Justifying Choices

I agree with Will’s statements about how we as writers are expected to follow a certain rubric, restricting us from truly being creative. I think that as Will said, there are certain rules about how we write so that it is our words that paint the picture, not the layout itself. I think that there are types of writing that you want to express the creativity, and express meaning in presentation as well as your words. However I think that in a writing paper where the focus is how we write and how we present an argument in our words, than it is best to have a simple layout that highlights the words instead of the paper. The “societal norms” that will talks about I believe are there so that we can have our argument be the focal point of a paper, so that you’re opinions are not agreed with just because they look pretty. We write in the bland style that we have so that our arguments can be truly examined for how we describe them in our words, and that we can learn to do it better as well. So I do agree with Will that we have these norms for a reason, and that the reasons are valid.

How Do I Know This Is Good? Sample H

Reasons I Was Moved

-       - The author brought up points that brought up points that made me wonder why I got an iPod.

-       - The use of facts and statistics in the paper gave more power and substance to the argument

-       - References to how the iPod may advance mad me consider the future of the product

-       - The different attractive features of the iPod mentioned helped show why it is popular

-       - Giving reasons how the iPod became the most popular music plaver, over its competitors

-       - The papr talked about the premise of “cool” and how that helped the iPods popularity

Reasons I Was Unmoved

-      -  There were parts when the paper felt repetitive

-       - There were occasionally unnecessary words that took out of the flow of the writing

-       - At times the paper read more like an informational paper on the iPod than a comparison to society

-       - Did not talk about iPods with an older generation

-       - Focused on younger generations instead of a whole

-       - The paper had a focus on the capabilities and advances of the iPod, but not why they where there or what the said about society

How Do I Know This Is Good? Sample G

Reasons I Was Moved

-       - The paper immediately tells you what it is about and what it will be trying to prove, pulling the reader in.

-       - It gives examples of everyday American life, and then ties it in to Red Bull

-       - The research and quotes used help to make the paper more convincing

-       - The paper has the fast-paced mentality that it is saying society as a whole has

-       - The comparison of success of Red Bull versus the lack of success of relaxation drinks

-       - The use of Red Bull’s advertising slogan to prove a point and talk about society

Reasons I Was Unmoved

-       - The fast-paced rhythm of the paper made it feel like you were getting a lot at once

-      -  There were not many transitions between ideas

-       - Although the paper listed stressful situations it did not say how Red Bull would be appealing to them

-       - There were a few typos, which mad the paper seem less professional

-       - Although the ideas were comparing society to Red Bull, it felt like there were long stretches in between them

-       - The papers main tying points were only the beginning and the end and felt like the middle was different arguments, not tied in until the end

Spring Come Early? Was The Groundhog Right?

            It’s a beautiful 48 degrees out which is something that on a Friday in February, is probably the last thing I’d expect. I woke up this morning expecting to put on my coat and speed walk to my classes, hoping that I wouldn’t freeze in the process. But to my surprise when I left my dorm this morning I quickly realized that, with the sun shining down on me, I didn’t even need my winter jacket today. Walking around campus the smell of melting snow and warm grass hit me like a long waited for sign of spring. Although I realize that spring is still over a month away, and in 5 days I’ll be speed walking to class again, it was a nice present from Mother Nature for at least a day.

Billy Collins' "Litany"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56Iq3PbSWZY

Questions For The Author

Q1: What possessed you to take the original poem and change it in this manner?

Q2: Did you purposely choose to make some of your metaphors ridiculous?

Q3: Why put personal metaphors in as well?

Q4: Was there intended hidden meaning behind any metaphors, or was it their pure ridiculousness”

Q5: Why end with the same metaphor that you started with?

Q6: Were any other ideas or metaphors taken from the original poem?

And although this assignment only called for 6 questions I have a seventh.

Q7: If she isn’t the pine-scented air, can I call dibs on that?

The Three Letters That Rule My Life

            MLA. These Three simple letters have dictated a large amount of my career as a student, but the truth of the matter is I do not know why. Since I was in about sixth grade I was given this rubric for how my writing should be, black ink, 1 inch margins, double space, name and page number in the header, and a proper heading. It was never really explained to me why everything had to be like this, in fact the more I think about it the more I feel like a citizen in George Orwell’s 1984, blindly following the bland style that I was told I should.

            When I was first asked why my papers looked like this, why they were in this format, my mind went back to my junior year English teacher. I waned to write her a letter telling her that, although she made sure we knew how to write in MLA format, she never told us why we did it, and because of that she should write this explanation for me. However I realized that my letter would most likely go unanswered, so I started to honestly think about it.

            I believe the most logical reason that we are taught to write in this form is so that papers can be uniform. It’s easier to grade a paper if there’s a rubric to it, if there is a set up that is ordered and logical. It may feel like a bit of brain washing. But writing in This MLA format makes it easier for our errors to be critiqued. In one standard form we know what is expected, and we can build off of that, and work on the flaws in our writing while still having something to lean on. So although I still cannot tell you exactly why I write in the format that I write in, I can tell you that there is logic in writing in a standard format. It gives us something to work off of and learn with.

Don Stap's "Flight of the Kuaka"

            In Don Stap’s article “Flight of The Kuaka” he describes his experience in capturing Bar-tailed Godwits, a type of bird that migrates from Alaska to New Zealand each year. Stap also explains how this bird’s species is endangered and facing new challenges in the changing world.  The first thing I noticed about the article is the story that Stap presents you with. He describes to you his experience of capturing the bird and, using descriptive language, brings you along with him on this journey. However you soon notice that this article is much more than just a story.

            Stap’s writing soon takes a turn into a more scientific approach. The writing uses terms from the bird watching community that may be lost upon the average reader. Stap does not give his readers much of a definition for some of the terms, which leave the reader to continue on and have to fill in the blanks. The article appears to be readers within the bird enthusiast community as opposed to the average reader.

Definitions and Metaphors In Jonah Lehrer's "DON'T!"

Mark each time Lehrer offers a definition. How elaborate is each definition? What does the sequence of these mean in aggregate?

“There is something deeply contradictory about Walter Mischel—a psychologist who spent decades critiquing the validity of personality tests—inventing the marshmallow task, a simple test with impressive predictive power.” (paragraph 18)

““Young kids are pure id,’ Mischel says. ‘They start off unable to wait for anything—whatever they want they need. But then, as I watched my own kids, I marveled at how they gradually learned how to delay and how that made so many other things possible.’” (paragraph 19)

“What, then, determined self-control? Mischel’s conclusion, based on hundreds of hours of observation, was that the crucial skill was the ‘strategic allocation of attention.’ Instead of getting obsessed with the marshmallow—the ‘hot stimulus’—the patient children distracted themselves by covering their eyes, pretending to play hide-and-seek underneath the desk, or singing songs from ‘Sesame Street.’” (paragraph 22)

“‘If you’re thinking about the marshmallow and how delicious it is, then you’re going to eat it,’ Mischel says. ‘The key is to avoid thinking about it in the first place.’ \ In adults, this skill is often referred to as metacognition, or thinking about thinking, and it’s what allows people to outsmart their shortcomings.” (paragraph 23)

“The early appearance of the ability to delay suggest that is has a genetic origin, an example of personality at its most predetermined.” (paragraph 26)

“Two of the experiments were of particular interest. The first is a straightforward exercise known as the ‘suppression task.’ Subjects are given four random words, two printed in blue and two in red. After reading the words, they’re told to forget the blue words and remember the red words. Then the scientists provide a stream of ‘probe words’ and ask the subjects whether the probes are the words they were asked to remember.” (paragraph 30)

“In the second, known as the Go/No Go task, subjects are flashed a set of faces with various expressions. At first, they are told to press the space bar whenever they see a smile. This tasks little effort, since smiling faces automatically trigger what’s known as ‘approach behavior.’” (paragraph 31)

“Approach behavior” is the most interesting term here, letting its connotative meaning shine.

“For the most part, the regions are in the frontal cortex—the overhang of brain behind the eyes—and include the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the anterior prefrontal cortex, the anterior cingulate, and the right and left inferior frontal gyri. While these cortical folds have long been associated with self-control, they’re also essential for working memory and directed attention. According to the scientists, that’s not an accident. ‘These are powerful instincts telling us to reach for the marshmallow or press the space bar,’ Jonides says. ‘The only way to defeat them is to avoid them, and that means paying attention to something else. We call that will power, but it’s got nothing to do with the will.’’” (paragraph 33)

            What I found interesting about all of the definitions used in Lehrer’s article was what they where defining. In the first couple of definitions that we see, they are not so much definitions of words as much as they as they are explanation of an idea. These definitions are not simply telling us what a word means but instead they are telling us how an idea works and why it is present in the experiments.  It isn’t until later in the article that Lehrer starts using scientific definitions. It’s in these definitions that we are actually told the meaning of a term used in the article. What this tells me about Lehrer’s writing is that he uses words that the readers will know, allowing the reader to follow the article without feeling as if it is a science textbook. However when it is necessary to define a term Lehrer is not afraid to explain what it means even if it does momentarily take you out of the flow of his article.

Have you found any metaphors in this text?  Did you expect to find metaphors or metaphoric language in a scientific text?

“One of Mischel’s favorite metaphors for this model of personality, known as interactionism, concerns a car making a screeching noise. How does a mechanic solve the problem? He begins by trying to identify the specific conditions that trigger the noise. Is there a screech when the car is accelerating, or when it’s shifting gears, or turning at slow speeds? Unless the mechanic can give the screech a context, he’ll never find the broken part.” (paragraph 19)

“In adults, this skill is often referred to as metacognition, or thinking about thinking, and it’s what allows people to outsmart their shortcomings. (When Odysseus had himself tied to the ship’s mast, he was using some of the skills of metacognition: knowing he wouldn’t be able to resist the Sirens’ song, he made it impossible to give in.)” (paragraph 23)

            I did not find too many big metaphors in the text however there were a couple. I think that the metaphors serve a big purpose in a scientific text because it relates something that is very large and compares it to something that the normal reader can understand. I think that the metaphors in a scientific text allow the common reader to understand what is happening without having to know the exact process and hypothesis behind the procedure.

Ideas, Ideas, And One More Idea

 “In thinking about an idea, many sentences and ideas can be drawn by using detailed words within the idea”

            The idea of this sentence of ideas is correct, however I for one have heard the word idea to many times at this point. At its base, this quote is saying when you have a thought it can branch of into many other thoughts. Although that this statement may be true, I believe the quote goes about saying it the wrong way. As I mentioned the first thing I noticed is how sick of the word idea I got by the end of it. Also the sentence feels as though it could be separated into two different sentences. If the writer broke the sentence up into one or two sentences, each explaining a part of the process described in the original, then it might make it easier to understand. Breaking up the sentence may also allow the writer to better convey what it is he or she means. I believe the sentence does get its point across, but that it could do so more clearly and creating more flow if it is approached differently, such as breaking it up.

Not Missing Our Train of Thought

            “Metacognition, thinking about thinking, and it’s what allows people to outsmart their shortcomings”. Thinking about thinking is understanding how you think. For instance a thought process might be connected like such “why is the sky blue? I’d like my hair blue. That girls laptop is blue”. Then once you snap out of it you are back to thinking on your previous thoughts. You can think about thought patterns and change them at your own will, which can eliminate negative thought tracks, or behaviors. To find out these patterns of thought we engage in metacognition. An example of this may be an overweight teenager wondering why he or she possesses the urge to eat the unhealthy products advertised to young consumers. However if we know why we are thinking what we are thinking then we can counter it and adjust the thought process however we may want. For instance if the same overweight teen knew why he or she was having the urge to eat these unhealthy products, he or she would be able to substitute it for another thought that may change the outcome.

Where Are My Wings?

            If we are what we consume then I’m surprised that America hasn’t already sprouted wings and flown away already. After all weren’t we promised to get wings somewhere in the form of the energy drinks that we crave for, and when talking about energy drinks what better brand to mention then red bull? Well I for one am still bound by the laws of gravity. With energy drinks such as Red Bull we expect a jolt of energy to replace the sleep we miss and the relaxation that we are too busy for. However energy drinks truly do not offer anymore of a jolt then a cup of coffee or caffeinated soda, and are merely sold to use on the appeal of quick energy when we need it.

            It has been said that since the beginning of time man has dreamed of conquering the skies, we thought we were close with the Wright brothers but now we have Red Bull to help us fly, or at least that’s what their commercials say. Red Bull feeds on one of Man’s oldest desires, to rule the sky, what a powerful thought. Well unfortunately it is not true, red bull does not give you wings, at least not that we know, but then who knows what the long term side effects of those ingredients will be. So what Red bull is actually doing is tapping into the power that consumers associate with the ability to fly and telling us that we can get that exhilaration form their product.

            The other thing that Red Bull offers us is a quick fix to day-to-day situations. It seems that in the animated ads, every problem or funny anecdote is solved by a can of Red Bull. One that comes to mind is a commercial in which we are at an older man, presumably a grandfather’s funeral when we see the grandfather in the clouds flirting, the grandmother then pulls a red bull out of her purse to fly up and pull him away. Now I don’t think my grandmother carries around a Red Bull in her purse next to the hard candy and cough drops, however if she did that scenario would be quite convenient. But no once again the producers of this commercial are only appealing to our desire for immediate gratification, and our love of humor.

            With what I have said in mind it is both impressing and sad at how the producers of these commercials have America’s consumers pegged. We as consumers are well, for a lack of a better word, consumed with the ideas of power, exhilaration, immediate gratification, and who doesn’t love a little laugh. We are all looking for a quick and easy way to get something that we would otherwise have to make time and effort to gain such as a solution to a problem or energy and rest. So as far as the ideas that Red Bull is targeting to get us to buy into the product, well then yes we are what we consume.

You Can Shine!... Or Can You?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Um9KsrH377A

            The link above is a Pantene commercial that ends with the slogan “you can shine”, however my question is if that is what they really want you to believe that you can. The commercial is about a blind violinist who, through practice, hard work, and the help of an unidentified street “hero”, makes it to a classical music competition and seemingly wins it. Now there is no doubt in my mind that this is an inspirational story illustrating how the ability exists to “shine”. However I am questioning how Pantene wants you to shine.

            The first thing you have to notice is that this is in fact a commercial, used to attempt to sell you a product. Secondly the company that produces this commercial does not sell violins, they sell shampoo. Knowing this you have to ask in what way are they saying you can “shine”? The company feeds you a breath-taking story, which feels as if it should be produced as a feature film, about how this girl accomplished her dreams. However it is then that the commercial says to you “she did all this, but the best you can do to shine is use our product”.

            The commercial creates a “fairytale effect” that causes its viewer to dream big and then takes that dream and replaces it with their product. So the commercial, although it seems to be building up you hope and ambitions, was actually designed to tell you that you cannot reach your dreams. It is after this that the commercial offers an alternate to your dreams with their product, to tell you that you cannot accomplish your dreams but you might as well look like the kind of person that does accomplish his or her dream. So can we all shine? That’s not up to me; it is up to each individual himself or herself. However for the sake of the commercial, even though they say “you can shine” they do want you to feel as though you can shine, but at the same time they want you to believe that the best you can shine is using their product.