The article comprehensively describes the definition of an introvert, the features of his behavior, and personal attitudes in the modern model of society. This category of people often remains misinterpreted in a world focused on predominantly extroverted and energetically intense people. The purpose of the author is in the clearly expressed desire to convey to society the goals and wishes of introverts, whose thoughts and feelings often go unrecognized or neglected. A superficial analysis of the text captures a vivid personal appeal of the author and intensely expresses subjective sentiments due to individual experience. A large number of rhetorical questions at the beginning of the message immediately attract the reader’s attention. The article is written in a journalistic style and has a bright emotional coloring with a hint of a pronounced rejection of the global focus on extraversion.
The observant text analysis allows the reader to better understand the personal message of the author. The article is well structured and includes general questions regarding the life and worldview of introverts. The text is characterized by a high degree of subjectivism and a pronounced bias towards the category of extrovert readers. The author compares extroverts with “puppy dogs” who can listen to a person for a minute and then start “barking” again. Such a comparison is pejorative and may cause an ambiguous reaction in the reader (Rauch 133). In addition, the author directly states that introverts are a more intelligent, reflective, and sensitive category of people. Every conclusion has the right to be presented for acceptance; however, a rather dismissive tone towards extroverts may, on the contrary, cause rejection of the message.
The position of the author is coherent and has the potential to find its reader and supporter. However, the aftertaste from its reading is rather ambiguous and makes one think about the excessive tendentiousness of the writer. The text does not compare two different categories of people but vigorously downplays the principal personality traits of extroverts. The author says that the world would be much calmer and saner under the guidance of introverts. This theory may well be valid; however, perhaps the world should not be so sharply divided into “white” and “black,” “extroverts,” and “introverts.” This article does a good job of its central purpose: to illustrate an alternative radical vision of the modern model of society separated mainly between extroverts and introverts.