Mathew  Longo’s The Picnic: An Escape to Freedom and the Collapse of the Iron Curtain detailed various interactions between parties and countries. Throughout Longo’s work, how he described the politics and social constructs of these multiple countries was incredibly endearing. I especially found it interesting when he told the Hungarian democratic forum political parties while in communist Hungary. After the Iron Curtain and Hungary’s disrepair, Longo’s interactions between Habsburg and Hungary provided insight into the extent of border conversations and how Habsburg went about visions of a borderless Europe.

I found a few quotes from the Mathew Longo reading especially compelling; one of the very first quotes, “history cannot speak for itself, it must be given a voice,” especially resonated with how I think about how journalism plays a crucial role in the retelling of history and the retelling of historical events. Through writing, history and specific policies, social constructs, and international developments can be given a voice that implements a way of higher thinking and higher attention. I think some details highlighting and emphasizing how difficult it is to make political change in the Michael Longo reading also stood out and helped shape my understanding when going about some of the Jessica Goudeu readings reviewing US immigration policy. I think that the emphasis Mathew Longo placed on the Pan-European Picnic throughout his chapters crafted an understanding that great communication, time, and effort go into making political change or even attempting it.

Moving onto the Jessica Goudeu readings, you outlined important information that helped me better understand the Longo readings after the second reflection. To better understand the past, revisiting information helps craft better understandings and perspectives on a more significant level. Using personal narrative and historical and political context throughout her writing, I felt that the Goudeau readings developed precise levels of understanding through explicit details that helped make policies understandable.

The John Mcfee reading was also fascinating in a journalistic context and helped revamp/refresh my journalism mindset after a Summer of straying away from journalistic practices. After taking Professor Joe Stephen’s course last semester and learning about ledes and nut graphs, revisiting these critical journalism practices through the lens of John Mcfee was incredibly beneficial. I enjoyed how he describes and emphasizes the various ways to go about different ledes and how they can evolve throughout the writing process. For me, he balanced both taking the stress away from immediately getting the lede right and ensuring that it is proper at the beginning of the writing process and understanding that the right lede will develop over time. McFee also makes it explicit just how vital the lede is while setting the proper tone for a piece.

Some questions I have after these readings is how to balance both storytelling and information telling when going about non-fiction writing? How do you ensure that your writing is factual and informative, without sacrificing narrative and the story’s appeal to the reader through explicit detail and empathetic/realistic interviews?