In the article about Bernie Goetz, I liked how the first two paragraphs were set up. I did not know who this man was previous to this article so when I first started reading I thought it was just the one story of this man and his love for squirrels but then in the second paragraph I was thrown a curveball. I like the idea of how this was structured because instead of starting with the cool little side fact about this man, he was first described as a regular man. I think that the back story of this man was something that largely contributed to its success. If this were just a story of a man saving a squirrel it would have just fallen into the same category with all the other savior stories. The plot twist of how this mans seemingly irrelevant past is incorporated into this narrative was smart.

In the article about Sean Casey, I find that the pictures are the most vital aspect to the structure of this story. While hearing about animals, people always want to see them as well because their so cute so the article did a really good job of connecting the pictures with the text. It is mentioned that Casey saved a legendary “ghost dog” and if the reader does now know the legend then there is a helpful picture that captures the heart of the reader. Who wouldnt want to see the picture of a dog that had been rescued. The content connection between the text and the pictures really helps give more connection to the reader.

What I would take from these two articles would be the idea of having an element of a twist like the Goetz story. I really enjoyed how it was kind of like a story inside a story and one little piece of information (he shot four people) added a new insight into a minor story of saving a squirrel. So I think that is the biggest thing I would take from this: keep things interesting!