Analytic Reflection

Analytic Reflection

Of the wealth of information gained from taking this course, what has been the most influential is the insight I've ascertained on the world of Wikipedia and ideas from Porter's "Intertextuality and the Discourse Community". The combination of these two elements from the course have taught me that writing is a process that involves the contribution of many great minds that influence each and every piece of text in a completely unique, one-of-a-kind way.

This Wikipedia group endeavor has illuminated that there are many elements that go into the creation of a single article. I once thought writing was something done by one individual, alone. I've realized now that it takes a community of thinkers, each providing their own sliver of wisdom, for the final product to manifest.

In retrospect, I understand that the process that we as a class have taken part in through creating our very own Wikipedia article correlates perfectly with Porter's theory. Porter explains that in each and every text exists intertextuality, the theory that all types of written discourse contains hints of the past. "Examining texts 'intertextually' means looking for 'traces,' the bits and pieces of Text which writers or speakers borrow and sew together to create new discourse" (Porter 34). Our group effort with the Wikipedia page is an example of the network of influences, both unique personal to each individual and of the past, that blend together to form a final product that is essentially a reflection of our perceptions of the world.

Porter and Grant-Davie's theories combined have also been very influential to my understanding of the writing process. From Grant-Davie's "Rhetorical Situations", I've learned that the exigence of a text, aka "an imperfection marked by urgency" (Grant-Davie 265) is more than just an obstacle, it is the means with which an idea is understood and mediated on through rhetorical discourse. Exigence is also a platform from which a writer can persuade an audience. The knowledge I've gained from studying Grant-Davie's theory has illuminated for me the fact that we as a group have identified an exigence and have responded to it by creating a new platform for discourse by writing a Wikipedia article. We have also utilized the constraints of our exigence to our advantage. In choosing a Wikipedia article as the form to publish our knowledge, we gain ethos by allowing our text to be influenced by the constraint of maintaining a neutral, unbiased tone as opposed to formulating an article that is full of fallacies and opinions that are objective.

Although what I have learned about how texts have influenced my own thought and writing is a very powerful lesson, it is the understanding of how these texts have shaped who I am and what I believe that I find most valuable. As a result, this course has shed light on what makes me, me.

Works Cited

Grant-Davie, Keith. "Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents." Rhetoric Review. 2nd ed. Vol. 15. 
     London: Taylor & Francis, 1997. 264-279. Spring, 1997.

Porter, James E. "Intertextuality and The Discourse Community." Rhetoric Review. 1st
     ed. Vol. 5. London: Taylor & Francis, 1986. 34-47. Autumn, 1986.

SA #6: We, the Wikipedians

SA #6: We, the Wikipedians

 Preliminary Notes

What I've learned from the Wikipedia Editing Tutorial: if you edit a page, provide information on why you made the additions or alterations in the "Edit summary" box below the edit window. The explanation can be as short or long as you desire. Afterwards, in the sandbox page, select the "Edit" option again and write "Testing" in the summary box. Secondly, I learned that the "Show preview" tool is a great resource. It allows writers and editors to view the page before they save it, allowing them to make sure it's formatted the right way.

What I learned from the Wikipedia "Help: Editing" page: We can all be proud that we are Wikipedians! No matter how minor our alterations are, we helped make Wikipedia the renowned Encyclopedia that it is today. Paragraphs are begun with a leading space and they are separated with a blank space. References are a very important aspect of adding information to a page. Otherwise, they might be removed.

I chose to review and edit the article "Bulgarians in Albania" for two reasons. One because I found the topic interesting, and two because I'm more comfortable editing for errors in spelling, grammar, and sentence fluidity than I am adding new information; this article in particular requires copy editing because of poor translation. 

Analysis

This editing task has helped me understand that there are many aspects that contribute to the creation of a Wikipedia article. Members of the community are not expected to complete an article all on there own; each person can contribute by providing their own slice of knowledge, and for some that's as simple as fixing spelling errors or adding commas where needed. For others, that's adding information on a topic, and if the information is riddled with errors that's okay, because there are members of the community that will help. What I'm trying to say is that I've learned that as a Wikipedian I am not alone.

The theory behind Porter's "Intertextuality and the Discourse Community" is that there is no original work, and just like Wikipedia articles, each piece of writing has intertextuality, meaning it contains fragments of information from the past. "Examining texts 'intertextuality' means looking for 'traces,' the bits and pieces of Text which writers or speakers borrow and sew together to create new discourse" (Porter 34).

On Wikipedia, all writing derives from the same network of contributors, a discourse community dedicated to the spread of knowledge. Two aspects of Porter's theory of intertextuality exist on Wikipedia. On each page is iterabilitity, the tracing and utilization of references, quotations, allusions, traditions and phrases, and presupposition, the assumptions an article makes about its reader. Wikipedians use these influences to include the types of information they believe their audience wants to know. According to Porter, the true nature of writing is about being able to recognize yourself within the constraints of a text. These constraints are similar to Grant-Davie's in that they exist with each other in their own discourse communities, forming boundaries and guiding writers.

Wikipedia articles are platforms for a discourse community, not just a single author; a place where many works influence and work together to create a new product that is essentially a reflection of society.

SA #5

SA #5

Part 1: Notes

The first difference noticed between Michelle Citron's and Marshall McLuhan's biographies is the structure of the background information on each respective person. Citron has a short sentence under her name detailing what she does as a career, and then a separate section, "Early life" on her education. McLuhan's biography is more aesthetically pleasing. Instead of a meager sentence about what he does, the information under his name is a concise overview of his life's work, basically what he would be known for. Another paragraph, "Life and career", is a combination of his background information and road to success in his field. He has a more robust description, in part because a few topics that could have been split up into different sections were combined into one. Citron's "Early life" and "Career" are both short paragraphs that could have been combined.

Citron's page has very few links, one of which is to another biography of her life, a few others to the schools she attended and taught at. McLuhan's page has a plethora of links to other pages, in fact, nearly every paragraph has hyperlinked words, even if it's just the name of a city. This large difference in detail makes Citron's page seem more like a stub that needs to be completed. Additionally, the tone of Citron's biography is much more impersonal than that of McLuhan's. McLuhan's work is not presented in a list like Citron's is, it's described in paragraphs of text.

It's quite obvious that Sidgwick's biography on Wikipedia is very different than his Stanford Encyclopedia biography. Stanford's text is extremely detailed with quotes and in text citations. It takes on the tone of a scholarly report that includes a ton of information. The wikipedia biography is concise, to the point, and includes only general information. The types of information linked in the Wikipedia article are primarily locations, social groups or organizations, and key concepts. There is no linked information in the Stanford biography. Stanford's references are made up of mostly citations from published works on Ethics, whereas the Wikipedia article's references are medical journals and published works on the supernatural. The Stanford article has no illustrations to accompany the text, but Wikipedia does, and it's extremely helpful in putting a face with the name when imagining who this individual was. Sidgwick's Wikipedia page consists of a bibliography of his published works, Stanford does not. Overall, the structure of the Wikipedia biography is much more organized than that of the Stanford biography, which is written more like an academic essay on Sidgwick. 

Part 2: Featured Article 

One of Wikipedia's featured articles is titled "Acra (fortress)", on the history of a fortified compound in Jerusalem constructed by Antiochus Epiphanes after his destruction of the city in 168 BCE.

According to Wikipedia, all of their encyclopedic texts should be written with a neutral tone, representing the information fairly, without bias, and accommodating all of the significant views that have been published by credible sources on the subject. The article on Acra does this perfectly. It’s tone is completely unbiased, stating known facts about the history of the fortress and the battles that pertained to it without being biased towards the many Jews that were killed or the Seleucid suppressors. The writers and editors of the article remain incredibly unbiased as early as the second paragraph, refraining from stating their personal opinions on the location of the fortress, they wrote, “The exact location of the Acra, critical to understanding Hellenistic Jerusalem, remains a matter of ongoing discussion. Historians and archaeologists have proposed various sites around Jerusalem, relying mainly on conclusions drawn from literary evidence.” By doing so, trust is established among readers that the information is as accurate as possible, without the blemishes of opinion or personal belief.

Requirements for image use include: always tagging the image with one of the image copyright tags and stating where the image originated. The images should increase the reader's understanding of the text. Because the exact location and remains of the Acra are unknown, the images used in this article are not all that helpful for readers. Besides a map of Jerusalem that identifies the general location of the Acra, the images are unrelated. One is a border along the eastern wall of the Temple Mount, another is a potential remains site of the fortress, and another is Antonio Ciseri's art depicting the persecution of the Jews by Antiochus IV. However, the reason the images are unhelpful is not the fault of the writers and editors, it is simply because the location of the Acra remains an unsolved mystery.

Article titles should be recognizable, neutral, precise, concise, and consistent with the pattern of related articles' titles. The article titles of the piece fit the FA criteria perfectly. They are clear, concise, and leave no uncertainty for the reader about what the ensuing information is about. They are simple, neutral, and chronological, which is especially beneficial for readers because it eliminates issues of confusion and disorganization. For example, under the "History" section of the article, subtitles are presented logically in the order of "Background", "Construction", and "Destruction".

Analysis

In "Lessons of Wikipedia", Zittrain portrays that when humans are involved in situations where rules and regulations are lessened and there is room for individual creativity in collaboration, order is achieved because the members of the group have respect for the limits. The "Acra (fortress)" featured article on Wikipedia is an exemplary example of this. When individuals consider themselves a part of a whole, each feels the weight of responsibility for contributing quality information and revisions. Dozens of writers and editors came together to produce a text that is informative, without bias, and perfectly written.

In "Integrating the American Mind", Gates explains that one of the issues with education in the U.S. is that other cultures are not included in the curriculum. "We need to reform our entire notion of core curricula to account for the comparable eloquence of the African, the Asian, the Latin American, and the Middle Eastern traditions, to prepare our students for their roles in the twenty-first century as citizens of a world culture, educated through a truly human notion of the humanities" (Gates 346). This Wikipedia article in particular helps to solve this issue that exists in American schools by offering readers information largely unknown by students and non-students alike.

Researching the four biographies and examining the article on Acra in relation to Wikipedia's FA requirements, has shed light on the importance of remaining unbiased when providing information to the public on a subject that is unknown to many people. Writers and editors have an obligation to readers to supply information that is clear, concise, and that covers all aspects of a topic or issue.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acra_%28fortress%29

Copyright: Good or Evil?

Copyright: Good or Evil?

Ridolfo and Rife delve into a case study that questions the ethos of a Michigan State University student’s photo remediation and rhetorical velocity (the strategic concept of delivery where the rhetor speculates the possibilities of the recomposition of a text depending on how he or she thinks the text will be used in the future). Maggie's story entices the audience to confront controversial issues of rhetorical appropriation and copyright in terms of ethics and intellectual property. The implications for using intellectual property are undoubtedly connected to rhetorical theory and the delivery of a text. This text highlights the ways in which copyright is perceived and the ways that perception needs to change. Copyright law is more than just a limiting regulation, it is also a means for rhetorical creativity to exist.

In "Plagiarism and Promiscuity, Authors and Plagiarisms", we learn that issues of plagiarism and appropriation vary depending on power, status, and hierarchy. "As Martin's taxonomy makes clear enough, the designation of plagiarism has at least as much to do with where you reside in a power structure as it does with whether you did or did not present someone else's text as your own” (Wiebe 34). Plagiarism becomes a rhetorical grey area when considering the idea that there is no original thought. Any text, whether it is written or spoken, references other texts or occurrences, cultures, and languages. In this way, plagiarism is basically untraceable, but the substance of texts, and everything that has ever been said, can be considered plagiarism. Most of our thoughts and utterances are secondhand, adopted from another outside source, and conveyed by the plagiarist with assurance that the thought began with them. 

No text exists that was not created by a blend of knowledge ascertained by earlier works. This idea relates to Maggie’s controversial issue with MSU using her photo on their website and promotional texts. Her photo influenced and inspired the creators of those later texts, and left a mark on history and creativity that cannot be denied or deemed as plagiarism. Her moment in the snow later served as the focal point in the remix of new thought and creativity that was unavoidably influenced by the past.



https://campus.fsu.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-6800561-dt-content-rid-38256208_2/courses/ENC4404-0001.fa14/ridolfo_courant_rhetorical_velocity.pdf

https://campus.fsu.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-6800560-dt-content-rid-38256207_2/courses/ENC4404-0001.fa14/wiebe_plagiarism_promiscuity.pdf

In Wikipedia We Trust

In Wikipedia We Trust

In "Lessons of Wikipedia", Zittrain introduces the theory that when humans are in situations that are heavily regulated, our behavior adjusts to actions based on reward and punishment by an arbitrary external authority, rather than an intrinsic motivation to maintain a better world that we help to construct. When rules and regulations are lessened, basic order can be achieved because people decide to respect limits and other people with the absence of enforced rules. His ideas describe Wikipedia—when individuals see themselves as part of a greater whole, each feels responsible for maintaining order; they are a connected community under a common goal.

The Internet, since its creation, has functioned as an encyclopedia in and of itself. Expert and amateur writers and bloggers are free to make public whatever information they want, and when someone does a search on a particular topic, a wide variety of information may come up. Search engines function as an encyclopedia written by many authors, not just one or a few, and this gives searchers the privilege to pick what they want to read. Wikipedia's foundation is based on verkeersbordvrij (the idea that unsafe is safe, or more simply put, less rules and regulations lead to a public mass effort to maintain order and high standards), dialogue between readers, writers, and editors where alterations can be explained, and a team of core editors that serve as the overseers.

In "Editing Out Obscenity: Wikipedia and Writing Pedagogy", Hood portrays Wikipedia as a "collaborative writing endeavor" that has great potential as a compromise of knowledge and opinions of many people. Because Wikipedia articles are constantly being edited and monitored for vandalism, over time the only result is that their quality would improve. Wikipedia, unlike other encyclopedias, places value on the process of writing and editing, not on the final product. Wikipedia is all about achieving harmony and solidarity when working in concordance with others readers and writers to fully inform the public on a topic and to give them the best information possible.

In "Integrating the American Mind" by Gates, he explains that there is a problem with he American teaching curriculum, that students do not learn about other cultures and their histories because high schools and colleges are focused on European and American societies, with America as the perfect example of how a society should be since the Greeks, in a similar way to how Christians looks to Jesus as an example. "We need to reform our entire notion of core curricula to account for the comparable eloquence of the African, the Asian, the Latin American, and the Middle Eastern traditions, to prepare our students for their roles in the twenty-first century as citizens of a world culture, educated through a truly human notion of the humanities" (Gates 346). Wikipedia offers students and individuals alike to do so because it covers such an immense, broad array of subject matter and international history down to the most obscure, rarely known cultures.

Wikipedia is an amazing resource for many reasons but most of all because it functions as a group effort that is maintained by readers and writers who want to see the overall education of Wiki users by offering them the most accurate information possible. It's a resource that trusts its contributors who want nothing more than to contribute to the spread of knowledge.

SA #4: Integrity, Intertextuality, and Exigence of Wikipedia Articles

S.A. #4: Integrity, Intertextuality, and Exigence of Wikipedia Articles 

 

The sources for the Wikipedia page "John Bauer (Illustrator)", are credible, published books, some of which are exclusively about Bauer. This is especially advantageous for readers wishing to gleam knowledge from this article because the information comes from published works. None of the sources are unreliable, they are all respected. A few of them are even textbooks. Because of this there is no uncertainty as far as the integrity of the sources.

There is a spelling error in the first sentence of the section on "Courtship and marriage". Bauer's name was spelled "Baer". It is unknown whether this error occurred because of a simple editing oversight, or if the writer of that particular section was not knowledgeable on the subject to spell his name correctly. Other than that, upon further investigation other facts proved true including that Bauer met his wife, Ester Ellqvist, while at school at the Royal Swedish Academy of Arts, that the Bauer's and their son, Bengt, died by drowning in a mass causality boat accident on Lake Vattern, that historic painter, Gustaf Cederstrom was one of his teachers, and that his famous painting The Fairy Princess was inspired by his wife.

The information in this article is very reliable, albeit the minor spelling error here and there, but not every writer has the patience to re-read their work. The sources are what make this article reliable. Because the article is not ridden with extraneous details readers might find it more in accordance with the true facts of Bauer's life. 

The article functions similarly to Porter's theory of intertextuality in that it has elements of iterability and presupposition. The article uses references, quotes from Bauer's art professors, and traditions of culture while making the assumptions about the reader that he or she is knowledgeable of certain types of art such as frescos and cultures within Sweden without giving explanation on these topics.

After reading the Wikipedia article in its entirety, it became obvious that the writer (or writers) included information that was especially valuable that piqued interest in the reader. This is similar to what Killingsworth writes on when he explains concepts of human interest and news value when considering how an audience will interpret information. "For a story to be considered "news," it must tell readers something they don't already know, something they haven't already heard or become accustomed to" (Killingsworth 134). There were obviously details of Bauer's life that were not newsworthy enough to include, but the writers focused on facts that were unique and personal that readers might not have known.

Read the Wikipedia article here: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bauer_%28illustrator%29#CITEREFCorin2013

The Importance Of Time To Rhetoric

The Importance Of Time To Rhetoric

Killingsworth and Handa’s argument definitely have strong similarities. Both texts explain the ways in which rhetoric is used today, the analytical and technical skills needed to present it successfully, and the best ways to appeal to the audience at the perfect time.

In "Appeals to Time" from Killingsworth's Appeals in Modern Rhetoric, he explains the ways in which rhetoric exists in society today in comparison to that of the past in order to appeal to the audience in the most ideal way. "The news and advertising industry often use a simple version of the appeal to time, with newness occupying the position of value" (Killingsworth 39). Killingsworth places heavy importance on the kairos and exigence of rhetoric, conveying that they are designed to serve a purpose at a certain time in order to be successful, meaning that authors and rhetoricians alike need to be conscious that their strategies appeal to time in order for it to be presented to the audience at the most ideal moment.

In The Multimediated Rhetoric of the Internet, Handa explains the purpose of remediation on platforms such as the Internet. Handa explains that time, societal culture, and the media function together to form an argument that is especially powerful in terms of affecting the audience. Handa explains that in this day and age, the Internet is very important in terms of portraying an exigence, because its relationship with time is more lucrative than that of many other ways to communicate an idea, such as speeches for example. Handa also writes about the different forms of rhetoric, whether it be conscious or unconscious, spoken or unspoken: "Furthermore, if we ask what might be involved in analyzing a compelling rhetorical performance given digitally, we need to account for a Web site's non-verbal as well as verbal communication and whether or not the total performance foes in fact make an impact on that 'social world in which we live'" (Handa 17).

SA #3: My Editing Experience...

SA #3: My Editing Experience…

The original un-edited text, “Let Us All Bear Witness to the Conversation! How the Media-Political Class Ate the News this Summer” by Mark Leibovich, had major problems with clarity and organization of information. Most of the sentences lacked a professional tone and needed better explanation because they were hard to understand. Many of them included words that can be described as amateur. There was also a lot of information that strayed away from the main ideas of the text, such as interjections about national conversations concerning Presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton. There was also an issue of organization of the information and there was no solid ending.

There are three general principles that guided me tremendously throughout my editing process. These principles come from Killingsworth's "Rhetoric and Environmental Politics in America", Williams and Bizup’s Style, and Jones's "Finding the Good Argument OR Why Bother With Logic?"

Killingsworth's ideas about information value and the concepts of news and human interest helped me greatly when putting myself in the shoes of the audience and their interpretation of information. Killingsworth writes, "For a story to be considered "news," it must tell readers something they don't already know, something they haven't already heard or become accustomed to" (Killingsworth 134). It was very clear to me that the idea of bearing witness is not one that is often discussed. During the editing process, I came to realize that the writer was arguing about a very relevant issue in society today. This helped me focus in on what the most important elements of the text were.

Williams and Bizup’s Style helped me considerably when addressing the original text’s cohesion and coherence. Style taught me to avoid using passive verbs, which I replaced out for active ones in the text. I implemented the tip “End sentences with information readers cannot predict” (Williams and Bizup 37) in my own way in the text. I included an open-ended question at the end because readers prefer to read the familiar and known first, and then move on to the unknown, and possible unanswerable. I also took into account the tip about coherence. I made sure that all the sentences in the text added to the main argument. I extracted the sentences that did not flow well. I did my best to make sure all the pieces fit to strengthen and illuminate the bigger idea.

Jones's description of inductive reasoning helped me formulate a plan for the reorganization of the text. "Inductive reasoning starts with a particular or local statement and moves to a more general conclusion" (Jones 164). This is exactly what I decided to do when editing the text. I placed the most particular information first, followed by broader statements that flowed into the conclusion.

There are three main changes I made to help the text regain balance. First, I reworded most of the sentences so that the main idea was clear. I omitted words that did not sound professional. I decided to change the title because I felt as though it did not do the text justice. It did nothing to inform the audience what the text was about prior to reading it. Finally, I changed around the order of some of the paragraphs, and even omitted a few of them. I did this in order to give the text a fuller, more symmetrical structure with a strong beginning and ending. I omitted some of the information because I felt as though it did nothing to strengthen the argument. I felt that certain information about the Clinton's and George W. Bush would confuse the audience and took the argument completely off track.

Liberties that I took in order to strengthen the complexity of the argument include changing many of the sentence's structures and words, changing the title so that it is more indicative of the information in the text, omitting certain information, and reorganizing the order of the paragraphs to enhance the clarity and balance of the argument.

There was an overall pattern of unclear language that I constantly had to correct. It was severe to the point that I had to completely restructure the majority of the sentences. I also noticed that most of the word choice was poor. Many of the words and phrases were not the best fit for the argument, and I substituted them out for descriptions that made the information easy to understand.

Short Assignment #3 made me discover that I'm very good at explaining concepts clearly and deciding what kind of information is valuable to an argument and what information is not. I also discovered that I'm fairly good at adding an element of symmetry to texts that I write and edit, for instance designing the ending of a text to mirror the beginning. I found that I'm also very good at organizing information in a clear, logical order. Something that I found was a struggle was not being well informed on the subject of the text I was editing. Perhaps if I had been more knowledgeable on the Ferguson controversy I would have had a little something more to add to the argument to give it some extra flair.

Response to Christina's Discussion Post

In Preparation for Kaufer and McDonald...

In Preparation for Kaufer and McDonald...
Response to: http://cmorganfall2014.blogspot.com/ 

According to McDonald in his text, Rhetorical Citizenship and Public Deliberation, people become citizens rhetorically by engaging with each other on public topics. Average citizens are not usually a part of the contribution to socialtechnical controversies because they lack expert knowledge. However, these controversies give credibility to this type of audience in particular whose public lives are influenced by sociotechnical stock issues.

McDonald selected Le Suroit, the gas-fired power plant, as a case study in his text because it is a perfect example of when public opinion got in the way of a new technology being introduced into society, regardless of their lack of knowledge of the issue. This was a controversial issue that was highly supported by individuals, such as the government and scientists, who have expert knowledge of the technology. However, the public was very critical of the Suroit project and asked that it be discussed, and was eventually turned down because of their disapproval. In this particular case, “deliberation” and “citizenship” because "this case has all of the characteristics of a socialtechnical controversy" (McDonald 204).

McDonald's "inductive, rhetorical approach is similar to Kaufer's "Levels of Policy Conflict Analysis" in that they both organize their texts in a way that the audience can follow chronologically. Meaning, Kaufer and McDonald write out their texts in a sequence of events that a controversy would naturally go through in reality. The difference between the two is that McDonald is focused on educating public citizens to deliberate effectively, whereas the purpose of Kaufer's work is to teach his audience how to develop policy arguments.

McDonald's justification for why there is a need to deliberate better is that it allows individuals with conflicting ideas to realize that they share common views, and that both had valid arguments that needed to be discussed. By doing so, many groups are able to find common ground. The Suroit case is an example of when rhetorical democracy existed. It's all about accepting what adversaries have to say because it brings common points from differing parties to the forefront. "Thus, through public deliberation over the heterogeneous topics that are an integral part of sociotechnical controversies, parties initially opposed realize that their opinion differ less than they first thought" (McDonald 214). This acceptance of what the other party believes enables all individuals involved to find common points and possibly even a solution that everyone supports.

"Stock issues are points of disagreement that recur regularly when people deliberate on questions of justice or public policy" (Kaufer 57). Stock issues are not enough because in order for an issue to be fully addressed, there needs to be expert information concerning both sides, not just opinions that arise among public citizens. 

https://campus.fsu.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-6800550-dt-content-rid-38255100_2/courses/ENC4404-0001.fa14/kaufer.pdf

https://campus.fsu.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-6800548-dt-content-rid-38255099_2/courses/ENC4404-0001.fa14/mcdonald_i_agree_but.pdf

Analytic Reflection of the Sci-Tech Blog Post, “Urban Sprawl Is Giving Us Cancer”

Lindsey Marcus

ENC 4404

Professor Graban

September 24, 2014

Analytic Reflection

The foundational principals of my Sci-Tech blog post, “Urban Sprawl Is Giving Us Cancer”, are based on the theories from the critical texts “Rhetorical Situations” by Grant-Davie and “Intertextuality and the Discourse Community” by Porter. Grant-Davie's and Porter's texts each significantly influenced my creation of this blog post. They illuminated the purpose of deconstructing Stratton's "New Ruralism" and understanding how one work can relate to another intertextually. These theories explain the way society and the human mind function, which was especially useful in deciding what kind of information to bring into the blog post and how to present it to the audience.

            Grant-Davie's "Rhetorical Situations" taught me the power of exigence, "an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something waiting to be done, a thing which is other than it should be" (Grant-Davie 265). The exigence of the blog post was the harmful effects urban sprawl has on food sources and the environment. The exigence is the cause of urban sprawl and the harmful effects it has on various aspects of society. The problem presented in the blog post can be understood with the rhetorical discourse presented. The exigence was a way to persuade the audience discretely and made the piece more interesting to read.

            While collecting sources for the blog post, I remembered Porter's idea that there is no original work. Meaning that each piece of writing has some level of intertextuality, pieces of the past and pieces of other texts. The blog post was completely inspired by other works, whether it be Stratton or articles from The International New York Times. "Examining text 'intertextually' means looks for 'traces', the bits and pieces of Text which writers or speakers borrow and sew together to create new discourse" (Porter 34). The exigence was inspired by texts that already existed prior to the formation of the blog post and they all derive from the same network.

            A major part of Porter's theory that I implemented into the blog post is his idea that there are two types of intertextuality, Iterability (using references, quotes, allusions, and traditions) and presupposition (the assumptions a text will make about its reader and context). The iterability of the blog post is the quotes from other texts that I brought in to bolster my exigence. The blog post's presupposition is that the audience cares about their health and the wellbeing of the environment and that they would be interested in learning about solutions to a pressing issue.

Overall, Porter's and Grant-Davie's theories are very different, but they both helped tremendously when it came to understanding how bringing in certain sources strengthened the power of exigence and why intertextuality is so important when forming an argument. The repeatability and presupposition of complicated the exigence and audience's reaction to the blog, influencing its success.

Works Cited

Grant-Davie, Keith. "Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents." Rhetoric Review. 2nd ed. Vol. 15. London: Taylor & Francis, 1997. 264-279. Spring, 1997.

Porter, James E. "Intertextuality and The Discourse Community." Rhetoric Review. 1st

ed. Vol. 5. London: Taylor & Francis, 1986. 34-47. Autumn, 1986.

Urban Sprawl Is Giving Us Cancer

Urban Sprawl Is Giving Us Cancer

With so many overcrowded cities like New York, Los Angeles, and Miami, there’s a huge overflow of people into surrounding areas, creating urban sprawl. Forests have been ripped down and the land has been transformed into suburban neighborhoods. An astounding relation exists between the lack of connection with nature and our food sources. This particular occurrence is where high demand for mass-produced foods originates from, and with it has come troubling consequences like obesity and cancer from food that contains chemicals.

 

To sustain large population pockets, science has devised a way to grow crops and livestock quicker than ever, feed us all, and have some leftover: frozen foods, factory farms, and synthetic growth hormones to beef up our livestock. As a result of these innovations in agriculture, cancer has become more and more prevalent in the U.S., especially among children.

Artificial food dye makes your food look cool but inhibits nerve-cell development. Waxy preservatives such as BHA and BHT are found in most bubble gums but are linked to cancer and tumors. Arsenic is a chemical injected into poultry to make it appear pink and fresh, but it is poison and can cause death if ingested in large amounts.

Scientists are discovering with much alarm that some very common endocrine disrupting chemicals are found in mass-produced foods. These chemicals have appalling effects for humans including breast cancer, infertility for men and women, genital deformities, diabetes, and obesity.

"Philip Landrigan, a professor of pediatrics at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, says that a congenital defect called hypospadias — a misplacement of the urethra — is now twice as common among newborn boys as it used to be. He suspects endocrine disruptors, so called because they can wreak havoc with the endocrine system that governs hormones" (Kristof paragraph 4).

There is also a significant association between childhood cancer and the consumption of foods exposed to pesticides. Clusters of acute leukemia are found in agricultural countries that use substantial amounts of pesticides.

According to International New York Times article "Chemicals in Food Raise Children's Cancer Toll”: “As documented by the Food and Drug Administration, residues of numerous carcinogenic pesticides are commonly found in most fruits and vegetables. Additionally, milk and other dairy products are often laden with carcinogenic pesticides and antibiotics. Factory farm meat, particularly liver, veal, frankfurters and hamburgers, are also contaminated with carcinogenic pesticides, besides growth-stimulating sex hormones and other feed additives” (Paragraph 4).

In order to end this vicious cycle, there needs to be a major countrywide lifestyle change. The change begins by fixing the root of the problem: city planning and population disbursement need to be organized differently. The answer is New Ruralism.

New Ruralism is a philosophy based on the idea of re-connecting with the land by encouraging smart growth, walkable neighborhoods (aka less gas consumption), and conservation of land while averting away from suburban sprawl, loss of natural habitats, and deserted public areas. New Ruralism depletes the use of miles of pavement, the time spent driving from place to place, and strengthens the connectivity lost to sprawl. It’s a preventative measure that protects rural areas on the urban edge that are at high risk for the intrusion of suburbanization, environmental deterioration, and industrialization. It’s a combination of planning cities around compact neighborhoods and growing sustainable food that promotes environmental health and socio-economic impartiality. New Ruralism promotes the preservation and enhancement of rural areas that are invaluable to the economic, environmental, and cultural livelihood of U.S. cities.

Serenbe is the paradigm of what New Ruralism can be. As described in Emily M. Stratton’s “New Ruralism”, it’s a 900-acre development in Fulton County, Georgia that contains three hamlets, or small villages, each with their own town center, restaurants, and retail shops. The development has its own organic farm, wastewater treatment plant, and enough paths that walking has become more efficient for residents than driving. Serenbe also has a vast amount of preserved land including protected forests, pastures, farmland, and even a wildflower meadow.

Serenbe and other New Ruralist communities across the country are dedicated to organic food products and farmer’s markets because planners and homeowners are aware that industrialized agriculture caused by urban sprawl is harmful to both nature and humans. 

“There is a vaccine against sprawl, a way to ward off the encroachment of those who see the land as an accessory and not a commodity, and it is New Ruralism” (Stratton 7). But it isn’t just a way to combat the overcrowding of metropolitan areas, New Ruralism has the power to give our children—and the world— a healthier tomorrow.  

https://campus.fsu.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-6804317-dt-content-rid-38263933_2/courses/ENC4404-0001.fa14/stratton_ruralism.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/03/opinion/kristof-how-chemicals-change-us.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Aw%2C{%222%22%3A%22RI%3A12%22}&_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/16/opinion/l-chemicals-in-food-raise-children-s-cancer-toll-872691.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Aw%2C{%222%22%3A%22RI%3A12%22}

An Explanatory Genre Piece To Inspire Social Change

An Explanatory Genre Piece To Inspire Social Change

Homes Not Handcuffs: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities is designed to make readers uncomfortable to inspire social change. It feeds readers facts and statistics on the criminalization of homelessness. The organization is one of the more successful aspects of the piece in terms of evoking emotion. It draws on issues including types of criminalization measures, the prevalence of laws that criminalize homeless persons, examples of geographical locations that are both inhumane and humane towards homeless persons, and constructive alternatives to the issue. The writer draws on examples such as "Sweeps of city areas in which homeless persons are living to drive them out of those areas, frequently resulting in the destruction of individuals' personal property such as important personal documents and medication" to make the audience feel terrible for the homeless, thus changing attitudes and behavior.

It is a very powerful piece, and because is designed to inspire social change, it can be considered a citizen's explanatory genre. Homes Not Handcuffs: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities functions in a way that can be compared to Rettberg’s definition of the purpose for social blogs in that both are designed to challenge opinions and expectations, and because both function as an authoritative text.

The audience of this white paper is constructed by the facts that make up the writer's argument. They are individuals who are not homeless and who, perhaps, do not know information about this particular social issue, or maybe they are aware but do not care. This white paper gives them a reason to care. It was designed to change the way homelessness is perceived, because currently, many view homeless persons as subhuman. These individuals are often treated with cruelty when they should be treated with the utmost sympathy.

Don't kick someone when they’re down.

The argument is solidified with a shocking list of laws in U.S. cities that violate the constitution, including freedom on speech, the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizures, and the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. These actions also violate international human rights law.

The goal of this piece is to convince its audience that instead of criminalizing homelessness, governments and law enforcement officials should work with these people to come up with humane alternatives. Cities are encouraged to allot more resources to creating affordable housing, shelters, and food services for these individuals, because as per the white paper, "When cities work with homeless persons and advocate for solutions to homelessness, instead of punishing those who are homeless or poor, everyone benefits."

This white paper works surprisingly as a mediated discourse because it illuminates inhumane aspects of U.S. society. It inspires emotions in readers such as sadness, embarrassment, and pity, and this complicates the notion of publicly mediated discourse.

On Jonah Lehrer's "The Future Of Reading": Why This Work Is A Scientific Discourse and How It Works With Grant-Davie and Porter

On Jonah Lehrer's "The Future Of Reading": Why This Work Is A Scientific Discourse and How It Works With Grant-Davie and Porter

By Lindsey Marcus

Early on in Lehrer’s “The Future Of Reading”, Lehrer gains readers’ trust by making himself relatable to his audience. After all, who hasn't been in the situation where an auxiliary cord was left behind, leaving you forced to listen to the radio? He's extremely casual, clear, unassuming, and as the piece progresses I wonder if he does this to disarm his readers. I mentally prepare myself for him to pull wool over my eyes, metaphorically brainwashing me into believing what he wants his readers to believe. He continues to make himself relatable to the reader, drawing us in moreso with his story about his love for books (perhaps an attempt at forming pathos) and the experience of having an overweight bag at the airport. He confides in his readers about his fear of how our reading technology is changing. Illuminating the prospect of losing the potential for old treasures to exist in the future if new books are exclusively read on Kindles and Nooks. Many avid readers—myself included—share his fear. Lehrer's article becomes publicly mediated when he draws on platforms widely known to the public, such as the eReaders he critiques. He has a strong relation to the public by explaining these experiences that so many have also encountered in their lives.

He also illuminates the reality that is undeniable: the potential of digital texts and e-readers is revolutionary. "For me, the most salient fact is this: It’s never been easier to buy books, read books, or read about books you might want to buy. How can that not be good?" (Lehrer paragraph 4). This new technology is making it easier for us to perceive the content. Lehrer deconstructs eReaders by explaining that by making content easier to attain we trade our understanding and admiration for the novels we love for the ability to perceive the texts, to simply hold them, to read them, but not will not be able to cherish them because they will no longer exist in a physical form. Their words exist on the technology, but will they survive the test of time like Shakespeare's original texts have?

Lehrer breaks down the knowledge of Stanislas Dehaene, a neuroscientist at the College de France in Paris, explaining the neural anatomy of reading. He explains the two ways to read, the ventral route and the dorsal stream. Reading requires a certain amount of awareness. Books printed in clear, popular fonts or illuminated on bright screens are read effortlessly. Whereas unusual, complicated sentences and personal handwriting require more attending to. This phenomenon leads to more activation in the dorsal pathway. "All the extra work – the slight cognitive frisson of having to decipher the words – wakes us up" (Lehrer paragraph 8). His scientific writing becomes a discourse when he analyses aspects of society that affect everyone, and when he voices his concerns and ideas about the influences of the types of reading on the human mind. Something every literate human can relate to.

Thus, Lehrer concludes his argument by clearly stating his exigence. His wish for us to struggle with our reading—for it to be as it once was in earlier times—is actually for our benefit. With less reliance on the ventral pathway there will be no more mindless scanning of words, only contemplation of their meaning and purpose. How better to honor the authors of our beloved favorites.

His scientific discourse: not every sentence should be easy to read. Taking in difficult texts keeps our brain sharp and healthy. Reading something in a physical form inspires analyzation, just like when we read our essay on a screen and don't notice errors, but then print it out on paper and notice a ton.

The rhetorical situation of Lehrer's text is that society is changing in ways that affect the way our brains function, and this is something significant that people need to be aware of. Lehrer's ideas go hand-in-hand with those of Grant-Davie's and Porter's. Essentially Lehrer is deconstructing a medium with which society reads, not unlike how Grant-Davie and Porter illuminate how we understand a text. The theories of these three break down the way society—and the human brain in its neuroanatomy—function. They each illustrate the ways in which historical texts are incorporated into new ones, and also how they can be lost.

This blog post was inspired by Jonah Lehrer's "The Future Of Reading", Grant-Davie's "Rhetorical Situations and Their Constituents", and Porter's "Intertextuality and The Discourse Community". 

http://www.wired.com/2010/09/the-future-of-reading-2/