Journal #2
In detail, describe your experiences drafting writing projects. And what about revision? What did that look like? What was your process? How did it work for you?
During my last two years of high school, I took AP Language and Composition and AP Literature. These two classes have greatly influenced and improved my writing and writing process. Especially in AP Lang, we focused on techniques and writing for a particular audience. Before I start composing a big writing assignment, I create a brief outline. I do not go into a lot of detail, but I write down my ideas so that I do not forget them while I am writing. I usually jot down a working thesis and bullet a few other points I know I want to make. If I am writing a piece that has an argument, I also write down my intended/target audience so that I can keep this in the back of my mind. Typically, I must draft an assignment all in one sitting because I find it very difficult to jump back in. This can be tiring especially if it’s a lengthy paper. Once I finish the first/rough draft, I usually put it away for the rest of the day. The next day, I go back to it and proofread. This type of revision is typically focused on fixing sentence structure and grammar. I also read it aloud to myself because this is where I catch most of my grammatical errors. In high school, the teacher would read our first drafts and hand them back with corrections. I would then go back and edit based on the comments left on my paper. Sometimes we would do this process with peers as well. Typically, we were required to hand in multiple drafts of an assignment to show our revisions. This process worked well for me, and I have typically ended up with well written papers according to my teacher’s feedback and my success in their classes. I understand that in college, I will not always have the opportunity to get a professor’s feedback, and I will have to be a more independent critic of my own writing.
Journal #3
They Say, I Say – The Art of Quoting Response
This chapter of They Say, I Say is focused on quoting outside sources to effectively argue a thesis. I found it helpful that the author explained what not to do when quoting. As a writer, I must make sure not to leave, “dangling” or “hit and run” quotes. I must introduce and explain them thoroughly, using a “quotation sandwich” as the author calls it. When I am writing, I am usually consistent in following up a quote with a sentence or two restating the point and connecting it back to my thesis, but I am also guilty of assuming that my reader will find a quote obvious when it is not. I must be attentive to when a quote contains hidden complexities, many details, complex language, or jargon in order to sufficiently analyze the quote for my reader. When I am revising a piece, I occasionally skim over the quotes that I have included because I want to focus on my own writing rather than the work of others. This chapter brought to my attention the importance of ensuring that quotes continue to align with the points made in the essay as it evolves through the revision process. It is also helpful that the author included templates for introducing and explaining quotes. If I am ever quoting someone in my writing, and I just can’t find the right words, I can always revisit this chapter for suggestions.
Journal #4
“The End of Food” Response
“‘The college student fridge of the future.’ It contained Miller Lite, condiments, and a pitcher of Soylent. I noticed a bag of baby carrots: food! Rhinehart who refers to food that is not Soylent as ‘recreational food,’ explained that one of his roommates had bought them as a fun snack” (Widdicombe 6).
This is interesting because when I think of a “fun snack”, carrots are not usually the first thing that comes to mind. It seems as if this transition to Soylent has changed the taste of food for these busy individuals. In other words, they appreciate vegetables such as carrots more than they would have on a steady diet of ramen and pizza. The picture conjured up by the description of this fridge is very different from my fridge at home, but they essentially contain the same nutrients despite the difference in volume. This draws a contrast between the lifestyle associated with Soylent and the one that most of us are used to.
“As Rhinehart puts it, you ‘cruise’ through the day. If you’re on a groove at your computer, and feel a hunger pang, you don’t have to stop for lunch. Your energy levels stay consistent: ‘There is no afternoon crash, no post-burrito coma” (Widdicombe 14).
This “benefit” of Soylent may not appeal to everyone. As Widdicombe describes her experience in the next paragraph, she mentions missing her normal routine with solid food and breaks in the day to enjoy meals. This description of energy levels seems to strongly appeal to very busy college students who do not see themselves having time for meals. I have had nights in high school where I would have forgotten to eat if my mom hadn’t brought a plate of dinner up to my room, so I understand the appeal for busy students who do not have the luxury of their mom bringing them home cooked meals. In order to eat on the go, these busy students typically grab takeout with minimal nutritional value. For people like this, Soylent seems like a good alternative. However, according to taste tests at Widdicombe’s office, this drink is comparable to something you drink before a colonoscopy. Even if this was an efficient way of getting nutrients, I couldn’t picture myself being able to easily stomach this formula.
“To help a village full of malnourished people, ‘you could just drop in a shipping container’ full of Soylent producing algae. ‘It would take in the sun’s energy and water and air, and produce food.’ Mankind’s biggest problem would be solved” (Widdicombe 17).
This passage offers a different application of Soylent. Even though Rhinehart’s intentions were based off of his experiences as a college student, Soylent could be used for much more. In the interest of ending world hunger, Soylent may send us on our way. This is potentially one of the ideas that the author was considering when she mentioned, “food-related hopes” at the end of her article.
Journal #5
They Say, I Say – “Entering the Conversation” Response
In this section of They Say, I Say, the authors explicitly state the main take away from their book, which is presenting your own ideas as a response to the ideas of another person or group of people. They claim that to effectively argue a point, or enter a conversation as the chapter is called, one must do more than just give their own opinion. We must acknowledge others opinions because often these ideas are what “provoked” our own arguments. It is helpful to acknowledge the opinions that lead you to your own ideas because it demonstrates your line of thinking; the reader understands why you came to the conclusion that you did. The introduction of Martin Luther King’s letter as an example of summarizing another argument in order to state your own, gives the authors of this book some credibility. The readers of They Say, I Say know who Dr. King is and know that he was a very effective speaker and writer. By explaining that he used this technique, the readers are more likely to acknowledge the validity of the strategy and use it in their own writing.
The authors provide many templates throughout this book that are helpful to guide an inexperienced writer in the right direction. In this section, the authors but forth “the template of templates” in order to give an example of how many writers structure their articles and books. This large template shows just how often the arguments of others should be referenced in contrast with your own thoughts. This section also briefly introduces the term “naysayer”. This is when you insert and answer an objection to your own argument in order to address the skeptical thoughts that your reader may be having.
Journal #8 – They Say, I Say, “Starting with What Others Say” Response
This chapter begins with a clever and intriguing story about a situation (Dr. X) where there was no acknowledgement of the other side of the argument. While some may be hesitant to acknowledge the other side for fear of weakening their argument, it is important to not only state what your thesis is but also the larger conversation that the thesis is responding to. Even in this last sentence I used a “they say, I say” format. I read and utilized this book back in high school, and it is clear that I remembered and found this structure very effective because I do it now without even thinking about it.
There are two sides to every argument, and it is usually the criticism of their own opinion that motivates an author to express this opinion in text. Acknowledging the other side, shows a reader how you arrived at this line of thinking and why you disagree with the opposing side. The example given by the authors of Orwell’s writing using this technique, gives their advice some credibility because readers of They Say, I Say can acknowledge Orwell as an amazing writer and want to replicate his work. The authors also offer multiple templates in this chapter that I found very helpful because they explain how to introduce a wide range of arguments, from one that is widely accepted to an ongoing controversial debate.
Journal #9
What did you spend the most time revising?
How much is the drafting/revising process different from your past approach?
How did your approach to this project fit with the expectations for this class?
Since I outlined my essay in detail prior to drafting, my essay was organized and already flowing well when I reread the draft for revision. I spent most of my time revising sentence level errors. However, I did move a couple sentences upon a suggestion from Haley. For example, I had one spot in my essay where I made a point followed by a few other sentences before the quote to back up this point. She suggested that I delete these unneeded sentences. For the most part, I worked to ensure that my points were clear and that they related back to my thesis. I followed my typical drafting process by jotting down a detailed outline and then writing out the essay. With revising, I usually had not received three different perspectives on my work. In the past, I had only received one peer review. Having three people read over my essay gave me more feedback than I have ever had before because multiple people see different things and offer different suggestions. With this being a college level class, I expected the process to be a step above what I had done in the past. This approach with peer review in a group rather than one on one, gave me more perspectives and forced me to compile their suggestions into an essay that follows their advice but keeps the nature of my essay. I believe that my initial drafting process is already sophisticated enough for the level of this class because it ensures that my essay is organized prior to putting it on the page.
Journal #10 – Response to Pollan Article
Page 4 – first and second paragraph (begins on previous page)
In this passage, Pollan introduces a paradoxical statistic in which our society has experienced an influx in popularity of cooking shows but a decline in people cooking for themselves. He claims cooking has been influenced by the incorporation of women into the workforce and food companies convincing Americans to let them do the cooking. He claims that it is easier to give up cooking than it is to give up talking about it and watching it. I agree with Pollan’s point here because I know that I like to watch cooking shows with my mom, but we often sit there watching them with an order of Pad Thai from our local take out restaurant. We love to watch others cook, and it is a way for us to relax after a hard day at work or in class, something that cooking for an hour does not offer. Therefore, Pollan’s mention about women entering the workforce has validity in the sense that they now have more tasks per day and a lot less time to continue to conform to gender roles. Fast food and processed food also gives us shortcuts to lessen the time we spend in the kitchen after a busy day. It is the culprit of our fast paced world that has forced us out the kitchen and into the line at the drive thru window.
Page 8 – first paragraph
This paragraph is a quote from Balzer claiming that this abandonment of cooking is simply the evolution of our species in the same way that we no longer go out and kill our own meat for dinner. He claims that cooking is something our grandchildren will not learn how to do. I disagree with Balzer. Even though I do think that the world is moving towards mostly fast and processed foods, I think families still see the value in cooking and eating a meal they cooked together, even if it is not every night. In my favorite meal essay, I uncovered the degree in which baked haddock has connected my mom and I. So, I do not think this will ever fully disappear. Based on Pollan’s reaction of Balzer, he also seems skeptical or hesitant to accept this as reality. His opinion comes through further on page 16 when he says, “we’re not prepared to see it disappear from our lives entirely… Perhaps because cooking… is an activity that strikes a deep emotional chord in us.” Pollan’s opinion here lines up more with how I feel about the importance of cooking.
Page 12 – first paragraph
In this paragraph, Pollan makes the claim that Food Network has turned cooking into something you watch rather than something that you do. My response to this opinion is complicated. While I agree that the Food Network relies largely on fast paced competition shows like “Iron Chef” and my personal favorite “Chopped” rather than Julia Child’s instructional videos, they are catering to what their audience wants to watch. It does inspire the audience to sit in front of the TV and watch, but isn’t this their goal as a network? I would say the Network has changed to fit the lifestyles of busy individuals. There are instructional shows on during the day, and even though Pollan claims these are over-edited to take out waiting time, it allows the network to get more recipes on the show per day. People who watch can easily look up these recipes on their Iphones if they want to replicate the dish. At night, the network puts on the entertainment shows which allow those who have been at work all day watch something to unwind. Even though the landscape of this kind of TV has changed since Julia Child, I do not believe it is the fault of the network because the network is built around the fast paced society we live in today.
Journal #11
They Say, I Say – “What’s Motivating This Writer?” Response
In this chapter of They Say, I Say, the authors stress the idea of reading a text with the goal of finding the authors reason for writing. They claim “reading for how the author’s argument is in conversation with the arguments of others helps readers become more active, critical readers rather than passive recipients of knowledge” (178). It is important to think about what other arguments the writer can be responding to, even if this is not explicitly stated, because this will allow you to form a better grasp on the whole conversation and make an informed opinion for yourself. Although this seems like a daunting task, the authors claim that this might even be “simpler and more familiar than reading for the thesis alone, since it returns writing to the familiar, everyday act of communication with other people about real issues” (178). Also in this chapter, the authors discuss looking at the larger conversation as a way to decipher challenging texts. By understanding the arguments that exist surrounding an issue, the reader of a complex piece might have an easier time figuring out the authors view point. I found this helpful because I often encounter complex texts that I can apply this strategy to.
Journal #12
Going into both peer review sessions , I was focused on providing my peers with comments that were more global than local. I believe I was successful in giving my peers clear and in depth comments that were more than just sentence level corrections. However, if I saw something in a essay that I thought could be worded a bit differently in order to help their point come across in a more concise way, I left a local comment suggesting a new way to word the sentence. When I coded my peer reviews from paper 1 and paper 2, I found that my comments usually fall more frequently under the ideas category. I usually ask questions in my comments that relate to the ideas in the paragraph. In my second peer review, I focused more on organization in my feedback letter than I had before. My peer had an essay with many good ideas, but her organization was jumbled. In my feedback letter, I spent a lot of time bulleting out a suggested outline for her essay that I compiled from her existing ideas. Based on my current peer reviews, I think that I am doing well by giving an array of comments focusing on ideas, evidence, and organization. I know how much time it takes me to review a peer essay, so my goal for peer review 3 would be to keep up the level of hard work I have put into my other reviews.
Journal #12b
Caitlin Doughty Podcast Response
Caitlin Doughty certainly has some unique views on cremation and its current practices. She believes that the family of the deceased should be more involved in the process. When she mentioned the witness cremation, I did not know this was something that was done. If people want to be involved in the process, they should know about their options, but I am a bit hesitant to endorse the ability of the family to “push the button” on an industrial machine that will ultimately burn their loved one. However, if I think about the practices of other cultures and other times where funeral pyres were prevalent, it may not seem like such a bizarre practice. Ultimately, I realized that the moment of uncomfort I felt when listening to Doughty mention the family doing the job of the mortician was simply from the way I was socialized. This is simply not the way that I have experienced cremation and not the way that society in America does it. Realizing this, I can understand where she is coming from, but in order to change these practices like she suggests, we would have to see a large shift in the culture surrounding funerals that may take several decades.
Journal #13
Project #2 Reflection
I began my drafting process in the same way that I begin all my essays. I write a detailed outline on notecards. This allows for me to clearly see what I want to focus on in each paragraph and which quotes will be involved. This also makes the drafting process go much smoother in terms of flow and the amount of time I spend doing it. Based on my highlighted essay, I have quoted Pollan twice and each peer once along with paraphrasing each several other times. I also have moments where my peers and Pollan are in direct tension with one another. I worked much more on making my quotes flow with the essay, something that professor Miller set as a goal for my second essay. In terms of revision, my essay had good organization because of my notecard strategy, and my peers generally didn’t have too much to say in that aspect. They helped me find places where my quotes weren’t introduced in the best way. When I went back to edit, I realized that when I was drafting, there was a disconnect between the thoughts in my head versus the thoughts on the paper for some of these quotes. With this essay, we also had the unique experience of having spring break the week before the essay was due. This ended up being helpful for me because it gave me the opportunity to really step away and not think about the essay for a few days so that I had fresh eyes when I came back to edit for the final draft.
Journal #14
This essay focuses on the idea of consciousness and who has it. Ross Anderson explores the ideas of Jainism as an extreme to what it means to believe in the consciousness of all living things. Many, myself included, find it a bit excessive to wear a mask to prevent the inhalation of insects or not stepping in puddles to be mindful to the ecosystems living within. Many of us do not encourage the harm of animals, but we also do not think twice about stepping in a puddle on a rainy day. Anderson points out that our research on animals has identified how other species show levels of consciousness, like birds and fish. This begs the question, are the Jains right? Will we continue to discover each organism has the characteristics of consciousness? This brings me to my next question… what is consciousness, and how do we know that something has this? If consciousness is simply being aware of surroundings, then I can’t think of anything that doesn’t have this quality. Most living things react to their surroundings, and even microscopic beings have sensors that allow them to be “aware” of what is around them. But then again, will we ever really know how organisms that are not human see and feel things around them? We only know what we have experienced. We can hypothesize about other animals, but we will never really know because we haven’t experienced this for ourselves.
Journal #15
Animals Like Us Response
Page 3 Paragraph 1
The author mentions the story of Carolyn and Snooty in order to show the reader relationships that can be formed between humans and animals other than the common relationship that many of us think of between humans and dogs. The manatee becomes upset when Carolyn leaves for vacation. This is possibly in relation to the last article we read referring to animals not understanding the concept of pain and the fact that it will end. The manatee thinks that Carolyn will never come back. The author brings this story up to emphasize the fact that animals are able to connect emotionally to humans and vise versa. Carolyn has fallen for the manatee to the extent that her husband excuses her of loving “a half-ton blubber and muscle more than she loved him.” This story is an example that furthers their authors later argument about the paradoxes between what we do as humans in our relationships with animals but also the cruelty we can inflict on them.
Page 5 Paragraph 1
The author demonstrates the solution of sacrificing live rodents to snakes for food to feeding them euthanized cats. The author claims that even though this is a logical solution, he still felt the idea volting. This explains how our socialization in society tells us that this is wrong even when it would be less cruel if these cats were being killed anyway. We as humans are uncomfortable with this because cats are domesticated animals that many of us have formed relationships with in our lives, so we feel uncomfortable feeding dead cats to snakes. This demonstrates the fact that in humans emotions can often override logic, for better or for worse.
Page 7 Paragraph 3 and 4
Based on the examples that the author gives about human relationships with animals and the paradox about our cruelties of animals, like breeding the bulldog, eating animals, and testing animals in the lab. The author presents the idea “the troubled middle” as a “murky ethical territory”. The author admits that he lives in this territory and I believe that I do as well. Herzog’s argument is this feeling of not knowing what is right and wrong comes with the definition of being human. He believes that humans constantly fight between logic and emotions which creates this “troubled middle”. This can be different for each person because some are more logical, some are more emotional, and some feel both equally.
Journal #16
Reconsider the Lobster
Reading “Considering the Lobster” by David Foster Wallace through the lense of project three has allowed me to look further into the authors argument about American values. DFW describes the views of members of PETA and those of Maine residents. The facts that they choose to believe about the lobster are the ones that they feel the most comfortable with. For Mainers, lobsters are a part of their lives and livelihood. For example, the cab driver who DFW comes in contact with during his visit, has family who relies on lobster fishing for money. Because he values the consumption of lobster, he chooses to believe that the lobsters can’t feel pain even if the facts say otherwise. People who protest the eating of lobster most likely do not rely on it or even like to eat it, so they are content without it. These people do not see the value in lobsters as a food source, so they are against boiling them alive. People can be selfish in the sense that they will believe what they want to believe and shield themselves from the truth as long as it doesn’t make them feel guilty. Lobsters are different from other animals that we eat because we kill them at home. We do not kill cows or pigs in our own homes because of the blood and the fact that they are too similar to us to be able to inflict that pain on them. They make noises of pain that we empathize with, so we give others this horrid job to put it “out of sight, out of mind”. These animals are different than the lobster in their reaction to being killed, but we still eat these animals. As long as we do not see the blood that we can empathize with and “feel” the pain, then we are okay with pretending that nothing bad happened between the farm and the plate.
Journal #17
They Say, I Say – “Planting a Naysayer in Your Text” Response
A naysayer is someone who believes in the argument opposite to yours. Some think that mentioning this person or group, will weaken the argument you are trying to make, but the reality is that this is an effective strategy. If you’re viewing your paper or essay as a conversation with others, mentioning the opposing argument and refuting it with examples is an important “preemptive” strike against the response of the other side. If you address what they might have to say, then they do not have anything to say in response to you. I have read They Say, I Say in high school so I know the value of introducing a naysayer, and I try to include this as a strategy in all of my essays. It was helpful to learn different ways to introduce the naysayer because I had usually always introduced them the same way. I had not thought about introducing the naysayer with a question. This is a unique way to bring up a naysayer, and by answering the question, you can refute a possible objection to your argument.
Journal #18
JSF Response
- When I first read this paragraph, it reminded me of my favorite meal essay and the favorite meal essays of my peers. The author talks about how some of his happiest childhood memories are surrounding food. He claims the relationships he built with his mom, dad, and grandmother “wouldn’t have been the same without those foods”. He feels that without these foods, he isn’t just missing the taste but the memories he associates with these foods as well. However, the author says “this kind of forgetfulness is worth accepting”. He believes that the benefits outweigh the costs of becoming a vegetarian. He must find other ways to remember his values other that just the connection with food. It is possible that Foer found it difficult to maintain his not eating meat because of the memories he attached to it. Raising his kids from birth without meat may allow them to attach their memories to veggie burgers instead of turkey burgers.
- The question that Foer presents is “why doesn’t a horny person have as strong of a claim to raping an animal as a hungry one does to confining, killing and eating it? This is a rather shocking question but it is a rhetorical device to get the reader to think about their values. The question is more asking the reader to think about the practices of mass farming rather than to actually consider a person raping an animal. Humans are selfish. They chose not to think about the practices that go into getting the piece of meat that appears on their plate. When many people hear about mass production of meat, they are repulsed, but they will continue to eat meat. It is easy to forget because we don’t actually see it. The only sense that we experience is taste and this sense can overwhelm logic and our emotional connection to animals.
Journal #19
Process: Part 1, 150-200 words: Help me understand how you’ve gone about your work for this project in detail. Explain what your process has been like in terms of time on task, place for writing, resources you’ve availed yourself to, and challenges. Part 2, 150-200 words: Help me understand how this compares to your process on paper 1 and paper 2?
Part 1: After unpacking project three, we had time in class to begin working. During this time, I brainstormed all the ideas I had regarding the essay on scrap paper. Since there were many options for texts to bring in for this essay, I came up with two different combinations. Option 1: “Consider the Lobster”, Kaitlyn Doughty’s podcast, and “Animals Like Us”. Option 2: “Consider the Lobster”, “Animals Like Us”, and “Against Meat”. I have written two introductions in order to see which option I prefer. At this point, I think I am going with option 1. The challenge for me with this essay is the ability to choose a variety of different texts to discuss. I feel that I have many so things to talk about that I found it difficult to narrow down.
Part 2: This is different from my process for paper 1 and paper 2 because I did not plan my essay in detail on note cards before I even opened up a google document. I changed my methods because I did not know which direction I wanted to go in. I decided to just write introductions for both and see which one I liked better and had more to say. Now that I have made the decision to go with option 1, I plan to do my typical detailed outline before I start body paragraphs because I find this strategy helpful for organizing my thoughts.
Journal #21
I have not done as much writing and editing as I would have liked this weekend because of a leadership conference on Saturday, and I had to go into work today. However, I did work on it for about an hour today. In this time, I continued to write my third body paragraph and part of a conclusion. While writing this section, I tried to keep in the back of my mind the comments given by my peers. They suggested in peer review discussion that I need to make my voice and opinion come through more. I have previously written with the mindset of not using “I” in essays, so it was difficult to transition from this habit. In addition, I edited my first three paragraphs looking for places where I could insert my own perspective. I also read each of my quotes again to make sure that they were explained in the way that I intended to do. In some places, I realized that the quote was not connected well to the sentence following. In this case, I added more information to try to get what was in my head onto the page. Moving forward, I need to look again at the comments that were given during peer review to ensure I address all concerns. I am looking forward to meeting with professor Miller during class tomorrow to discuss goals for my final draft of this essay.
