How many times, from the time you were a bare-butt baby to a fussing fossil, have you been hoaxed by the many vibrant and splashy fronts of products stacked up in stocks? They like houses, cars, clothes, appliances- screws- foods, tools, stools, and an ever going list of fluff are designed to fool the common man into spending in unnecessary trifles. Fooled like so many before him, an English writer writes a memoir to reflect and describe his poor choice of stay. Using admiring and also judicial diction to demonstrate the hotel’s quality, contrast and shifts in tone, the writer better conveys his experience. This piece offers contrasting views of the maison, or guest house, that the two writers rented. Indeed, there are two sides to the coin. When first enchanted with the place though, the writer employs lauding word-choice when he describes the little room he shared with his fellow. He is satisfied with the hotel’s convenient location, as it faces the ‘cool blue blaze of the bay’. In fact, the writer himself informs us that he ‘fell in love immediately with the smallest room’. Such word choice reveals that the writer and his companion at least found some features of his lodging to good taste. On the other hand, and on the other side, we see the opposing face of the coin. By using words such as ‘small’ to describe the bathroom, ‘antique’ petrol burner and ‘empty’ ice-less icebox, the writer comments on the hotel’s inadequacy. Apart from judging the lodging, the writer also does not refrain from using ad hominem attacks about the renter. In these attacks, contrast about the renter is evident. Although ‘Senora’ and ‘Madame’ are both the same people, each term means something different throughout the piece. When the boarder was incompetent, when she lived in a dream cloud instead of on the ground, she would be described as ‘Madame’. She would be ‘Senora’, in contrast, when she was at her peak, dominating, the king- or queen, rather- of her...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document