Student Writing Center Extra Credit

My final paper ended up being nearly 26 pages long. I'm very happy with how my paper turned out. To achieve this I wanted as many eyes as possible to see my paper and provide me feedback. I went to the student writing center not only once, but twice. The scheduling process for the writin center isn't the easiest especially around finals time. There weren't many spots available. The first time I went was on Tuesday and I was worried that this senior undergrad tutor named George was going to rip my paper apart. I was delighted to find that he was extremely helpful and gave me some great feedback. In an hour we went through all three of my papers and definitely had an idea of changes to make. I discussed with him that I expected there to be more necessary revisions in my paper. He said that sometimes the smallest changes, whether making paragraphs or fixing small sentences, can make a huge difference in the persuasive effect of a paper. I was beyond surprised when he said he felt I had a real talent with writing. I was even more suprised when my professional writing tutor on Wednesday, Gabe, said the exact same thing and that he encourages me to continue writing. Gabe and George definitely had two different outlooks and teaching styles when it came to helping me with editing. George took the time and read through all the papers on his own and made edits and from there we discussed the revisions in depth. He was very personable and on my level. Gabe on the other hand was extremely different. He really pushed me to search my paper on my own for issues and it was a challenge. Both tutors were very helpful. Even though not all the changes I made in my paper were huge changes, I think they made the overall effect of the paper much better and I addressed many of the revision changes you suggested.

Literature Festival Extra Credit

Diane Ackerman: The Compassion of Observing

Literature Festival

            When I sat down in Baker Theatre I honestly assumed I would be quite bored for an hour or so while an honored author lectured about something I just either didn’t understand or couldn’t make any connection too. Diane Ackerman’s reading was quite the opposite of that. The lady whom introduced Ms. Ackerman talked of all the awards she had received and how much of a gift her writing was. It’s been a long time since I’ve been able to sit down and read a book because I wanted too and had time too. When looking through the program of events for the week it showed her adorable picture with her bright smile. The introducer read one of her articles that were published in the New York Times about Pythons in Florida this past fall. I have never heard someone describe Pythons in such a way I felt like the Python was slithering around in front of me as I hold my breath. The introducer also read an excerpt from a novel in which she tells the story of rehabbing her husband from a stroke. This little excerpt from the novel was from deep within the book after her husband had his stroke and was working to gain back many years of knowledge the stroke had taken from his through elementary style workbooks. Ackerman chose to read several excerpts from different books. As she began to read these excerpts I realized she is one of the most diverse authors I’ve noticed in a long time. Not only because all of the different types of literature she publishes; novel, research, blog and articles. But also the topics about which she chooses to write about. Her article in the New York Times was discussing pythons and describing them like painting a picture in my head. Her novel, which is her own story of her and her husbands journey after his stroke. The first excerpt she read, Remembering Winter, an insightful and almost childlike outlook of not only winter but also summer and all the little thing we didn’t appreciate as children, but we should have. Her second excerpt, An Alchemy of Mind, discusses the brain as a complex, intrinsic thing. But not in a way that only scientist and doctors could understand. In such a way that everyone can understand and wants to understand, wants to learn. At this point in the readings I assumed I would have been bore to the point I could no longer sit still; not the case. Her third excerpt, Dawn Light, she described as an awakening to life. She then proceeded to talk about how she regularly stops reading and imagines herself as things such as slime mold and owls to see how the world would be in their shoes.

“An owl can read the bottom line of eye chart from a mile away.”

            She ended the reading with her stories from her trip to Patagonia when she went to observe the whale camps. Diane Ackerman is a marvelous author. This may be a biased opinion but I support this with the fact that she can write about so many different topics. Yet she is just as capable and intriguing with each topic that she writes about from pythons to whales, from slime mold to owls, from the story of her husbands stroke to the story of her childhood winters to the brain. 

Discussion Questions/ Chapter 4 Intro and Swales

1. Regarding discourse communities Swales is one of the most well-known authors and researchers. He  discusses his six characteristics of a discourse community and makes it very simply to understand, which is awesome. Maybe this is a question that could be answered from browsing the section before the reading but how did Swales come up with these characteristics? Did he do it on his own or can we attribute the creation of these characteristics to others too? What type of research did he perform to form these characteristics? They questions are unimportant in the long run but it's interesting to know how these six characteristics came about.

2. Since we've began discussing and analyzing discourse communities more I've had a chance to understand each of the characteristics more. After having dealt with all the characteristics and how they relate to discourse communities I'm wondering if the fourth characteristic is necessary? Swales discusses the characteristics that discourse communities need including goals, outer communication, inner communication, genres, lexis and hierarchy. Why is the genres of communication needed as a characteristic of discourse communities? I feel like it's over kill.

3. I would also be interested to know of Glenn, Wardle and Swales who came out with their research first and did they influence each others texts. Swales, Glenn and Wardle all make relevant points about discourse communities but who's idea was the original idea?

Discussion Questions: Glenn

1. I was a vegetarian for almost a year and a half and during that time I was crazy about animal rights and animal equality. I was constantly talking about how horrible animals are treated and looking back on it now I was probably extremely annoying. Yes, animals are treated bad, especially in the food industry where they are born and raised for their meat. But since that time I've come to realize that you can't save all the animals, you just can't. Why were they created, why did our ancestors eat meat ? Apparently if society has gotten this far then there must be some reason that we continue to eat meat. Whether it's because God created them to be eaten, we would be over populated if we didn't, for the health benefits or because they simply taste good. After hundreds of thousands of years we're still eating meat.

2. I realize this article isn't supposed to be focused around the example of Farm Industry and how cruel it is but I think it's hard to focus on the real point of the article with such a strong example. One of the questions in my mind is how can people live with themselves? Not the farmers who make a truthful living and treat their animals with respect and real living beings but the farmers who beat their animals and treat them as if they're not a living, breathing beings. Do they realize the beings that they are treating so horribly is what is producing their paycheck?

3. The idea of double speak that Wardle introduces is an interesting concept especially with the farm industry example. Wardle discussed that commercials and the fact that they are clearly lying to us in two ways; cows don't speak (which really isn't a lie) and also what the cows are saying is a lie. The California cheese cows are probably more than likely in a single pin that is extremely small that allows them no room to move. How is it legal for these commercials to be so deceptive? How gulable and oblivious are people that believe that farmers actually take care of these animals and treat them with respect.

Informal Writing Assignment: Learning to Read/ Malcolm X

In his article Learning to Read, Malcolm X "demonstrates the extent to which literacies shape the worlds available to people and the experiences they can have."  He discusses, through this excerpt from his autobiography his experience in life and how literacy transformed his life while in prison. He is successful in his argument by discussing his own life experiences and how his life changed so drastically as well as the amount of opportunities that become available to him because of his newly gained knowledge. 

Not only does Malcolm X's article relate to Brandt's Literacy Sponsors but it is a great supporting example of her argument. Literary sponsors don't have to be people. In many situations they may be but not for Malcolm X. His literacy sponsors included the literature he was reading, the prison, his cell mate that he looked up to, Muhammad and the library in the prison. These places, people and items all helped Malcolm on his journey to greater knowledge and understanding while he was in prison. One of the authors, discusses how you can not move from the discourse community you were born into to a higher status community. But Malcolm X does just that. He is "eligible" for this higher status discourse community because of the level of knowledge he has gained.  

Nearly all of the articles we have read in class proceeding this one have nearly bore me to death. This excerpt though had my full attention the entire time I was reading. I had only heard the name Malcolm X a few times but never knew who he was. I also think this article is very inspiring because it breaks many stereotypes. When most people go to jail they don't do anything with their lives, or try to change the issues that put them there. Malcolm X turned his life around and became someone who inspired others. I think this story should be shared with other young, troubled adolescents so they realize they have the opportunity to turn their lives around and become someone; to realize their life doesn't have to be wasted in jail. I have always wanted to believe that all people are good at heart and can change for the better. Malcolm X's story is all around such an inspiring story that should be told more often. 

Discussion Questions: Annoying Ways People Use Sources/ Stedman

1. One of the biggest issues with the annoyances Stedman discusses is simply being unsure of what is allowed. In our last project we argued in support or opposition of a writing construct. Part of this being unsure, I believe, comes from not wanting to break these writing constructs. How do we ever know what is wrong and what is acceptable? In high school I had teachers who told me never start a sentence with and or because. I've seen very famous authors start sentences with and. I was told in junior high to never use quotations at the beginning of essays but I began my senior thesis paper with a quote and it is by far one of the best papers I have ever written. I argued for the five-paragraph writing form, but there are many professors who don't like it. With all these conflicting rules swirling around in the academic world who is too decide what is right and what is wrong?

2. Another issue that parallels this topic is plagiarism. Young students and even careless older students don't understand how important  it is to cite when quoting. Does this not understanding plagiarism descend from the topic not being taught and stressed or students simply not caring? To many students who don't appreciate the english language, citing is just extra work. They don't understand nor care that the words they are taking are someone else's words On the other hand, my little sister became frustrated this past year with citing because she is in the first stages of learning how to do so. 

3. Kahn discusses early in the article how important is it for authors to know and understand the audience they are trying to reach to know how to write. But when is it okay to start bending the rules? I was always told you have to learn the basics before you can do the fun stuff. Does this mean that students shouldn't be able to start breaking from these "rules" until late high school and early college? Or is the rule breaking for best selling authors and professors only? I think this question is up for heated debate. Obviously many of the annoyances Kahn discussed were grammatical issues that make writing better. But quotes, for example are a tool in writing I feel very strongly about to deepen the audiences understanding and make them think.  

Discussion Questions:Putting Ethnographic Writing in Context/ Seth Kahn

1. After reading Kahn's stories of ethnographers' struggles I think it is a huge responsibility to write one.   On the other hand it is great writing experience. Kahn mentioned that the ethnographer had the participants sign papers to wave any legal situations that may come up. But how did this professor not have any idea of how his actions were affecting his students? If he did know about his actions, then why would he have agreed to allowing the observations then gotten mad at the ethnographer. It's a hard decision to select a discourse community to study. If you select a community of someone who you or another group member is close with and the conclusions doesn't come out in a positive manner it can cause serious interpersonal issues. Though, having a known person in the community can give you the in you need to truly understand the community on another level.

2. Another question that I've had throughout this project and after reading this article was if these ethnography's can be successfully written by a group of people. The situation Kahn discussed was one person writing. We are working on the project in groups. The person in Kahn's example had to be very unbiased, which he/she does a good job of, even though she has already had the professor in class and enjoyed it. With a group of people working on such a project I think it would be difficult to have everyone be unbiased as well as perceive every participant in the same way. One group member may interview a participant and perceive their reactions in a certain way and then another perceive that same participant in another way. These may be minor conflicts but when trying to make a conclusion it could become problematic.

3. Kahn discussed some of the positive effects of ethnographers writing. One situation he discussed was a college escort service which had once been successful now lacked funding and was used less frequently. With the help of the ethnographers' findings, the escort service was able to present the findings to the university and regain the necessary funding. In what other positive ways could ethnographic writing be used? Ethnographic writing pushes you to consider all sides of a situation in the most unbiased way because it's not benefiting you at all, its effecting those participating and being observed. With these unbiased views I believe there are many more ways and situations where ethnographic writing could be a positive tool.

Informal Writing: Vocabulary of Comics/McCloud

In his article Vocabulary of Comics, Scott McCloud demonstrates the difference meanings between icons and symbols and how we perceive them. He discusses, through comic book strips and other animations that icons are not anything until we perceive them as something and relate them to ourselves and our surroundings. He is successful in his argument by using the animation to help demonstrate the idea of icons and symbols. 

McCloud's article is very unique in the way he tries to help the reader understand his purpose for writing the article. I've read or viewed, because there are few words in his work, besides those that are part of the animations, very few works like his. Even though the topics are different, Wysocki's The Sticky Embrace of Beauty reminds me of this article. Both involving and analyzing media and how it is perceived. Even though Wysocki and McCloud are discussing the media in different ways, I think it exemplifies the effects animation can have on a reader and an audience. McCloud show's a comic strip with evolving faces. Through his work he explains that this face has no real characteristics until we internalize it and relate it to ourselves. The same is true for the Peek advertisement in Wysocki's article. The picture featured in the Peek advertisment isn't a crystal clear photo. Even though the woman appears as slender, curvy and brunette, when people view the image its up to individual perception; a person would see someone or relate it to someone who appeals to their eye. 

McCloud's article is also very unique in the way he presents his underlying argument. If we hadn't taken the time to discuss his purpose in class I might have not understood. I think it's important to note how much impact works like McCloud's can have. Not all texts are normal texts. I think people sometimes think that texts have to be word after word, line after line of black ink on white paper. Art can express amazing messages. The significance of this article for me was how much of an impact art and media can have on an audience and readers. Not only that but how many different messages media and art can help express to readers. 

Discussion Questions: Materiality and Genre in the Study of Discourse Communities/ Amy J. Devitt

1. When I think of genre I think of books and movies. Both books and movies come in many genres, stretching from comedy, tragedy, romance, science fiction and many more. I understand the concept of genre's and that she uses them to help understand the discourse communities. But what is becoming confusing is whether she is giving genre's to the discourse communities themselves or the way they communicate. I don't see how giving the discourse communities themselves genres would help at all in the process of analyzing. On the other hand, I think it could be very tedious and confusing to give genres to the mechanisms of communication within the community. What kind of genres could even be established for forms of communications? Emails for example, are a form of communication but what genre do emails into, technology? If that's the case there is going to be overlapping of the genres. It's important to understand this process because like other authors have discussed, it can be very difficult to fully analyze a discourse community and uncover issues.

2. Devitt makes an interesting point when she begins discussing specialized communities creating writing for nonspecialized communities. I don't think many people, myself including make that connection. Do most people make that  connection ever? If they did, or if they do realize it have people just accepted it? I don't think completely understand your tax forms from the IRS ever killed anyone. But wouldn't it be so much easier if the IRS created the forms in such a way that it would possible for average citizens to be able to fill them out? Why is it necessary to publish the forms in such a way that we, the people who are filling them out, need someone else to assist us in filling them out because they are so confusing. Maybe it's a minor issue but Devitt also mentions ballets. Ballots are fairly important items. Wouldn't you think it's important that average citizens should be able to easily maneuver filling out a ballet? Do the specialized communities realize that what they are creating is made for someone that doesn't have the level of expertise they do?

3. Devitt seems to be trying to explain genre's and their role in discourse communities. But she barely makes a straightforward connection of an example of a genre that helps elaborate what she's explaining. The one genre she mentions that I identified was a verdict. I don't really understand how a verdict is a genre when the only discourse community that it will ever apply to is the one in this example. How did Devitt decide that verdict was a genre? The examples that she used are great in elaborating her point but she doesn't make it very clear as to what that point is. Yes genre's but what about them.

Discussion Questions/ Literacy, Discourse and Linguistics: Introduction/ James Paul Gee

1. After finishing this reading about discourse communities I am rather confused. Prior to reading Gee's text, we read texts that suggested to be a part of a discourse community you must learn everything before you are allowed to be a part of the community. You must learn to talk a certain way, obtain certain skills, and even dress a certain way in some cases. Each discourse community has it's own specific criteria. For example, athletic training students, you can't be an athletic training student unless you are knowledgeable about sports. But from Gee's description of discourse communities, I obtained the idea that to be a part of the discourse community you there must be complete enculturation. Meaning that this discourse community accepts you on the terms that you agree to learn their rules, how they speak, how they act, how they dress and all the necessary skills. The later of the texts, Gee's, seems almost like a college major; you agree to fulfill the requirements set forth by the university and the major if they accept you. Maybe I am misunderstanding what the authors are saying but the prior texts seem the person learns everything about the discourse community from the outside, looking in. While Gee's text suggest the complete enculturation of a person to learn everything. I'm assuming that this isn't very important or significant it just depends of the specific discourse community and how their growth.

2. I really enjoyed the metaphor Gee used to describe discourse communities. "A sort of 'identity kit' which comes complete with the appropriate instructions on how to act, talk, and often write, so as to take on a particular role that others will recognize you as." When he beings discussing the primary discourse communities and their significance, I wondered how young to discourse communities start. Can a kindergartener be a part of a discourse community. Can you be put into a certain discourse community because you're parents were/are part of it? After internalizing the text I feel like I came to the conclusion that you have to be aware of how people perceive you to be apart of a discourse you choose. But why is this relevant? Parents, siblings might not realize that they're actions or decisions might make you be a part of discourse community without you having a choice. Along with that I wondered what primary discourses are. Are they your family, your socioeconomic level, your town, your biddy sports team, your church? How can come be a part of so many discourse communities when at some point the beliefs of them are going to overlap.


3. This question is probably irrelevant really to the point of the text but I still wondered when I was reading. Gee briefly touched on the consequences of discourse communities overlapping but didn't go into much detail. Can people loose discourse communities as they grow or is that discourse community always a part of them? This is a very cliche example but I was raised in a small town where everyone acts a certain way, talks a certain way and has very small minded beliefs. I was raised in this discourse community. Even more specifically I was raised in a church in which was a discourse community; certain beliefs, language and restrictions. The beliefs of that discourse go against beliefs of discourses here at OU. Many of the beliefs instilled in me by my primary discourse are still with me but they conflict with my current discourse. I feel like this question is extremely relevant in real life because generations have conflicts with beliefs; what our parents grew up believing was right and wrong, good and bad, unacceptable and acceptable is completely different then what we grew up with. But do those primary discourses every leave us?

Discussion Questions: God Don't Never Change: Black English from a Black Perspective/ Smitherman

1. Smitherman is making this article into an argument about racism. Is it about the black dialect/english or is it about racism ? I understand how she is tying the two together and her theory may be partially correct but BE doesn't sound right. Maybe it sounds right to them, but to me, grammatically, I don't think it sounds correct. I am not by any means racist. But if you were an business owner, hiring an employee and both being interviewed were equally qualified in every way, would you hire the person who speaks BE or WE ? It's extremely depend on the audience you are trying to target. If you're in an upscale, highly educated, gated neighborhood, its more than likely going to be the WE. Apposed to a small town where most speak BE, where maybe they hold onto their traditions and culture more tightly you would hire the person who speaks BE. But in American today, I strongly feel that someone who speaks strictly BE would struggle and be looked down upon. Again, this comes of as racist but it's in no way meant to be. 

2. I'm not sure the point of the argument Smitherman is trying to make? She clearly states that the BE was adapted and created "with characteristic laziness, these Gullah Negros took short cuts to the ears of their auditors, using as few words as possible, sometimes making one gender serve for three, one tense for several and totally disregarding singular and plural numbers." The example she uses in the article astounds me. A freshman in college was asked to take a position on the Vietnam War and present and argument to defend his position. I think the professor had every right to hand him back that paper, ask him to correct his grammar and resubmit it. As a freshman in college you shouldn't be making those types of mistakes. 

3. One of the valid points Smitherman does make is that we cohesively can understand each other's WE and BE. When it's BE versus WE, it's true people do throw a fit about it. But when it's northern english versus southern english, or western versus eastern, no one really makes a huge deal about it. Why is that though? It is because the eastern, western, southern and northern still sound correct but have slang ? Or are we truly racist against BE? Should BE be more widely accepted?

Project #2 Writing Constructs Proposals

Originally I  had planned to discuss and argue that there are more than two sides to an argument. But after writing the second part of project one I decided to keep the same claim I had in project one. I now plan to write about the five paragraph essay form. I discussed how important the five paragraph essay form is to the writing process and becoming a successful writer.

Defending the five paragraph essay form for my construct only seems right because I think it is important to learn the basics of writing. All through high school I became very skilled with the five paragraph essay and I feel like I'm strong in writing due to learning this basic so strongly. In high school, teachers use the five paragraph form not to constrict students but to help them learn form and organization.I haven't read into research against the five paragraph form but I think there are strong arguments for both sides. I will definitely be including criticism of the five paragraph form in my essay. It's important to understand both sides of the arguement and defend your opinion. In the end though, the five paragraph essay plays an essential role in learning the organization and function.

Project #2 Writing Constructs Pre-Bibliography

Supporting

Title: The Five-Paragraph Essay: An Attempt to Articulate
Author(s): Duane C. Nichols
Source: The English Journal, Vol. 55, No. 7 (Oct., 1966), pp. 903-908
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/812186

Title: Speaking My Mind: In Defense of the Five-Paragraph Essay
Author(s): Kerri Smith
Source: The English Journal, Vol. 95, No. 4 (Mar., 2006), pp. 16-17
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30047081

Title: Speaking My Mind: Defending the Five-Paragraph Essay
Author(s): Byung-In Seo
Source: The English Journal, Vol. 97, No. 2 (Nov., 2007), pp. 15-16
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30046782

Title: Praise for the Five Paragraph Essay
Author(s): Tracy A. Novick
Source: The English Journal, Vol. 90, No. 3, The Lure of Young Adult Literature (Jan., 2001), p. 12
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/821293

Title: In Defense of the Five-Paragraph Essay
Author(s): Raymond Stopper
Source: The English Journal, Vol. 85, No. 3, The Universe of Literature (Mar., 1996), p. 9
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/820092

These records have been provided through JSTOR.
http://www.jstor.org

Refuting

Title: The Ill Effects of the Five Paragraph Theme
Author(s): Kimberly Wesley
Source: The English Journal, Vol. 90, No. 1, Teaching Writing in the Twenty-First Century (Sep., 2000), pp. 57-60
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/821732

Discussion Questions: Intertextuality and the Discourse Community/Porter

1. The description he gives of discourse communities is very vague for how long the text is. I'm not sure I understand the purpose of explaining a discourse community in this article. I understand what a discourse community is but not the point in this text about originality. If anything, these authors try so hard to become of these discourse communities. But to become part of the discourse communities you have to have common ideas and not step over the line of what is and isn't allowed. If that's the case and these authors aren't allowed to write about anything outside of what this discourse community believes and agrees too, then no wonder Porter says there are no original ideas. If you are being bound by other ideas, opinion and rules then you can't come up with new ideas and your creativity is smothered down to meet their standards.

2.  Porter is questioning originality in every aspect. My first question for porter would be do you find yourself to be unoriginal? I do agree that authors use each others work to build their own ideas but what he is claiming is that no authors ideas are original so where did they come from, back in the stone age? I find it challenging to understand that no authors ideas have ever been original. I can understand an author questioning another's work to research his own work and then in return using it. But, I don't understand how he believes all ideas are unoriginal. In that case is he okay with saying his idea of being unoriginal is also unoriginal? Does his idea of no idea being original also extend farther than just literature? What Steve Jobs not the first person to invent the iPhone and all of the things he invented? Did Michael Jackson, the King of Pop, steal his song ideas from someone else? I also don't think its acceptable to claim Jefferson not an original writer. I'm sure he did use all of those sources of work but the piece of writing he composed will be forever known in this country.

3.  I think the idea of intertextuality and plagiarism are on opposite sides of a very fine line. When Porter discusses Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence, the way he argues it sounds as if he is almost trying to convince the audience Jefferson is guilty of plagiarism. So what's the difference between intertextuality and plagiarism? How does Porter want to define the difference if he is arguing that there is a difference. If he is going to argue he needs to define the difference. I believe intertextuality is the positive influence the author takes from another work while plagiarism is a negative influence when a student, usually, takes ideas and does not recognize that they are those of the authors.

Informal Writing: Helping Students Use Textual Sources Persuasively/ Margaret Kantz

In her article Helping Students Use Textual Sources Persuasively, Margaret Kantz attempts to discuss the struggles of composing original arguments and research texts by combining numerous sources. She points out that it is much easier to use the claims and theories from the sources than to create a new purpose and abstract ideas of your own. Kantz's tells the story of a sophomore in college to relate the story and help the audience understand this struggle.

At first read this article doesn't relate to much we've read. But after reflecting I realized the ideas behind we she is saying is the entire purpose of Kleine's article. You can put facts upon facts upon facts into a research paper, there are millions of those out there. That's easy. A real research article has those facts but has arguments and claims of your own. Those arguments shouldn't come out of a book you get at the library but between the lines of those books you get at the library and the discussions you have with your peers. It's not very self explanatory but I feel like this is one of those ideas that is better said with few words and left the audience to ponder and figure out on their own.

I'm not sure if I feel like this article relates well to any of the texts we've read up to this point. We've read about inspired writers, shitty drafts, writing processes, the perception of beauty and now this. This article reminds me of high schoolers doing a shitty job of trying to half ass a paper the night before it's due. I understand though that is not the point she is trying to make. Creating original claims from facts upon facts, doesn't give you much room to be original. Discussion within facts takes practice because you have to keep the facts but manage to intertwine your own ideas into those "facts."

Discussion Questions: The Sticky Embrace of Beauty/ Anne Frances Wysocki

1.  In society today, sex sells. People can argue with the statement but in my eyes it's completely true. What brought our society to such a point where its essential to have a half naked female or man with rock hard abs to successfully sell anything? Society always has convinced themselves you need to be a single digit size to be considered beautiful. The world healthy has been thrown out and beautiful now equals skinny. How did our society get to this point though? It wasn't appropriate to have half naked women in the newspaper in the 19th century or 18th century and I don't know if the printing press was even capable of such images. So how did society progress to this ideal?

2.  I don't know it it's acceptable to include this picture as part of my question. I believe that the top ad for Victoria Secret would be another ad that Wysocki would we angered by. As a first reaction the ad is pleasing to the eye, like Peek but then when you compare the top picture to the bottom it becomes almost disgusting. I feel as if Wysocki would agree with me. I feel that the point Wysocki is trying to make is very significant to societies current perception of beauty.

3.  Although Wysocki is incredibly hard to dissect and read I really appreciate her organization. She's extremely thorough in explaining every part of her claim/theory and backing it up with research. This article is one of my favorites we have read in class so far this year even though I did have a hard time focusing on it. When we talked about it in class I heard mostly dislike and discontent about it from my peers. Was it  merely because of the length of the text or it was it because of the topic? If it was because of the topic of the text then our society has truly corrupted some of my peers. After reading the article and understanding Wysocki's research I don't understand how anyone could still not see how society perception of beauty is corrupt.

Informal Writing:Decisions and Revisions: The Planning Strategies of a Publishing Writer and Response of a Laboratory Rate--or, Being Protocoled/Carol Berkenkotter and Donald Murray

In their articles Decisions and Revisions: The Planning Strategies of a Publishing Writer and Response of a Laboratory Rate--or, Being Protocoled, Carol Berkenkotter and Donald Murray attempt to analyze and discuss the highly researched and accredited writing process. Together they argue not every writer utilizes the original five step process of writing; prewriting, drafting, revising, proofreading and publishing and that many times the steps are unclear and blur together. They are successful in this argument by analyzing Donald Murray through his writing own writing process. 

Synthesizing between articles isn't always easy. You would think the more articles you read, the easier it would be to put all of them into conversation together. Not the case for me at least. The articles we read, the more they blur together and there is so much information to put into conversation. To put this article first and conversation with Shitty First Drafts, I think they conflict in a way. Murray's writing style, the way I understand it, blurs together drafting and revising. Shitty First Drafts, discusses how all authors have that really shitty first draft that's just a huge ass mess to get all of their thoughts out. Murray doesn't seem that he writes in that way. It's more of a write some, revise it, write some revise it; which is the way I write. I'm not sure if this is the correct or healthy way to write, but at this point, its what works best for me. Yes this is a minor detail and ahead of schedule, but in Kleine's article he mentions how eager how the authors he interviewed were to talk to him about their writing. I also feel like Murray was extremely willing to about him writing. He did allow basically allow Burkenkotter to use him as a lab rat. Early in the 20 century authors had this image of being this unsocial, nerd, bookworms that didn't interact with the real world or at least that's how I feel people perceived them. I worry when I put articles into conversation that the topics or details I focus on are to minor and don't really matter but the smaller details of the article are really what interest me. 

After I dissected this article a  bit more and with the discussion we had in class it really helped me to understand. At first I really didn't the "deeper meaning" or what the article was trying to help us as students understand. I was having a really difficult time coding my writing process using the video I recorded of myself. A few of my categories like drafting and revising, in my writing process, were one big blob and I truly thought I was writing wrong. I still have the image in my head that authors sit down and they literally go into their own world and can't function until they've gotten everything out of their head. But, I think this article was helpful in understanding why we're writing this paper and there are other authors who have done this to help them understand their own writing process. 

Discussion Questions: What Is It We Do When We Write Articles Like This One--and How Can We Get Students to Join Us?/ Michael Kleine

1.  This question in it's own may be unimportant but I still wonder. Can you split authors into hunters and gathers as Kleine talks about in his article? Or is that what he's talking about? I think Kliene is discussing the writing process styles of writers and not the writers themselves. Society is always trying to dumb down the writing process into five simple, easy to follow steps. When in reality how many writers actually write with that exact, evenly split, five step process? We saw with Murray when he became a research project that his process of writing over lapped tremendously. I think it is essential for us to teach the five step writing process when learning to write but as you grow as a writer is it no longer appropriate.

2.  The system he's using to score these writers seems to be quite subjective so how is it accurate? If he is the one always doing the interviews with the writers then it is possibly less subjective. But still, he seems to have a lot of issues and frustrations with his own systems of coding/scoring that I wonder how accurate is really is? Why not add more categories or make them more inclusive. If I was the audience and knew how biased this was I don't know how much I could rely on his research.

3.  I brought this topic up in another one of my IWA's or discussion questions but it keeps reoccurring to me. Kliene starts talking about how the eight writers he interviewed never wrote for an external reason, they always wrote for internal reasons. Every time this leads me to celebrities or TV stars and the discussion of are they really writers? Real writers write for internal reasons, not for the money or because a higher authority asks it of them. Does Dr.Phil write because he has an internal want to write or does he write for the fame and the money. I know I've discussed this before and I should probably drop it but I don't believe people like Dr. Phil should get the amount of respect they do for their writing.

Discussion Questions: Reading Games: Strategies for Reading Scholarly Sources/ Karen Rosenburg

1. Rosenburg discusses how academic publications won't use sensory language, suspense and other literary methods to keep you hooked on what you're reading. I would like to know if Rosenburg's article is considered academic? I assume it would be because most of the articles we read are. But even for a academic publication I feel like she does a really great job of keeping the attention of the audience; atleast she has kept my attention. The reason I ask is because if it's possibly to make academic publications more intriguing to their audience why would you not attempt to do so. If they're academic publications then they want us to learn from them but they expect us to continue reading something that lacks any "zest" per say.

2."Unless the reading is billed as a review or a synthesis, the only way that an academic text can even get published is if it claims to argue something new or different." I have seen so many books out there, that seemed and I assumed to be saying the exact same thing over and over again. Why do we need so many books stating the same thing over and over again? How do they justify if these books get to be published? If one sentence of the entire book is a new idea or concept but the rest of the ideas and arguments are old, it can still be published. 

 3.  Is this text a different type of academic text from the others we have read? I felt the organization, explanations  and discussion that Rosenburg used were much easier to understand and she really wanted to help us understand what she was saying. Compared to Greene's framing and arguments where there was no organization, he bounced form issue to argument and in the end I had no idea what he was talking about. Why would all scholars not write in this format is my questions. Especially if they're writing for the college audience.

Informal Writing: Argument as Conversation/Stuart Greene

In his article Arguments as Conversation: The Role of Inquiry in Writing a Researched Argument, Stuart Greene attempts to analyze the importance of arguments in society and explain the concept of framing to young writers. He points out that arguments and framing are critical strategies to research and writing by analyzing Rodriguez use of The Use of Literacy, a parlor metaphor and other examples.

When I first began reading this excerpt from Greene's book, I saw no straight forward comparisons to any of the other articles that we have read before. I kept asking myself how this excerpt about arguments and "framing" things have anything to do with Allen's The Inspired Writer or Lamott's Shitty First Drafts. Then Greene started discussing how this young boy Rodriguez, a nonnative speaker just wants to put himself in the mainstream for the sake of his education. Rodriguez struggles to cope with school and home. Rodriguez finds Hoggart's book The Use of Literacy and identifies with it. He uses the book to help understand his situation and at the same time advance his ideas as well. Greene goes on to explain how other peoples text can serve as tool for helping you to say more about your own ideas. At this point I was starting to think that this storyline sounded slightly familiar. In Allen's article, she talks about how she uses Bizzell's work as a guide to her own work and she can even she the influence of this authors work has own her own. Because these authors are becoming a tool and a guide to other authors I would definitely consider these author's, Bizzell and Hoggart, to be literacy sponsors, especially in these situations. Both Allen and Rodriguez are extremely influenced by the authors and I think if a person influences your life or your own work that much they should definitely be considered a literacy sponsor. There are many authors that have affected me but I will never have the chance too meet them because they were before my time.

Discussion Questions: Shitty First Drafts/ Anne Lamott

1. Does this whole "in the zone" thing with writers actually exist? If Allen was sitting in front of me, writing her shitty draft, I'm just wondering what her expressions would be, especially if she has all of these voices talking to her.

2. When I scanning the table of contents for this article and saw that is contained the word shitty, I smiled to myself a little. Lamott talks about a shitty first draft. In high school teachers always tried to help students to understand that a first draft and brainstorming is almost essential to writing papers because the brain gets stimulated. Even for awhile I opposed the idea of brainstorming because I thought it was pointless. Then I had to write a 15 page research paper and I had no choice but to brain storm because I mean seriously what the hell am I going to put on 15 pages. So, is brainstorm a good idea or a bad idea? Or does it just depend on the person and what they're writing?

3. This is really unrelated to the topic itself but do you think it's okay to cuss or use vulgar language in literature? I know as college readers it usually grabs our attention when an author does use it. But would the article still have gotten the point across and been as interesting or affective without it ? 

Discussion Questions: The Inspired Writers vs. The Real Writer/ Sarah Allen

1. How do you decide if someones literature is good or not? Is worthy? Allen is continually discussing how nervous writers get about producing work that people will want to read, that they like.  Literature in a way is like art. In one persons' eyes a painting might be an absolute master piece. While to another this piece of art might be nothing out of the ordinary, even boring. How do we decide what is good, who gets to decide. Just because I think a work of literature is very well written and grabs my attention, doesn't mean others will think the same. Personally, I don't like Edgar Allen Poe's work. But he is a very famous author. So is it all in the eye of the beholder when it comes to deciding whether literature is good?

2. Do authors write for the audience or do they write to write and express themselves? I don't think Dr. Phil has any true writing abilities, but he still has books published. But there are other authors out there, who I really believe write because it's how they express themselves and they feel a need, an urge to write. Why do I ask this? I think authors like Dr. Phil have no real talent and write just for the money and the attention per say.

3. From what I'm understanding Allen is describing the inspired author as one who doesn't have fears or worries about what the audience will think of his/her work, never has writers block and everything they write is perfect, per say? The real writer is actually admits and knows that all they're work isn't perfect, they're going to struggle sometimes, they're going to have writers block but it's okay because it happens to the best of them?

Discuss Questions: Literacy Sponsors/Deborah Brandt

1. Are people aware that they are literacy sponsors? I had never even heard of this concept having an actual "name" before reading this literature. For example, I believe that almost all parents are sponsors of their children, whether it be in a negative or positive way. (Assuming parents are part of the child's life).  If parents who  were negative sponsors understood and were made aware of how large an impact they were having on their children's literacy, would they change? 

2.Do the type of sponsors strictly depend on age, class, gender, economic level, religion or race. For example a middle aged christian women, a young black college student, a teen who's parents own a multi-million dollar company or a Japanese immigrant wouldn't have the same sponsors. 

3. Is it possible in the future that the internet alone will become a stronger sponsor than any other and all other original sponsors will cease to exist? Will the internet cause us to loose all originality? Or will parental sponsorship always stand as one of the strongest sponsors?