A piece of writing can be evaluated based on several criteria depending on its purpose, stylistic characteristics, and overall tone. Generally, the factors of grammar and consistency with an intended style are considered to be some of the most influential ones. This paper attempts to examine and evaluate the presented writing sample to determine whether it succeeds in achieving its purpose. It also comments on the existing strengths and weaknesses within the sample and suggests possible areas of improvement.
The sample in question is a letter addressed to the George Bush at the time of him being the President of the United States. It is a piece that intends to perceive the leader of the nation to stop the ongoing war, appealing to the negative impact it has on the American citizens. The clear conviction behind the writing is an apparent strength of the letter in question. It is apparent how dedicated the author of the letter is to the idea they are attempting to preach, which speaks in the letter’s favour. The concern showcased by the author towards the well-being of the American children and the American citizens in general is easily identifiable. However, the argumentation is far from perfect, with the piece appealing solely to emotions, rather then a mix of emotions and logic. The letter does not mention any verifiable evidence of any connection between financial struggles experienced by some of the U.S. citizens, and the ongoing war.
The sample is unlikely to be successful with its purpose, considering the lack of professionalism and thought put into phrasing throughout the piece. The tone of the letter is incredibly inappropriate and arguably demanding, with an author claiming to represent the collective thoughts of American families on the subject matter. The writing is not phrased adequately for an instance of political communication (Reyes and Ross, 49). Furthermore, stylistically the writing is exceptionally difficult to classify due to the lack of structure and analytical argumentation. It does not follow the guidelines for either official correspondence or academic debate-oriented writing. Although the purpose behind the writing is clear, the same cannot be said about the precise points the author is willing to discuss, further reducing the chances of success.
From the standpoint of grammar and punctuation several mistakes can be identified both within the sentence structure and the spelling of certain words. Multiple sentences within the letter are too short and do not therefore fit the style of either academic writing or official correspondence. An example of such would be the closing sentence of Put America back together, that would have been appropriate for a political campaign, but not in an official piece of writing. Additionally, minor grammar mistakes can be identified within the spelling of multiple words throughout the letter, such as backward being written instead of backwards.
As per final thoughts, it seems reasonable to comment on the questionable sensibility behind the central topic of the letter in general. The writing is based on the idea that the U.S. children are supposed to be inherently privileged over those in other countries, normalizing the idea of the American supremacy. Such approach has long been rejected by the majority of modern democratically elected officials in America due to its inherent discriminatory component. Therefore, to write a proper letter to the President, the author would need to improve their tone, spelling, structure and even the argument they are attempting to make.
Work Cited
Reyes, Antonio, and Andrew Ross. “From the White House with anger: Conversational features in President Trump’s official communication.”Language & Communication 77 (2021): 46-55.