Replies

Thank you for your insightful analysis. As I read your analysis, I simultaneously re-read Trump's letter. It was a good learning experience to have your expert's view of writing style. Thank you for your time.

Nevertheless, I found Trumps letter direct and forceful. It's a joy to see him take on the MSM. You are probably right, he probably spent little time writing it.

P.S. please don't review my post -- I am not a professional writer :)

It was a good learning experience to have your expert's view of writing style. Thank you for your time. Nevertheless, I found Trumps letter direct and forceful

My longwinded analysis of his analysis aside, your assessment is the better and more relevant. The point of language is to structure arguments and to communicate them. The impact on the reader is what is foremost.

I would sugggest that you ponder the fact that that poster grades ACTs and determines who will get into our top schools. I will then allow you to draw your own conclusions about how we got where we are and whether there is any hope of climbing back out of the hole we are in.

Someone as direct at straightforward as Theodore Roosevelt could never get into Harvard these days and would not therefore be presidential material. "Bully" just does not cut it in any well-structured sentence following the sentence structure cookie cutter templates that are used to educate and then test our better students at our better public schools these days.

Hemmingway would have failed high school. He still fails high schools he does not even attend. One of the great ironies is that his archive of material is at Harvard, which is about as far in style and personality from Hemmigway as one can get these days.