3 Responses to Purposeful Summary – ChefRat

1. davidbdale says:

   September 25, 2024 at 6:50 am

   Thank you, ChefRat, for getting 50% of the assignment just right. You leave no doubt how you feel about the photos that were used without permission for whatever purpose they were used.

   You also do a fair job of summarizing the events that occurred, but you don’t deploy them as well as you communicate your reaction to the (ab)use of the images after they were taken.

   I could spend an hour with you improving your sentence structure and phrasing, if that’s of interest to you. (Even if it’s not!) 🙂

   Please let me know if you would welcome some grammar/phrasing advice. I can improve your writing 100% if you permit me, by improving your sentences. It’s your call.

   If you choose to Revise this post, PLEASE DO NOT publish a second post with the same title. Just open this post in Edit mode, make your improvements, put it back into the Feedback Please category, and click Update.

   Reply
2. davidbdale says:

   October 3, 2024 at 3:41 pm

   Thank you for your conscientious attention to this small assignment, ChefRat. I see it’s back in Feedback Please again following your revisions. I appreciate the effort and commitment.

   You’ve earned some specific Feedback. I hope you don’t regret it. 🙂

   It seems counterintuitive that the lifeless body of Fabienne Cherisma was likely still warm, just as the photograph was taken.

   —It’s not at all counterintuitive that a body would still be warm shortly after death, ChefRat, but I see why you want to mention it. You probably mean that it’s ironic she survived the earthquake and then died anyway from a stray bullet or because she was shot by the police who should have protected her.

   This death was a non-direct result from the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Imagine how the people of Haiti felt, to know one of their own was able to survive this natural disaster, only for that person to be killed through human action.

   —This comment confirms what I suspected about your first sentence. The people of Haiti would have felt the cruel irony of her death coming so soon after her lucky survival.

   While lootings were occurring, as a result of the earthquake, she was shot by the police. Imagine this was your child and you weren’t even aware of their death yet, and an unconsented photograph was taken.

   —Your use of “imagine how” and “imagine this” so soon thereafter is not very effective. A better strategy might be to point out how Cherisma, who was lucky to survive the natural disaster, was first betrayed (or failed) by the police and then again betrayed (or abused) by the photographers.

   —Then you could shift to an observation that her family was also betrayed (or disrespected) by the photographers who immediately exploited their daughter’s still-warm body for their own gain. Even if the images raised sympathy from distant viewers and resulted in aid, they owed it to the girl and her parents to seek consent.

   There’s no debate an average Haitian would want support for their country, donations, word of mouth and more. But a flock of photographers immediately rushing over to a lifeless body to get “the best shot” to justify it, seems inhumane to say the least.

   —Here you balance two observations nicely. It’s your best sentence.

   However you feel about the photo, whether it’s about how Haiti benefitted as a whole due to it, or if the photo was extremely inappropriate and never should’ve been taken in the first place, cataclysm sparked in Haiti that day and would never be forgotten.

   —Your setup, all the way to “taken in the first place” is very nice, ChefRat. But the closing is unrelated to your observations and lets readers down hard.

   You’re more than welcome to revise again if you wish. I’ll grade this post now so you can decide if more revision is worth the effort.

   Reply
3. davidbdale says:

   October 10, 2024 at 10:57 am

   Wow. Your new draft is substantially better than the first, ChefRat.

   I’m going to reproduce it here with some additional refinements, since I don’t expect you’ll want to return to it for additional revisions but may find the suggestions useful.

   It seems counterintuitive that the image of Fabienne Cherisma’s lifeless body—an image only possible through the failure of the police to protect her—was distributed widely enough for it to cause direct support to Haiti, Cherisma was lucky enough to survive one of humanity’s great natural disasters, the 2010 Haiti earthquake, only to be betrayed by her own people, the police who killed a child in the midst of hardship—over, of all things, a looted painting. Her warm dead body was flocked over by photographers who were trying to raise awareness and support for Haiti while the parents of the poor girl were still unaware of their daughter’s death. Without doubt, an average Haitian would want support for their country, donations, word of mouth and more. But a flock of photographers immediately rushing over to a lifeless body to get “the best shot” to justify that support, seems inhumane, to say the least. However you feel about the photo, whether it’s about how Haiti benefitted as a whole from it, or whether the photo was extremely inappropriate and never should’ve been taken in the first place without the parents’ consent, it is never justifiable to exploit a tragedy for the greater good.

   I hope this is helpful.

   Regrade recorded.

   Reply