3rd Diigo Post - 0 views
-
Natzem Lima on 20 Jan 12Argument: While the literary criticism by Boyl isn't that of entirely having to do with how Ishmael Beah constructs his theme, Boyd does eagerly bring up an original point that small bitter conflicts can end up affecting contemporary history far more than the "squalid reckoning that modern warfare encourages". Claim: To support his argument, Boyd highlights that Ishmael Beah was one of the first ever to give literary voice to distressing phenomena like that of pubescent or prepubescent warrior-killer. He goes on claiming that much of how a phrase becomes construed or illustrated is that dependent of the reader; such adolescent, non-seemingly affectionate lines, can end up affecting the reader in unintended consequences. Lastly, Boyd gives light to the fact that small-scale conflicts are often mirror that of an anarchy because of the unpredictability, unlike that of modern warfare tactics which a winner can be estimated nearly correct every time. Evidence: 1) "All this has the idiosyncratic ring of precisely remembered truth." 2) "Such knowledge is shocking, but it's the reader's imagination that delivers the cold sanguinary shudder, not the author's boilerplate prose. It is a vision of hell that Beah gives us, one worthy of Hieronymus Bosch, but as though depicted in primary colors by a naive artist. 3) "It was a moment of pure potential anarchy that could have gone any way. "