Analysis of the arrangement of “Lessons of the Game; Life Lessons » Organization and layout analysis primarily explains and interprets the meaning of events. It predicts what may happen given certain events, discusses the consequences of actions, and provides a perspective from which the reader can follow subsequent developments as they unfold. This is illustrated in this piece by Henry Petroski’s “Lessons From Play”; Lessons From Life,” writing about the engineering concept of “fatigue failure” in 1992. He begins his topic and overall approach with an opening statement that broadly covers the general topic of his essay: “fatigue failure.” p.21). "Here, the author establishes credibility with the reader by demonstrating his theory through a classroom experiment asking his students to bend paper clips to the point of breaking (p. 21.). The author tells the reader : “Thus, students recognize both the phenomenon of fatigue and the fact that failure due to fatigue is not a precisely predictable event (p. 22). » What follows is as if the author is thinking out loud while thinking about why things break from repeated use. Figurative language such as burning light bulbs and breaking shoelaces add texture to the writer's thoughts (p. 22). Petroski makes his point through a colorful anecdote and the use of metaphors through his son's use of the Speak and Spell computer toy (p. 22) to set the stage for a more detailed argument of his proposition. The author illustrates the assertions that “the plastic buttons of the toy that were pressed most frequently were the ones that were among the first to break (p. 23). “The body of the text provides the details that support the writer's argument. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay First, rather than taking a position, the author poses a question: "Why did the toy's designers apparently not anticipate this problem?" Why didn't they use buttons that would last longer than the toy's electronics? Why haven't they solved the problem of fatigue, a problem that has defined the life of mechanical and structural designs for ages (p. 24)? » The differences lie in tone, and in both cases the author uses the authority of his own opinions and that of an engineering expert. One of the ways the author supports the argument that "fatigue failure" and not design failure is the primary reason things break is by a simple enumeration of cases: collapse of a bridge and plane crash (p. 24). ), design failures of the Hyatt Regency gangways and DC-10 aircraft, as well as automobile breakdowns (p. 26). Furthermore, the author takes a strong stance on what might actually happen in an alternative scenario: "(unless we are generally picky), we live dangerously and pay little attention to the preventive maintenance of our frayed shoelaces or our aging light bulbs.” Although we may still ask “Why?” “When they break, we already know and accept the answer” In the following paragraphs, the writer uses repetition as a tool. rhetoric: the wear and tear from repeated use of shoelaces and bulbs, as well as repeated bending of paperclips (pp. 27-28) strikes the reader again and once again the author drives home his point as with a hammer On the other hand, the author summarizes the. 33).