So, this next assignment concerns obituaries. Discussing the process of writing obituaries in class was rather strange. In the end, it is a journalist's responsibility to sum up a life and accurately portray it to all audiences. That's a lot of pressure! On top of which, while it's easy to skim over these important pieces while reading the paper, writing one out is extremely draining.
I read an extremely well-written obituary in the New York Times online today. Werner von Trapp died yesterday at his home in Waitsfield, VT at the age of 91. died Click here for the link.
Here's what I thought:
The introduction was well placed. I was a little bit skeptical about the numerous mentions at "The Sound of Music" and his relation to the movie. However, I realize that in such a widely read newspaper, the obituary should open his lifestory to the widest of audiences. I guess I don't know if a characterized depiction of his early life should be one of the main focuses. In a more personal paper, though, I'm sure that his personal lifestory is highlighted.
The next parts of the obituary talk about his achievements, mostly centered around his musical interests, though his time with the US Army during WWII is also highlighted.
Overall, it was a nicely written obituary.
.jpg)
1 comment:
I agree with you in terms of having skepticism over whether something in this person's earlier stage of life should be the focus of the article. I had the same issue with the "war hero" obituary we wrote in-class, in terms of whether it would be appropriate to mention that he was a car salesman. It's hard to decide if something's "newsworthy," and I'm put-off by the hierarchical categorization that happens with these pieces. A sweeping generalization, but still- I don't like the idea that a person's life revolves around a few choice "prime" years. That implies a sense of unimportance in regards to the rest of their life.
Post a Comment