Journal
My definition of good writing is writing that entices
the reader to want to keep reading the text. I can distinguish good writing
from bad writing if it doesn’t entice me to read more. I can also tell if it’s
good or bad by the use of words and grammar. Another difference between good
and bad writing is writing that puts focus or a lack thereof on the audience,
because I feel like a lack of focus on writing for the audience isn’t exactly
writing but merely typing.
Reflection
This journal was from the very beginning of the
semester. I chose this particular piece because I found it to be a pretty poor
journal in my honest opinion and was surprised to see that I had such a dense view
on what I feel good and bad writing is. However, I still feel my original
version of this piece was accurate just a little to simplistic. This piece
showed me that I have expanded my view on writing in a big way and it showed me
how much more deep of a thinker I became about writing in general.
Journal
This piece of writing from Adulous Huxley’s “Doors
of perception” moves me because it takes me back to about nine months when I
feel I was opening my doors to different perceptions on life to help me to
connect with myself spiritually and overcome anxiety and esteem issues that I
let control me. This writing also is an influence on one of my biggest
influences, Terence McKenna, who stated he was heavily influenced by the book.
Both Huxley and McKenna are two influential writers that I have spoken of
multiple times through my writing over the course of the semester.
Reflection
This Journal was also a journal written early on in
the semester. I picked this piece mainly due to the fact that I have
incorporated and referenced work from both of the writers that I speak of
within this journal, and I also think this was one of the more interesting
journal that we had written in the class this semester. I think the idea of
this journal was to have the students think hard about a good piece of writing
that influences them so they can kind of be reminded about what form or style
of writing they enjoy.
Journal
I use to keep a “dream Journal a couple years ago.
The purpose of the journal was to write down my dream immediately after waking
up from one, since you forget most of you dream soon after waking.
Self-reflection to me means doffing into your subconscious and finding your
inner-voice. I do buy into the benefits of reflection because it will help you
overall writing style and will feed into an authentic voice with good rhetoric
style. Reflection I feel can also show an individual of his/her areas of growth
that have been improved over a period of time as well as highlight areas that
could still use improvement. This could allow the individual to have knowledge
on what they can do to improve even further until further reflection is looked
into.
Reflection
I chose this journal article because it talks about
the importance and benefits of reflection, and reflection is a big part of what
this portfolio is all about, so I felt this journal was perfect for the
portfolio. That being said, looking at this Journal as a whole, I feel I had a
very accurate explanation of what reflection is and what reflection can do to
help someone improve on something, whether it’s writing or life in general. I
think I was speaking of reflection in terms of life when talking about the
dream journal I speak of ha! Anyway, through creating this portfolio and doing
this reflective writing, I found that my views of reflection in this journal
came true for me from the work we did this semester.
Response
to Hall-Morrow/moodle
These articles of course are very different from
one another, but in a way touch on the same idea and purpose. Both articles
dive into the idea that what makes good writing is the individual at hand.
Morrow discusses several bad habits and the article plays out to a conclusion
of what good writing means. The Hall article discusses an evolution in
discourse which talks about how clarity as a literary term has changed and
sprouted off new meaning over the course of thousands of years, which Hall
brings about by referencing the works of Scholars from ancient Greece; such as
aristotle, to more modern writers like George Orwell and Ernest Hemmingway. I
wanna say that the purpose of the Morrow article was to express how
institutions such as academia are to hung up on the tradition of what they feel
literature should be and kind of dismiss a new age of literature that presents
original thought and imagination, which academia feels is incorrect as they
want you to write literature their way not your way. The Hall article I feel
touches on the same value by discussing the tradition vs the modern age of
clarity of writing. All in All i feel you can merge the ideas behind both
articles and get a good sense of the point the two articles were getting across
to its readers. That point being is that good writing cannot be taught as
creativity cannot be taught. Therefore, good writing is not based on set rules
and limitations nor that traditional values are above new age values when it
comes to what good writing is and what being a good writer is all about.
Reflection
This was a moodle post where we discussed the
Hall-Morrow articles. In this post we were to once again discuss what we feel
makes good writing. In this post I am reminded that my thoughts on what makes
good writing has changed a lot over the semester. In this post I once again say
that what makes good writing is “the individual at hand” , while I still hold
that aspect of good writing to be true, I changed the view that good writing is
strictly at the hands of the individual but rather a combination of other
things such as a strong focus on writing for the audience.
Fox news response/moodle
Eric Bolling was hosting the fox news segment "Follow the money." The segment included geuest host Dan Gainor from the media research center aswell as co-host of "The Five" Andrea Tantaros. The segment from fox news were applying ethos, pathos, and logos to send the message that the liberal agenda was brainwashing American Youths into thinking the corporations were an evil entity. The basis for the argument was the message fox news feel they saw within the Jason Segal written muppet movie. The movie depicted the character of Tex Richman as an evil oil tycoon who wanted tear down the muppets studio inorder to drill for oil. This raised the idea for fox news to ask whether the liberal media was brainwashing kids against capitalism.
While Eric Bolling, Dan Gainor, and Andrea Tantaros were arguing that yes, in fact, the liberal agenda is brainwashing children through the use of media, fox news brought on a politics professor from Occidental college by the name of Dr. Caroline Heldman to serve as the counter argument to Eric Bolling, Dan Gainor, and Andrea Tantaros. the segment started with Eric Bolling bringing on Dan Gainor from the media research center, that title sounds like it gives Dan Gainor credibility to argue such an issue. Eric bolling continued the Dan Gainor discussion by asking him if he believes the liberal media is brainwashing children against capitalism. Dan Gainor proceeds with saying “Absolutely and they have been doing it for decades. Hollywood, the left, the media, they hate the oil industry. They hate corporate America.” Followed by Dan saying this, Dan cites other Hollywood movies that used a similar strategy by liberal Hollywood to brainwash its audience. These moviews included other children movies such as Cars 2, Captain planet, and the Nickelodeon produced movie the Big Green Help. Other movies mentioned was the non children movie Syriana. Dan Gainor establishes ehtos with his opening statement and then proceeds with beginning to establish logos by citing examples of other movies that further his point about liberal Hollywood. Dan then establishes pathos by discussing the positive side producing oil through a large capitalist corporation.
After the discussion with Dan Gainor, Bolling furthers the segment by bringing on Andrea Tantaros and Dr. Caroline Heldman. Dan Gainor and others took no time to demote Heldmans position as a Dr. and professor, all whilst introducing Tantaros as the "Fantastic co-host on The Five." Through most of the argument between Tantaros, Bolling ,and Heldman, those arguing against heldman quickley discredit her argument in an almost classless kind of manner. They were classless in the way they name dropped her title as a professor and Doctor. Tantaros continues to take shots at the liberal media by stating “Because liberals don’t care, they want to get you at the youngest age." This statement was followed by Bolling asking the question of "Why do children have to be exposed to this?" Through such statments and a lack of class with arguing with Heldman, Bolling and Tantaros further the logos and pathos that they've established with their audience, which of course are mostly in favor of the bolling and Tantaros argument.
Reflection
This piece of writing was moodle post where the students discussed a clip from fox news. A big part of this response was to indentify rhetoric that the newscasters and guest used to argue the topic at hand. I chose this piece because I was actually surprised at how well I was able to identify what rhetoric styles were being used in this video. I am surprise because I didn’t have a strong knowledge on what rhetoric was exactly and how to identify rhetorical situation through writing or speech. This response really helped me gain an understanding of rhetoric, which in result helped me with my writing later on in the semester.
No comments:
Post a Comment