Compare And Contrast D. Brown And N. S Momaday
C/C
Although both D. Brown (I) and N. S. Momaday (II) clearly describe the extreme weather conditions at the Oklahoma landmark, especially during the summer; Brown essentially states his observations while, Momaday romanticized his view of the landscape, which altered their perceptions.
In the first passage, written by D. Brown uses laconic diction and vivid imagery to make the scenery more realistic and simple. First, Brown immediately begins by saying what the problem is. The author declares in line one, “Out on the Plains later that summer, it seemed that everything had turned bad.” Instantly, Brown writes his assertion which makes him very straight forward and easy to understand. His laconic diction makes his interpretation of the land more easy to envision. Letting the reader …show more content…
Having a clear imagery and concise diction provided for the reader creates that straight forward and easy understanding effect.
In juxtaposition, although N. S. Momaday’s explanation of the Oklahoma landscape is just as dreadful; Momaday uses belletristic language, dark romanticism, and vivid imagery to depict the summer of Oklahoma. The countryside of Oklahoma during the summer is not the best place to be at, but the way Momaday describes the scene makes it less horrific. In line eight Momaday denotes,”in summer the prairie is an anvil’s edge.” This belletristic sentence makes the land sound very pleasant, because
the author intended to make it delightful than it is. Behind all the belletrism, Momaday meant the grasslands of Oklahoma is a steel or iron block edge; this shows how awful it is without the replacement of the elegant words . By describing something (or in this case Oklahoma) with elaborate and sapient diction, it makes the object existence sounds so beautiful than it really is. Romanticizing an existence is fundamental when expressing something repulsive or unbearable. This is why, the author
Although both D. Brown (I) and N. S. Momaday (II) clearly describe the extreme weather conditions at the Oklahoma landmark, especially during the summer; Brown essentially states his observations while, Momaday romanticized his view of the landscape, which altered their perceptions.
In the first passage, written by D. Brown uses laconic diction and vivid imagery to make the scenery more realistic and simple. First, Brown immediately begins by saying what the problem is. The author declares in line one, “Out on the Plains later that summer, it seemed that everything had turned bad.” Instantly, Brown writes his assertion which makes him very straight forward and easy to understand. His laconic diction makes his interpretation of the land more easy to envision. Letting the reader …show more content…
Having a clear imagery and concise diction provided for the reader creates that straight forward and easy understanding effect.
In juxtaposition, although N. S. Momaday’s explanation of the Oklahoma landscape is just as dreadful; Momaday uses belletristic language, dark romanticism, and vivid imagery to depict the summer of Oklahoma. The countryside of Oklahoma during the summer is not the best place to be at, but the way Momaday describes the scene makes it less horrific. In line eight Momaday denotes,”in summer the prairie is an anvil’s edge.” This belletristic sentence makes the land sound very pleasant, because
the author intended to make it delightful than it is. Behind all the belletrism, Momaday meant the grasslands of Oklahoma is a steel or iron block edge; this shows how awful it is without the replacement of the elegant words . By describing something (or in this case Oklahoma) with elaborate and sapient diction, it makes the object existence sounds so beautiful than it really is. Romanticizing an existence is fundamental when expressing something repulsive or unbearable. This is why, the author