A Quilt Of A Country Analysis

The main purpose of the two essays, Quindlen’s A Quilt of a Country  and Kennedy’s The Immigrant Contribution is to inform the reader about how the immigrants offered many ideas and talents to the development of the United States. The two writers explained how the immigrants made different contributions to the development of the United States by using different types of diction and by appealing to your emotions or adding different kinds of fact and making to paper more informational. A Quilt of a Country appeals more to your emotion and how you feel about the immigrants, while The Immigrant Contribution adds more facts and gives you proof of how immigrants helped develop the country. There are two main differences in how the two authors explains their ideas whether it is emotional or informational.

The way Quindlen’s A Quilt of a Country explains how the immigrants helped develop the U.S. is very different as to the way the other story explains it. A Quilt of a Country uses your emotions to get you to connect with and understand the purpose of her writing the story. Once these disparate parts were held

together by a common enemy, by the fault line of world wars and electrified fence of communism (Quindlen 15). This quote from the short story by Quindlen show that she appeals more to your emotion, by bring up the hardships of war, but even though we are all different we still may come together as one to fight a common enemy. A mongrel nation built of ever changing disparate parts, it is held together by a notion, the notion that all men are created equal, though most men consider themselves better than someone (Quindlen 13). Once again Quindlen tries to get you to see that immigrants were a key part of the nation by making you feel for them. Both authors are trying to show you that immigrants helped the U.S. in many important ways by helping bring us together, but they have different ways of doing it.
Finally in Kennedy’s The Immigrant Contribution the author still wants to prove to the reader that immigrants contributed many things to the development of the nation, but he proves his point using different dictions and being more blunt.

Immigration was plainly not a happy experience (Kennedy 26). This quote shows that Kennedy’s diction varies quite a bit from Quindlen’s. Kennedy will come straight out and tell you what he is thinking while Quindlen will make you infer about what she is trying to explain to you. Significant as the role was in politics and economy, the immigrant contribution to the professions and the arts was perhaps even greater (Kennedy 26). Once again Kennedy does not make you think about what he is saying he comes right out and tells you. Even though both authors and trying to prove the same point they can do it in totally different

ways.
In conclusion, authors may be trying to prove the same idea, but they may do it in completely different ways. Kennedy was simpler in his explanation, he came right out and told us what he thought and he gave the reader the facts. While Quindlen would make you piece together her ideas and have you come up with what she was trying to explain to the reader. Even though both authors wanted to prove that immigrants helped develop the United States they did it in completely different ways.