Response Question - Essay Example

a writing style which means that Sima Qian wrote as a group. Sima Qian observed the whole picture of the events in China, and wrote it from the standpoint of the group’s view. On the other hand Herodotus wrote it mostly from his view point, adding up details which he thought were necessary for the readers to read. What did the group think of what happened? What did the group think was important to write down? Why did they think it was important? These are questions that we should answer. The most amazing thing about these authors is that they never once met each other in person.

Yet, for people who never met each other, never enjoyed each other’s company and never had a cup of coffee or tea over the dinner table together, their recollections and styles are vastly similar. The similarities become eminent to the readers by the different accounts of the writers that they give, and the brilliant ways in which they speak. Herodotus’ brilliant account of politics was fascinating to me, as was Qian’s ability to go off on random mythical journeys. Many would say this was separate, but it is also identical as both writers could go off onto one stretch of writing style and stay there.

Regardless of the similarities that the two writers share their writing styles are vastly different. However the fact remains that Sima Qian and Herodotus are great writers and perhaps some of the best writers in history. Their writing style shall be forever analyzed and young students and emerging writers will always try and strive for their great style. A major difference that the two authors have is the manner in which each writer presents his personal interpretation. As mentioned above Herodotus tends to go off on political tangents while Sima Qian tends to keep the political thoughts to a barely noticeable minimum.

However Qian has no problem in exploring the mystical world of China, something Herodotus virtually leaves untouched. Qian wrote from what is known as the group standpoint. He wanted everyone to receive his entire message, to see his whole picture, so to speak. It is a contrast to be sure from Herodotus, who wrote from his standpoint and more about what he thought, and wasn’t as worried about making sure that the entire group got the picture. However this does not means that readers of the text will not find Herodotus’ work compelling.

The first thing I noticed about both authors, as I was reading their work, was how stunningly easy the work was to read. Many history books are dry and full of only factual writing. However in my opinion this time the writing from the history book seemed to come to life. Although I liked Herodotus’ approach slightly better because I am more of a political person than a mystical person, yet Qian’s work was also equally engaging. However I did think that Herodotus’ work was more intellectually stimulating perhaps because it had a more historical and more fact-based approach.

Many books, especially books about this time period in history, are quite boring although I was glad to see that this one was very interesting. I found Herodotus’ work to be more enlightening than Qian’s, perhaps because I was able to relate to the style of writing that he used and it was slightly better than Qian’s. Sometimes it was hard to know who actually wrote what document as the book did not always specifically mention it, thus making an absolute and fair analysis and comparison challenging, to say the least.

I personally could not have done all the research and