Sharma,
Bhadra. "Blizzard and Avalanche Kill at Least 20 Trekkers in
Himalayas." NY Times 15
Oct. 2014: n. pag. Print.
The
article that I decided to read for my current events response was “Blizzard and
Avalanche Kill At Least 20 Trekkers in Himalayas”, by Bhadra Sharma. This
article told of the horrible events that took place on the mountain of
Annapurna in Nepal, which is the world’s tenth highest peak. Starting on
Tuesday, a huge storm system began to ravage this area of the world, and the
eventual effect of this was a huge avalanche that is already known to have
taken 20 lives. Many more fatalities may be discovered later on, as many who
were trekking the great mountain are still missing. This horrific disaster is
putting the lives of many in ruin, some due to the loss of family members, and
some due to the fact that they don’t know if they have lost a family member. As
people, both alive and dead, are found scattered across the mountain which has
become a bloody site of devastation, these stricken people are put to rest with
either feelings of euphoria or intense sadness. The timing of this incident was
extremely bad as October is considered to be one of the most popular times of
the year for trekking Mount Annapurna and other mountains near it. This is
reflected in the number of deaths which is even higher than the last big
trekking incident that occurred when 16 guides died in the Himalayas. In
addition to this, the disaster went beyond physical devastation for the country
of Nepal. The economy of Nepal, which is mostly based on mountaineering
tourism, took a big hit from the avalanche. The reason for this is that the Sherpa,
who guide people throughout the mountain, are threatening to quit their jobs
because of the disaster. If this happens, tourism may plummet in Nepal, and
with it, the economy of the country will plummet too. The
avalanche that occurred on Mount Annapurna will have lasting effects on the
world, and especially on the people of Nepal. As was stated in the article, the
economy of Nepal looks likely to plummet due to the avalanche. This could lead
to many people in this country, which is already pretty impoverished, losing
their jobs and having no way to provide food and shelter for their families and
for themselves. This would make the already huge problem of world hunger and
poverty even bigger, not to mention that it would likely lead to many
malnutrition related deaths in Nepal, which is something that would devastate
the society. Outside of Nepal, the avalanche will affect people’s choices in
travel and entertainment. After hearing about this, many people are probably
less likely to embark on a mountaineering trip. People might even have second
thought about skiing or snowboarding for fear of dying in an avalanche similar
to the one in Nepal. If this were to happen, it could hurt the economies of
places throughout the world that thrive on the money brought in from snow
related sports. As in Nepal, this would cause people to lose their jobs, or at
least to take pay cuts, which would hurt families all over the world. The
article written by Bhadra Sharma on the terrible event that happened in Nepal,
despite its grisly topic, was a great article. It was well-written, with no
grammatical mistakes that I could see. To me, that piece of writing had a very
good flow between ideas that made it enjoyable to read. It was not boring list
of facts, but instead it kept me engaged from beginning to end. In addition, I
like how Sharma related the avalanche to the economy of Nepal. By showing how
the disaster might affect people (other than by the loss of loved ones) in
their everyday lives, the author made the article much more interesting and
relatable. Despite liking this about the article written by Sharma, I did not
like the fact that it devoted an entire paragraph to the fact that a group on a
social media website was created for fellow mourners to communicate. While this
may sound heartless, I do not believe that this information was very important
to the article as a whole. Had it been left out, my understanding of the article
would not have changed, and this shows that it is not a necessary piece of
information. I feel that omitting this section of the writing entirely would
improve the article, as it would make it more succinct overall.
William Bogatyrenko
ReplyDelete3 Things I Liked: Gave an accurate description of the disaster that was comprehensive and easy to understand
Three well-written paragraphs distinctly separated based on the aspect of the article analyzed
Explained the devastating affects on families and the world in general: How the knowledge of their loved ones being dead, or lack of knowledge about their loved ones, affected families, and the affect on Nepal’s economy.
2 Improvements: Find more things to critique about the article, you did not criticize the article very much.
Compare this disaster to others. Compare how the disasters affected economies, families, etc.
1 Thing I was Impressed by: How you described not only the affects on families, but the affects on Nepal’s economy as a whole. You explained how it would affect Nepal’s economy and tourism very clearly.
When I read Billy's article review I was appalled at how devastating this avalanche/blizzard was. In fact, prior to reading this review, I had read the article myself from the NY Times website, because of how awestruck I was to hear about this awful tragedy. This review was very well written, and there were many things that I liked about it. first of all, I liked how he went into such great detail about the effects of the avalanche on both the people caught in the accident, their families and their loved ones, and the whole of Nepal as well. He also gave a great summary of the article that had was both succinct and informative. He wrote the review so that summary was only a little bit longer than the critique or the effects paragraphs, and I tend to struggle with writing succinct summaries, because I always think that every little detail in the article is important to include in the summary, so my summary ends up being around three times as long as the other paragraphs. I also liked how Billy made the connection from the natural disaster to how the economy of Nepal, mainly based on tourism, could falter, and even to the fact of how people around the world will have second thoughts about going skiing in local places, and how this could affect the entire industry of snow based entertainment.
ReplyDeleteAlthough this was a great article, it inevitably had some errors. First, that although Billy's critique paragraph had great detail, he only critiqued one aspect about the article: not having one paragraph. He could have added a few other things about the article that he disliked. A second thing is that he started with the same generic sentence that everyone starts every write-up they've ever done with: "I read the article... by ..." This is a very boring beginning and it could result in people being turned off from reading the review. It could have started with something like: "Can you believe that...many people could be directly affected by just one blizzard? Well neither could I until I read this article."
Billy's review was extremely informative well-described. I couldn't believe how well he connected this disaster to people involved, their loved ones, Nepal's economy, and even the entire snow sports economy. After reading this review I now realize how overpowering a blizzard really can be, and how it can affect the whole world in a way!
After reading Billy’s review on the blizzard and avalanche that killed 20 people I felt that the review was very well written with few mistakes. I particularly liked the way he chose alternative words to describe things such as ravage or euphoria instead of traditional words like destroyed or relief. When analyzing the article Billy also posed a possible worldwide effect not just one that would affect the Himalayas which I felt was also very well done. Finally I liked that Billy gave an authentic reason for removing one of the sections in the actual article to improve it instead of just stating it isn’t required to keep the article moving. Alternatively Billy didn’t include a single quote which could have enhanced his article further. After reading the sentence about the Sherpa wanting to quit their jobs why are they threatening why don’t they just do it, are they looking for better pay? That sentence needs a better explanation because right now it’s unknown to the reader why they are threatening and to who are they threatening to leave. On the other hand I was extremely surprised to read that a group had set up a social media group for mourners to communicate. That just seemed wrong to put something like that on the internet for everyone to see and read about people’s personal lives in the aftermath of this disaster.
ReplyDelete