Generating Interpretive Questions
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orleans Purpose for using quotes
Why are quotes so important to us as readers, what is the purpose behind them, and should they always be trusted?? Can an author lose their credibility within quotations?
Quotes are an important part of any authors writings. Quoting someone or something can have many purposes. In Lifelike Orlean uses 44 quotes statements. The fact that she uses so many quotes shows us as readers that she does that for a specific reason, but why? I have several theories for orlean's abundance of quotes.
Initial thought-->
The first being to show her credibility. The quotes had to come from somewhere right? The fact that she can quote someone or something means that she had to have seen or heard that piece of information she is reiterating to us. We as readers trust her to be honest with us and be giving us truthful information. By incorporating quotes shows us that Orlean did her homework and read up and studied taxidermy first hand.
After re reading a few times-->
Secondly, is there to many quotes? How could one woman have heard or discovered 44 well said and put together quotes? Although she did gather her information from numerous sources such as one on one conversations, overhearing, internet researching, and taxidermy websites- it does still seem a little far fetched. I know if I were at the World Taxidermy Championship I would be taking notes, but I would also be taking in my surroundings. The quotations that Orlean incorporates from merely overhearing others conversations are too spot on and 'perfect' if you will. It would be almost impossible to get that kind of information down word for word. Thinking about Orleans quotes brings a lot of thoughts to mind which definitely end up contradicting each other.
After class discussion on Thursday-->
Thinking about the quotes more in depth raised another question in my mind. While in class we talked about the target audience not being who we think it would be. The article is written to be informative to those who may not know much about taxidermy. We can come to this conclusion because the information Orlean provides us with common knowledge to any taxidermist. She is trying to educate those who aren't familiar about the topic the sort of things that happen and the skills that are necessary behind it. With that being I know generally we like quotes while reading something, especially something we aren't familiar with- at least I know I do. If someone were to be flipping through The New Yorker and came across Orlean's Lifelike they may begin to skim it to see what it is about. Quotes catch many people's attentions while skimming. With one of the first one's being "Acetone on a squirrels tale will fluff it right back up" I think it would make people decide to give the article a chance and read it. I think Orlean being a journalist knows this- and uses that. It's safe to say that many people just aren't interested in taxidermy. But, when you read some of the quotations Orlean chose to use it will definitely bring in more readers than it would have if it were strictly facts and informational. So, 44 quotes- definitely starting to sound a lot less realistic at this point. Being a trained and experienced journalist I don't doubt Orleans information- but maybe the ways in which she chose to portray it. From the start of her writing you can tell that Taxidermy wasn't a topic Orlean was very accustomed with- so in my opinion I think she choses to use the quotes as a way of making her story more appealing to the reader. Certain information that she may have came across in her research I think she choses to make into a conversation or a quote. In depth taxidermy research would tell you that some taxidermists use acetone to fluff up a tale- but no one would want to read the statistics or facts about it. So, instead Orlean puts it into a quote that will catch our eye and make us continue with it.
I understand that all of these assumptions don't tie together, and can definitely make you question Orleans credibility behind this article. I don't think any of her information is false. It is all able to be researched and backed up- I just think she used her experience as a journalist to make the article more appealing to her target audience. It seems to me that she did her research and gathered her information and then chose to provide and illustrate it in a way that would get people to read her article.
So does this cause Orlean to lose her credibility? Although the information is factual, and just put into quotes or conversation form to make her article more appealing does she lose her 'ethos' as a writer?
