This is the online discussion post that I felt was my best.

Discussion Post

1. Bruce Catton had a very effective approach to comparing Grant vs. Lee. He starts by laying in a few similarities and giving a brief history of the setting which acts as his hook statement. He then goes on to talk about the vast differences between the two generals followed by the few similarities to tie it all together. It has a good flow and works well to keep the reader interested in the paper, as you are constantly hearing new facts.

2. The entire setup of Catton's essay is effective. The introduction pulls you in and the conclusion ties everything together and makes the essay coherent. Overall it is a very effective format that worked well comparing two vastly different people.

3. I found neat vs. sloppy people to be grossly exaggerated. Both sides seemed to be taken to high almost OCD extremes. It was decent comparison but overly twisted to try to make a stronger point. One of the pieces that stuck in my head was the scene revolving around the black plague with the man showing off his splotchy leg that was distorted because of the plague. One interesting thing i found out about the time of the black plague was the bewilderment of society as they tried to understand what was causing the epidemic. Some blamed rats, some blamed their sins, and some even blamed the Jews. No one really new what was causing it. A good piece to compare to the one in the museum would be the photo on page 528 of convergences. The piece shows what looks like a cold disgruntled homeless man sitting on a bench at a street corner. Both pieces show sadness, sickness, and poverty. They also both have a central subject figure, both of which seem to be in pain. My main point would be that even though both pictures are different, I mean one is a photo and one is an old painting both featuring different subject matter, but as one looks deep inside and sees the emotion lying in the faces and bodies of the two figures, one can see they are vastly similar.