Why Design?

I was very unsure of the meaning or argument of this paper the first time I read it. She

goes into many of her own experiences in great detail, including the beginning. The first

few paragraphs start with a very exciting experience of hers that reminded me of a novel;

it did not once mention a goal or argument of this paper. I believe this is to keep the

reader interested before she goes about explaining her case in cryptic passages. Most of

what she writes could very well be actual experiences of hers, but others seem like mere

metaphors. I enjoy how she made it into a story, but I think it takes away from what she

is really trying to say to the reader. Personally, I did not see the connections she was

suggesting until reading it a second time. It almost seems that there is too much detail in

her experiences, it drones on about the same experience until you forget what it is you are

actually reading about. I see the connections she is making with nature, but I think that it

can be accomplished with less experiences and more evidence, a more even balance

between them. As the connections go, however, I agree with what she is suggesting. I

think that she believes that there is a "spirit" of anyplace. There is a spirit on the island,

there is a spirit in the mountains, and there is a spirit in the frog. No matter where or

what it is, there is always a spiritual connection. I believe that this is why she used so

many experiences, to show that it is present in every experience that she has told. Annie

Dillard is not straightforward in the least, but it does make it much more interesting to try

and find these connections and come to some sort of explanation unique to every person

who reads it.