The book I read is called All the President’s Men by Carl Bernstein, and Bob Woodward. The text was about two reporters who formed a news story about the shady business that had been going on at the democratic national committee headquarters. This building is also known as “Watergate.” They followed the leads and information they collected and it all led up to getting the president at the time, Richard Nixon, to resign.
One characteristic of the authors writing style is imagery. Imagery was not used much throughout the book but it was very important when explaining the building of Watergate, and what had been going on inside of it. By going on inside of Watergate, how the listening devices were placed, and how Nixon’s men got broke inside. Hence the name, “All the President’s Men.” Another characteristic of the authors writing style would be mood. The authors kept a rather, ominous, or mysterious mood throughout the story. While reading I felt almost obligated to keep going instead of stopping. I wanted to know what was going to happen next, especially when the authors explained what happened at Watergate. The last writing style that I thought was used frequently throughout the book would be voice. The voice that was being used was in a way liberating. Since the whole essence of the book is mostly about the extermination of evil in the government at the time I believe that liberation was a perfect choice for the voice. Every step of the way the authors were uncovering more and more about the whole situation allowing the “good people,” if you will, to take down the evil scumbags that reside in what is known as the government.
I think the authors’ thesis would have to be that the two main characters believed what they were doing was right. It was to be honest. The authors of the book are the main characters of the book because they were the ones who put their journalism skills to the test and really dug deep and uncovered the scandal. They were doing what had to be done and it overall was the right thing to do. All they really did was follow the truth, and that’s what counts.
The book had many strengths, and its weaknesses were limited. A dominant strength that book had was its overall caption of the situation. This was mainly because it was solved by the authors of the book. A weakness would probably be the fact that it is a very complex scandal, and it maybe be hard for some people to understand.
I thought it was a great book in my opinion. I enjoyed the good versus evil aspect of the book. I also loved how the two journalists kept going even though it was just them against Nixon and the network of people working for him. I definitely benefited from the book and would strongly recommend it to anyone who is going into the field of journalism. Overall this is a phenomenal, and most certainly valuable book. It is more than likely this book is read by journalists in training. The reporting by Carl Bernstein, and Bob Woodward on the “Watergate break-in” is maybe the single greatest reporting effort of all time.
daviesmax54 