Outside the Insider

An insider is one who has more knowledge about the place itself, having a better idea of the community and surroundings. His viewpoint may of course, be then biased; he has inside information of the place. An outsider is the exact opposite – someone who does not have much knowledge about the place and an unclear idea of the community and surroundings. His viewpoint will be based on his own interpretation of the place and may be misleading.

This can thus greatly influence what the readers will perceive about that place. The natives of the place would, most probably, put on a facade for the outsider, showing only what they desire the world to see them as, in order to mask the unknown while not revealing the truth about the place, be it their culture or traditions. However, an insider is in a better position to photograph a place, considering the fact that the insider is not biased and will be able to produce a picture that will depict a neutral stance.

An outsider does not have any idea about the place and its hidden identity. The outsider is in a worse position as compared to the insider when taking a photograph of a place. Despite the fact that the insider could be biased, he would be able to portray truthfully, a part of what the place is really like, as compared to the outsider, who would show an entirely wrong image of the place itself.

In conclusion, we feel that the insider is a better choice out of the two to photograph a place.Image

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Outside the Insider

  1. STRUCTURE:
    – thesis statement was not stated clearly in the first place
    – explanation and elaboration is elaborating on….nothing
    – first paragraph should be an outline of the content of the argument, instead of just defining. definitions can be part of the intro but not the only thing in it.

    CONTENT
    – flow of ideas is not well linked
    – argument stand is vague until the end: rebutting themselves through the whole argument (which is like contradictory and ironic)
    – para 2: “this” what is this
    – substantiation not strong enough to support their stand (in the first place stand is not defined clearly)
    – instead of putting the advantage of both insider and outsider, which is neutral, should put the insiders advantage and the outsiders disadvantage. this way we can see more clearly what you are fighting for
    – picture has no relation to post: no caption
    – key assumptions made (eg. Despite the fact that the insider could be biased, he would be able to portray truthfully, a part of what the place is really like, as compared to the outsider, who would show an entirely wrong image of the place itself.) left unexplained
    – no examples given!!

  2. After reading the first paragraph, we felt that the thesis statement was not stated clearly in the first place as the first paragraph should be an outline of the content of the argument, instead of just defining. We suggest that you state your purpose in your first few sentences and then elaborate on your purpose and not dwell on the what your point is not and why.

    Also, instead of putting the advantage of both insider and outsider, which is neutral, should put the insiders advantage and the outsiders disadvantage. This will further emphasize your stand

    Lastly, there are a few key assumptions made (eg. Despite the fact that the insider could be biased, he would be able to portray truthfully, a part of what the place is really like, as compared to the outsider, who would show an entirely wrong image of the place itself.) l

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s