Monday, February 25, 2013

Assignment 5

     "Lifelike" by Susan Orlean, is all about taxidermists and the animals they create. My first thought while reading this was how gross this job is. I don't really understand how someone could kill and skin animals only to make them look real again. It's ironic that the animal has to die before these people can make them look realistic or like they are alive. On page two of the paper, Orlean states "most people were still discomfited by it. How could you not be? It was a business of dealing with dead things, coupled with the questionable enterprise of making dead things look like live things." I would be one of the people she is talking about. It's weird to me that people do this for a living and in a way it's very creepy
     I think she wrote this article to show people how much of an art this job it. How passionate people become with it and how much work and detail go into the final project. Most people have seen the mannequins taxidermists create, but most people don't understand how much work these people put in to the finished project and how much time it takes to perfect it. I don't think that Orlean wrote this to make people like taxidermists or to become one but I think she wrote it to open peoples eyes to different things. I think she wanted people to see just how competitive it can be. People know that sports are competitive and art is competitive as well as most normal jobs these days. But a lot of us don't realize how many people do this, how much work it takes, and just how competitive the job is. 
     For me, the article left me disgusted almost. I didn't like the article at all but that might also be because I love animals. Taxidermists in general didn't really bother me but when I read this article, I kind of had an angry feeling toward them. To me the job is really disgusting and extremely creepy, it reminds me of the way a serial killer would act without anyone else knowing about it. I guess it's weird to me because taxidermy isn't really something I see a normal person doing for a living. I didn't really get the purpose of the article the only thing I can think of is an informative article.

What do you think the purpose of the article is?
Does anyone else think that Taxidermy is disgusting? 

Controlling Purpose

My controlling purpose:

I think that the humor Sedaris used while making fun of people made him seem less harsh. This made it easier for me to read because I wasn't so taken back on how cruel he was being.

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Reflecting on Revision.

     I had the opportunity to read Paige Hoppmann's essay. One thing that stood out to me instantly was we had a lot of the same opinions on the story. We both noticed that Sedaris uses a lot of humor and came to the conclusion that he incorporates the humor to try and cover up his judgement. One thing I liked about Paige's essay was, she used humor while writing it too. It didn't sound like a boring paper you have to read, it was also entertaining and I wanted to continue reading her thoughts on the story. Even though we both saw the story almost the same, there were some things I really liked that she made obvious. "Sedaris actually seems to be mocking us as readers in a sense; because while reading his story our first instinct is to be surprised at him for judging others so harshly." She then points out that everyone judges people, it's unavoidable. This is why Sedaris is mocking us, because it makes us as readers realize, we do it too.
     I incorporated the same things into my essay but I feel like Paige got the point across a lot easier and a lot more clear than I managed to. It's easy to understand the things she is pointing out in her essay and even relates it back to real life. I think it was funny how we both realized Sedaris' purpose the most in the final paragraph when Sedaris proposes his famous question, "We're forever blaming the airline industry for turning us into monsters: it's the fault of the ticket agents, the baggage handlers, the slowpokes at the newsstands and the fast-food restaurants. But what if this is who we truly are, and the airport's just a forum that allows us to be our real selves, not just hateful but gloriously so?" (Sedaris, 277). Paige and I both stated in our papers that we really understood what his purpose was after reading this part of the story.
     I think the only thing I would want to change in my essay is to try and make it clearer. I think when I look back, I didn't make as much sense as I wanted to. In a previous blog post I said, when it comes to formal writing, I know what I'm trying to say, but others don't. That is what gets me every time. So when I revise my draft, I will keep this in mind. Last but not least, I want to make my essay more entertaining. Reading over it, it's kind of boring. I want my reader to be interested in what I have to say but at the same time completely understand it. They don't have to agree, but just understand.

My Weekend



Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Assignment 4

     "Standing By", by David Sedaris, takes place in an airport. I think he placed the story in the airport because there is such a variety of people traveling, there are people from all over the world. Sedaris's target audience are people who have traveled by plane before because they understand the environment. People who haven't been in an airport before may read this and still think it's funny but they can't actually place themselves into the story and become the character, it's not as realistic.
      During the time this story took place, Obama just became president. Sedaris makes this known by putting it into the story. He talks about the two men who are complaining about Obama and how terrible of a president he is, when he was just getting into office. I think Sedaris included this to show just how much people are stuck in their own heads. Sedaris mentioned these things to get people thinking. Like I said in my previous blog post, I think Sedaris wrote this as a challenge to his readers to try and change the way they act and how self centered people are.

    Sedaris is trying to prove a point to his readers. He's trying to change the way we think and act. Maybe he's trying to better the world by showing how shallow humans are. I think Sedaris wants the readers to be puzzled by this and question themselves on how they behave on a day to day basis as opposed to when they’re in an airport. There really isn’t much of a difference if you really think about it. Yes in the airport the way people act is more obvious because you’re forced to think about it more than on a typical day. But the more I thought about it, the more it made sense. It’s human nature to be judgmental and to complain about things. Everyone does these things daily, they just become more apparent when you’re stuck in a situation such as being in the airport.
     I think that this was published in a magazine because the audience is the most abundant. Most likely the article was in a travel magazine because that would be Sedaris's target audience. It also just puts his story out there. Anyone can have access to it and people would be more willing to read it if they picked out the magazine anyways. I don't think the message would have been as clear if it was published anywhere else.

Assignment 2

       I expect to become a better formal writer when I leave this class. I hope that I will learn how to follow the structures better and be able to understand how to write formal essays. I prefer writing freely, such as short stories or something creative. Structural writing is boring to me especially when it's about something I'm not interested in. Research papers are my weakness. I know what I'm saying when I read my paper, but other people do not. It's a bunch of gibberish and when there is a set amount of pages I tend to just ramble on and repeat myself just to get to the expected amount. I hope I will learn tricks and tips on how to become a successful writer.
       I've heard a lot of bad things about this course actually. Most of the people I've talked with failed because of portfolio. I think it's unfair that the professor doesn't grade them and some random people do. The reason I'm critical of this is because, they don't get to see the progress the student has made throughout the year and they don't know what goes on during class. It just doesn't exactly seem fair that random people are criticizing your personal work and deciding if you pass or fail just from that.
        One thing that stood out to me in the yellow book was on page 8, someone said in high school they didn't write papers that included their opinion. I completely agree with that. I was told never to use the words "I", "you", "we", etc. in any paper! Now, in college, we can? It's hard to write this way now because I have to train myself to forget what all of my other teachers said in the past. But, I'm hoping this will make me a better writer so I can be successful in my career.

Assignment 4: Choices

Writerly Choices
 

A writely choice is something the author puts in the story to make the readers feel a certain way.
 
 
           In "Standing By" by David Sedaris, there are a lot of writerly choices for the readers to come across. I think most of these choices are trying to provoke a certain emotion from the readers. For example, Sedaris uses a lot of humor in his story in many different ways. One of the ways that stands out the most to me was when he was making fun of the kid in front of him, Sedaris could have just summed up the kid by saying he was a poorly dressed teenager with a baby. Instead he decided to go more into detail and explain why he was making fun of the kid by saying, "Then, too, Stevie Wonder didn't have acne on his neck, and wear baggy denim shorts that fell midway between his knees and his ankles. Topping it off was the kid's T-shit. I couldn't see the front of it, but printed in large letters across the back were the words "Freaky Mothafocka"...." (276). By going off on such a rant, Sedaris adds a lot of humor to the text and makes it feel more realistic to the reader. I think if he didn't incorporate humor, the whole story could have been offensive to the reader.
         Sedaris had a lot of controversial statements in the story. He referenced Hitler, made fun of the people he saw and even told the readers his political views. These choices relate directly to his humor. He used the humor to cover up all of these topics. He wanted these topics to be known and heard, but he didn't want to lose readers because of it. I think he used the humor to keep the readers attention and cover up the offensive things he talked about. "I imagined a man picking up the receiver, his voice made soft by surprise and the possibility of bad news. "Yes, hello, this is Adolf Hitler." Thinking of it made me laugh, and that brought me back to the present,and the fellow behind me in the khaki shorts. "Isn't it amazing how quickly one man can completely screw up a country," he was saying. "You got that right," Mr. Mustache agreed." (277). Sedaris could have just called the man Adolf Hitler and left it at that but he used humor in such a way that it wasn't as offensive to the reader but it still managed to get his point across. The choices Sedaris mad in the story were carefully chosen and each played an important role in the story. Most of these choices were particular situations or words he used to make the reader feel the emotions Sedaris wants them to.
         I think the reason Sedaris went into such detail about all of the situations he found himself in was to put the reader in his spot. This is an extremely important choice he made because this allowed Sedaris to have the power to persuade the readers into feeling the emotions he was throwing out. "Hell, I should have punched her is what I should have done!" (276). Instead of just stating that he was listening to an old man ramble about how angry he was with the flight attendant, Sedaris quoted what the man was actually saying. If Sedaris didn't do this, the story would be very dry and the point would be lost. This is not the only time Sedaris used this choice, he actually used it all through the story, beginning, middle and end. Every time he introduced a new person to the readers, he went into detail describing them and showing their personality through the things they say. I think if Sedaris didn't tell us these things, the whole point of the story would be lost.

         To me, the purpose of the whole story was to challenge people. I honestly think Sedaris wants people to realize how they act, whether it's good or bad. A lot of the things Sedaris does in the story relate directly to human nature. Throughout the whole story, Sedaris is judging people and whining. Everyone does these things. We all judge people even if we aren't trying to and we all complain about something every now and then. It's just how people work, human nature, something we can't control. Everything he puts in the story is there for a reason, so people think about how they would react in the particular situation. "We're forever blaming the airline industry for turning us into monsters: it's the fault of the ticket agents, the baggage handlers, the slowpoke at the newsstands and the fast-food restaurants. But what if this is who we truly are, and the airport's just a forum that allows us to be our real selves, not just hateful but gloriously so?" (277). This is at the end of the story, right before Sedaris wraps it up. I think it's placed at the end so it sticks in our heads. That is his challenge to everyone, it makes one question the way they think and act. It makes you wonder, "Am I really this person or is it from the situation I'm in?". I think that the challenge is extremely twisted and is really weird to think about but I think that small little part of the story, was the whole purpose.