Feedback for Article
Now I have written the first draft of the article, we have again gave each other feedback so we can improve it. Our peers read the article out loud so that we can spot faults easier.
Here’s the article:
Here’s a audio of the feedback I got from one fellow student. I have some points summerised further below.
- Some of the adjectives and verbs I used seem to be from another genre of writing. For example, the phrase “materialised atom by atom” seem straight from a sci-fi novel, while “indicates” is way too formal. I have to write in mind of the audience. I’ll change the words that are out of place.
- Second paragraph told was too dense, too many “-isms”, while I been told I lack “cultural imperialism”. I’ll shorten it, and implement the former too.
- Metaphor of “broken glass” does not work. Find another.
- More fitting language, perhaps some Russian street slang e.g “Gopnik”?
- Add more ways to identify him as some of Soviet influence, as well military-like.
- Some of the descriptions are two long for the little effect they give. E.g. “The only indicator that this is the 21st century, is that a minority of the villagers wear t-shirts with a brand from the west”
- The rhetorical question is weak in the first paragraph, find something stronger.
- I should aim to make the writing of the criticism to be more amusing, so far the entertainment category is rather weak.
- Too many times the word “music” has been said. Use a different one.
- Find a name for a backwater Russian village.
- Improve the ending somehow. The buildup drops quite dully.