Both of these articles want to take their readers far off the beaten path to see the sights not normally advertised in brochures. They both want to teach their readers about the particular areas instead of just focusing on their own reactions. In the first piece, readers are taken by the hand and led through the Arctic in search of polar bears. We find out that the author is used to extreme activities, making her a credible source. Next she gives us facts about the bears, which the reader can remember and take away. Within the first few paragraphs, readers already know key facts about a distant land. She uses quotes from the locals, which helps the piece move from one topic to the next. In the second piece, the author uses sarcasm and humor to bring the readers into what he considers to be an incredibly boring spot in the world. He describes every aspect of the surrounding environment in an attempt to paint a vividly dull picture for the reader. Because he exaggerates so many of his negative feelings, readers might automatically assume that he is intentionally leaving out the good parts of his trip. This is the type of piece to spark the reader's curiosity, making them more likely to want to learn about it. -Elizabeth Nash
Of the two articles, I felt the second was more successful in its goals and more enjoyable to read. While the first piece tackled what it set out to--finding the polar bears--I felt the author's word choice was poor and bland. She ended up describing a landscape so vastly different from what most people are used to in unimpressive ways. What I did feel worked for her piece were the quotes from locals, especially Cookie and the bear he shot. I understood her angle about polar bears and how it shifted, however, I would have liked to see the shift brought in quicker and ultimately focused on the town sooner. The second piece, I felt, had more going for it, if only because it had a sarcastic edge built into the angle. While it wasn't what I would necessarily call a travel piece, it was well written and entertaining, which "made" it. -- Emily Kent
I very much enjoyed the first piece--the focus on the relationship between the humans and bears and, in particular, the story about the bear grabbing its shoulder when shot was very compelling. It seemed to change direction towards the end, which was a little confusing--it made me think that he could have just introduced the idea of the bears and then focused on the rest of the town instead of going on about the bears, but the last line brought it around. However, even with the last line, the detour made me want to hear more about the town and be less certain about the point of the piece.
The idea of finding the most boring place--that any place, in and of itself, could be boring--is absolutely fascinating, and the writer manages to describe it in a suitably engrossing--if amusingly deprecating--way ("Welcome to Goole – we kill smack dealers"). It helps that he focused not only on the location itself, but the project, and the journey and surroundings--how much could really be written about the most boring place by itself? His use of language is eloquent and well-chosen without feeling overly wordy or pretentious and feels vivid and almost derelict itself, as though the language reflected the boring, dirty, and crumbling locations. Thoroughly effective and has made me look forward to bad hostels.
The first piece was interesting because of the overarching story of the polar bears. The reader is drawn in by the danger but stays for the glimpse at the locals. The polar bears are definitely a great part of the story that makes the reader want to adventure up north for their own taste of Canadian polar bear adventure. For me though, the locals are what make the story great. Their quirky attitudes towards the bears and how they co-exist. The story about the guy shooting the bear was great because it showed how the locals didn't want to hurt the bears and the guy felt awful about having to shoot it. In the end, the locals need to defend themselves. The ending was my favorite part because even though the polar bears are common place the local still asked about them despite the beauty of the Aurora Borealis in front of him. No matter what, the locals can't shake the bears and that fact made the piece one that made me want to travel.
The premise of the second piece was exceptionally amusing to me, find the most boring place in Britain. I couldn't help but think of the tv show Top Gear when the author talked about his Austin Maestro. The appeal of the piece is that the reader wants to know if the place is really that boring. The reader starts for the premise but stays for the interesting travel that finally gets him to the beet field. The descriptions of Craig and the beautiful descriptions of how awful everything looks kept me interested. The piece is about that road to discovery and wondering about what will be there. The final destination doesn't disappoint. It's a beet field, but the author imagines all of the things that could have happened there which almost makes me want to travel there myself. It's a piece that makes the reader want to go on an awesome adventure to somewhere awful and see the beauty of the place. He managed to romanticize the mundane and make the reader want their own terrible adventure.
Mance's travel piece began well with its descriptions of getting into Churchill and its landscape. Bears were mentioned frequently, but I was disappointed that only a few sentences were given to her first-person encounters with them -- although Cookie's recollection of his first time killing a bear was a wonderful addition. I understand the angle that it's not just the polar bears that make Churchill, but the people; however, I would have wanted more than just Cookie's story and the last lines to make that point. Overall, I found the piece to be an adequate account of her time in the tundra, but would love to have heard more on every subject she introduced.
I love that Moore's piece attempts something I rarely encounter in travel writing: to describe roughing it in boring locations. So many pieces are, instead, about lounging in luxurious cities rich with history, food, culture, and art. No so here, and I like that quirky quality. There's a thrill in traveling to run-down, beat-up places. To read about them in the same style used for more exciting holidays was a treat. "The blackening sky was unblemished…" is the beginning of a great line, but not one you'd expect to describe a place that some call "a waste of petrol." I enjoyed the author's angle and thought he did a wonderful job of enlivening a dead-end area, if only with his words.
I found the first piece a little unexciting and purposely misleading. Of course every piece is titled dramatically in the hopes someone will click and read it, but the subtitle of “becoming prey” becomes silly when her closest encounter––at least that she describes––is seeing the bears from afar. The writer doesn’t even go into a definite sense of being hunted or vulnerable except once when crossing a street and abruptly changes direction at the end to what I thought was an overly sweet people-are-everything typical angle. No one clicked this article to learn about how nice people are in a nowhere town. S/he clicked to learn about bears. The article was very good on a functional level, as it introduced the area, its remoteness, and used ample quotes from locals. I thought the use of “I” either needed to be removed or used more; without being absent or the focal point, her personal insertions were useless.
The second piece is clearly designed to entertain rather than inform, because its subject’s only noted value is not having any. I enjoyed the writer’s voice, especially the asshole-y comments added on to the quotes gathered (“...I should add that there is an electricity pylon in one corner, and that people edge away from me at parties”). While the first attempted to teach the reader something, even if that something is trite sentiments and how dangerous bears are dangerous, the second attempts nothing except to note that a place exists and it is terrible, but the writer is good.
I found the first piece to be unexciting and, as stated before, misleading. I didn't think she included enough sensory writing; I didn't feel like I was really engaged in the piece. It didn't even really strike me as travel writing-- instead, it seemed more like a personal anecdote. I couldn't relate to the author's polar bear obsession. All I could think of was how I would do things differently if I were in northern Canada, and how I was sure there were other things to describe. Although I guess the inclusion of the locals was good, I doubted how real the conversation with Cookie was. It seemed dramatic. This piece didn't really make me want to travel, and it didn't help me learn anything or envision a new place. The writing was self-aware, and, for the most part, boring.
The second piece was significantly more enjoyable and actually made me more inspired to travel, even if to the most boring place on Earth. There was a lot of description and it wasn't as personalized so I could see the voice of the author appealing to a wider audience. It's a funny concept and well-executed. I'm more interested in going to the most boring place than mistaking white vans for polar bears after reading both of these pieces-- the latter is engaging while the first is not, presenting a town that does not seem all that special, or any different from any other town in that northern area.
When I started reading about Churchill, I expected that the entire article would be more of the same-- a lot of descriptions about the bears and the bears habitat. Though this is a subject foreign to me, it is nothing that particularly piques my fancy. I found myself pleasantly surprised when the author switched focus and wrote more about the townspeople and the aspects of Churchill that make it similar to nearly every other small town. By writing about the community and the way the people deal with the Polar bears, the author is giving us an insight that is both unexpected and original. We could find information on Polar Bears anywhere, of course, but it is not so easy to find information on the people of Churchill. The only thing I would change in this article would be to shorten the beginning, introductory writing. The piece started very slowly.
As for the piece on the most boring areas of Britain, I was not as impressed. This was probably for more personal reasons than anything else, but I had trouble getting myself to want to read an account of the most boring places in Britain. If no one wants to go to those places, why would anyone want to read about them? And why would this guy want to spend his money at all these shitty restaurants and hotels? Other than these questions, I didn't get much out of the piece.
I loved the first piece a great deal. Kim did an excellent job of setting up the setting of the article and taking the reader to a land foreign to most. Throughout its entirety it held a vibe of mysteriousness and wonder that drew me in immensely. By far the most touching part is when the man at the bar describes his unfortunate killing of a bear. Kim really brings across the theme and message here when she speaks of the people and bears who live in harmony together. For me this was a story that started out as an animal planet episode but ended as a tale about compassionate human beings.
I thought the second writer's style was very cool and had a charming humor to it. I may have received this impression because of the project mission alone. The idea of challenging the whole art of travel writing by applying nonfiction entertainment to something inherently unentertaining is awesome. He tries a lot of things with words and referring to the area by its coordinates or county code. This style only works at times and sometimes is just down right distracting. But other times like when he said "in the eye of the Beet-holder" I loved him for being such a shameless jack ass. -Timothy O'Brien
I found the second piece was definitely more enjoyable. The first piece, while succeeding in the actual point, didn't seem to capture the essence of the setting or story; the word choice did not entice me at all. For a place so intriguing, interesting and different, I did not feel impressed by the images Mance created. I did enjoy the quotes, however, because at least then we got a sense of the area from the people actually living there.I really enjoyed the second piece for the author's angle of sarcasm and humor. Even though he found Britain to be "the most boring place on earth", there was a lot more detailed description. I felt Mance's piece focused too much on her, and therefore didn't give any room for imagining the experience myself, while Moore gives us more freedom to interpret the experience; especially for someone not used to "roughing it".
The first piece was a very easy (but fun) read. The way he took us through the day really set the scene and brought the reader into the story. I liked the way his curiosity and excitement almost shifted to an anxious feeling toward the end, but he reminds himself of the way the locals live with the bears, and have been living with the bears for centuries.
The second didn't hold my attention as much. It was interesting, but I honestly just didn't care. I did like the one line "I went to see what I had wasted my Petrol for" (something like that at least). I thought it was a clever way of saying, "yeah I thought I had wasted my time and energy too." Good writing, but it just didn't hold my attention.
I really enjoyed these two pieces, particularly the first one about Churchill. I think that Kim took a very different route to explore the area, especially as she talks about the Aurora Borealis which is a phenomenal event but that was more of a last minute addition in comparison to the bears. It felt like I got a real feel for the town because we got to see the town through an everyday scope. It definitely achieved the goal of providing a more personal look of the area and made me want to go there, if only to see the bears.
The second piece is interesting in a different way because he uses self-deprecation as humor in conjunction with his search for a travel destination that will put you to sleep. Despite this sarcasm, he does include interesting facts about the history of the area. However, this didn't make me want to travel there. Ever. So it almost defeats the purpose of writing the piece at all. I almost would want to go just to see if the town is really as boring and a waste of Petrol as he makes it seem.
I wrote this TWICE today and both entries deleted because I had trouble signing into my account...third time's the charm.
I found Kim to be an author with an acute point of view. She did a great job being a third party observer, taking in the inhabitants of Churchill's body language as well as their dialogue. I loved the recurring theme of using warnings from the guide, Dave. I also loved the recurring theme of "any bear sitings today?," an example of everyday conversation used in Churchill. It came full circle nicely.
The author in the second piece succeeded in making the reader never want to travel to the most boring places in Europe. He used adjectives well in order to describe how awful these places actually were, making the reader biased in their decision never to travel to these places. If that was his goal, then why did he even bother writing this piece? We are never told to visit Great Britain to see these towns because we are always told to go to London. -Taryn
Sorry, I didn't realize that my comments didn't post from last night, I was having posting problems too.
To reiterate:
The polar bear piece I found really compelling. The language that Mance uses is phenomenal, and even though most of it isn't particularly flashy or strong, the voice comes through incredibly. The tone and feel to the piece, thanks to the nice use of language, what what I found most appealing. The "noted" part was very strong, in my opinion. Also, the first line was an instant favorite. "There is no road to Churchill." is has so much imagery to it. I was entirely entranced and compelled to read on from there.
As for the second on, I tend to agree with Taryn. For functionality purposes, it really does do its job. I've never been to the locations he described, but damn, I never want to. Word choice like abysmally read gave an awesome feel for the piece. I might not ever go to this place, but if I do, I'd be extremely weary of EVERYTHING. I liked the way everything was focused and especially enjoyed the ending to the piece.
Both of these articles want to take their readers far off the beaten path to see the sights not normally advertised in brochures. They both want to teach their readers about the particular areas instead of just focusing on their own reactions. In the first piece, readers are taken by the hand and led through the Arctic in search of polar bears. We find out that the author is used to extreme activities, making her a credible source. Next she gives us facts about the bears, which the reader can remember and take away. Within the first few paragraphs, readers already know key facts about a distant land. She uses quotes from the locals, which helps the piece move from one topic to the next. In the second piece, the author uses sarcasm and humor to bring the readers into what he considers to be an incredibly boring spot in the world. He describes every aspect of the surrounding environment in an attempt to paint a vividly dull picture for the reader. Because he exaggerates so many of his negative feelings, readers might automatically assume that he is intentionally leaving out the good parts of his trip. This is the type of piece to spark the reader's curiosity, making them more likely to want to learn about it. -Elizabeth Nash
ReplyDeleteOf the two articles, I felt the second was more successful in its goals and more enjoyable to read. While the first piece tackled what it set out to--finding the polar bears--I felt the author's word choice was poor and bland. She ended up describing a landscape so vastly different from what most people are used to in unimpressive ways. What I did feel worked for her piece were the quotes from locals, especially Cookie and the bear he shot. I understood her angle about polar bears and how it shifted, however, I would have liked to see the shift brought in quicker and ultimately focused on the town sooner. The second piece, I felt, had more going for it, if only because it had a sarcastic edge built into the angle. While it wasn't what I would necessarily call a travel piece, it was well written and entertaining, which "made" it. -- Emily Kent
ReplyDeleteI very much enjoyed the first piece--the focus on the relationship between the humans and bears and, in particular, the story about the bear grabbing its shoulder when shot was very compelling. It seemed to change direction towards the end, which was a little confusing--it made me think that he could have just introduced the idea of the bears and then focused on the rest of the town instead of going on about the bears, but the last line brought it around. However, even with the last line, the detour made me want to hear more about the town and be less certain about the point of the piece.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of finding the most boring place--that any place, in and of itself, could be boring--is absolutely fascinating, and the writer manages to describe it in a suitably engrossing--if amusingly deprecating--way ("Welcome to Goole – we kill smack dealers"). It helps that he focused not only on the location itself, but the project, and the journey and surroundings--how much could really be written about the most boring place by itself? His use of language is eloquent and well-chosen without feeling overly wordy or pretentious and feels vivid and almost derelict itself, as though the language reflected the boring, dirty, and crumbling locations. Thoroughly effective and has made me look forward to bad hostels.
The first piece was interesting because of the overarching story of the polar bears. The reader is drawn in by the danger but stays for the glimpse at the locals. The polar bears are definitely a great part of the story that makes the reader want to adventure up north for their own taste of Canadian polar bear adventure. For me though, the locals are what make the story great. Their quirky attitudes towards the bears and how they co-exist. The story about the guy shooting the bear was great because it showed how the locals didn't want to hurt the bears and the guy felt awful about having to shoot it. In the end, the locals need to defend themselves. The ending was my favorite part because even though the polar bears are common place the local still asked about them despite the beauty of the Aurora Borealis in front of him. No matter what, the locals can't shake the bears and that fact made the piece one that made me want to travel.
ReplyDeleteThe premise of the second piece was exceptionally amusing to me, find the most boring place in Britain. I couldn't help but think of the tv show Top Gear when the author talked about his Austin Maestro. The appeal of the piece is that the reader wants to know if the place is really that boring. The reader starts for the premise but stays for the interesting travel that finally gets him to the beet field. The descriptions of Craig and the beautiful descriptions of how awful everything looks kept me interested. The piece is about that road to discovery and wondering about what will be there. The final destination doesn't disappoint. It's a beet field, but the author imagines all of the things that could have happened there which almost makes me want to travel there myself. It's a piece that makes the reader want to go on an awesome adventure to somewhere awful and see the beauty of the place. He managed to romanticize the mundane and make the reader want their own terrible adventure.
Mance's travel piece began well with its descriptions of getting into Churchill and its landscape. Bears were mentioned frequently, but I was disappointed that only a few sentences were given to her first-person encounters with them -- although Cookie's recollection of his first time killing a bear was a wonderful addition. I understand the angle that it's not just the polar bears that make Churchill, but the people; however, I would have wanted more than just Cookie's story and the last lines to make that point. Overall, I found the piece to be an adequate account of her time in the tundra, but would love to have heard more on every subject she introduced.
ReplyDeleteI love that Moore's piece attempts something I rarely encounter in travel writing: to describe roughing it in boring locations. So many pieces are, instead, about lounging in luxurious cities rich with history, food, culture, and art. No so here, and I like that quirky quality. There's a thrill in traveling to run-down, beat-up places. To read about them in the same style used for more exciting holidays was a treat. "The blackening sky was unblemished…" is the beginning of a great line, but not one you'd expect to describe a place that some call "a waste of petrol." I enjoyed the author's angle and thought he did a wonderful job of enlivening a dead-end area, if only with his words.
I found the first piece a little unexciting and purposely misleading. Of course every piece is titled dramatically in the hopes someone will click and read it, but the subtitle of “becoming prey” becomes silly when her closest encounter––at least that she describes––is seeing the bears from afar. The writer doesn’t even go into a definite sense of being hunted or vulnerable except once when crossing a street and abruptly changes direction at the end to what I thought was an overly sweet people-are-everything typical angle. No one clicked this article to learn about how nice people are in a nowhere town. S/he clicked to learn about bears. The article was very good on a functional level, as it introduced the area, its remoteness, and used ample quotes from locals. I thought the use of “I” either needed to be removed or used more; without being absent or the focal point, her personal insertions were useless.
ReplyDeleteThe second piece is clearly designed to entertain rather than inform, because its subject’s only noted value is not having any. I enjoyed the writer’s voice, especially the asshole-y comments added on to the quotes gathered (“...I should add that there is an electricity pylon in one corner, and that people edge away from me at parties”). While the first attempted to teach the reader something, even if that something is trite sentiments and how dangerous bears are dangerous, the second attempts nothing except to note that a place exists and it is terrible, but the writer is good.
I found the first piece to be unexciting and, as stated before, misleading. I didn't think she included enough sensory writing; I didn't feel like I was really engaged in the piece. It didn't even really strike me as travel writing-- instead, it seemed more like a personal anecdote. I couldn't relate to the author's polar bear obsession. All I could think of was how I would do things differently if I were in northern Canada, and how I was sure there were other things to describe. Although I guess the inclusion of the locals was good, I doubted how real the conversation with Cookie was. It seemed dramatic. This piece didn't really make me want to travel, and it didn't help me learn anything or envision a new place. The writing was self-aware, and, for the most part, boring.
ReplyDeleteThe second piece was significantly more enjoyable and actually made me more inspired to travel, even if to the most boring place on Earth. There was a lot of description and it wasn't as personalized so I could see the voice of the author appealing to a wider audience. It's a funny concept and well-executed. I'm more interested in going to the most boring place than mistaking white vans for polar bears after reading both of these pieces-- the latter is engaging while the first is not, presenting a town that does not seem all that special, or any different from any other town in that northern area.
-Libby
Of the two pieces, I preferred the first.
ReplyDeleteWhen I started reading about Churchill, I expected that the entire article would be more of the same-- a lot of descriptions about the bears and the bears habitat. Though this is a subject foreign to me, it is nothing that particularly piques my fancy. I found myself pleasantly surprised when the author switched focus and wrote more about the townspeople and the aspects of Churchill that make it similar to nearly every other small town. By writing about the community and the way the people deal with the Polar bears, the author is giving us an insight that is both unexpected and original. We could find information on Polar Bears anywhere, of course, but it is not so easy to find information on the people of Churchill. The only thing I would change in this article would be to shorten the beginning, introductory writing. The piece started very slowly.
As for the piece on the most boring areas of Britain, I was not as impressed. This was probably for more personal reasons than anything else, but I had trouble getting myself to want to read an account of the most boring places in Britain. If no one wants to go to those places, why would anyone want to read about them? And why would this guy want to spend his money at all these shitty restaurants and hotels? Other than these questions, I didn't get much out of the piece.
-Kali
I loved the first piece a great deal. Kim did an excellent job of setting up the setting of the article and taking the reader to a land foreign to most. Throughout its entirety it held a vibe of mysteriousness and wonder that drew me in immensely. By far the most touching part is when the man at the bar describes his unfortunate killing of a bear. Kim really brings across the theme and message here when she speaks of the people and bears who live in harmony together. For me this was a story that started out as an animal planet episode but ended as a tale about compassionate human beings.
ReplyDeleteI thought the second writer's style was very cool and had a charming humor to it. I may have received this impression because of the project mission alone. The idea of challenging the whole art of travel writing by applying nonfiction entertainment to something inherently unentertaining is awesome. He tries a lot of things with words and referring to the area by its coordinates or county code. This style only works at times and sometimes is just down right distracting. But other times like when he said "in the eye of the Beet-holder" I loved him for being such a shameless jack ass. -Timothy O'Brien
I found the second piece was definitely more enjoyable. The first piece, while succeeding in the actual point, didn't seem to capture the essence of the setting or story; the word choice did not entice me at all. For a place so intriguing, interesting and different, I did not feel impressed by the images Mance created. I did enjoy the quotes, however, because at least then we got a sense of the area from the people actually living there.I really enjoyed the second piece for the author's angle of sarcasm and humor. Even though he found Britain to be "the most boring place on earth", there was a lot more detailed description. I felt Mance's piece focused too much on her, and therefore didn't give any room for imagining the experience myself, while Moore gives us more freedom to interpret the experience; especially for someone not used to "roughing it".
ReplyDeleteAdriana DePalma
The first piece was a very easy (but fun) read. The way he took us through the day really set the scene and brought the reader into the story. I liked the way his curiosity and excitement almost shifted to an anxious feeling toward the end, but he reminds himself of the way the locals live with the bears, and have been living with the bears for centuries.
ReplyDeleteThe second didn't hold my attention as much. It was interesting, but I honestly just didn't care. I did like the one line "I went to see what I had wasted my Petrol for" (something like that at least). I thought it was a clever way of saying, "yeah I thought I had wasted my time and energy too." Good writing, but it just didn't hold my attention.
-Val
I really enjoyed these two pieces, particularly the first one about Churchill. I think that Kim took a very different route to explore the area, especially as she talks about the Aurora Borealis which is a phenomenal event but that was more of a last minute addition in comparison to the bears. It felt like I got a real feel for the town because we got to see the town through an everyday scope. It definitely achieved the goal of providing a more personal look of the area and made me want to go there, if only to see the bears.
ReplyDeleteThe second piece is interesting in a different way because he uses self-deprecation as humor in conjunction with his search for a travel destination that will put you to sleep. Despite this sarcasm, he does include interesting facts about the history of the area. However, this didn't make me want to travel there. Ever. So it almost defeats the purpose of writing the piece at all. I almost would want to go just to see if the town is really as boring and a waste of Petrol as he makes it seem.
-Rachel
I wrote this TWICE today and both entries deleted because I had trouble signing into my account...third time's the charm.
ReplyDeleteI found Kim to be an author with an acute point of view. She did a great job being a third party observer, taking in the inhabitants of Churchill's body language as well as their dialogue. I loved the recurring theme of using warnings from the guide, Dave. I also loved the recurring theme of "any bear sitings today?," an example of everyday conversation used in Churchill. It came full circle nicely.
The author in the second piece succeeded in making the reader never want to travel to the most boring places in Europe. He used adjectives well in order to describe how awful these places actually were, making the reader biased in their decision never to travel to these places. If that was his goal, then why did he even bother writing this piece? We are never told to visit Great Britain to see these towns because we are always told to go to London.
-Taryn
Sorry, I didn't realize that my comments didn't post from last night, I was having posting problems too.
ReplyDeleteTo reiterate:
The polar bear piece I found really compelling. The language that Mance uses is phenomenal, and even though most of it isn't particularly flashy or strong, the voice comes through incredibly. The tone and feel to the piece, thanks to the nice use of language, what what I found most appealing. The "noted" part was very strong, in my opinion. Also, the first line was an instant favorite. "There is no road to Churchill." is has so much imagery to it. I was entirely entranced and compelled to read on from there.
As for the second on, I tend to agree with Taryn. For functionality purposes, it really does do its job. I've never been to the locations he described, but damn, I never want to. Word choice like abysmally read gave an awesome feel for the piece. I might not ever go to this place, but if I do, I'd be extremely weary of EVERYTHING. I liked the way everything was focused and especially enjoyed the ending to the piece.