Question

After reading the article "your heart is a muscle the size of your fist, answer the questions below. Also, make sure to bring a hard copy of this assignment to class with you.

Article link:  https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/17/books/review/your-heart-is-a-muscle-the-size-of-a-fist-by-sunil-yapa.html

1. Does the author of this article present a clear argument? What is it?

2. What information does the author provide to summarize before criticizing?

3. What common expectations does the author focus on when reviewing this book?

4. What do you think is missing from this review? What else do you want to know about the book?

5. How does the author look to the future in the conclusion of this review?

Answer 1

1.Yes. The author clearly presents the base argument which is nothing but the big question of what people want in terms of society, their country and anti-globalisation.

Are they saying that globalisation is hampering current environment situation and lives? If it is true, then are we ready to lead a life without the development and changes happened so far in the outside world.

2.Author told that even if people have demand and criticize something which is not good as per their expectation but did not have the courage to get rid of it by doing something logical. The protest of Seattle is totally like a movie drama which includes people pondering here there, and trying to get limelight, some doing business by selling weed to activist and they have buyer too. Also police trying to overpower the crowd. Delegate is trying to prove their own point of necessity of growth .so everyone here is to benefit their own need rather than thinking of a global cause.

3.The only expectation which author showed here is a need for change in the mind-set of people before carrying on something which has global impact. If we are not happy with something going around we need to find the root cause and get rid of it.

But everyone is running behind a common cause of satisfying their own need.so one should have selfless feeling before executing something and do not make situation complex or dramatic as happened in the riot.

4.I think there is no mention about the key players in organising the protest and how they combat the riot like situation when opposed by government. Also how they got persuaded if they had a strong motive of protesting the globalisation.

I also want to know what was the consensus of the whole protest and what difference it made to society and hence world and how it impacted people’s life.

5.The review by author is criticizing in natures and covers sarcastic statements for the deed done by the protesters, police, advantage taker and everyone who wanted to serve their own interest and wanted to prove their own logical deed as right without thinking of the severe impact and the life lost in the massacre.

Their tendency of taking something easy and not following proper way to achieve it and if this is the trend the future is going to be ugly for the coming world.