Differences And Similarities Between Kennedy And Quindlen

Diction and Tone Kennedy and Quindlen’s tone and diction in their essays make their writing better. They both use it to Reflect their audience, purpose and message. These two authors both talk about the same topic, American voices, but they have some similarities and differences. One way that Quindlen and Kennedy have similar tone and diction is by their message. They are both trying to say that america is built of different ethnic groups. “America is an improbable idea. A mongrel nation built of ever changing disparate parts” (Quindlen,13). Quindlen is saying that america is different than any other nation in the world. Their is no person in America that is fully and only American.She uses such descriptive language that she makes the audience think. Kennedy doesn’t use as much descriptive language. Their message is also different because Quindlen makes it seem as if it is okay to discriminate. “Historians today bemoan the ascendency of a kind prideful apartheid in America, saying that the clinging in ethnicity, in background and custom, has undermined the concept of unity” (Quindlen,14). Kennedy thinks the opposite. “Today we are belatedly, but resolutely, engaged in ending this condition of

Kennedy wrote about how immigrants were treated when they arrived here in the United States. “When poor ill-educated and frightened people disembarked in a strange land, they often fell prey to native racketeers, unscrupulous businessmen, and cynical politicians” (Kennedy,26). Another way they are different is when Kennedy talked about how the immigrants started everything in this country. “Once I thought to write a history of the immigrants in America. Then I discovered that the immigrants are American history. In the same sense… Americans have been immigrants or descendents of immigrants” (Kennedy,23). This shows how the author's tone and diction reflects their