Category: Journals

Respond to The Art of Quoting from “They say/ I say”

Through my academic writing career, I have been told a multitude of different things. From ways, you should be portraying your argument to proper MLA formatting. This, in turn, has made it hard to find a cohesive technique moving from teacher to teacher. One thing that has been especially unclear throughout this time is the proper integration of quotations. There are a few things that I know. Firstly, quotations help your argument and essentially increase the credibility of it. Secondly, they should be encompassed in quotation marks. That’s basically all that has been enforced through the many essays I’ve had to write. They say/ I say has opened my eyes to the proper rules and dos and don’ts of integrating quotes in a cohesive, clean way. To start, the authors Cathy Birkenstein and Gerald Graff introduce the idea of introduction. They state, “the main problem with quoting arises when writers assume that quotations speak for themselves. Because the meaning of a quotation is obvious to them, many writers assume that this meaning will also be obvious to their readers, when often it is not.” (Birkenstein and Graff 43) I am especially guilty of this. Trying to reach a word count goal is easiest when you drop lengthy quotes that you personally understand, but might ultimately confuse the reader of what the purpose is. I think outlining is an important aspect of organizing quotations and making sure there are an introduction and explanation to follow to keep the reader in the loop. Although quotes do provide a substantial amount of credibility to your overall claim, being unable to explain them takes away from the cohesiveness of your essay and makes it difficult to follow. Birkenstein and Graff both give great templates on how to introduce a quote and make it as easy as a “blank states,” type of introduction. Not super difficult and very helpful for the reader. This being said, Birkenstein and Graff also write, “readers need to see how you interpret the quotation since words – especially those of controversial figures – can be interpreted in various ways and used to support different, sometimes opposing, agendas.” (Birkenstein and Graff 49) Being clean and clear and under control when it comes to explaining quotes is very important in portraying your overall argument. I found it interesting how there isn’t really a way to overanalyze a quote. It’s better to be over-analytical about a quotation than it is to leave the reader hanging with nothing.

Respond to Entering the Conversation from “They say/I say”

 

As I embark on my first assignment as a college academic writer, I have realized that I am not a very good academic writer. I know what every English teacher would say to that statement. “It takes time to improve,” or “You’re not a bad academic writer, you just have to strengthen your skills,” but my response is, I am a bad academic writer, but I’m excited to get better. After reading the first chapter of “They say/I say,” I have realized that writing is much different than originally anticipated. Argumentative writing in the past has been such a solid, unchangeable force that requires you to form an opinion and preach your godforsaken truth. This is the truth that I followed through most of my high school career. I have recognized now that arguments are not solid, and they are ever changing. “If you have always had the impression that in order to succeed academically, you need to play it safe and avoid controversy in your writing, making a statement that nobody can possibly disagree with. Though this view may seem logical, it is actually a recipe for flat, lifeless writing and for writing that fails to answer what we call the ‘so what?’ and ‘who cares?’ questions.” (Birkenstein and Graff 8) Although writing should voice your beliefs, you don’t have to pick sides and that’s something that was always hammered a little too deep in my educational journey. You don’t have to agree with a piece or writing or a topic, nor do you have to agree with it. Actually, if you were really adamant, you’d be easily able to agree and disagree at the same time just to get your point across. All I’ve truly known is the five paragraph essay with a strong claim and a flat opinion. Just like an argument with a spouse, these things are complex and can mold into many different shapes and sizes. Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein also state, “You have learned how to develop a thesis and support it with evidence. This is good advice as far as it goes, but it leaves out the important fact that in the real world we don’t make arguments without being provoked. Instead, we make arguments because someone has said or done something,” (Birkenstein and Graff 3) It is extremely important as a writer to take in every piece of information there is to understand why we argue. We don’t rally to stand there unsure why we’re there and how we got there. We rally for our rights, our beliefs, and morals. The same thing goes for writing and that’s why it’s so important to understand the argument you’re trying to make or defend, or dismantle.  

Pick one topic and write a narrative that includes all of the 5 senses. Help the reader see, smell, taste, touch, and hear the scene you’re creating.

It was like a spark of light. The only thing you could see for a split second before everything became silent and pitch black. A spark of light, a blinding flash that divided you from your imagination and reality. That’s what it felt like on the worst night of my life. It didn’t start out so awful, things were actually peaceful. The air was dewy, it was so thick it felt as if you could swim in it, it forced your lungs to work a bit harder and coated your mouth with a layer of misty dew. It didn’t help that the air conditioner in our car did not work on this particular night. In my 1998 Ford Ranger with the paint chipping right above the left rear tire. Everything happened too fast and without even knowing it, my Ford Ranger was in shambles. I was feet away from it. My boyfriend nowhere in sight. My eyes opened to bright lights, rearing sirens, and the smell of burning rubber. I felt completely unaware of my surroundings other than the familiar sound of ambulances. An irony thick liquid filled my mouth and flooded my taste buds. There was grit in my teeth as if I had shoveled dirt down my throat. The pavement surrounding me is cold and dark. It is gritted with shattered glass that gets stuck between my fingers as I try to lift myself from the ground. The burning rubber smell quickly transformed to a strong burning smell. It wasn’t quite firewood, but it also didn’t smell like a vehicle was burning before my eyes. It was the weirdest smell I’d ever encountered. I ran my hand through my hair as I finally was able to sit up and take in my surroundings. It was awful. It was so awful that it made my throat close up and made me feel like I would suffocate. It happened so quickly and almost without a trace. It was unreal. Unfathomable.

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?

In my  many experiences involving english academic writing, drafting writing projects has taken many turns as I gather my technique in starting writing. The usual beginning to any writing project for me starts with an outline. I base my essay off of the clauses I want to analyze and the information I plan to present throughout the essay. Usually that includes taking quotes from credible sources, whether that be from text that I’m analyzing or from other sources through research. I often use my finished outline as I go and start forming cohesive paragraphs from the spread out ideas. Revision is a little bit different for me because I often struggle with being self-critical of my writing. It’s difficult to concentrate on picking out weak spots in my own writing. I often look to use peer editing strategies to pick out weaknesses in my writing that I would otherwise be unable to notice. It is important that revision has many steps for me, which means reading over my essay a  multitude of times and consistently asking for outside feedback. My process is very much going to and from the drawing board with the help of outside criticism. I think building my ability to criticize my own writing would make the process a lot easier on myself because I can eliminate a lot of the second guess and build confidence in telling myself no.

1. Imagine you could invite David Foster Wallace into the discussion in our classroom. What questions would you ask him about this essay?
2. Use that experience to think about larger issues, specifically, what are the limits of a written discussion? How might you anticipate your audience’s questions when you write?

David Foster Wallace explains the controversy between animal rights activists and your average everyday Maine foodie. If Wallace were able to attend a freshman English composition class, it is easy to assume that there would be an abundance of questions regarding the debate. To name a few, what is the purpose behind putting unpalatable descriptions of the upbringing, preparation, and consumption of the lobster, but still pushing the argument that the Maine Lobster Festival has potential? Or, why make your opinion unclear to the reader by pushing two opposing clauses? Between the sensory details of all the commotion that the Maine Lobster Festival brings, and the harrowing truth behind most, but not all, lobster right activists, Wallace makes the readers struggle with a side. Why ask questions that cloud the reader’s ability to form a solid opinion? As an example, Wallace writes, “Is the whole thing just a matter of personal choice?” (Wallace 503). Does Wallace believe that including gruesome details about Lobsters feeling adequate pain will drive his readers to live differently? Or does Wallace believe that it is at capitalism’s hand on who these crustaceans are treated, prepared, and eventually pushed to their demise? All in all, the debate between what crosses the line for the consumption of lobsters, and the success of a Maine tradition leaves readers questioning morals. For that, Wallace could expect many whys, whats, and whos, if asked to join a discussion about his essay.

The act of performing a written discussion can provide many obstacles and limitation for not only the participants but for the individuals developing cohesive thoughts. The obvious downside of written discussion is the act of spontaneous additions to thought. People as human beings live through patterns, it is especially natural to build off of thoughts to create new persuasive ways of thinking, speaking and learning. Written discussion leaves it up to the individual to ponder and explain the author’s message cohesively. From an author’s perspective, it seems extremely difficult to anticipate what questions will hurdle towards pieces of writing. A few ways to try to best get across the meaning behind one’s writing and why someone might mean that is to simply be as concise as possible without being blatantly obvious. Explaining an argument, but leaving room for opinions, guessing, and learning. Answering questions before they’re even asked by using a factual backdrop to provide the reader with information before an opinion or argument is shoved down their throat. Following facts with the purpose behind their placement by stating the argument and sticking by it. Although it is near impossible to answer every question that an author’s writing brings, it’s possible to make one thing clear, the purpose. The purpose is a very important thing that makes the reader comfortable, but pushing their intellectual boundaries by questioning deeper into the text rather than the whys and whats of the writing. The author can anticipate more if they’re able to answer the questions themselves before putting together a cohesive piece of writing.