Close Read #2

Steve Jobs: the Magician

The Economist paid a tribute to Steve Jobs, a business and technology genius.

Diction: It is evident that the author holds Steve Jobs in great respect. He/she opens the paper with "nobody else in the computer industry, or any other industry for that matter, could match Steve Jobs". The author almost speaks with a sense of elevation and formality when referring to Steve Jobs. It's almost ironic because it is a tribute because of his mortality(death), but the actual tribute describes his immortality. The journalist strives to propagate the point that Steve Jobs above all else was passionate, "his obsessively high standards". Why use the word obsessively? Obsessively paints an image of Jobs spending long nights toiling away with the ipod prototype. Any other word wouldn't resonate with the audience because we all know that Apple has high standards, but what the author did was make it personal. Often we associate tycoons, like Jobs and Bill Gates, as being machines rather than people. We also like to think that these people are just the lucky figureheads that don't get their hands dirty. However, what the author did was use diction to state that Jobs was central figure behind Apple's success.

Details: Apple wasn't always a computing giant. In fact, it only became a household name in the last decade. How so? Steve Jobs, according to this journalist. This author wants to highlight Jobs's importance, but in doing so he/she is implicitly stating that without Jobs, apple will fall (thus gravity). Whether this is true or not is unknown, but  it is hard to think of a generation where the ipod is unheard of. The author hints at this with stating the trends of companies like Amazon coming out with a popular Kindle. He also states that the on going battle between Microsoft and Apple was only won by Apple because of Job's ingenuity. One of the influential statements in this tribute is "With Mr Jobs gone, Apple is just one of many technology firms". Just another technology firm? It is almost scary to think that one individual can influence a company and the whole world in such a drastic sense.

Imagery: Yes the economist has imagery in it! Through out the article the author is painting a picture of Steve Jobs because the sad reality of the nation is death is the most publicity an individual will receive in his or her lifetime. So while the author has to mourn the death of Steve Jobs, he/she must also describe Jobs to the audience. Who is he? What did he do? Why does that matter? The author must implicitly answer all these questions and imagery is the best way to do such. The author paints a picture of Jobs being a magician, "channelling the magic of computing into products". "Without Mr Jobs to sprinkle his star dust on the event", the event wouldn't be the same. When it comes down to it, this article is trying to say that Steve Jobs made a difference and his death should be honored. Jobs is a modern Henry Ford and his death is like the fall of an enlightened titan. Rest in Peace Steve.