Passage Discussion

[griffin.811]

Outline:
¶1: Autor claims LT has not been in american history of film and theater despite having played an influential role. Reasons for this are listed.

¶2: Discussion of how author got the info to write the piece. Lists items, where they came from. Stresses primary source of info being in person interviews with LT himself in 1985 and 1986, which is also the year LT died.

¶3: Briefly discusses adv/ disadv of creating a bio of a living person. ( ¶ does not seem too important in the grand scheme of things...)

¶4: Justifies the authenticity of the of the evidence used in writing the work that is to follow. Also leads us to believe that even the un verifiable claims made by LT seem to be true based on how they fit with the rest of the evidence.

[noah]

Nice work. I edited it a bit, bolding my changes:

¶1: Introduction/context. Author claims LT has not been in american history of film and theater despite having played an influential role. Lists accomplishments.

¶2: Detail. Discussion of how author got the info to write the piece. Lists items, where they came from. Stresses primary source of info being in person interviews with LT himself in 1985 and 1986, which is also the year LT died.

¶3: Discusses potential issue & returns to central topic. Briefly discusses adv/ disadv of creating a bio of a living person.

¶4: Resolves potential issue. Justifies the authenticity of the of the evidence used in writing the work that is to follow. Also leads us to believe that even the unverifiable claims made by LT seem to be true based on how they fit with the rest of the evidence.[/quote]

As for a scale, this is dangerous territory - as anyone who struggled with (A) vs. (D) in #1 knows. The third and fourth paragraph deal with a tension between whether personal interviews are valuable information or now. However, that issue is raised and resolved in order to support the general point that the biography is relevant (i.e. good).