In the views of John James Audubon and Annie Dillard alike, birds are undoubtedly one of the most fascinating creatures on Earth. However, as an observer, both Audubon and Diller differ in their method of conveying their affections for these winged animals. Audubon describes the birds placidly; giving stale, dull but accurate accounts of the birds, whereas Dillard gives a vivid image of the mammals, but does not match in accuracy of Audubon's descriptions. Ultimately, Audubon and Dillard both deliver slightly varying affections for birds, but nonetheless, fascinated.

John James Audubon, most recognized for the society named in his honor, uses stale facts to deliver his message of what impact birds have had on him. Instead of a vivid description, Audubon "[rises] and count[s] the dots then put down, [and finds] that 163 had been made in twenty-one minutes." Althroughout, Audubon uses precise remarks but has a lack of imagery. In fact, Audubon himself admits "[he] cannot describe to [the reader] the extreme beauty of their aerial evolutions," thus laying proof to the claim that Audubon has a deficiency in imagery. All descriptions are geometric as he describes "almost solid masses, [the birds] [as they] darted forward in undulating and angular lines."

A far cry from the bland portrayal Audubon provides, Dillard prduces a more imaginative representation of the flock of birds, as well. She is no naturalist like Audubon, yet is able to capture "the flight[,] extending like a fluttering banner, an unfurled oriflamme." Whereas Audubon describes their flight in a geometric method, Dillard shows the flight of birds as if it were an unfurling of the flag, or the banner of monarchs. To her ears, the birds sound like "a million shook rugs, [or]...a muffled