http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/10/16/when-a-daughter-dies/
In "When a Daughter Dies," the narrator tells the
story of his daughter's brief battle with insurmountably aggressive cancer in
two ways: as a father, and as a doctor. The style of the piece is very concrete
and precise, much like a medical report. The sentences are short and free of
fluff, the diction is emotionless, and the details provided are almost
exclusively on the illness and procedure. His description of the chronicle is
emotionless; he himself puts it best: "Although painful, I am capable of
describing the events of my daughter’s illness.
When I try to describe my despair and grief, words fail." However,
while emotion may not be overtly expressed in the piece, its presence is
implied by the narrator's use of syntax, imagery, and specific details.
Levitt's use of the passive voice shows how impersonal the
hospital care system is: "A relationship is formed with a local
oncologist, the neck mass is biopsied, and my daughter is discharged to await
biopsy results. Four days later, the
biopsy is read as non-small cell carcinoma of the lung. We are told that in young women who have
never smoked this tumor occasionally may have a favorable genotype that renders
it susceptible to chemotherapy." The lack of agents for these actions
shows that they are dealing with some distant, faceless entity instead of
friendly doctors.
Some of the diction in the piece also conveys Levitt's
frustration. In a particularly strong example, he says that "... the MRI
result has converted my daughter into an ambulance case and me into a very
nervous, distressed father. " The system converts his daughter into
something other than a human with a family; she's another patient, or a number.
Levitt and his daugther are dealing with an impersonal system that doesn't care
about them.
The information Levitt presents, and often the way he
presents it, also hints at his emotions. The closest Levitt comes to expressing
his fears overtly is when he creates the image of the illness being "a
genetically altered monster [that] is running rampant in my daughter’s
body." Additionally, Levitt expresses his thoughts in a very short
sentenced, specifically placed at the end of a long paragraph for emphasis in
the following excerpt: "The response to my son-in-law’s query if some
treatment can be started immediately is that no treatment is better than
mis-directed treatment. She is scheduled
to return to the referral center in four days to begin chemotherapy. I fear there will be no return visit. "
The final sentence is a chilling conclusion to the preceding paragraph, and
begins to show how chilling the situation was for Levitt. Essentially in the
same vein of thought is Levitt's attempts to get ice chips for his daughter:
"Immediately upon arrival, my daughter
asks for something which, with difficulty, I determine to be ice
chips. I ask the nurse for ice
chips. Her response is that nothing can
be “administered” until ordered by the doctor.
I tell her I am the doctor, and I want the patient to have ice
chips. I am told I am not the admitting
physician and cannot give orders. She
ignores my request to show me the location of the ice machine. "
Hi Matt--
ReplyDeleteI thought your point about Levitt's use of the passive voice was really effective here. I thought of the euphemisms we sometimes use to describe death, and how distant they usually are: like "she was taken from us." I'm fairly sure that's what they say at funerals. But the "faceless entity" you mention does seem to be very prevalent when speaking of death--is it God or Death, who knows, but it's sinister. On a more critical note, I think you could be a little clearer about the diction you mention--you're headed somewhere good, but you don't state it explicitly. You sort of repeat the diction without pointing it out. The use of the word "convert" is indeed an impersonal choice, and I think you should directly say that that word choice is what you're referring to. It's picky, but I think it could help bring your argument home.
Matt-
ReplyDeleteI thought you did a really good job of effectively showing how the DIDLS were used in this story. However I have to agree with Michaela that you should try and expand on the diction aspect. It does not really say much about how the pice was enhanced or more effective by the use of diction. Also I think that it would be better if you added more about your opinion of the story and how that was changed by the author's use of the DIDLS. Great work :)
I agree with the other two in that you did a great job here. Like Michaela, I thought the discussion on the passive voice was very insightful and effective. I also agree with both Michaela and Natasha in that you could expand the section on diction. It seems too brief, like you were picking up on something great but then you dropped it. A little more expansion could be great here and would really help add to the rest of the essay.
ReplyDeleteYour September peer reviewers suggested that you needed more uniform support and warrants and that you might want to untangle some syntax here and there. I think that your syntax is quite clear here, but again you have one excellent, fully developed paragraph of support and a couple of really underdeveloped paragraphs. For next month, work on making all of your support paragraphs equally persuasive.
ReplyDelete