Artem, you did a wonderful job on your paper. It is very well written. Your writing is very clear and you get straight to the point with your sentence structures. I like how you added in the Russian statistics. I’m sure basic statistics regarding foreigners in the US is easy to come by, but more time and research is needed to obtain such data on a particular nationality, as Russian.
I learned a few things from this paper including the idea of Russians collective society. I also find it interesting the amount of power the Russian government has over its media, regarding the control of all of the content. I also found it interesting that Eric found people in the US friendlier than those in Moscow. I always though the US, especially the New England area has a reputation of not being the friendliest people.
Just one suggestion for this paper is to have a stronger concluding paragraph. The paper just seems to end abruptly with the last sentence about Russian television. Perhaps something that wraps all three readings together, tying all of your thoughts and research together.
All together this paper is written extremely well; it is well organized and clearly links Eric’s “difference” to the readings used in order to conduct this analysis.
I found your analysis of Eric very interesting and you did very well incorporating information about the experience of a Russian student living in America. I was unaware of the differences in educational system, specifically how exams are given and I like that Eric has found his own creative and organizational skills, which he knows he will use when he returns to Russia.
The comparison of Eric to Louis C.K. is informative and well analyzed. It is very clear how Louis handled the situation in Best Buy and how the experience can be compared to someone feeling as though they do not belong. I’ve been in a similar situation and it can be very uncomfortable.
You did a great job analyzing the in-class articles, especially comparing Eric to Leslie Cheung by tying in that they both hide aspects of their identity; Cheung did not want to seen as gay and Eric will not go out of his way to tell people he is from Russia so he is not seen as someone who does not belong in America. I also found the peer-reviewed article on Who Wants to be a Millionaire extremely interesting, especially how the Russian version of the show highlights national identity.
To improve your paper, I would suggest a more in-depth explanation of why Eric does not associate himself with American culture, as that would further distance himself from the experience as an international student.
Hi Artem,
You did a great job in your analysis 2 and I really appreciate you work. You organized your article in a clear structure. The interviewee you picked is good and appropriate to analyze. I learned a lot from your article.
In the introduction part, you introduced the interviewee as everyone did. However, you provided some background information which is a good reason for why you pick up this particular interviewee. I love that.
Next, you summarize the interview in an intensive way. You didn’t tell the story in a simple straightforward way, you conclude them and make the sentence more meaningful. For example, “This openness makes Eric feel more comfortable with asking questions in everyday life settings.”
Also, when summarizing the three articles, you showed a thoroughly understanding of these articles.
Finally, I like your subheads such as introduction, interviews and analysis. They make the analysis paper more organized and easy to follow.
One weakness might be that you didn’t professor ‘s outline of the paper. For instance, you spent about 1 page on discussing Kim’s (2011) paper, while professor requires only 0.5 page.
Overall, your paper is well and clearly written, showing your understanding of relating your interviewee with the topic of “difference”.
Great paper! The most amazing part of your paper is the way you relate a small character to a big society and gave comparation throughout your paper.
First of all, this well organized paper provides the imformation of the person you interviewed, Eric, he is a a new immigrant from Moscow and he is different to Americans. Then you provide some detailed information, which included number and percentage of new immigrants in Russia, these information gives me a clear background.
For the interview part, you stated several points that represented his “difference” and then provided specific examples in comparation of US education system and Russia education system like exams in school, activities outside the classroom, asking classmates questions.
The TV character”Louis C.K.” is nicely connected to Eric and you gave a detailed introduction to the epsoide. But the point you want to give in this paragraph that Amercican are not so friendly maybe contract with the last paragraph in the interview part. Maybe you can add one sentence like “maybe American are just friendly when they first meet you” as you kept saying it in your presentation.
The articles chosen in the analyze part are very good, and the last one which talked about colletive style behavior really completed the analyze. But I think the analyse of Leslie Cheung and Eric lacked some deep common, maybe you can further discuss this part a little bit.
Hey, Artem. You did a great job on your analysis paper 2. I found that is really well organized, and you presented your ideas pretty clearly. I can see that you paid a lot of attention on preparing it.
Especially the interviewing part, I think it is well written and detailed. It is very interesting to know that in Russia exams are formed to answer questions orally, and it has great differences as the exams in United States.
It also draws my attention when Eric tries to relate himself with Louis C.K., because apparently Louis C.K. is a white man who belongs to mainstream society in Unite States. Then he said that Louis is not like a typical American, Louis C.K is well known for his “dark” sense of humor. Both Eric and Louis consider themselves less friendly than most Americans, and they share a dark sense of humor. It does make sense why he wants to related himself with Louis C.K.
The other shining point of this analysis paper is the third article you chose. I think it does complete the first and seconds article, because it applied to the Leung’s article about queer theory who describes Hong Kong media as simultaneously hostile and powerful by stating that media conglomerates controls the content and choose what to broadcast. The authors state that Russian version of the show simply enhances Slavic identity and collectivistic way of behavior, and this idea also correlates with the ideas explained by Kim.
Artem, I very much enjoyed reading your paper because I could really relate to it. It is true that in the U.S. there is a level of friendliness that Europeans are simply not used to. I am also a big fan of Louis C.K. (perhaps I share his dark sense of humor) so I love that you picked this show and I see how well you related it to you friend Eric. The clip we watched in class was a great example. Kim’s article was naturally a great fit. I found it impressive how well you summarized Kim’s article in one sentence. Interviewing Eric was a great choice because you showed an interesting dynamic: It seems that Eric has one stable foot in America and one stable foot in Russia: he integrated into American culture while maintaining his Russian identity. It’s a great identity negotiation. Your presentation of Russian culture, especially the fact that you explained Russia’s emphasis on cultivating a more group oriented/collective style behavior has deepened my understanding. You explained well how the peer-review fits in with Kim’s and Leung’s article. At first I thought Leung’s article could be a tough fit but you made it work and extracted excellent points. Great work, Artem!
Artem, you did a wonderful job on your paper. It is very well written. Your writing is very clear and you get straight to the point with your sentence structures. I like how you added in the Russian statistics. I’m sure basic statistics regarding foreigners in the US is easy to come by, but more time and research is needed to obtain such data on a particular nationality, as Russian.
I learned a few things from this paper including the idea of Russians collective society. I also find it interesting the amount of power the Russian government has over its media, regarding the control of all of the content. I also found it interesting that Eric found people in the US friendlier than those in Moscow. I always though the US, especially the New England area has a reputation of not being the friendliest people.
Just one suggestion for this paper is to have a stronger concluding paragraph. The paper just seems to end abruptly with the last sentence about Russian television. Perhaps something that wraps all three readings together, tying all of your thoughts and research together.
All together this paper is written extremely well; it is well organized and clearly links Eric’s “difference” to the readings used in order to conduct this analysis.
Artem,
I found your analysis of Eric very interesting and you did very well incorporating information about the experience of a Russian student living in America. I was unaware of the differences in educational system, specifically how exams are given and I like that Eric has found his own creative and organizational skills, which he knows he will use when he returns to Russia.
The comparison of Eric to Louis C.K. is informative and well analyzed. It is very clear how Louis handled the situation in Best Buy and how the experience can be compared to someone feeling as though they do not belong. I’ve been in a similar situation and it can be very uncomfortable.
You did a great job analyzing the in-class articles, especially comparing Eric to Leslie Cheung by tying in that they both hide aspects of their identity; Cheung did not want to seen as gay and Eric will not go out of his way to tell people he is from Russia so he is not seen as someone who does not belong in America. I also found the peer-reviewed article on Who Wants to be a Millionaire extremely interesting, especially how the Russian version of the show highlights national identity.
To improve your paper, I would suggest a more in-depth explanation of why Eric does not associate himself with American culture, as that would further distance himself from the experience as an international student.
Overall, well done.
Hi Artem,
You did a great job in your analysis 2 and I really appreciate you work. You organized your article in a clear structure. The interviewee you picked is good and appropriate to analyze. I learned a lot from your article.
In the introduction part, you introduced the interviewee as everyone did. However, you provided some background information which is a good reason for why you pick up this particular interviewee. I love that.
Next, you summarize the interview in an intensive way. You didn’t tell the story in a simple straightforward way, you conclude them and make the sentence more meaningful. For example, “This openness makes Eric feel more comfortable with asking questions in everyday life settings.”
Also, when summarizing the three articles, you showed a thoroughly understanding of these articles.
Finally, I like your subheads such as introduction, interviews and analysis. They make the analysis paper more organized and easy to follow.
One weakness might be that you didn’t professor ‘s outline of the paper. For instance, you spent about 1 page on discussing Kim’s (2011) paper, while professor requires only 0.5 page.
Overall, your paper is well and clearly written, showing your understanding of relating your interviewee with the topic of “difference”.
Hello Artem~
Great paper! The most amazing part of your paper is the way you relate a small character to a big society and gave comparation throughout your paper.
First of all, this well organized paper provides the imformation of the person you interviewed, Eric, he is a a new immigrant from Moscow and he is different to Americans. Then you provide some detailed information, which included number and percentage of new immigrants in Russia, these information gives me a clear background.
For the interview part, you stated several points that represented his “difference” and then provided specific examples in comparation of US education system and Russia education system like exams in school, activities outside the classroom, asking classmates questions.
The TV character”Louis C.K.” is nicely connected to Eric and you gave a detailed introduction to the epsoide. But the point you want to give in this paragraph that Amercican are not so friendly maybe contract with the last paragraph in the interview part. Maybe you can add one sentence like “maybe American are just friendly when they first meet you” as you kept saying it in your presentation.
The articles chosen in the analyze part are very good, and the last one which talked about colletive style behavior really completed the analyze. But I think the analyse of Leslie Cheung and Eric lacked some deep common, maybe you can further discuss this part a little bit.
Overall, great paper!
Hey, Artem. You did a great job on your analysis paper 2. I found that is really well organized, and you presented your ideas pretty clearly. I can see that you paid a lot of attention on preparing it.
Especially the interviewing part, I think it is well written and detailed. It is very interesting to know that in Russia exams are formed to answer questions orally, and it has great differences as the exams in United States.
It also draws my attention when Eric tries to relate himself with Louis C.K., because apparently Louis C.K. is a white man who belongs to mainstream society in Unite States. Then he said that Louis is not like a typical American, Louis C.K is well known for his “dark” sense of humor. Both Eric and Louis consider themselves less friendly than most Americans, and they share a dark sense of humor. It does make sense why he wants to related himself with Louis C.K.
The other shining point of this analysis paper is the third article you chose. I think it does complete the first and seconds article, because it applied to the Leung’s article about queer theory who describes Hong Kong media as simultaneously hostile and powerful by stating that media conglomerates controls the content and choose what to broadcast. The authors state that Russian version of the show simply enhances Slavic identity and collectivistic way of behavior, and this idea also correlates with the ideas explained by Kim.
Artem, I very much enjoyed reading your paper because I could really relate to it. It is true that in the U.S. there is a level of friendliness that Europeans are simply not used to. I am also a big fan of Louis C.K. (perhaps I share his dark sense of humor) so I love that you picked this show and I see how well you related it to you friend Eric. The clip we watched in class was a great example. Kim’s article was naturally a great fit. I found it impressive how well you summarized Kim’s article in one sentence. Interviewing Eric was a great choice because you showed an interesting dynamic: It seems that Eric has one stable foot in America and one stable foot in Russia: he integrated into American culture while maintaining his Russian identity. It’s a great identity negotiation. Your presentation of Russian culture, especially the fact that you explained Russia’s emphasis on cultivating a more group oriented/collective style behavior has deepened my understanding. You explained well how the peer-review fits in with Kim’s and Leung’s article. At first I thought Leung’s article could be a tough fit but you made it work and extracted excellent points. Great work, Artem!