It is evident Barbara Kantrowitz did not want to narrow her audience to one group of people. However, the context of the article is sure to appeal to women. It is also evident that Kantrowitz is opposed to the Miss America pageants and writes to persuade her audience to be opposed as well. What is more, Kantrowitz’ general, but informative, way of writing cleverly targets women without screaming “hey! Miss America is an outrage!” Yet, this is exactly what her article implies.
Kantrowitz writes in order to reach women, not by offending them, but pointing out the obvious flaws of her subject. She writes, “In 2007, Miss America might seem a paltry target, but back then it was a very big deal”: this, hardly vicious, choice of words is enough to draw the audience without smacking the issue in its face.
Kantrowitz ends her article by writing, “crowned or uncrowned, sisterhood is powerful.” While she has diverted singling out an audience all through her writing, it is safe for her now to assume, that if the reader is indeed a women she would better bond with the article by somehow being tied to it. She is left with the strong feeling of the power of sisterhood.
1 comment:
I thought that the article was very geared towards women and alienated everyone else. It is interesting that you do not think the same. I also think that initially there is some pageant hating but then again in the 2007 pageant she mentions nothing about disliking them. So I wonder if that was really her point at all.
Post a Comment