How did the scholar introduce his or her topic?

Dr. Rita Charon started off her article by showing us an example of her discussion of narrative medicine.  This gave context and understanding before she dug deep into the article.

Where did the writing draw you in?

The writing drew me in when she used descriptive language in the first section about the patient that she was dealing with.  For example, “The patient lives a life filled with passion and responsibility”.

Are there parts of the essay that confused you, or sections where you didn’t know enough about the topic or the sources to follow the argument?

No, throughout the whole article Dr. Rita Charon was very clear about always bringing the point back into the conversation.  Every section of the article was a different situation showing how applying the concept of narrative medicine to daily activity can help everyone in the situation (doctor, patient, patient’s family, colleagues, etc.)

What parts of the article were particularly clear?

I found that the parts of the article that were particularly clear were within the first two or three pages.  The sections named “The Turn Toward Narrative Knowledge” until “Patient-Physician:  Empathic Engagement”.  They were the sections that were the clearest to me because they described what narrative medicine was and also how to start applying it to the medical field.

Were there passages that prompted you to think new thoughts?

The passage named “Patient-Physician:  Empathic Engagement” made me think about when I or anyone else goes to the doctor.  It shows without knowing the doctor could ask you “how have you been?” and your response would be “a story-a state of affairs or a set of events”.  Just learning about what narrative medicine was I thought it was a newer idea.  But, I found out that it is used in our daily lives more often then you would think.  It is used with any medical professional when you swap stories or talk to them about why you are in their office.