\"Writing.Com
*Magnify*
SPONSORED LINKS
BY ONLINE AUTHORS
Printed from https://shop.writing.com/main/profile/reviews/ubiety
Review Requests: OFF
9 Public Reviews Given
9 Total Reviews Given
Public Reviews
1
1
Review by Ubiety Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ | (3.5)
What you've written here is a very good start in expressing an alternative way to live one's life. When I say "alternative," I mean alternative to what society tells us to do.

Your observations about the world are accurate. And, your conclusions about how to change things for the better are worth considering. I understand that this was written out of your own experiences and frustration with the world we live in, and that you're hoping to find like-minded individuals, but to encourage more people to agree with you, you must present logical and specific arguments.

As a young person, you don't seem to realize that many people already agree with you. You do have allies. The key is to persuade those who are immersed in the highly materialistic life to reconsider their values. This is a difficult task, but not one that should be abandoned.

By using logic, we can test your observations about how wrong it is to hire people based on looks and personality. For example: if we hired cancer researchers based on their looks rather than their skills and talents, do you think we would ever have a cure for cancer? No, of course we would not. The same holds true for every other job. Hiring the person with the best skill set, talents and work ethic is more valuable to an employer (and society) than hiring someone based on superficial criteria such as appearance. To change people's views, you should provide examples like this one, to support your ideas.

It would also help to spend time working on your writing skills. Well written arguments are the most persuasive. This article isn't terribly written, but it needs work in terms of sentence structure and punctuation. There are many good (and free) resources online where you can learn more about grammar and writing technique. I would recommend searching for such sites; the most reliable ones are owned by colleges.

I will give you a couple of examples to help you understand where you need improvement. In the first paragraph you write: "There is no level of content." I understand what you mean, but this sentence is poorly written. The goal is to express discontent among the working class. State this directly, such as: "Among the working class, there is dissatisfaction with the way things are because workers are always struggling to achieve the next level of greatness, the next best thing."

The following sentence needs editing: "Having interviewed for more than my fair share of jobs in my short career lifetime, I can still not explain the reasoning process of a hiring manager." You have unnecessary and incorrectly ordered words in this sentence. It should read: "Having interviewed for more than my fair share of jobs during my short career, I still cannot explain the reasoning process of a hiring manager."

Later, you say: "The “dream job” eludes my grasp." You haven't told your reader what the "dream job" is or why you want it. All you have told us is why you have trouble getting hired. Elaborate upon the idea of a dream job and then tell us why it is out of your grasp.

There are also a few problems with your conclusions. You claim that everyone can live with nothing more than "family, food, and shelter." This is not always the case. Some people, like the sick and disabled, need additional things just to survive -- like medication, for example. A better way to express this idea is to emphasize the importance of getting back to basics -- in terms of our values, not literally -- and de-emphisizing luxury items (which are superfluous).

Your conclusion that "family is happiness" isn't true for everyone. Some people have no family. Try broadening this to include loved ones.

Overall, you have done a good job of expressing an idea which is particularly important in our current economy. Still, you may want to consider who your target audience is. Even though there are older people who agree with you, your focus should be on gaining the support of younger people who possess the enthusiasm and energy to effect change. You might also want to consider that the problem of being judged by your looks is experienced more by women than by men. Judging women by their looks, rather than their character or abilities, has been a problem for a long time -- and it will continue if people don't demand change. Keep writing: it can't hurt, and you will never change anything in this world if you don't speak out.
2
2
Review of The Gift  Open in new Window.
Review by Ubiety Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ | (4.0)
Overall Impression: This is a nice story about a young man whose life appears to revolve around strokes of good luck and misfortune. From a writing standpoint, it does capture a dialect, which I can detect as Southern, but whether it's consistent with the Northern Arkansas dialect you describe, I cannot say. For the most part, the piece is well written. I might change a few words if I were writing this myself, but I didn't find anything in glaring need of correction.


The part I liked best was the description of how the family acted in the father's absence. It clearly showed the aspect of family life that drew Danny home in the end. And, it was clearly contrasted with the terrible relationship he had with his father -- which is what drove him from home in the first place.

A couple of things might have improved this piece. First, a small, but important detail detracted from the the piece's realism. You wrote: "My father’s silence said 'to hell with me.'" Usually, such a thought is expressed as the son picking up on the father's words, which would be: "to hell with you."

Another place where I detected a break from realism was this offhand remark about why the jury had convicted him: "I do not think they were acquainted with Ned Claggert." This sentence was unclear. No jury would consider the victim's character when deciding whether to convict someone of murder. If you were trying to inject humor into the piece, the sentence should have shown the character's humorous thought process, for example: "If they knew what Ned Claggart was like, they might have thanked me, rather than convicting me of murder." In any case, this needs clarification.

In addition, one sentence seemed out of place: "The idea of earning money later to take Lucy away from dirt poor neglect only sneaked in my mind later." Tacking this thought onto a paragraph about the character's goal of working to stay alive makes it seem irrelevant. While it's a good idea to mention his desire to rescue Lucy from neglect, his reasons for doing so should be developed, preferably outside of that paragraph.

With a little editing, this would be a very good story.
3
3
Review of Evolution of Eras  Open in new Window.
Review by Ubiety Author IconMail Icon
Rated: E | (4.0)
This monologue does a good job of portraying an individual's view of what life was like in Postwar America. The best part of this piece is the "grenade worthy" test you apply to people.

One thing I wondered about when I read this was whether average Americans were really grenade worthy in the post war days, or was it just soldiers? And why was America "on the right side?" Was there some moral test that everyone agreed on, or was the belief in being in the right just a feeling people had about their country?

This piece was very amusing, but I would have liked it better if you had done a couple of things differently.

First, you posed a question, but you didn't answer it: "Things were different back then. I remember them as more fun...better times. I wonder if the times really changed or, if it has been just me. Do I see things differently now? Do I have a choice?"

I could answer this myself, to some degree, but what would have been more interesting is if you -- as someone with a clear recollection of the period from the 1950s through the early 1960s -- had provided your perspective on what had changed, and why.

My own response to your questions is that both you and the world have changed. Some things may have been better in the past; but some things are better now. In the past, there was a sense of "decency," patriotism, and belonging to a country that was the undisputed leader of the world. And, life was simpler back then.

Today, people are rude and self-absorbed; and, they are temporary patriots who practiced patriotism for about a year after 9-11 -- or at least until it was no longer fashionable. Life has become very complex, as well. However, technology has made our lives easier and better in ways which weren't possible in the past.

Life (in the era you're describing) was local, with neighborhood and country as the focus of people's lives. Today, thanks to the advent of the Internet, we can communicate with and befriend people from around the world. We know more about other cultures and can contrast them with our own. This may be why some people no longer see America as always being "in the right."

Aside from the changes in the world, you have changed, too -- we all do. This change may not be due to age; it may just be a result of the passage of time. We change from life's experiences, so maybe the time before those experiences were gained seems more pure (as you described your childhood). In any event, it would be interesting to read an elaboration of your own views.

Also, I noticed a small problem with your writing: I wasn't certain whether I was observing typos or just unclear sentences. For example, when you described how you got separated from your suitcase on the bus, you wrote: "The bus and I arrived in Minnesota, but my luggage went somewhere else. I had lots of pictures with friends and sports stars." When you said "I had lots of pictures with friends and sports stars," were you talking about "in your suitcase?" as in "I had lots of pictures with friends and sports stars in that suitcase?" Or, did you mean that you had prized photos to show people? I understand the gist of what you're saying about losing the photos, but this sentence is confusing. Other than that, I enjoyed reading this piece.
4
4
Review by Ubiety Author IconMail Icon
Rated: E | (4.0)
What strikes me first, when reading your proposal, is that it's unclear who your target audience is. Comprehension of this proposal is dependent upon first-hand knowledge of the costs and requirements of medical education; this would lead one to believe that your audience is medical professionals. However, you have posted this proposal on writing.com, where the participants are primarily lay people. Either way, while I agree with the concept of your proposal, you haven't made your case.

To substantiate my observation about why your proposal appears to be written for medical professionals, one only has to look so far as your use of acronyms. You refer to ECFMG / USMLE without any explanation of what these acronyms stand for or why they are important. As a lay person, I was only able to figure out what you were referring to because I knew a foreign medical student who underwent this process. When writing any proposal, it's best not to make assumptions about your readers. Spelling out "Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG)" the first time you use it will eliminate confusion.

As far as your arguments go, there are contradictions and blind assertions in place of well-reasoned explanations. For instance, first you say "America would be able to produce doctors at, maybe, a fraction of the cost in USA." Then, you go on to say "Heavy fees can be charged for medical education. There would be no dearth of American and other foreign students, as also Indian students, including children of Indian origin in USA and other countries, who would queue up to pay high fees and get a medical degree." That America would be able to produce doctors at a lower cost is a blind assertion. And, the assertion about this proposal providing lower educational costs sits in direct contradiction to the claim that students would be willing to (and should) pay high fees (so that the program can be self-financing).

Who are you referring to when you say "America" could produce doctors at a fraction of the cost? The students who attend medical school in India will certainly be paying as much in tuition as they would in the U.S. -- so they won’t save anything. And, as far as I know, the U.S. government subsidizes teaching hospitals, not medical schools. I could be wrong, but as I understand it, the government pays teaching hospitals according to the number of medical residents they train. Under this arrangement, America won't save anything with your proposal -- because the medical students training in India will be unavailable to U.S. hospitals, where they're needed. Yet, the colleges who run these medical schools may save some money, provided that the cost of running a medical school is substantially lower in India. If it is, you haven't provided any evidence of cost savings.

India, on the other hand, has a lot to gain from your proposal. As you put it "India would be able to earn through outsourcing of medical education to India, in the same league as earning through "medical tourism" and clinical research trials." India will make a lot of money from this arrangement, while the U.S. will gain little financially. Is this really a "win-win" situation (as you concluded)?

With respect to the quality of medical education, India would benefit as much (if not more) than the U.S. Their doctors would be better trained by using U.S. teaching methods and standards. If the U.S. government were to finance any of this training, what guarantee would they have that students born in India would practice medicine in the U.S., rather than in India?

I agree with you on two points: standardizing foreign medical education to meet U.S. standards is beneficial; and eliminating the ECFMG / USMLE process, to make foreign trained doctors immediately qualified to practice in the U.S., is desirable. Training foreign doctors to U.S. standards would allow them to enter U.S. residency programs right after medical school, just as U.S. trained doctors do, which would increase the number of practicing U.S. doctors more rapidly.

All in all, your proposal might appeal to a significant number of people if you developed your arguments and provided facts (in the form of statistics) to support your claims.
4 Reviews · *Magnify*
Page of 1 · 25 per page   < >
Printed from https://shop.writing.com/main/profile/reviews/ubiety