Living in the Anthropocene
Hello, Editor of the Shorthorn. You have asked me to read and review the article Living in the Anthropocene and give my opinion on whether it should or should not be published in the Shorthorn. I have read and analyzed this article and have reached the conclusion that it should not be published in the Shorthorn. This article is too morbid for the UTA readers and is also depressing.
Roy Scranton, the author, wanted to make this point: In order to survive in this world both now and into the future, we must first learn how to die. This claim is backed up by his own experiences when he was a war veteran and as a witness to Hurricane Katrina. Starting with his time in Iraq, Scranton talks about his time in Iraq, explaining, …show more content…
Now, granted, some people might say that this is a fair way of doing things. Going over how we can improve by looking at how bad we made things is a good way of preventing and improving ourselves in the future. However, I strongly believe that the way he presents this fact is not suitable for readers of the Shorthorn. He doesn't elaborate on how we can survive by going over our mistakes, instead he just plainly states the condition of Iraq and how chaotic things got as time progressed, and also says how bad we, as America, made the country during and after the war. In essence, he is saying how we are a very destructive country, which I highly doubt is something the readers want to read about.
Now, he also talks about his experience with Katrina. However, instead of saying how bad Katrina was, he reverses it and say how bad we as a country dealt with Katrina. What he says is that we have a poor infrastructure and because of our lack of preparation for the storm, we got more damage than we should’ve gotten had we been prepared. He then goes on to say that this lack of infrastructure is also the reason why there is so much evil in our
Hello, Editor of the Shorthorn. You have asked me to read and review the article Living in the Anthropocene and give my opinion on whether it should or should not be published in the Shorthorn. I have read and analyzed this article and have reached the conclusion that it should not be published in the Shorthorn. This article is too morbid for the UTA readers and is also depressing.
Roy Scranton, the author, wanted to make this point: In order to survive in this world both now and into the future, we must first learn how to die. This claim is backed up by his own experiences when he was a war veteran and as a witness to Hurricane Katrina. Starting with his time in Iraq, Scranton talks about his time in Iraq, explaining, …show more content…
Now, granted, some people might say that this is a fair way of doing things. Going over how we can improve by looking at how bad we made things is a good way of preventing and improving ourselves in the future. However, I strongly believe that the way he presents this fact is not suitable for readers of the Shorthorn. He doesn't elaborate on how we can survive by going over our mistakes, instead he just plainly states the condition of Iraq and how chaotic things got as time progressed, and also says how bad we, as America, made the country during and after the war. In essence, he is saying how we are a very destructive country, which I highly doubt is something the readers want to read about.
Now, he also talks about his experience with Katrina. However, instead of saying how bad Katrina was, he reverses it and say how bad we as a country dealt with Katrina. What he says is that we have a poor infrastructure and because of our lack of preparation for the storm, we got more damage than we should’ve gotten had we been prepared. He then goes on to say that this lack of infrastructure is also the reason why there is so much evil in our