Any good author writes because they want their ideas or purposed to be known to others. Their works get published, and other read them. They hope that it holds a lasting impression or makes their readers think. No one wants their work to be read and pushed aside with a, "on to the next one" attitude.
Sedaris made his purpose clear, and stable throughout. But he chose to express his purpose in a unique way. By giving us examples, or scenarios in every day life and situations. Judgement is strong in life, but Sedaris also shows us that judgement is a vicious cycle. We are judging other because of their judgement towards someone else.. Judgement is an impulse action, we do it quickly and most times without regret.
Sedaris adds little bits of what is going on in the world to help make it more relatable to us as readers. I think this is beneficial and makes more people continue to read on, because they understand.
Monday, April 22, 2013
Assignment #4
I think Sedaris wanted to target all of us as readers. Although our initial thoughts may think the audience is those who have been in an airport, but hiss message on judgement carries out much further than the walls of the air port. I do believe he came to this writing idea from an air port experience, but wanted his purpose to apply to all life situations.
This story was published not long ago so much of what is socially going on the world now is similar. We have an African American President. We have the war in Iraq, and much more.
His message about how we all judge others is a serious one, but he lightens the criticism and pinger pointing by that of the use of humor. I do think his purpose is a successful one. It made us all sit back and take a second look at our life both in and outside of the air port and how we do judge others without knowing them.
This story was published not long ago so much of what is socially going on the world now is similar. We have an African American President. We have the war in Iraq, and much more.
His message about how we all judge others is a serious one, but he lightens the criticism and pinger pointing by that of the use of humor. I do think his purpose is a successful one. It made us all sit back and take a second look at our life both in and outside of the air port and how we do judge others without knowing them.
Monday, April 1, 2013
Group Work Reflection [Due: Tuesday April 2nd]
Ryan and I worked well with each other. We had a lot of the same views, and also ended with the same summary together.
Positives(+)--> Group work has a lot of positives. It allows us to work together and get our ideas out of our head. Sometimes saying things out loud really changes our views some times. It also let's us get opinions from our peers and also it lets us hear advice from others. We also get to hear their ideas and see if they change ours. We can help our group members as well. Sometimes working through other people's views helps with our own.
Negatives(-)--> But like any positive, it also comes with negatives. Group work makes some people hold back out of fear of embarrassment or even just merely being to shy. We may be too focussed on our group product instead of our individual thoughts and then we lose our own opinions.
INTRO- The intro is important to the story and I like that they made their one pager interesting. They added a lot of color. Apple really did break the conformity and crossed a technology barrier which is an important part of the introduction but also the article as a whole which was a good call on their part for adding it to their one pager.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK- New technology keeps consumer interest. They brought up that people believe that whatever the advertisement is that it is good for them. They asked the question- "Does Stein portray the ad as a movement towards a revolution or does it go back to the idea of consumers being subject to brainwashing?"I really don't know how to answer that question because I'm still too up in the air about this article. I don't understand it.
Assignment 10 [Due: March 28]
Questions:
1. Stein's emotions- What are they? How does she feel?
2. Genre: Academic Article--> Was she made to do it in this way? or did she chose it because she thought that it would be most effective?
3. What 'age level' or Audience is it intended for? and Why is it so difficult to work with and interpret?
Steins article begins as an in depth summary of the 1984 Macintosh Ad. She covers the article in extensive detail to give the readers background on the ad. After covering the ad as a whole she breaks it up and covers it in sections. She talks about which parts she thinks mean what. Stein choses to incorporate certain things that draw in readers or make it more personal to them such as using the Wizard of Oz idea, and bringing up Steve Jobs.
I don't really understand why Stein would have wanted to do an article on this ad. I feel as though it was an assignment because I don't see as how it would be interesting or be a choice article. I think instead of just explaining the article she choses to also give her interpretations on the ad. In doing so I think she wants us to form our own interpretations and by her givings us hers it makes us a little less scared to type ours out or same them out loud. We all have our own opinions but sometimes we chose to keep them in our head out of fear of embarrassment or what people may think.
1. Stein's emotions- What are they? How does she feel?
2. Genre: Academic Article--> Was she made to do it in this way? or did she chose it because she thought that it would be most effective?
3. What 'age level' or Audience is it intended for? and Why is it so difficult to work with and interpret?
Steins article begins as an in depth summary of the 1984 Macintosh Ad. She covers the article in extensive detail to give the readers background on the ad. After covering the ad as a whole she breaks it up and covers it in sections. She talks about which parts she thinks mean what. Stein choses to incorporate certain things that draw in readers or make it more personal to them such as using the Wizard of Oz idea, and bringing up Steve Jobs.
I don't really understand why Stein would have wanted to do an article on this ad. I feel as though it was an assignment because I don't see as how it would be interesting or be a choice article. I think instead of just explaining the article she choses to also give her interpretations on the ad. In doing so I think she wants us to form our own interpretations and by her givings us hers it makes us a little less scared to type ours out or same them out loud. We all have our own opinions but sometimes we chose to keep them in our head out of fear of embarrassment or what people may think.
Assignment 9 [Due: March 12th]
I want to work with adding emotion to my writing. English 101 has showed me that good quality writing that keeps the readers attention as well as completes the course goals and outcomes is much more important than a writing with a bunch of big words that no one ever uses. I want my writing to sound educated but not that I went through and right clicked a thesaurus option.
I want my readers to feel as if they can relate to me and know that I care about what I am writing about. In my efforts to do so I plan to add feeling and more "I's" to my writing to make it seem like it means more. Comparing Sedaris's Standing By to Orlean's Lifelike I think that was a big tell tale difference between the two. Most people liked Lifelike more and I believe it's because of the powerfulness of Orlean's closeness to it. The only thing people seemed to like about Standing By was the incorporation of humor. You can tell this because that's the only thing people could seem to write their interpretive essays about. I'm targeting my peers as well as my professors, and I plan to write at a level appropriate for that group.
I want my readers to feel as if they can relate to me and know that I care about what I am writing about. In my efforts to do so I plan to add feeling and more "I's" to my writing to make it seem like it means more. Comparing Sedaris's Standing By to Orlean's Lifelike I think that was a big tell tale difference between the two. Most people liked Lifelike more and I believe it's because of the powerfulness of Orlean's closeness to it. The only thing people seemed to like about Standing By was the incorporation of humor. You can tell this because that's the only thing people could seem to write their interpretive essays about. I'm targeting my peers as well as my professors, and I plan to write at a level appropriate for that group.
Assignment 8 [Due: Thursday March 7]
In Amy Roddick's assignment seven I really liked that she brings up that Orlean chose to write her article in first person. No other class members chose to incorporate that or deemed it relevant or worth writing about, but it really is. Although it was general knowledge to us as readers- it is an important writerly choice on Orlean's part. It makes the piece more powerful. Choosing to write in first person really emphases on how personal it really is. Using submersion journalism causes writers to become attached to their work- which makes sense to why Orlean chose to write her story in first person.
I also chose Ryan Chandler's blog. I really didn't think much about the history aspect of taxidermy till reading Ryan's assignment seven. He touches on the evolving of taxidermy and how it started as a small business and became this amazingly profitable trade. I also agree that when taxidermy first surfaced in makes sense that people were stand offish about the idea because the fact of a dead animal being preserved but still holding so much life is just a bit grotesque- but you would think the fact that we have people dedicated to preserving those animals and the technology to do so that people would be amazed by it. Yet still, after hundreds of years people still don't understand it or see it in a positive way. They chose to focus on the grossness of it- not the art of it.
In re reading my blog posts, I really enjoyed seeing how my perspectives on taxidermy grew. All the work we did in class and re reading the story really was an eye opener and made me see things differently- which are noticeable through my blog posts.
I want to incorporate passion into my writing. Orlean loves to write. It is not only her job- but her hobby. It isn't difficult to read what she writes because she makes it interesting- and that is what I want to do. I want my readers to feel eager to finish my work, not just set it down and move on. Compared to Standing By I think it will be much easier to evolve into a better writer because Lifelike is an article that just brings up so much emotion and views which once we all put it into our own words we have potential to have great work. My tone is both positive and negative. Different theories on her quote usage cause different tones or moods for me and hopefully for my readers. I want people's thoughts to be racing and brains to be full force because that's what reading should do. We should all have our own interpretations to what we read. Although some views may be the same we all have our differences that will make it personable to us- and that's what I want to happen after people read my essay.
I also chose Ryan Chandler's blog. I really didn't think much about the history aspect of taxidermy till reading Ryan's assignment seven. He touches on the evolving of taxidermy and how it started as a small business and became this amazingly profitable trade. I also agree that when taxidermy first surfaced in makes sense that people were stand offish about the idea because the fact of a dead animal being preserved but still holding so much life is just a bit grotesque- but you would think the fact that we have people dedicated to preserving those animals and the technology to do so that people would be amazed by it. Yet still, after hundreds of years people still don't understand it or see it in a positive way. They chose to focus on the grossness of it- not the art of it.
In re reading my blog posts, I really enjoyed seeing how my perspectives on taxidermy grew. All the work we did in class and re reading the story really was an eye opener and made me see things differently- which are noticeable through my blog posts.
I want to incorporate passion into my writing. Orlean loves to write. It is not only her job- but her hobby. It isn't difficult to read what she writes because she makes it interesting- and that is what I want to do. I want my readers to feel eager to finish my work, not just set it down and move on. Compared to Standing By I think it will be much easier to evolve into a better writer because Lifelike is an article that just brings up so much emotion and views which once we all put it into our own words we have potential to have great work. My tone is both positive and negative. Different theories on her quote usage cause different tones or moods for me and hopefully for my readers. I want people's thoughts to be racing and brains to be full force because that's what reading should do. We should all have our own interpretations to what we read. Although some views may be the same we all have our differences that will make it personable to us- and that's what I want to happen after people read my essay.
Monday, March 4, 2013
Assignment 7 [Due: March 5th]
Generating Interpretive Questions
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orleans Purpose for using quotes
Why are quotes so important to us as readers, what is the purpose behind them, and should they always be trusted?? Can an author lose their credibility within quotations?
Quotes are an important part of any authors writings. Quoting someone or something can have many purposes. In Lifelike Orlean uses 44 quotes statements. The fact that she uses so many quotes shows us as readers that she does that for a specific reason, but why? I have several theories for orlean's abundance of quotes.
Initial thought-->
The first being to show her credibility. The quotes had to come from somewhere right? The fact that she can quote someone or something means that she had to have seen or heard that piece of information she is reiterating to us. We as readers trust her to be honest with us and be giving us truthful information. By incorporating quotes shows us that Orlean did her homework and read up and studied taxidermy first hand.
After re reading a few times-->
Secondly, is there to many quotes? How could one woman have heard or discovered 44 well said and put together quotes? Although she did gather her information from numerous sources such as one on one conversations, overhearing, internet researching, and taxidermy websites- it does still seem a little far fetched. I know if I were at the World Taxidermy Championship I would be taking notes, but I would also be taking in my surroundings. The quotations that Orlean incorporates from merely overhearing others conversations are too spot on and 'perfect' if you will. It would be almost impossible to get that kind of information down word for word. Thinking about Orleans quotes brings a lot of thoughts to mind which definitely end up contradicting each other.
After class discussion on Thursday-->
Thinking about the quotes more in depth raised another question in my mind. While in class we talked about the target audience not being who we think it would be. The article is written to be informative to those who may not know much about taxidermy. We can come to this conclusion because the information Orlean provides us with common knowledge to any taxidermist. She is trying to educate those who aren't familiar about the topic the sort of things that happen and the skills that are necessary behind it. With that being I know generally we like quotes while reading something, especially something we aren't familiar with- at least I know I do. If someone were to be flipping through The New Yorker and came across Orlean's Lifelike they may begin to skim it to see what it is about. Quotes catch many people's attentions while skimming. With one of the first one's being "Acetone on a squirrels tale will fluff it right back up" I think it would make people decide to give the article a chance and read it. I think Orlean being a journalist knows this- and uses that. It's safe to say that many people just aren't interested in taxidermy. But, when you read some of the quotations Orlean chose to use it will definitely bring in more readers than it would have if it were strictly facts and informational. So, 44 quotes- definitely starting to sound a lot less realistic at this point. Being a trained and experienced journalist I don't doubt Orleans information- but maybe the ways in which she chose to portray it. From the start of her writing you can tell that Taxidermy wasn't a topic Orlean was very accustomed with- so in my opinion I think she choses to use the quotes as a way of making her story more appealing to the reader. Certain information that she may have came across in her research I think she choses to make into a conversation or a quote. In depth taxidermy research would tell you that some taxidermists use acetone to fluff up a tale- but no one would want to read the statistics or facts about it. So, instead Orlean puts it into a quote that will catch our eye and make us continue with it.
I understand that all of these assumptions don't tie together, and can definitely make you question Orleans credibility behind this article. I don't think any of her information is false. It is all able to be researched and backed up- I just think she used her experience as a journalist to make the article more appealing to her target audience. It seems to me that she did her research and gathered her information and then chose to provide and illustrate it in a way that would get people to read her article.
So does this cause Orlean to lose her credibility? Although the information is factual, and just put into quotes or conversation form to make her article more appealing does she lose her 'ethos' as a writer?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)