Also, Crane is very explicit and shows many details which helps me visualize what he is saying. Pleasanton is missing that in his paragraph.
The term used by Boyer indicates that generals sometimes brought their regiments into the middle of the fight. The generals sometimes made decisions that got the regiment in a tough situation. This is where most people are killed - the heart of war.
We learn that the generals were secretly despised. The regiment didn’t like how sometimes they would be wandering in apparent aimlessness. The regiment wanted to be fighting, but they didn’t know what was in store for them.
The writer’s purpose was to inform the reader of the formations of the equipment and soldiers. His writing described what he was trying to say, but it was in such a way that I felt like I was reading a solely informational book.
Crane’s purpose was to inform the readers of the formations and struggles of the regiment, but he also wanted the reader to be interested in what he was saying. For those who don’t know anything about war, Crane’s approach made it much more visible. He spoke descriptively, but it was put in a more creative