Both were very nice pieces---very well written. Writer 2 had a better flow which was helped by using longer multi-syllables and having better timing (imo). The imagery was equally great in both. I did feel Writer 1's piece placed me in the image more though. Writer 2's piece had a lot of references to things that weren't included in the image---the bully, the politician, uneducated mothers, etc. I understand that's meant to provide a backdrop for what's going on overall, which is the end of the world, but it just made the piece seem distant from the central topic, which is the image and what's happening in it. While Writer 2 wrote as a narrator watching these events, Writer 1 went as far as to write from the perspective of the person in the image who's brain is being disintegrated and even describe the process of dying. He even covered the perspective of the two subjects reflected in the lens of the gas mask as they recount how they have met their objective. Overall, I just feel that Writer 1 covered more within his piece and it was more relevant to the image. Vote: Writer 1
|