The way this article is organized is crucial to the overall effect it aims for on its audience. He uses his previous arguments to support the next element of his argument, pointing out that music does a lot for the listener and can do much more for the artist who creates it. He also gives a personal testimony to solidify and illustrate the argument he is making. I think it's an essential part of the whole thing. He uses pathos to support his philosophy. Readers are more likely to absorb the ideas and opinions contained in his article because of his effective and demonstrative pathos. He cleverly depicts a fascination with how instruments work, and does so with childlike wonder. His words masterfully delight the reader and he elevates their feelings about music with words in tune with the appreciation of physical art. This makes the audience feel sympathetic toward his argument. Greene tactfully contrasts sport and music in this article. He talks about how competitive all sports are and how both teams can do their best, but only one comes out on top. In music, he asserts that everyone wins, and that it is the opposite of a zero-sum game. To allay possible objections, he points out that the proliferation of music competitions has led many programs to forget that music is about unity. Even though I don't completely feel that way