Well, I worked with Crystal. I think we worked well together, we pretty much had the same ideas and it was pretty easy to come up with our poster. I like working in groups because we get to bounce ideas off one another, and it also helps me get more of an insight on what I read, especially because this article was a lot more difficult than the rest of them. As far as the essay goes, I prefer to do my own thing, but the group work in class helps me a great deal because I understand the text better and also it gets other peoples point of views out there so it helps me have an open mind.
Theoretical Framework:
This one pager stood out to me in particular because of the question they asked. "Does Stein portray the ad as a movement towards a revolution or does it go back to the idea of consumers being subject to brainwashing?" That question alone made me think, that was a really good question. Because she says the ad was going for "liberation" and to get people out of brainwashing. However, the fact that they questioned that the ad might be a new form of brainwash but they are trying to tell people it breaks that. So weird, because in a sense, people wanted this liberation and that ultimately got their attention, another brainwash, different company? I think their ad was really well done.
The Rhetorical History of the Mac:
What stood out to me on this one was the pictures. After I got past the pictures I noticed their question. They asked if this helped their revolution. I think it did, because it got the attention of everyone. The ad was the talk of the year and even longer. They also put on their one pager how this ad changed the face of advertisements. Which is true. I like how they portrayed the Macintosh company in their page by putting the two men in one small building because they were such a small company to start with.
CP: Stein referenced the 1984 Macintosh ad to the Wizard of Oz which helped me understand what she was trying to say.
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Assignment 10
Questions I still have about this article:
How does Stein feel about the ad?
Why did she choose to write about it?
What are key things in the essay that point out Steins feelings about it?
For some reason I'm having a difficult time seeing her emotions or seeing how she views the topic.
Steins article started by explaining the Macintosh 1984 ad in depth. She pointed out every detail of the ad and described it fully. As she goes more into depth she starts explaining what each part of the ad means or what represents these key things. She directly related the ad to the Wizard of Oz which was really interesting, she explained how the woman is the one liberating everyone, she described the hammer being thrown and linked that to the dog uncovering the "wizard", and also she related the revolution of the Mac to when Dorothy says "I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore". I think that the fact that she used the Wizard of Oz in her comparison was extremely beneficial to the article, because not all of us are scholars or professors and even if we were, most people have seen this movie and know what it's about, so relating things back to that helps us have a better understanding of the ad. Or we at least have a better understanding of her interpretation of the ad.
#4 is really difficult for me because I honestly still don't know what Stein wants her readers to feel. I think like we talked about, Stein just wanted to inform everyone, hence the academic article. The main reason she probably wrote about this was because as she mentioned, people have talked about it but no one really analyzed it.
How does Stein feel about the ad?
Why did she choose to write about it?
What are key things in the essay that point out Steins feelings about it?
For some reason I'm having a difficult time seeing her emotions or seeing how she views the topic.
Steins article started by explaining the Macintosh 1984 ad in depth. She pointed out every detail of the ad and described it fully. As she goes more into depth she starts explaining what each part of the ad means or what represents these key things. She directly related the ad to the Wizard of Oz which was really interesting, she explained how the woman is the one liberating everyone, she described the hammer being thrown and linked that to the dog uncovering the "wizard", and also she related the revolution of the Mac to when Dorothy says "I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore". I think that the fact that she used the Wizard of Oz in her comparison was extremely beneficial to the article, because not all of us are scholars or professors and even if we were, most people have seen this movie and know what it's about, so relating things back to that helps us have a better understanding of the ad. Or we at least have a better understanding of her interpretation of the ad.
#4 is really difficult for me because I honestly still don't know what Stein wants her readers to feel. I think like we talked about, Stein just wanted to inform everyone, hence the academic article. The main reason she probably wrote about this was because as she mentioned, people have talked about it but no one really analyzed it.
Thursday, March 21, 2013
Assignment 9
My essay on "Standing By" wasn't very personal at all. I don't think I personally thought about who my audience would be besides the people grading my final portfolio. I'm hoping after I reread it another time I can think of a good way to rewrite the essay. At first I didn't think it was so bad, but after we were clear on the assignment I realized just how bad it was. I didn't make it personal, I didn't bring the readers in, etc. Maybe after I rewrite my essay for "Standing By" I will be able to make the connection with my readers a little better.
Although my essay for "Standing By" wasn't personal, my second essay was a little bit better. I wrote it like I was writing a letter to Susan Orlean. I included why her article wasn't effective for me and what things I would have liked to see in her article. I also am working on picking out a couple things she did well while writing. I think because I wrote it like a letter it was a lot easier for me to make it personal. I didn't feel guilty about using "I" or "you" like I would in a more formal type of essay.
I don't think I am going to rewrite my essay for "Lifelike", because I actually really like how it is now. However, I'm hoping that I can think of a creative way to write my essay for "Standing By" so it sounds more like an interpretive essay as apposed to being so formal and just summarizing the story basically. My essay as of right now is one of the essays that would put the portfolio readers to sleep, and I want mine to truly stand out.
Although my essay for "Standing By" wasn't personal, my second essay was a little bit better. I wrote it like I was writing a letter to Susan Orlean. I included why her article wasn't effective for me and what things I would have liked to see in her article. I also am working on picking out a couple things she did well while writing. I think because I wrote it like a letter it was a lot easier for me to make it personal. I didn't feel guilty about using "I" or "you" like I would in a more formal type of essay.
I don't think I am going to rewrite my essay for "Lifelike", because I actually really like how it is now. However, I'm hoping that I can think of a creative way to write my essay for "Standing By" so it sounds more like an interpretive essay as apposed to being so formal and just summarizing the story basically. My essay as of right now is one of the essays that would put the portfolio readers to sleep, and I want mine to truly stand out.
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Assignment 8
The main thing I noticed in my classmates' writing was how they viewed the article. I may have been too wrapped up in my own ideas of taxidermy to be open minded about Susan Orleans purpose. I don't like the images that were put in my head while reading, I love animals and it was shocking to me how weirdly obsessed these people were with stuffing dead animals.. After talking to my classmates and reading what they had to say about it, I realized maybe I was a little to caught up in the negative parts. Now I can see a little more of the things they are saying, but I still have my personal opinions on the side. I'm glad this is an interpretive essay so I won't have to hold back my true feelings, but for now I will put them off to the side. One thing I noticed about my writing was that I was trying to explain Orleans purpose the whole time while we are supposed to be giving our own personal interpretation of it. I had some of my own feelings in there but they were lost while trying to explain what Orlean wanted her readers to feel. Now I realize that for me, the choices Orlean used in her writing, did not work for me at all.
As far as my essay goes, I think this essay will be a little bit better than my last. I have more personal emotion attached with this topic than I did with "Standing By". "Lifelike" evoked more emotion out of me and made me feel disgusted yet really angry at the same time. I believe my overall tone is very negative. I don't understand why someone would take up taxidermy as a hobby or profession, as I told my classmates, Taxidermy reminds me of something a serial killer would do in his spare time, it's twisted and extremely weird that someone would want to kill something, yet rebuild it to look as if it was alive and never died in the first place. It's too weird for me to wrap my head around this but I have at least tried for discussion purposes. I think the main thing that makes my essay stand out is my purpose, a lot of my classmates were focusing more on Orleans purpose of trying to persuade everyone to love taxidermy that they forgot how they felt the first time reading it. For me, I can't forget that feeling and I believe that is what really will set my essay apart from my classmates.
As far as my essay goes, I think this essay will be a little bit better than my last. I have more personal emotion attached with this topic than I did with "Standing By". "Lifelike" evoked more emotion out of me and made me feel disgusted yet really angry at the same time. I believe my overall tone is very negative. I don't understand why someone would take up taxidermy as a hobby or profession, as I told my classmates, Taxidermy reminds me of something a serial killer would do in his spare time, it's twisted and extremely weird that someone would want to kill something, yet rebuild it to look as if it was alive and never died in the first place. It's too weird for me to wrap my head around this but I have at least tried for discussion purposes. I think the main thing that makes my essay stand out is my purpose, a lot of my classmates were focusing more on Orleans purpose of trying to persuade everyone to love taxidermy that they forgot how they felt the first time reading it. For me, I can't forget that feeling and I believe that is what really will set my essay apart from my classmates.
Sunday, March 3, 2013
Assignment 7
Why does Orlean present her information in such a formal way?
Would it be more effective in more of an informal article?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
After reading "Standing By" by David Sedaris, this story seemed to bore most of us as a class. Is this because we didn't really understand the topic, or is it because of the formal way it was presented to us?
I think we are so used to reading these boring, formal writings that we see it as very plain. The fact that they are boring and there isn't much to differentiate them, we lose the purpose of the story itself. I know the first time reading, I zoned out and had to re read often. As did a few of my classmates. I think if Orlean would have presented her information in a different way, she may have been more successful in persuading her readers to reconsider their opinions on taxidermy. Orlean may have presented in this way because it's what she's used to or maybe that's how the newspaper wanted it to be. But maybe if she did something that was a little more risky and different, more people would have been on her side at the end.
If Orlean would have been a little more informal, played with her words a little more and cut out unnecessary things. The story would have been more effective for me. The story dragged on and seemed as though it would never end because she put so many things in it. I zoned out multiple times and didn't understand what I just read because it bored me. However, I think that if she made it shorter and more to the point, she might have actually gotten my attention. Needless to say, I think that if the article was more informal, her overall purpose would have been more effective.
What do you think??
Would it be more effective in more of an informal article?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
After reading "Standing By" by David Sedaris, this story seemed to bore most of us as a class. Is this because we didn't really understand the topic, or is it because of the formal way it was presented to us?
I think we are so used to reading these boring, formal writings that we see it as very plain. The fact that they are boring and there isn't much to differentiate them, we lose the purpose of the story itself. I know the first time reading, I zoned out and had to re read often. As did a few of my classmates. I think if Orlean would have presented her information in a different way, she may have been more successful in persuading her readers to reconsider their opinions on taxidermy. Orlean may have presented in this way because it's what she's used to or maybe that's how the newspaper wanted it to be. But maybe if she did something that was a little more risky and different, more people would have been on her side at the end.
If Orlean would have been a little more informal, played with her words a little more and cut out unnecessary things. The story would have been more effective for me. The story dragged on and seemed as though it would never end because she put so many things in it. I zoned out multiple times and didn't understand what I just read because it bored me. However, I think that if she made it shorter and more to the point, she might have actually gotten my attention. Needless to say, I think that if the article was more informal, her overall purpose would have been more effective.
What do you think??
Assignment 6: Choices
CHOICES
As an author, Orlean used many writerly choices to get her purpose across to her readers. Were they all effective? We will leave that up to the individual to decide...
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-aMkLOa5nCZo/UJKmoetv4TI/AAAAAA
AAEJc/zQizDghKmpY/s1600/choices-sign.jpg)
1. Orlean used many quotes in her story. Effective or no?
-Not so much. There were too many quotes in the article and most of which undermined what
she said right before it. The quotes contradicted what she said and therefore made the article
less effective. The last reason the quotes didn't work out is because a lot of them were so perfect that it left a lot of us thinking, "Did she make this up?".
2. Orlean really put herself in the life of a taxidermist? Did this work for her?
-I think so. She did the perfect amount of research to make her readers feel as though she was a
trustworthy source to take information from. She built her ethos up by doing so.
3. Orlean presented her information in a long article. Effective or no?
-Not for me. The article seemed to drag on. She could have shortened it a bit to make it shorter
and to the point. Most of my classmates thought the same thing as I did. Booooring! Orlean
could have done a better job at making the article more interesting. Instead it was just another
boring informational article about something most of us don't care about.
Assignment 6
The first time I read "Life Like" by Susan Orlean, I didn't see a purpose to the article at all. In fact I thought it was purely informational and she didn't even seem to have a purpose. But after chatting with the class, I soon realized that there actually was a purpose. I was not entertained while reading this article, in fact I found it extremely boring, as did a lot of my classmates. However, after our discussion in class I realized Orlean actually had a purpose and I got a little more interested.
We discussed that Orlean didn't know anything about taxidermy when she first started. We were introduced to her story and she was showing us right away how overwhelmed she was. However throughout the story, she started to realize how hard these people work and what taxidermy really takes. I believe that Orlean built up her ethos by showing the readers that it was all new to her. It allowed us to experience these things for the first time with her, but in the article she kind of destroyed her own ethos at the same time by saying something positive about taxidermy and then throwing in a descriptive quote making us as readers think otherwise. Some of her descriptions were so precise that it makes you actually picture it like you were there yourself. It becomes real to the reader, this was not effective for me at all. When I read the article I was completely grossed out, I thought taxidermy was kind of cool before I read it but after I was left completely disturbed. For me this article wasn't effective at all if she was trying to get people to appreciate taxidermy.
I'm thinking the reason this was put in a newspaper is because that would be her largest audience. Through the newspaper, Orlean would be able to reach out to more readers. The reason she wanted a large audience is because it's the perfect mix of people reading. You have your average joe's, maybe extreme hunters or even elderly people. There is an unending variety of people that she was able to reach through newspaper.
We discussed that Orlean didn't know anything about taxidermy when she first started. We were introduced to her story and she was showing us right away how overwhelmed she was. However throughout the story, she started to realize how hard these people work and what taxidermy really takes. I believe that Orlean built up her ethos by showing the readers that it was all new to her. It allowed us to experience these things for the first time with her, but in the article she kind of destroyed her own ethos at the same time by saying something positive about taxidermy and then throwing in a descriptive quote making us as readers think otherwise. Some of her descriptions were so precise that it makes you actually picture it like you were there yourself. It becomes real to the reader, this was not effective for me at all. When I read the article I was completely grossed out, I thought taxidermy was kind of cool before I read it but after I was left completely disturbed. For me this article wasn't effective at all if she was trying to get people to appreciate taxidermy.
I'm thinking the reason this was put in a newspaper is because that would be her largest audience. Through the newspaper, Orlean would be able to reach out to more readers. The reason she wanted a large audience is because it's the perfect mix of people reading. You have your average joe's, maybe extreme hunters or even elderly people. There is an unending variety of people that she was able to reach through newspaper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)