Author: rainbow

Prohibition-era Chicago? [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2008-2-17 02:46:09 |Display all floors
.
.

Birds of a feather flock together! So I read that article too. I'm very interested in that precious picture however I don't risk to attach it here because Zhao is a sensitive topic. I agree with you that The Economist makes fair assessments on China's issues usually. That article comments on Chinese political leader Wen in a rare praisable tone and it let me feel we still can pin our hope...

And I enjoy its cartoons and captivating titles often featured with puns!

Thanks for your response again, Jeff,  and have a good day there! :)I want to hit the hay again! 88

[ Last edited by rainbow at 2008-2-17 02:48 AM ]
Talk in English rather than talking about English.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2008-2-17 08:25:11 |Display all floors
Originally posted by rainbow at 2008-2-16 10:46 AM
I'm very interested in that precious picture however I don't risk to attach it here
No, you really can't. One of my friends was quite astonished by the photo. (In fact, that photo shows exactly why he is viewed the way he is.)

Even phrases in that article such as "]x] means never having to say you're sorry" (in the article) is word play on the well-known phrase Love means never having to say you're sorry from an early 1970s novel (and movie) Love Story. If, as a reader, you're familiar with the original phrase, the phrase in the article is a clever twist.

I think The Economist's view on China is "cautiously favorable" with reservations. You can always look at the progress, on the one hand, and the problems, on the other, and take a positive or negative view. As an American, I try not to be judgmental. (And, given the US in recent years, I'd hardly be in a position to be, in any case.)

The Economist has a good article on infrastructure in China this week so you might want to take a look. Given the crowding that occurs every Spring Festival in the rush to get home to family, expanding the infrastructure is probably, on balance a good thing.

If you have any other "Economist questions," don't hesitate to ask!
中文我不会读也不会写。Really, I don't.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2008-2-17 12:07:41 |Display all floors
jeff

May I ask if you are a regular reader of The Economist? Because it seems that, at least to me,  you are pretty familiar with the writing style of this journal,

And this style is, in some sense, close to that of a TV show called MD House, I think. Quite a lot of references and metaphors perhaps are made btween the lines, which those walking encyclopedias like to do. By  walking encyclopedias, I mean the scriptwriters, sholoars and contributors.

[ Last edited by chen39yi at 2008-2-17 08:57 PM ]

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2008-2-17 16:16:14 |Display all floors
Hi, chen39yi!. No, I'm not really a regular reader. I read it on the Web sometimes and, like Homer Simpson, I read it on long flights (because it's so "dense" a single issue lasts a long time on a flight).

But I'm actually fascinated by The Economist writing style, though. It is witty and ironic, tight and detailed. I like the way you can pick up an article about some country you've never heard of and The Economist explains the situation there quickly and concisely. And it's just entertaining and fun to read.

Yes, the style is similar to the show House (we call it in the US). Haha, "walking encyclopedias." Yeah! Well, the "inside" references and metaphors make the writing seem fresh and sharp. Again, well, if you can understand some of those references, you are doing very well in English.
中文我不会读也不会写。Really, I don't.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2008-2-17 17:33:56 |Display all floors

Reply #18 jeff_in_sf's post

Thanks a lot, Jeff, for the sharing

Very interesting, the second paragraph described exactly how I feel about that writing style. When you get some metaphor that is made beautifully during the reading, it is like you share with the writers at some level. It feels great

I have tried to imitate that sort of style, of course only in Chinese so far, and The Economist does give the guideline for that actually. Well, for me, that is, however, much easier said than done.

It is fun to know someone discussing with you also watches the same show. House is my favorite show and the fantastic scricpt is exacly why I like it.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2008-2-18 05:35:57 |Display all floors
Originally posted by chen39yi at 2008-2-17 01:33 AM
When you get some metaphor that is made beautifully during the reading, it is like you share with the writers at some level. It feels great
That's a very perceptive comment. Actually, there is an "in-group" quality to The Economist. style. It's as if The Economist is saying, "If you can get the joke, you're 'in the group' with us." The style assumes that you know the cultural references (like The Simpsons' joke). And that's part of the enjoyment. It's exactly what you said—you're sort of "in sync" with the writers. I always enjoyed reading The Economist but it took me a long time to realize why it was so much fun.

Yes, I think The Economist's style is deceptively simple. But I think it's an excellent style to try to imitate—especially because it is so good at filling in the background so succinctly yet effectively. It's really quite amazing how the writers do that so consistently. If you can emulate that style in Chinese, I would say that is quite an achievement. It's hard for anyone, even native speakers of English, to do. But I think that style would be good writing in any language.

You sparked my interest in the TV show  House again. The writing on that show is also a large part of its appeal. It's similar to The Economist's style in that it has a lot of cultural references that creates a similar "inside" feeling. But the writing in House is a little different—it's a little sharper, more acerbic, more overt than that of The Economist. The Economist's writing is a little more subtle and more subversive because it gets you to "collude" with the writers, without knowing you're doing so. (You know you enjoy House's comments.)

Well, now I'll start watching House more regularly to enjoy the writing. :)
中文我不会读也不会写。Really, I don't.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2008-2-18 10:34:22 |Display all floors

Reply #20 jeff_in_sf's post

very well-organized and thought-provoking comment. I like that kind of experience involving much thinking work when reading the articles of The Economist and your comment.

Your further explanation for the elements of that wonderful writing style goes much deeper than my original thought. Now it is clearer to me.

Again thanks for sharing your opinion.

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.