Essay Critique - Stop Me Before I Shop Again

In the essay Stop Me Before I Shop Again, contained in Everyday Arguments (Katherine Mayberry 2009, p.278), James Gleick does not provide a clear thesis at the onset. By jumping into his perspective on eBay's role in auctioning goods, he doesn't clearly define the intent of his article. Gleick's perspective is ambiguously communicated via examples throughout the essay and leaves it to the reader's interpretation. However, his use of real-life examples and competitor comparisons provides varied testimony to support his evaluation claim. These examples do an effective job of illustrating how eBay has changed the flow of goods through around world. His use of descriptive words, personal anecdotes, and industry quotes enables readers to personally relate with the author's stance. While the author makes a compelling claim, style and mechanical errors distract the reader and cause confusion that weaken his claim.

For example, in paragraph two, second sentence, he uses contractions like "I'd" instead of "I had" that confuse the reader and make the paragraph a choppy read. In paragraph seven, third sentence, he uses industry terminology, such as "tchotckes," and does not clearly define the term for the lay reader to understand. Another style error is the author's inappropriate use of slang expressions, such as "got me a laser pointer" in paragraph six and "about nothing so much" in paragraph nine that make it difficult to understand and force the reader to re-read the sentence and at times the entire paragraph.

Mechanical errors such as run-on sentences in paragraph eight and first-read, incomprehensible sentences such as in paragraph nine, distract the reader and detract from his claim. Other mechanical errors include mis-spelled words. In the last sentence of paragraph seven, he uses "bid" instead of "big" which not only changes the meaning of his paragraph summary but also questions the writer and the publisher's credibility. Punctuation and capitalization errors further detract from the essay.

Even though the essay contains some mechanical and stylistic mistakes, it was still an interesting read. The writer provides some different perspectives and examples of the online auctioning business. I believe most people would be able to associate with Gleick's claims and would also be entertained with his personal and somewhat humorous style.