Comparative Commentary: The Imperial War Museum (ii)

Both text 1 and text 2 are reviews of the Imperial War Museum in London, although the approach to each review is very different. Text 1 is the writer’s personal response to her experience at the museum, and thus includes opinions, expressing her view that the museum has had on her. Since the text appears on the website ‘tripadvisor’, its intended audience is adult Internet users who are interested in trips and outings. Text 2, by contrast, excludes first person comments and opinions, intending to advise the reader. This text is from ‘Time Out’ magazine in London, and thus has a more narrow audience, mostly relevant to Londoners and visitors to London. Whilst both texts comment on the same topic – the Imperial War Museum – their overall intent is a little different, not least with text 2 using humor to criticize human behavior in a busy, working environment.

At first glance, both texts are similar in as much as they give the reader advice for their visit to the Imperial War Museum. Text 1 mentions the ‘letters’, ‘tanks’, and ‘guns’ of the museum as an example of the various activities that it includes, giving the reader an overview of their visit. Text 2, similarly, lists ‘planes’, ‘boats’, and ‘submarines’, to show what is available at the museum. However, the context of the two texts is quite different. The writer of the review of text 1 gives her opinion of the visit ‘as an American’. This may be reflective of the fact that her education in the USA may have focused on American history, as she states she has little knowledge of the world wars ‘before the US entered’. Thus, the review provides a foreign perspective on the museum, which seems to widen the audience, as it invites other nationalities and cultures to visit it too. Text 2 focuses entirely on the possible experience of a working adult in London, and includes references mainly intended for a British adult audience. The text mentions a ‘M&S wrap’, Franz Ferdinand’, and ‘Blackadder’, all British cultural references, making the text more obviously relevant to a British audience in this period. This also helps create the humorous tone of the text that will be explored later.

The two different intended audiences of the texts influence their content and language. Since text 1 includes the experience of the writer in reference to her children, it seems to address parents, although it is suggested that the museum is also ‘suitable for adults without kids’. The writer opens by stating that ‘contemporaneous letters and newsreel are better than having your kids read a history text’. This initial sentence is relevant to understanding the context of the reader, as it assumes that parents want their children to be educated and knowledgeable, something that they may be provided through visiting the museum. This, therefore, is an effective way of encouraging parent readers to visit the museum. In contrast, text 2 is entirely about rushing through lunch to see the place, as the text’s main target reader is working adults in London. The title ‘bomb round the Imperial War museum’ has two main effects: Firstly, the imperative to ‘bomb’ suggests the chaotic speed in which the visit should be done. Furthermore, the use of ‘bomb’ establishes the tone of the writer, as it is an ironic verb to use given the focus of the museum. The subtitle is also significant as it includes short syntax and abrupt use of punctuation in its repeated use of periods. The two sentences ‘Horror of War. Sandwich’, act as an antithesis to further establish a humorous tone. Juxtaposing war with the prosaic qualities of a sandwich hints at the careless attitude a visitor may have, because of their busy, apparently pressured lives. Thus, in both texts, the purpose and intended audience affect the language and content.  

A significant difference between both texts is that text 2, unlike text 1, is multi-modal, and this may have a different impact on the reader. The text includes a large image that has four different parts to it. The main image is of the museum itself, which seems to intend to immerse the reader and to provide her with a sense of what can be seen at the museum. At the bottom of the image is a map, which provides directions to the museum, and facilitates the reader’s journey to get there. The top of the image includes a caption, ‘London in your lunch hour’, addressing the reader through synthetic personalization. Lastly, there is an image of a clock in the top corner of the main photograph, clearly symbolizing time. The use of the clock is significant, alluding to the lives people live in modern, urban societies. The writer acknowledges that he is conscious of this pressure, and thus suggests with humor that a trip can be completed within an hour.

To enable a quick lunchtime visit, text 2 has a structure that aims to facilitate a quick trip, paralleling the organization the reader needs in the context of a busy working life. The text includes short body paragraphs that are sub-divided. Subtitles include the amount of time that should be spent on each activity, in a seemingly ‘militaristic’ way, appropriate to the museum and its focus. The text also includes a diagram to show the path a visitor should take, suggesting the necessity of being efficient and organized, and thus facilitate their trip. Text 1 is structured very differently, as the paragraphs describe a personal experience. The title is a quote: ‘If you like or want to learn WWI and WWII history, you will be happy’. The synthetic personalization, directly addressing the reader, as well as the high modality of the imperative ‘you will be happy’, is persuasive, appealing to the reader by establishing a sense of satisfaction. The text then includes a rating, to show that the website aims to address the reader’s desires. The first paragraph introduces the writer’s opinion, the second moves on to what to expect from a child’s reaction, and the last functions as a conclusion. This structure is significant, showing all aspects of the museum and the possible receptions to it, as well as to help advise and persuade the reader that the museum ‘is worth a visit’.

Lastly, the most significant contrast between the two texts is the tone and key ideas communicated. Text 1 has a colloquial, conversational tone, but uses this to convey a more serious idea: ‘the exhibits do not glorify war, but certainly make me grateful for what the English people endured’. This more serious assertion is necessary, as discussion of the world wars should convey respect. This is contrasted with text 2 which has a detached and witty tone throughout. The adjectives used in this passage undermine the horrors of war, creating a detached, almost careless tone. The writer describes the ‘cool planes’, a ‘spooky house’, and ‘superb Holocaust exhibition’. When the writer describes the serious aspects of the museum, the tone is humorous, given the way the atrocities are undermined. The writer claims that the gallery is ‘really depressing!’, where the exclamation mark highlights the ridiculous undermining of the holocaust. This method is repeated when the writer describes the ‘Death Clock that ticks at the rate of one casualty of war a minute’. This matter-of-fact tone used to describe what is, in reality, a horrifying object suggests that visitors do not really appreciate or understand the atrocities associated with war. This is continued in the mocking tone of the description of ‘Franz Ferdinand were involved’. The use of ‘were’ establishes that the writer means the UK rock band instead of the Austrian Archduke that was assassinated, triggering WWI. This is humorous as it reveals the ignorance of many in contemporary British society, and mocks their lack of awareness. Lastly, the last paragraph satirizes the attitude that busy, working adults may have. The sentence, ‘sprint to the tube with a new found appreciation of life’ draws attention to the fast paced, but also selfish side to human nature, as the horrors seen at the museum result in appreciation of the visitor’s life. The conclusion, ‘the 3pm meeting you were dreading will suddenly become less of a chore’ is also humorous, yet critical, as it compares a daily meeting to atrocious World Wars. Thus, text 2 has a very different approach, as the passage is relevant to the context of busy city life, as well as critical of the carelessness that results from a constant pressure on time that working adults feel.

In conclusion, although both texts treat the same topic, they vary greatly because of their contexts and purposes. Although they both, on the surface, act to provide advice to readers on a museum visit, the ending of text 2 shows the writer’s different intention. The detached yet humorous tone is significant because of the context described of busy city life for working adults. This also affects the message of both texts, as text 1 is a genuine help to the reader, whilst text 2 is also critical of the lack of time individuals have in the context of a modern and busy city.