The analogies used in the passage are ineffective in contributing to the author's message because they are clichés that don't contribute depth or understanding to the passage. Clichés tend to lack originality and can dilute the clarity or impact of the author's intended message about John Chapman’s true character and motivations. Instead of enhancing the narrative, these tired expressions may lead to a less engaging reading experience.
Many people have heard of Johnny Appleseed, but not everyone realizes he was
the real deal, an eccentric and energetic pioneer named John Chapman. However, the
authentic story can't hold a candle to the mythology of the oddball who sowed apple
seeds out of sheer benevolence. Chapman was actually a savvy businessman, traipsing
around the American Midwest planting seeds like they were going out of style. Good
things come to those who wait, and the trees flourished like there was no tomorrow. More
significantly for Chapman, they established his claim to frontier land and brought him a
degree of prosperity.
Why are the analogies used in the passage ineffective in contributing to the author's
message?
Search
BSUS
They use snobbish language that is not appropriate for this subject
matter.
They carry a message that is nearly opposite of what the author
intended.
They are cliches that don't contribute depth or understanding to the
passage,
1 answer
1 answer