Journal #2
When drafting a writing project I normally start with a blank piece of paper to jot down what my topic is, Let’s say “House prices.” I state that at the head of the paper. That’s not enough to go by, so I turn it into a question like, “ What causes house prices to increase?” Then I begin to narrow the topic down so i can state my own personal claim or thesis statement to make it my own thought and why i stand by it. So in order to do this I answer the question previously posed; House prices may increase because of consumer demand, demographic, and economic growth. Now that I have my thesis we can begin writing an introduction or in my case I draw a bubble around the topic statement to focus on my main ideas. I usually brainstorm for a little longer and whatever pops in my head I quick write down. Sometimes it doesn’t make sense or the sentence is not grammatical but this helps organize your final paper better. This looks quite messy, but for me it works. My thoughts are everywhere at once which is not a bad thing when drafting a paper but I do need to work on becoming more organized with them. I want my first sentence to grab the reader’s attention when I introduce my writing topic.
Once I finish with the first or introductory paragraph I move on with my first main idea, which is consumer demand. I try to support my idea with evidence or idea in an organized way, I draw at least three lines coming down from my idea so I have enough to support it with. I continue this method with the second and third paragraphs.Then I move to a computer document to continue writing my draft.
After the draft is complete i usually give myself some time off and clear my thoughts before I start the global (text as a whole, whether is makes sense) revision. I do this because I have a clear head to reread the text otherwise it can be bad if you don’t. Not realizing the mistakes you make will ultimately cost you. Making sure my ideas are strongly supported and organized are keys ways to make sure your paper is strongly written. Does each paragraph contribute to your main point? How can my thesis statement be better (add/drop)? Does the essay provide any helpful information? Are question to ask to help revise your paper.
This process usually has a lot of scribbles, deletes or crossing out depending on the platform I use to revise. I like to print my document out so I can make changes faster and it’s more convenient for me. When I revise my paper it will be as messy as or even more so than the draft. I like the way I go about drafting and revising but still need to work on; thesis, strengthen arguments, organization, and sentence competence so the reader knows what point i’m trying to make.
Journal #3
Reading ‘They say, I say’ on the “Art of Quoting” I realized how offical a “quote” can make your writing sound. This is one of many interpretations from a great writer to an okay one. It’s something I need to work on a lot in my writing. How can I sound more trustworthy with the writing I put out, so it’s not just me talking the whole time? And quoting essentially does that. While articles without “quotes” are just plain, they don’t provide other points of view to agree or disagree with your topic. Quoting gives credibility to your writing and also functions as proof to the reader that your summary is fair and accurate. I’m now aware that there can be mistakes while adding quotes, like quoting too little— might mislead what the quote is trying to say. And at the opposite end would be over quoting, leaving you little or no room to add your ability to comment on the matter. I also gathered information on what’s appropriate to quote. If it has relevance in my writing and if it agrees with or disagrees with the point i’m trying to make. Sometimes disagreeing quotes could be helpful in ways that you might further explain yourself in an essay to enhance your argument. Another helpful tool that stuck with me and I didn’t really learn before is, don’t leave a quote by itself, make it a sandwich. Meaning always introduce, then explain a quote. Explaining is trying to provide your reader how you decipher a quote and what the speaker of the quote is trying to say, and why you decided it is meaningful for your report. When reading I find quotes interesting because it make me feel like i’m reading a well written paper. I came off learning a bunch about quoting and how I was doing it totally wrong. I will now look back on this book for great info and examples on quoting.
Journal #4
The Article “The End of Food” by Lizzie Widdicombe talks about how one of three entrepreneurs, Rhinehart, a twenty-five year old living in a cramped apartment, who studied electrical engineering at Georgia Tech, considered food to be an engineering problem. But first he started his early work with three of his buddies working on a plan to make inexpensive cell phone towers, failing many times, they looked at how they could make their funds last, which they received 175k from the incubator company Y Combinator. The big problem to Rhinehart was food. Food is expensive, so he remained on the low cost fast food diet, which he related to McDonald’s “Super Size Me.” The food he eat was unhealthy and didn’t make him feel like he was alive after. He tried many diets at home to, to see if he could save even more money, but relying on ramen, corn dogs, and Costco frozen quesadillas made him more disgusted about food he put in his body and came up with an alternative route to his project. His new project, and down to 75k left from his initial funding, a company call Soylent. Soylent is a liquid gooey lemonade type drink when you mix the powder with oil and water. Soylent, which replaces meals and provides you with all the essential mineral, vitamins, fatty acids, carbs, etc… at a reasonable price, to carry out everyday life. In the article, Widdicombe visits Rhinehart in L.A., where his soylent headquarters was now located after he received tremendous funding. Widdicombe accompanies Rhinehart on a trip to El Segundo, to meet with C.E.O of Beyond Meat, Ethan Brown. Brown and Rhinehart share similar concepts about food in the near future. Beyond Meat sells meat as a 100% plant based protein. They both share there challenges to push their product to the everyday consumer market. Next they meet with Rachel Galimidi, a Ph.D candidate in biology and a resident advisor for Ricketts dorm on Caltech campus. She took them to meet college students who love Soylent. These followers were D.I.Y.ers, who made their own recipe to fit there liken/allergies off of Rhinehart’s original formula online. How to improve the product was Rhinehart main goal when visiting and also negative feedback. At the end, Widdicombe writes that Rhinehart’s main goal is to get rid of factories and farms and produce, as Rinehart states a “Superorganism” which would source all of soylents essential ingredients into an alge.
This article made me more aware how quick an idea can come about into reality. And how that idea could cause a new way in which we develop and live everyday. It made me think hard about the past and how our society perceives food and why food is a tradition we still celebrate when we have alternatives that can do the same. But as we all know, not everyone thinks and lives the same. Everyone has different patterns to their life and food happens to be a big pattern. I can understand where Rhinehart is coming from and how today’s eating habits are getting to be more and more dangerous when all you can afford is processed frozen meals. I like the idea of a meal replacement where you can get all the nutrients you need to survive from a drink. I believe, however, that you might not need it all the time but if you have a busy day and don’t have time for a traditional meal then it works out perfect. Like I said not everyone has the same day patterned and it could be very helpful for that person to get the essentials they need. I personally have taken meal replacement, protein drinks, fatty acid, and multigreen pills for a boost when i’m not getting enough of what I need. I know it’s hard to let go of food that might taste good but is not actually good for you, but I can possibly see in the future people moving more towards Soylent.
Journal #5
In the introduction to “They Say / I Say”: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing, Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein provide templates designed to help a writer organize his thoughts without giving up creativity. They provide templates to familiarize a writer with common academic writing structure. Specifically, Graff and Birkenstein argue that the types of writing templates they offer free the writer from their own mistakes and incorporates important structure maybe not taught to you yet. As the authors themselves put it, “They Say / I Say” is “the single most important template that we focus on in this book.” There are many important templates available but the one they want you to remember is that. It makes the writer think not only about what he wants to say but also consider some of the thoughts others have about a given topic. Although some people believe structured writing may sound plain and repetitive, Graff and Birkenstein insist that it will generate more creative and clear thoughts, ensuring the reader is knowledgeable about what you are trying to convey.
I personally found the readings very informative. Although I still tend to get stuck when starting a sentence the templates help me start one again. The text also cleared up the correct way to enter a conversation, which in academic writing gives writers a clear voice/ argument. It goes to show that the writer must assume what others are going to think and how he can write their thoughts accordingly. I happen to find writing not in my forte but it takes practice and as the authors states, “none of us is born knowing these moves, especially when it comes to academic writing.” Again, templates can be used as a mapping guide in ones writing; helping identifying issues, introducing a quote, controversy, argument and so forth. I happen to find the readings about ‘Entering the Conversation’ to be enlightening, the templates can provide a way to assert new creative beliefs/ ideas to one text that maybe before they couldn’t really proform. I happen to find “disagreeing without being disagreeable’ section helpful because I am not a person who like to totally disagree, I usually see both sides. Overall, I will definitely look back on these readings for my academic writing in college and beyond.
Journal #6
Hannah Mazza Draft 1 Peer Review Essay
Journal #7
My peer review went very well in the sense that I got a second view and a different perspective of my essay. We discussed my how my introduction clearly introduced Widdecombe’s article. The good that came with it was it gave background information to the reader about what was going to be discussed throughout the paper. The things I could improve are my sentence structure like combining two sentences into one direct sentence and making my thesis standout from the two introductory paragraphs. Next suggestion was the transitions from paragraphs to paragraph and even some sentences in the body where the text jumped resulting in choppiness. In the body paragraphs she mentioned I need to focus on the points that stick with my thesis and to further analyze my ideas to show the reader a different and unique perspective about Soylent. The biggest critique I took away from her review is leave the text with an afterthought, question or a proposing benefit discussed at the beginning. Doing this will allow my essay to be complete and not just sit there unfinished.
Some of the things I suggested for her paper were to have the paper outlined because it seemed the essay is very disjointed and confusing at times. So, I mentioned to introduce the “End of Food” article in one of the introduction paragraphs to inform what the essay is going to be about. The thesis needs to be clearly stated in one of the intro paragraphs which me was not clear. In the body of the essay, the second paragraph in her essay could be left out entirely. I think it just rambles and doesn’t provide any substance to improve the essay. Also, the body paragraphs stated benefits then veered off to something random. The essay left me confused with back and forth points that contradicted herself. I noted she needs to work on giving more detailed examples. Her quoting was a ‘drive by’ and didn’t stop to explain the quote. Wrapping up the paper, I advised her to summarize her text and not explain why Soylent is beneficial to society, but rather the opposite because her thesis didn’t agree with Soylent as a food for society.
Outside the review text we talked about the article “The End of Food” and went over points that could be made from that text to incorporate into our paper. One thing we talked about was to give deeper examples and not just touch the surface. One of the examples I used from her text is when she wrote, “…provide important health benefits.” But she just leaves it like that and doesn’t further analyze the benefits.
I felt that if we had more time we should have gone over grammatical and sentence errors fixing them and possibly coming up with further ideas that help our essay.
Journal #8
Having read Chapter One, “They Say” ‘Starting with What Others Are Saying’ in “They say/ I say” I realized what good writers do. They first introduce what they are talking about. Informing the audience should be the writers or speakers first point to make. In one of the examples the author used, Dr. X, who presented his case about an important issue but never really gave interpretation to why it was relevant made the audience lost. Some questions the listener I assume would think are; Why did he pose his case in the first place? Does anybody dispute what he’s claiming? To me, It was clear in the example; the listener was lost wondering “What’s going on.” This goes to show that If you jump into details, many will assume “Why is this important” or “I have no idea what’s going on” Many will be lost. I found this to be the case when I did my peer review. I had no clue the points or even where the paper was heading until very late in the paper she explained the importance. Going back to the example, Dr. X could have set up his claims by doing many things such as; summarizing what “They Say” then introduce a different view in what “You Say” but always keeping what “They Say” in view to help communicate your point. In other words, keeping scope of what others say enhances the audience about what you are untimely trying to prove. Doing this helps the listener stay on track with your ideas and not think “Wow this is going nowhere.” The author suggests, then, as early as possible in the text state your own position and the one it’s responding to together. He stresses the word “Together”, so you don’t forget one or the other. Think of this as a unit in your paper. Starting a paper with a unit like this allows the reader to frame and clarify the issues you will touch on later in the paper. Ultimately this provides the reader about what you’re talking about and why it’s important. The book giving a variety of templates, so you can choose how you want to introduce you point. Like templates for: what “They Say”, “Standard Views”, making what “They Say” something You Say, something implied or assumed, or an ongoing debate to start your paper off with. Lastly, I will try to incorporate this advice into my writing to clear up and help better purvey what will be going on later in the text.
Journal #9
Looking back at my essay I realized I that I still needed to be to the point and not drag on with sentences that are not relevant to my thesis. While rereading I realized that I should have added more personal experience that relates more global to the reader. There were very few mistakes at the sentence level, maybe one, and same with the grammatical level. I didn’t finish my in class final revision because I was too focused on really making sure everything connected. My thoughts while doing this seemed like I could always improve in others way such as providing clearing examples. I got a few light bulbs along the way. I like that every time I go back to my paper it just gets more organized and clearer.
Journal #10
“Out of the Kitchen, Onto the Couch” by Michael Pollan. I will be discussing three passages from this article.
Passage 1: Page 6-7 “Whichever, kitchen work itself has changed considerably since 1963, judging forms its depiction on today’s how-to shows.”
I agree with this passage, not only does it make a lot of sense in why people are moving towards processed food (ingredients made with other ingredients to form a product) and how it’s making people more prone to staying in the living room watching Food programs instead of making the food from scratch in the kitchen.
I found that in this passage the relation to today’s how-to cooking shows seems so simple compared to back then, when you had to make a meal from the simplest ingredients. Now that industrial companies have taken control of food, processed food is now a part of our diets and affects the way we cook food. Accompanying many of the shows on Food Network are Ingredients already made for large corporations. Many of the cooking celebrities are taking shortcuts with the way they cook food. Back then most ingredients were broken down in their simplest form, now cooking programs rely on ingredients that contain other ingredients, such as a can of tuna. There are better examples, as the article states, “Canned soup, jarred mayonnaise, frozen vegetables, etc.” This is changing the way people cook and how society is redefining the verb “to cook.” Many of the people I know fall into this trap and thinking there a good cook, when simply it takes no preparation at all. I agree with the text of how cooking today is found more in the living room than in the kitchen, where everyone is watching The Food Network rather than participating in the actual cooking process. This is leading to more and larger growth of big corporations like chipotle and other fast food places. I think the passage is spot on when Pollan says, “The rhetoric of kitchen oppression has been cleverly hijacked by food marketing research.” Meaning companies have been oppressing women and men from cooking at home because it’s more time efficient and cost friendly to buy processed food (Their product.)
Passage 2: Page (16-17) “The idea that cooking is a defining human activity is not a new one.”
I agree with this passage, not only does cooking satisfy your hunger it strikes as a bigger purpose of the way humans developed throughout history. This passage brought in three writers of the topic of cooking; James Boswell, Jean-Anthelme Brillat-Savarin, and Claude Lévi-Strauss. Which all claimed cooking as a benefit to humans. To me cooking gathers the family which is the most important thing.
Let me say, that without cooking we would not be this far advanced in society. I think cooking provides indescribable transformation to alter our brain and body to develop more into a cultural. Cooking started around a fire and fire simply gave human the advantage they needed to prosper while other animals didn’t. The fire also gave protection, weaponry, and comfort. A number of anthropologists recently suggest that cooking is in fact more important than tool-making or language. Harvard anthropologist, Richard Wrangham argues that the discovery of cooking helped with the transformation of our bodies and brains to form like they are today. By providing our primate forebears with more energy-dense and easy-to-digest diet. As with that said raw foods take more time to digest and don’t provide the body with the best nourishment. I think that if we stuck with raw foods humans would be just like animals, where in today’s eating fashion you rarely see animalist behavior. The author points out, “Cooking… freed… the need to spend our days gathering large quantities of raw food, humans could now devote their time, and their metabolic resources, to other purposes, like creating a culture.” And that culture took off with many cuisines from different areas of the planet. I think that without cooking humans would be lost, probably wouldn’t have connected with each other to create a more Intellectual environment in which we live in today or be very malnourished to the extent where we would still be a part of the food chain and participate in the act of killing to eat.
Passage 3: Page (18) “To play at farming or foraging the food strikes us as harmless enough, perhaps because the delegating of those activities to other people in real life is something most of us are generally O.K. with.”
I agree with this passage and what Pollan describes of outsourcing. No doubt cooking is outsourced to many processed food companies and there are real consequences to our health and well-being.
Processed foods may contain chemicals, synthetic fertilizers or pesticides which can cause harm to the body and brain. Outsourcing has become a big problem today with not many organic farmers producing natural food. This leaves big corporation in charge of the demand and supply of food. As we know their only goal is to make a profit at the expense of people’s health. First, we don’t know what’s exactly is in the ingredients we are being feed, which can lead to obesity and other harmful health risks. Processed food is known to have an access of sugar, salt and other minerals, which with can cause a decline in mood or performance. This is also a problem as Pollan implies the more we eat these foods the less we cook and leave out a better alternative. It makes sense, to cook more than you would go out to eat. I believe the outsourcing of food to preparation corporations has taken a serious toll on our physical and psychological well-being. Leaving many Americans to relegate the activity of cooking to others is defiantly a problem because there are feelings involved in cooking that can’t be compared to by another making one’s meals.
Journal #11
In writing there are a majority of moves to make to help you write a strong paper, but without an argument it’s hard to convince the reader what you are trying to say. In “They Say/I say” chapter fourteen, they suggest when reading a paper, it’s better to think about what you are reading with these questions: “What other arguments is the writer responding to?” “Is the writer disagreeing or agreeing with something, and if so, what?” and probably the most important “What is motivating the writer’s argument?” This gets the reader to really dissect the text and form their own words with what the writers are writing about. Also, what’s motivating the thesis or is it just placed there not giving any conversion or information to why you are arguing the stated topic. This means, don’t just try to find the thesis when reading, find greater points that lead up to the argument. Furthermore, when reading an essay think about who’s in the conversation. Is it just them talking or are they providing a conversation to their text to bring in what others would say to help push forward their argument. I found it very important in writing to allow a conversation to enter the text because that leads to a new or different view point on the topic, but it also helps you prove to the reader what is motivating your argument. To be a good writer you must be a great reader, and with that said, readers need to be equipped with strategies for detecting the conversations in what they read, more so when those conversations are challenging. Like the paragraph they mentioned in the chapter by Judith Butler, and how her writing leaves readers to stumble, so it’s key to really dig into what she is trying to convey. All in all, there are many strategies writers use but it’s up to the reader to properly interpret what’s motiving them.
Journal #12
Page 1 Paragraph 4 “But now she faced a difficult decision… United States by a ratio of three to one.”
This passage caught my eye with how it starts out, stating Judith faces a difficult decision. We to are faced with them each day. Decisions to lose weight, stop drinking milk, stop eating meat etc… Some are moral, some don’t even cross our minds, and some are emotional. In Judith’s case she thought she was doing the morally right thing by eating fish instead of meat, but it turns out fish is a debatable subject when it comes to clarifying whether her diet is vegetarian or not. The passage goes on to say how she ended 15 years of moral high ground because of her love for raspberries which was the sauce on the grouse. It’s amazing how quickly one’s mind can fluctuate when it comes to what’s morally acceptable. I found it kind of uncomfortable how her husband turned her away from being a vegetarian and possibly converted her back to a normal diet. This goes to show how others can influence your decision making. It could be by facts, but I think more so it has to do will their perception on reality, which doesn’t mean they’re are right.
Page 4 Paragraph 2 “The person who started the rumor…every single day.”
In this passage there’s a common knowledge between humans love and pets. I believe cats are more dangerous than other species we don’t love as much such as mice. Cats are flesh eating animals and part of the family Felidae. It fascinated me how pet cats in America consume over 12 million pounds of cat food or caned flesh which is the equivalent of 3 million chickens in a single day. This passage really claws at the idea of how pet owners overlook the bigger picture of what animals are to them and what the pet’s instincts are in nature. Many ignore the fact that they to eat other animals like us. Herzog shows that the person who started the rumor of him feeding cats to his Boa was a cat lover and would let cats roam the woods at night. This can go back to cats killing other species that are less favorited by humans such as rats, birds, and mice. I can agree that our perception of animals is more likeable towards other species. What this means is human relations with pets are changing and we are eventually blinked by the cute pets we have rather than logic.
Page 4 Paragraph 4 “So, pet cat cause havoc…living with a pet snake.”
What we think of morally acceptable is in some cases a hidden burden. For instance, we favor pet cats far more than we do pet snakes, yet cats consume way more living animals a year compared to snakes. A total of 50 pounds of flesh whereas snakes consume 5 pounds. In this passage it talks about the eating habits of both animals and how the moral burden of cats is 10 times higher than living with a pet snake. This connects to the text because Herzog wants to find out why humans behavior toward animals bring different emotions. Whereas in this case the emotion for snakes is hated but seems more moral to have them as a pet instead of cats.
Journal 13
Looking back at paper 2 and reflecting on my final essay I discovered how messy the process was for me. The outlining process wasn’t going to be easy. But before all of that, the first thing I did was read some of my peers’ essays, though I didn’t really know where I was heading in my own paper, I thought this was a good start. It confused me even more. The essays I read were hard to pick though and I didn’t have a clue where to begin. I eventually ended up marking up the peers’ essay that I found would be helpful in my paper. The trickiest part for me was how to incorporate it with Pollan’s claim. The techniques to place their quotes and elaborate on them is still new to me. The whole converging the two texts into one was a challenge. I found my writing wordy and confusing when doing this. What I would change in the beginning process is to let my thoughts out on paper. What do you want to talk about? Have a simple thesis that I can always go back and rework and maybe even change if something sparked a new interest. Other ways to better the writing process would be not to write so much in one day. I realized that with my writing I would veer off topic the long I sat down to write. A new way to plan my writing process would be to set goals like maybe a time period of 30-45min instead of 2 hours plus. I noticed that working on a paper that long frustrates me and that doesn’t help with putting clear thoughts on paper. This could also benefit me with rereading my draft more. As a result, less errors, clearer and stronger claims along with analysis and an overall better written essay. I will test and incorporate these techniques into my project 3 paper.
Journal 14
Reading the David Foster Wallace text, “Consider the Lobster” the first time, I was a bit overwhelmed. This passage was a bit much to contain with all the information, not only did he talk about everything the lobster is, like what species it belongs to, but also how it’s cooked, what early times thought of lobster and the Maine Lobster Festival. Wallace brought to my attention that lobsters’ too have social lives and the ability to feel pain with a different way to communicate that pain. The first time I read the article it got me thinking a little, but I must admit I was only skimming the surface. My mind didn’t really change. Compared to the second time of reading the article which occurred to me that there’s a whole connectivity to the way humans live and how different people have different morals and ethical values. Basically, what is right or wrong. As a class we discussed whether we think about these animals when eating. I would have to say I normally don’t think about what I’m eating because when it shows up on my plate it’s already dead. But sometimes when I fish with my dad and uncle I think more about the circle of life and more so about the living animals as its dies right in front of me. Experience is everything. I feel sorry but that feeling isn’t enough to bring the creature back, so I don’t really stress on what they think. If they could even think at all. The obvious rule of life “eat to stay alive.” is engrained in us and many of earthy creatures too. There’s don’t doubt some people kill for fun and even like when animals feel pain, but I am not one of those people. I do not condemn suffering but there’s a certain point in which I think I can handle it emotionally and psychologically. The lobster cooking to me is quite normal in today society and my mind is not changed. This did get me thinking more deeply about how most of our society decides what is right or wrong. This could hamper some of our thoughts about how we perceive what’s ethical and unethical in our own country. For instance, imagine if we boiled a cat alive. We would find that person utterly insane and they would possibly face jail time in the U.S. Whereas, in Asia cat is a meal. It’s socially acceptable in some impoverished parts because they must eat to stay alive. This not only adds to what DFW talks about but brings out a much bigger picture conflicting our society and others. Where is the line (ethical and moral) is placed and is it clear or fuzzy in how you perceive it? I am still in the fuzzy area, not everything we face is always clear. The way I think, if there’s a divide in a decision then it will have some grey area to me. Whether we have a vast majority saying it’s ethical and minority saying otherwise then there will always be a problem. Only when there’s total agreement is when I acknowledge the line clear, but that day will never come.
Journal 15
“Against Meat” provided insight on how hard it is to stick to the choices you pride and value, Foer in this article battled on and off with vegetarianism. Each time he started his diet there was a reason behind it. Maybe an ethical reason that he couldn’t just not think about. His diet change happened from the babysitter to his wife and then when his first child was born, which is when he went back to his diet. I found his early memories with his grandmother quite similar with the ones I shared with mine. She too would make her famous casserole every weekend and we would listen to her stories. I still salivate over how good it is. I’ve hadn’t had it in a while though I can still remember the taste. It’s very interesting how people perceive food and relate it to a bigger entity or something they find value in.
“Some of my happiest childhood memories…” In this paragraph Foer describes how his change to vegetarianism made him miss a lot of the memories he once prided as a child. His switch brought to light want he learned for the process and how we too can find value in the things we take for granted. Not only does he miss the sushi, turkey burgers, and his grandmother’s chicken and carrots but he misses the experiences with the meals; backyard celebrations, being with family. Those memories simply wouldn’t have come without the meals which were present. Foer gave up his family tradition as well. The loss of taste that these meals brought him along with his culture. Culture at home, school, restaurants etc… In turn he found himself. You must give up something for it to have value. He gained new values in this process of lost. Values that have a bigger purpose to serve. Those purposes could be environment, religious, or possibly just healthier/cleaner way to live, from to his family and community.
Journal 16
Writing an essay with a Naysayer makes a world of a difference in writing. It incorporates skeptics and another side to the story. It’s true, skeptics may object to your claim, so it is best to relate their point of view, so they realize you were not just thinking of your own views but thought of theirs as well. It shows in your text that you are capable of critical thinking and are connected to others emotionally. Incorporating the criticism or at least the anticipated criticism in writing allows the text to expand. Stronger and more interesting evidence will become, inevitable, making the text really begin in the eyes of the reader/Skeptics. In my writing I never incorporated the Naysayer because I was never taught the move in writing and it’s benefits in an essay. I realize how “planting a Naysayer” can help improve the quality of a paper especially in academic writing where you are trying to prove a point. Since this move pushes the text further and creates conversation, it’s a big mistake to ignore criticizing in your essay. One of the examples the book used, “Although some readers may object… I would reply that…” this is a great template to open up the paper to bigger conversations. Thus, making a debate between different views which allows others in the dialogue. I will use the template in my next paper to help connect to a bigger conversation. Another sentence I found interesting in the book “They Say, I Say” explains, “As we argue throughout this book, writing well does not mean piling up uncontroversial truths in a vacuum; it means engaging others in dialogue or debate” In order to make writing more interesting to the reader they want a conversation not just your boring tone; writing is a form of communicating and it gets old when you just hear one side of an argument. I realized this a lot in my papers. In all, Chapter 6 has brought to my attention a pattern in writing that many professionals use; “planting a Naysayer” and I believe if I use this move more in my writing it will bring out more thoughts of the other side while less thoughts about what I agree with. Therefore, making the process a lot easier and open to discussion. Writing is an act of conversation, and arguments/skeptics are a part of many conversations.
Journal 17
Peer Review For Project 3
Journal 18
Going through the process of writing my final paper was definitely a PROCESS. The beginning stages were mostly rereading David Foster Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster” too really get me thinking critically about the concepts and ideas he brings up. Also I wanted to see wether my mind would change. At first I my mind was set in stone, I didn’t care and wasn’t aware of the issue at hand, but after a couple rereads my thinking started to change, which lead to a completely redesign of my paper, unfortunately. From there I began to write down where I now stood on the whole ethics issue we face. Going through the other articles wasn’t that much different. Glossing over them I picked out some important concepts and ideas the authors brought up that helped further my stance toward the issue/s. This step I found to be one of the most time consuming and difficult because I tended to get confused of wether which author said what. To fix this, next time I will take organized notes about each author instead of going back to the text then going straight to my draft. This left my draft a bit unorganized, so in the final stage of my paper I had to do some heavy lifting and reorganizing. I felt I could have. done a better job on responding to the author in my text. Some authors made a smooth connection to DFW while others were complicated toward the issue. The more complex concepts took more articulating. I could have cleared up where I stood on which text I thought was appropriate towards my claim. Connecting my critical thinking when dealing with different text was challenging. The deep diving in my thoughts really made things more clear in some instances but in situations remained perhaps more fuzzy. Transitioning from the draft to my final paper I realized I wanted my introduction to include all the authors that I will be talking about along with paraphrasing their articles.
