A Response to Part Five of Albert Camus' 'The Plague'

675 Words3 Pages
Our analysis of Alpaugh's The Leap from Kitty Hawk shows that the writer did not make any reference regarding his approach within the paper. There is neither any insight as to what the paper introduces which would be valuable. The author's introductory paragraphs merely illustrate relevant contexts to the subject of his paper, however he does not define his goal in writing it. The subtitle assures us though that it is an historical perspective. However, that does not help in understanding the plan for the paper. Comparatively, Our nation's seaports" does provide that information which makes the paper more relevant and topic focused. We understand that the writer's paper is valuable in that it focuses on improvements made within the nation's seaports. The difference between including and not including the value of the work and the plan for the paper is important because of its relevance for the reader and for the reader's understanding. In the first paper, the writer's vocabulary is rather artistic in that it justifies the historical approach. It is not meant solely for professionals in the field, but it makes it available to the common reader as well. Some specific terms are used because of the topic itself which could not have been addressed in any other way, but it is generally an easy reading. The second paper makes use of more specific terms related to the subject it covers, such as vessels, cargo, shipyard, etc. Plus, it includes references to various services
Open Document