Journal 1:
4 September 2017
Journal Entry One
In his “Consider the Lobster”, David Foster Wallace briefly examines the history of eating lobster along the New England coast. Drawing from his experiences at the 2003 Maine Lobster Festival, he then poses questions surrounding the ethics relating to how lobster is “prepared”, and ultimately personal morals in how humans justify “preparing” lobster. In turn, if Wallace was to partake in our classroom discussion, I would have several questions to ask him myself. Starting first and foremost with “Do you eat lobster?”. I would then gauge his response and continue my interview. I would be very curious if he has ever “prepared” lobster himself and if so what his experience was like? Does he suppose that it appears more humane to the average person that having lobster served to them at a mass festival then when they prepare it at home? Wallace notes that there was a time in which eating lobster was thought of as “cruel and unusual” (Wallace 499), however today it is a “delicacy” (Wallace 500). I would like to know how he believes that this drastic change came about. Did pop culture or regional play a role? Or was it entirely made possible by a well marketed tourist attraction scheme? How may the psychology of one change to facilitate such a transition? Furthermore, why do we block out the knowledge that it is painful to animals when we kill them, be it by boiling or by mass raising chickens. Yet while I agree that it is wrong to harm animals the way we do. I love my steak. Many others, even Wallace himself feel conflicted.
While Wallace supposes many different scenarios on lobsters and whether they feel pain or not, his final assertions seems to reflect that lobsters do feel pain. But, as he backs up there are many different viewpoints on the subject matter. The problem with a solely written discussion is that one may never get to hear another express their true opinion. They will never truly understand each other’s backgrounds without interacting face to face. Nobody will listen to you until you will be heard, literally. If one simply traces history back and examines how Adolf Hitler came to power, it was through his ability to speak. While he did write Mein Kompf, it was his ability to capture the attention of a crowd and entice them that led to their trust in him, ultimately facilitating his rise. Writing is a great way to sit down and record ideas, but until we sit down and discuss a problem with others we will never truly understand it. While he recorded a great deal of his work, the Chinese Philosopher Confucius typically had other intellectuals to bounce his ideas off, and followers to carry on his legacy. Even a simple 18th century artisan shop in Boston requires a physical apprentice to keep the secrets of the master, the tools of the trade alive. Yet at some point the apprentices will ask themselves whether there is a better method that that of their master’s. This occurs in writing too. When I write I anticipate my audience to ask questions, I encourage it. I expect that they will question me based off their own stance, but I hope that they will question my writing to get a better understanding, or a broader view of the subject at hand.
Journal 2:
11 September 2017
Throughout high school, it was often that we would be assigned writing assignments. This motley of work included a vast array of poems, essays, and reading responses in English, as well as informative and argumentative pieces for history. Typically, before Junior year I would try to just put a draft out there, I would edit it nonetheless after having it handed back. On a usual basis, I would find myself writing only two drafts, a rough copy and a final.
When Junior year came around, I opted into taking A.P U.S History. This class would be the death of my heart and soul, however I learned much of my writing skills from it. In class, we found ourselves bombarded with essays, one due every other night. I found myself at first striving to complete the projects thoughtfully and thorough, but as time went on I just wanted to get them over with. Most of the time I would revise my paper and resubmit it. There was no peer editing in that class. Other times, the workload would just pile up, on top of the business of life, and I would find myself being satisfied with only one draft, not my best work. I admit, some of it was laziness. By the end of the year, I could easily bang out an essay a night. I felt that I had greatly improved as a writer, but I had much more to learn.
It is fall of senior year and Ponaganset High School has just acquired a young, yet well-practiced and well-traveled English teacher. Ms. Carvalho. With her Ms. Carvalho brought a new outside understanding of the writing and editing process. From analyzing text, all the way to handing papers in, she was extremely helpful. Possibly her most helpful skill lied in critiquing and her methods. This came in clutch when we had to write our school-required Senior Research papers. It was often that she would spend hours with us workshopping our papers as a class. If not in class, she was critiquing and giving us helpful feedback, paragraphs of it on not just papers for her class, but for scholarship essays, Common Application essays, speeches, you name it. We would practice methods of thoughtful editing and suggestion all throughout. As she had our own, every single one of us had suggestion for each other. Many times, our class would break itself off into groups revise, switch groups, revise, and repeat. I am happy to say that this method of critiquing allowed me to revise my Senior Research Paper three times and receive a score of a 93. By the end of this long and seemingly dreadful assignment, it all started it piece together. A first draft is only the framework of a true paper. To create a stronger and more desirable “house” you need various problem-solving methods to determine how to best build it. Often you are required to go back to the drawing board. The architect needs to ask his engineer for suggestions, and the engineer then in turn needs to consult the foreman. When the foreman encounters a problem, they bring it up with the engineer, and so on. Their focus is to build something that applies to not just them, but the “buyer”. Such can be used as a metaphor for the writing process. With the writer, the “architect”, and the reader, the “buyer”. While ultimately, I did learn the importance of the editing process, I will say that I am still guilty of not proof-reading my own work. But I promise, I will work on it and hopefully keep learning. There’s always room for improvement, and that’s that.
Journal 3:
18 September 2017
At one point in time, I may have believed that writing should come solely from the writer themselves, from their own heart and mind, with no outside help. However, upon thinking deeper, we have all learned generalized writing formats and strategies from outside sources throughout our whole lives. In They Say, I Say, Gerald Graff echoes this sentiment, stating that “most creative forms of expression depend on “patterns or structures”. In his introduction, Graff provides a connection of this statement to reality. He observes that when you master a familiar activity, you “no longer have to give much thought” to “the series of complicated moves that go into it”.
I believe that Graff is entirely right, and that this personal connection, allows the reader to better understand this point. Furthermore, I believe that he is also correct when he says that this same concept can applied to academic writing. For our whole lives, we have held our own views, influenced by society and its patterns, but still our own. When we go to school, do we not learn about how to structure our writing, and patterns that we should follow? I have no doubt that the “templates” that Graff and Birkenstein do nothing, but enhance the writing skills of the reader. As Graff states, “it becomes much easier to write creatively” when we learn such patterns.
In addition, Graff underlines the crucial connection to man and his society. To get more specific, he talks about the importance of being about to relate and successfully communicate with your audience as a writer. Just like you need to know the basics guidelines and structure of Spanish sentences, before you speak it, you need to know the structure of Academic writing to be successful at it. To me, the most important elements of the book are the examples of academic writing which are included. I found Dr. King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” to be most insightful to myself. I feel like having an idea of the conflict at hand helped my understanding. While such a conflict, a disagreement is present in doctor King’s letter, he takes the time to explain his opposing audience, and still relate to them, yet disagree on an amicable note.
But most of all, I find it interesting how Graff puts his own “they say/I say” technique to use through the chapter. Quite ironic. One such example would be in describing how others who dismiss it, and how he himself disagrees with their sentiment. I myself feel infinitely more enlightened by this text so far.
(See what I did there?)
Recent Comments