Holt doesn't aim to successfully portray the trials and difficulties Turing experienced during his lifetime. Holt wants the reader to see past Turing’s homosexuality. He aims to showcase all of Turing’s successes. Holt’s tone states that he wants to give the proper acknowledgment to Turing for his accomplishments. He speaks to Turing’s mysterious death and secret homosexuality to engage the reader, then follows by writing, “[a]nother [secret], however, had not come to light” his achievements such as, breaking the German Enigma code and creating the blueprint for the modern computer. Holt says that biographies and broadways “gave a lucid account of his technical achievement” (344) but “gets wrong the central idea of a ‘computable number’” (344). These examples imply that his primary focus is to shed light on Turing’s achievements, not his homosexuality.
Holt only mentions Turing’s death and homosexuality to engage the reader. Holt does not do so to engage the reader to think about what life was like for gay men at the time. The essay is not called, “What Life was like for Gay Men in 1900’s” it is called “Code-Breaker”. Any good writer knows, the first few sentences are vital in intriguing your audience. This is why Holt begins his essay by including the mysterious “death by poison apple” and “gross indecency” (337).
As a writer Holt understands that there are certain procedures to follow in order to engage a reader. He uses this knowledge to engage the reader but not to portray Turing’s difficulties but rather to shed light on his achievements. Holt speaks to Turing’s homosexuality and death only to dismiss the idea that this information is relevant when speaking to a man who “solved the most important logic problem of his time, saved the countless lives by defeating a Nazi code, conceived the computer, and rethought how mind arises from matter” (346).