good" to me can be many different things. I feel that "good" is compelling, entertaining, informative. It is also something that I could relate with. But these aren't the only things, because after all most writings are hard to fit into this category of what I consider "good". "Good" is something that can be different for everyone what I may consider good may not be for someone else and vice-versa.
In closing, I feel that this essay was "good" because it appeals to something that I have a first hand experience with and something that as a future career in the industry (major is video-game programming) I will be dealing with this on a day-to-day basis.
No comments:
Post a Comment