Paper 1: Student Response (Justin Gatlin)

          When speaking about a champion, the image of a perfect being comes to mind. However, this is not the case for Justin Gatlin, an American sprinter who won the 100m sprint in 2017 in London, beating Usain Bolt. This online article written for “The Sun” by Duncan Wright in August 2017 describes Gatlin’s win and the crowd’s response to this victory. The online article, accessible to English speakers who use the internet, is aimed at those interested in track and field. Throughout the article, Wright uses descriptive language of Gatlin’s tainted past and the crowd’s response to him to characterise Gatlin as a cheating substance abuser.

            Firstly, Wright plays with repetition to characterise Gatlin as a cheater. This idea is made immediately apparent to readers in the title of the article when Wright explicitly states “drugs cheat Justin Gatlin.” The use of the word “cheat” in the title serves to instantly characterise Gatlin as a rule breaker, and this impression stays with readers throughout the article. Furthermore, this word “cheat” is swiftly repeated again in the header before the article has even started. Wright’s repetition of the word “cheat” in such quick succession leaves the readers with no doubt that Gatlin is characterised as someone who is dishonest and not credible.  Wright also describes the crowd’s view of Gatlin through the quoted dialogue of the crowd chanting “cheat, cheat, cheat,” again using repetition to almost drone Gatlin’s characterisation as a cheat into readers. Therefore, throughout the article Wright clearly and explicitly characterizes Gatlin as a fraud.

            Additionally, Wright characterises Gatlin as a tainted drug abuser, to explain his previous characterization as a cheat. Again, in the title of the article, Wright uses the words “drugs” before “cheat Justin Gatlin,” as if this were part of his name. The word “drugs” has connotations of a shady business, characterising Gatlin as tainted and as a user (of drugs). Wright then goes on to mention how Gatlin was “twice banned for doping.”  Although Wright’s tone is factual, the mere inclusion of this information taints the reader’s impression of Gatlin, which allows Wright to characterise him as a substance abuser. Here, the subtext is that Gatlin is a sort of degenerate, unworthy of this victory. Moreover, Wright describes the runner as “American doper Gatlin.”  Wright’s use of the word “doper” after the word “American” suggests that Gatlin’s past experiences with drugs are as much a part of his identity as his nationality. To readers, Wright highlights how Gatlin’s history with doping is his defining personality trait which allows Wright to characterise Gatlin as a drug abuser.

            Then, Wright emphases the crowd’s reaction to Gatlin to characterise him as the opposite of a crowd pleaser. This is made evident when Wright explains that the “crowd then started booing” and “venting their fury” when Gatlin wins the race. Wright’s description of the crowd’s overwhelming negative response to Gatlin creates vivid auditory imagery for the readers, to effectively communicate Gatlin’s characterisation as someone who upsets and displeases the crowd. The crowd’s response is very strange for readers as usually the crowd usually cheers for the winner. Therefore, Wright’s description highlights how Gatlin is characterised as furiously disliked by the crowd. Again, Wright repeats how the crowd “vented their anger with cheers of abuse.”  This harsh response from the crowd also makes the reader understand that the crowd has no pity for Gatlin; he is thoroughly despised. 

            Finally, Wright characterises Gatlin as self-aware, which seems to be his only redeeming quality presented in the online article. Gatlin’s cautiousness is revealed when Wright reports that Gatlin realized “he shouldn’t” take a victory lap after winning. This choice made by Gatlin demonstrates his ability to read the room and therefore he is characterised as self-aware. Wright further characterises Gatlin as self-aware when he quotes Gatlin saying “I thought of what I would do if I win but I didn’t do any of that.”  This dialogue reveals Gatlin’s inner thinking and his decision not to flaunt his victory, which is a smart decision considering the crowd’s reaction. Therefore, by including this, Wright is able to characterise Gatlin as thoughtful and cautious.  Wright finishes the article by characterizing Gatlin as self-aware and thoughtful, which leaves the readers with a slightly better impression of the runner and a bit of pity for him too, but not too much.

            Overall, Wright consistently uses repetition throughout his online article to paint Gatlin in a mostly negative light, characterising him as a tainted substance abuser and cheater. What is surprising however is the lack of attention that Wright pays to the fact that despite his poor mistakes, Gatlin is still a champion. The only person who seems to acknowledge this is Gatlin’s opponent, Usain Bolt, who rightly tells him that the crowd’s negative response was unwarranted. Savvy readers might also be able to see that this article too is unfairly harsh.