I've finished reading alive (for the plot see my last blog post here ) and have sufficiently lost my faith in the morality of mankind. even though the 17 surviving men were rescued, it took way too long for them all to get back home. they all had mild to severe mental damage from the ordeal they'd been through, not to mention they were all starving and some injured.
but the worst thing, it seemed, was the media. rumors about what happened on the mountain circulated mercilessly, and before long the survivors were being blamed for preying on the weaker boys. of course no one said anything out loud, but it was heavily implied. imagine what that must have done for these damaged, fragile men.
but no one took it too seriously. it was just a horrifying story to fill the tabloids. they usually run a stupid story. and it gave someone a job to write it.
but it was still horrible. so what do you think?
was what the media did wrong? or was it just a harmless story?
hey clara, this sounds like an awesome book and i want to read it now. some things to make it an even better post are...
ReplyDelete- at the end, how i asked you about the tabloids and that part maybe expand to make it more clear
- grammer. CAPILTALIZE in the beginning of your sentences.
- expand on what you would do and why you think its wrong or right. how would you feel about the situation? if you were the one being eaten? how would you feel about that? (more people will probably comment if you write your opinion.)
- what are some things that were in the news about the story?
- are you saying it took "way too long" for them to get home because they were just slow or...? because when your stuck in cold, winter. mountains without food its going to be a stuggle.
clara, i want you to work on organizing your posts better. think about paragraphs. look at someone's blog who you think does this well.
ReplyDelete