I feel like I’ve focused more on integrating my voice in this English class than I ever have. I think it’s because we’re given heavy source material, so you need to have some balance between the source and your own voice. I’ve specifically put my voice in direct conversation with the sources, to have the reader understand my point of view, and what I’m arguing. I think adding your own perspective is very helpful and something I’ve definitely focused on this semester.
Month: November 2022
In a country so divided, is unity even possible? In, “Eating Jack Hooker’s Cow” an essay by Portland-based writer Michael Paterniti, informs us what it means to be an American while showing us insights into characters, Jack & Bout and how their individual lives are so different, yet so similar. They both have to jump over obstacles, but some are much higher than others. In another piece, “Small Kinsndesses,” a poem by American poet Danusha Lameris touches on how were losing parts of each other now, and in order to retain connections, we need to show kindness. Despite not everyone has the same path to success, it’s about the connections you make along the way, the small acts of kindness, and the obstacles you face that will ultimately shape you, and help with the divisions in American society.
Describe your essay’s most notable strength, using at least one direct quote from your work to support your choice.
I think my most notable strength is bringing in my personal opinions. Not just using the sources, but adding my perspective to the situation. Interacting my voice with the sources, and not letting my own voice gets lost. “I disagree completely, these lives matter, these children have families, and they have loved ones, who will need people to empathize with them. In today’s world, we are so connected that you can find these names on the internet, so it’s not just a statistical abstraction” This is me interacting with the source and bringing in my own thoughts which I think is my most notable strength in this essay.
Revisit your 1st Essay and then read your 2nd. How has your revision process improved? Call attention to one place in your 2nd essay where revision helped significantly.
In my 2nd essay, using the Barclay paragraph and a Naysayer was something that I focused on with revision. Not only making sure I had them, but making sure it was polished like we talked about in class. “Bloom’s understanding is that empathy is particularly insensitive to consequences that apply statistically rather than to specific individuals. While I agree that there’s a right and wrong time to empathize with someone, like if someone passes, sometimes giving space before showing empathy would be preferred. Instead of smothering the ones who were hurt with love, you may wait until the right moment.” This is the first half of my naysayer paragraph, instead of just stating the other side, I went into detail on why I can see where they may be coming from. This was something I focused on in revision, especially in the second essay.
Briefly analyze your integration of source material. What techniques did you use to synthesize source materials within your 2nd essay?
I integrated sources well, I would use transitions to help the sources fall into place. I feel like I had a nice introduction to the source before I used it, by saying, “as Wallace puts it” and others. This was to help the flow of the essay, and to not just throw the source in, but have something that helps readers understand where the material came from.
How has your voice been integrated as part of your academic writing so far this semester? Find your strongest use of voice in Essay #2, paste it into your post, then speak briefly about its strengths.
I already mentioned this as my biggest strength, but it was my voice integration I believe. Like when I mention the source but then say my own thoughts regarding it so the reader doesn’t lose sight of what I believe. “I disagree completely, these lives matter, these children have families, and they have loved ones, who will need people to empathize with them. In today’s world, we are so connected that you can find these names on the internet, so it’s not just a statistical abstraction” I tried in this essay to be stronger with my points, be more persuasive, in a way of saying that I’m right in this situation. I use counterarguments as well, but I try to stay on point in what I’m arguing.
Paste then analyze your thesis statements from the first and second essay. How do they compare? Note similarities/differences. Which is stronger, and why?
First: I believe we must monitor our use or else we will lose social skills, lose valuable in-person friendships while showing the next generation that this is essential to our daily lives and that we can’t live without it.
Second: Incorporating (Wallace’s) awareness will help us understand each other as individuals and take a deeper look into what others may be going through.
I feel like I’m more specific in the second one, and it’s easier to elaborate on. I can talk about Wallace’s awareness, as well as outlooks on other individuals, and then a deeper look into what they actually might be going through. I think it’s more to the point and overall a stronger thesis.
Close third person is when Parterniti sticks closely to one character but remains in the third person. There’s lots of character interaction so this point of view helps the reader understand who the author is talking about. Although, it does make the piece have less flow and it’s more choppy in my opinion. When the author refers to Jack by his full name Jack Hooker over and over again, this shows there audience that he has his own way of thinking about things, has strong beliefs, and the close third person shows us his inner thoughts and motivations. “America is a cow. It might sound funny if you’re not from Jack Hooker’s world.” By putting it in third person it helps you enter his world, however different his world may be. Also, how he speaks as Jack, and Bout as if he is them.
The essay is about two competing motel owners, Jack Hooker and Donna Sinhpraseut. Although they don’t know each other, Jack makes certain judgments and is resentful while Donna is shown through the unimaginable obstacles that led her to where she is, that Jack Hooker wouldn’t know. The overarching theme could be that there’s a lot more behind someone, and there’s a lot people don’t know that’s on the inside.
Since he switches perspectives of being Donna, being Jack, and being the reader, to show us that there are different ways to look at a situation like this one. It makes you think about what you would do in this scenario. Like how we judge people who are racially different from us without thinking about where and what they may have come from. “broken Sylvania bulbs and Budweiser beer bottles smashed from the second-floor balcony last night by some wasted Mexicans, the jagged glass reflecting on the pool bottom.” The part where it says some wasted Mexicans begins to show us racial judgement, and how this will be something that comes up again.
It makes you think about what it really means. To me, an American is someone with the freedom, to choose where they want to live, where they want to work, who they’d like to marry, etc. Jack and Bout both bring up different ideas of what it means to be American. “An American looks like Bout Sinhpraseut. Donna. A small woman with small hands and a mouth full of magnificently white teeth.” This is the physical idea of what it means to be an American, but they also go into detail on what it’ll do if you put a sign saying American Owned on the window of your motel. It’s a deep topic that has many people looking at it differently on what exactly it means to be an American.
The theme of not necessarily knowing what is going on inside of someone, and not thinking about where they may have come from, if they’re having a bad day, directly relates to David Foster Wallace and how he said, “that some of these people probably have harder, more tedious and painful lives than I do” and the importance of noticing this. This relates to “Eating Jack Hooker’s Cow” because Jack didn’t know about the obstacles Donna brought her family through and the backstory behind them.
Acts of kindness go a long way, and connections can be made even through small gestures. In Maria Konnikova’s piece, “The limits of Friendship,” she mentions the Dunbar number and how we can only connect with a certain amount of people. The Dunbar number shows the limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships. Although we see in Lameris’ poem on Small Kindnesses that it’s frankly easy to make connections with one another even if it’s a small gesture, like saying bless you or pulling your legs in a crowded aisle. Konnikova’s piece on friendship directly relates to Lameris’ poem and so does David Foster Wallace’s speech. Wallace mentions the default setting of how we have an impulse to be the center of attention all the time. In this case, Lameris’ poem describes how we have an impulse to do these small acts of kindness, and not selfishly think, like in Wallace’s perception of the default setting where generally all you are thinking about is yourself. Wallace and Konnikova both relate to Lameris’ poem, as the poem inadvertently argues against both the default setting and the Dunbar number. That we can make simple connections through a reflex or an act of kindness, and that we aren’t necessarily the center of attention, and on lots of occasions, we’re looking out for others, rather than ourselves.
A) This is Water by David Foster Wallace is about simple awareness. His commencement speech talks about the things the students should know about the real world. His main three arguments were as follows, students haven’t experienced what day in and day out really are. “But (experiencing day in, day out) hasn’t yet been part of you graduates’ actual life routine, day after week after month after year.” Another point he made was that the exact same experience can mean two totally different things to two different people. “Given those people’s two different belief templates and two different ways of constructing meaning from experience.” His third point was that you have to look at the bigger picture and that the people around you may have harder, more tedious, and painful lives than you do, and being aware of that was his main argument of his.
I agree with Wallace when he brought up that it’s really important to consider other people, and what may be going on in their lives. Not to look at it as if you are the center of attention, and if you are in a bad mood, to not act like everyone else is just in your way. I completely agreed with that. Like what if the other person is having an even worse day? A lot of things should be taken into consideration, and people should be more aware of that even when they’re doing something as simple as grocery shopping Wallace explained.
B) In my DFW Reading Response, I relied quite heavily on pointing terms, such as “that” and simple pronouns like “his.” You don’t notice this until you look specifically for that word, and I didn’t realize how much I used these two pointing terms, there’s definitely a pattern for me in some of my other pieces of writing too.
C) Wallace brought up how important it is to consider other people, and what may be going on in an individual’s life. I agree when Wallace says, to not look at it as if you are the center of attention, and if you are in a bad mood, to not act like everyone else is just in your way. It’s important to consider what if the other person is having an even worse day? A lot of things should be taken into consideration, and people should be more aware of others even when they’re doing something as simple as grocery shopping.
I’d say yes, it is easier to read now after revising it with help from the book, They Say / I Say.
