Response

For Leo’s blog post, he starts the essay with a paragraph of his own thinking. The first part gave me the deepest impression. Sometimes things that are hard to understand are more attractive. He introduces the reason why he chooses this poem and what was his thought when he first read his poem. He gives really specific details and trust worthy reasons which is good because I didn’t mention any of my own opinion in my essay. He also use questions to ask him self which is not an ordinary thing to use in and essay. Talking about one’s own opinion about his choice is a good starting which is an object lesson that others can use. For his second paragraph, he tells his understanding about the title of the poem，which is “the solemn hour”. He also tells his feeling about the way that writer use repeat sentence. His hook is pretty attractive to be honest because I didn’t understand what exactly he wants to say when I read this sentence so it attracts me to read more about his essay.

However Leo’s essay was not very well organized. Each paragraph should have its own work. For example, the first paragraph is about introducing his feeling which he made it. The second paragraph should be about telling readers what the poem is about. When I was reading his essay, I sometimes don’t understand what he was talking about if I never read his poem. As a reader also an audience who has listened his recitation, it is not really hard to understand Leo’s strong emotional feeling about this poem. However, if I were a reader who had never listened about his poem before, I need a more clearly meaning part. Before he tells his own feeling I want to know what the poem is about first so that I can make sure if I have the same feeling as well. So maybe he can exchange the place of his second and third paragraph. Also in the 3^rd paragraph, even though gives very specific sentence and uses quotes, he just says the sentences give him huge impacts but not specifically what kind of feeling, what does the sentence makes him think about. Also, readers of Leo’s essay needs to know more about the meaning of the poem but not only reading the original sentences by quotes. So far Leo has a good analyzing but doesn’t have a good conclusion. He ends up the essay with analyzing the poem, which is a point that he needs to work harder on. For the part of analyzing, it is good but not enough. He analysed the basic meaning but not about the metaphors, similes, personification… Though I really like Leo’s first paragraph, it still have something needs to improve. The first paragraph is a good paragraph but a little bit too long to be a starting. Maybe he can shorter it or use it in as a second paragraph.