Journal 1
1. Imagine you could invite David Foster Wallace into the discussion in our classroom. What questions would you ask him about this essay?
David Foster Wallace wrote an exquisite essay called “Consider the Lobster.” Although I found his writing to be interesting, I would have a couple questions for him to ponder. There is a part in his essay where he briefly mentions PETA- in fact, he pokes fun at the idea of their group, but seems to be advocating for them at the same time. I’d like to know his stance on PETA, especially regarding some of the controversial advertisements they use to sway the populations’ opinion. To add, this article seems to focus mainly on lobsters, and doesn’t mention any other type of sea creature. Does he feel abuse can be inflicted on fish, shrimp, or any other type of oceanic creature? If so, why? Fishing, in particular, is almost as gruesome of an activity (in my opinion) as boiling a lobster alive. Humans deliberately torture the fish as an activity, assuming that they are catching and releasing the animal. Fish are left to suffocate to death if caught. Lastly, I would like to know his stance on animal testing and the use of animals to promote products.
2. Use that experience to think about larger issues, specifically, what are the limits of a written discussion? How might you anticipate your audience’s questions when you write?
A written discussion can be quite hard to create effectively. To begin, the piece needs to have a topic controversial enough to be considered worthwhile. Abortion, immigration, animal cruelty, and topics of that content may be strong enough to begin an effective discussion. However, with a written discussion the reader is only able to see one side of the story, or opinion. Most writers who write pieces like this are biased, whether they try to be or not. It is difficult to capture both sides of the argument when the writer has such a strong opinion, especially regarding sensitive topics. If I were to write a piece like this, I may write the essay to begin with, then go back and read it. Assuming a question arises, I would address it within the essay itself. As an additional step, I may have a peer or trusted friend read the essay and write down their questions. Obviously, not every single question can be taken into account whilst writing. There should always be a question or two unanswered after a piece such as this. You cannot stray from the piece entirely, and there may be questions that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. In short, I would answer the necessary questions in my writing. To add, a written discussion is effective in proving a point but does not always offer two points of view.
Journal 2
In detail, describe your experience drafting writing projects. And what about revision? What did it look like? What was your process? How did it work for you?
In high school, my drafting process was very limited. If told to by the teacher, I’d create an outline and write a general idea of what I was going to write about. Normally I just start into the paper and write as I would normally. Afterwards, I go through and edit out the details that were not necessary. If I’m being completely honest, there was never much revision that I would do unless it was a huge paper. Peer editing was not exactly helpful, either. The students in my class never took it seriously and often overlooked huge gaps in my paper. I’d only realize that there were gaps when the teacher handed the paper back to me. Also, everybody was too scared to say anything negative about your paper. If I haven’t formed an idea well enough, I’d prefer for somebody to tell me rather than cover it up. I’ve never gotten a failing grade on a paper, however my grade could have definitely improved if I had spent more time editing and drafting a piece. The hardest part to a paper, in my opinion, is starting it. That is where I struggle the most.
Journal 3
For this assignment, pick ONE of these topics and write a narrative that includes all of the 5 senses. Help the reader see, SMELL, TASTE, TOUCH, and HEAR the sense you’re creating.
It was a normal Friday night. Me and my friends had been driving back from Kiana’s 18th birthday party. I could still smell the harsh pinch of liquor. The person driving the car sped up, and all of a sudden my vision went black. I must have bit my lip, because the taste of copper overwhelmed my mouth. When I woke up, dozens of people were groaning in pain. I tried to wiggle my fingers, but none of them moved. I looked over to see only half of my arm. The smell of the engine wafted over me. Although, this time it was different. It didn’t smell like gasoline. It smelt pungent. Stronger, more dense. The hard surface under my back started to shift, although maybe it was just God trying to take me out of my misery. To my left lay my friend. Or, rather, what was left of her. Her left leg was ripped halfway off, her mouth hung open. Her neck was bent in an unnatural way. There was no way she survived this. Cars honked and people screamed. My body lifted as I began to go unconscious. The last thing I remember is someone telling me to keep my eyes open, but it just wasn’t worth it.
Journal 4
“The Art of Quoting” response.
In the section, “The Art of Quoting”, in TS/IS, the author explains the importance of including the quote of another author or important person. By quoting another person, it gives the essay the writer is working on credibility, making sure that the information provided is accurate. The author goes on to explain that there are often mistakes in the art of quoting, as some writers provide too little or don’t explain the quote. It is important that the writer then explains the quote provided instead of assuming the reader will understand what the quote means, or what importance it holds. The suggested advice is that the writer chooses the correct quotes that hold meaning, and then explaining the meaning of that quote. The author then provides examples and templates for the reader to use in their essays.
This passage was very helpful in terms of describing to me how to quote a passage. I was aware that you had to always explain a quote, but wasn’t aware that you can quote too little. I often try not to quote too much because I do not want to be accused of plagiarism, or told that I was stealing another author’s idea and making it my own. I had also never heard of a “quotation sandwich”, which is when you introduce the statement, include the statement, and then provide an explanation. This analogy will be helpful for me to remember when I am providing a quote or argument in my paper. It is also important to remember that the overall quote is even relevant, because sometimes writers like to include quotes to make themselves more clear, but don’t understand that they are only hurting the essay by providing complex quotes instead of their own opinion. Concluding, “The Art of Quoting” gave me tips and tricks on how to insert quotes into an essay, while providing me with new information I did not yet know.
Journal 5
See “Peer Review” page.
Journal 6
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B1-MTQYf_12edVo1U1phYTFJUW8
Our group had an excellent peer reviewing process. My peers, specifically Kori and Grace, suggested that I make my paper flow together more. They mentioned that I had two great ideas, but I accidentally got off topic a couple of times. Without them telling me this, I may not have noticed. The suggestions I gave to my peers were similar, except I feel my best comments had to do with introducing meaning into their essays. It seemed that their papers just touched the surface, rather than explaining the meaning of their favorite food. In our conversation, we asked each other a lot of questions that we did not ask during reviewing. In particular, we asked Van what he did at his father’s kitchen, and helped him find a deeper meaning that related to his essay. For Grace, we touched on a completely different topic that her essay didn’t focus on. She decided she may talk about something else rather than her family barbeques, since they didn’t really hold a whole lot of meaning. Looking over my peer review comments, I wish my partners had looked a bit deeper into my essay. They might have been scared off by the topic, but there is a possibility they didn’t have anything else to fix. Overall, I thought our peer review group was once of the best groups in the class. Their feedback really helped me shape my essay into something I’m extremely proud of, and I am happy I was assigned to them as a partner.
Journal 7
Responding to TS/IS “Staring With What Other’s Say.”
In this section of “They say, I say”, the author goes over the important of a counterargument. They give a brief example of what it sounds like to listen to someone give a speech, or read a paper, without first introducing your point. Then, they give templates for the reader to use to provide a counterargument. It is interesting to think that you must provide a counterargument for your thesis. Normally, this is not something I would do. A lot of the time I just assume that the reader knows what I’m talking about, especially if it’s the teacher who assigned the writing prompt. It is a good tip to include your counterargument, since you might look silly when trying to prove a point, when there is nothing to prove in the first place.
Furthermore, they present some quotes that give examples about how to use the counterargument. It appears that the way the argument is presented depends on the point itself. The templates are considerably different depending on the subject. Although, I feel a counterargument only works in a certain type of essay. Obviously you would not want a counterargument in every essay you wrote. In a persuasive essay it is vital, but in a personal essay or an essay about your favorite food, it is not necessary. The advice that is given about how to present and write your essay, however, is great if you’re writing the correct type of essay. Overall, this passage opened my eyes to another way of writing papers, which could be much more effective than the way I am writing them now.
Journal 8
What did you spend the most time revising? What would you change? How much is the drafting/revising process different from your past drafting/revising approaches? How did your approach to this project fit with the expectations for this class? Answer honestly.
When I was revising, I first looked at the comments that my peers had offered to me. A lot of it was my sentence structure, and a couple of my peers said that they wanted my essay to flow better. I focused on these points until I decided to look over it myself and make my own judgment. Overall, I spent most of my time proofreading and fixing small grammatical mistakes. Although, I did spend a great deal of time fixing my word usage. If I were to change anything, I might make my conclusion a bit longer. I think it’s fine the way it is, but I probably could have added more detail. The conclusion is what I’ve struggled with my entire high school/college career, so this does not really surprise me at all.
This process was exponentially different from my drafting/revising process in high school. To begin, I did not really draft in high school. I simply wrote an essay and handed it in. This usually worked for me because I am a good writer, however it began to fail my senior year. It was only then did I decided to start editing a bit, but not nearly as much as I did for this paper. As far as my expectations go, it was pretty much what I thought it would be. I liked that we were not forced to make an outline, because drafting an outline only sets me back. I also really enjoyed peer editing, because it gave me some helpful feedback on what I should fix. Overall, I enjoyed the drafting/revising process and look forward to doing it for the next paper.
Journal 9
Carver draws upon the social interactions behind food and nourishment to structure his story. What values does Carver bring forward in this story through experiences with food? Be detailed and specific with your response and the text for support.
In the short story, “A Small, Good thing”, Raymond Carver tells the story of a young boy who gets hit by a car and then passes away. On the day that he was hit, he was celebrating his birthday. At the beginning of the story, his mother orders a cake from a baker. This baker calls many times which annoys the parents. The mother relates with another parent whose son got in a knife fight. When the baker calls a couple more times at weird hours, the parents recognize who it is and they go down to confront the baker. The baker apologizes and they bond over cinnamon rolls.
Carver brings forward a couple of different values in this story related to food. To begin, food is an excellent conversation starter. Throughout the story, Ann and Howard are completely irate at the person who is calling them. When these three people bond over the cinnamon rolls, it created a bond of some sort. The baker tells them about his story, and how he was once something other than a baker. It is also a sign of nurturing. The baker offered them food based on their appearance, which suggested that they had not eaten or taken care of themselves since Scotty was in the hospital. The gesture he made showed the readers that he cared, and wanted to make sure they were okay. On the surface, Carver also happens to bring forward the importance of food in a social event. The mother goes and orders Scotty a cake, in which they are planning to give him for his birthday. It brings up the question, why do we provide these types of meals for these types of occasions? For most people, it is symbolic and perhaps special. Cake is not something you eat every day (normally). When one gets a cake for their birthday, it is noted as a special item. Overall, there are a couple different values that you are able to interpret in this essay, but nurturing and bonding are the main two.
Journal 10
The Art of Summarizing TS/IS
In “The Art of Summarizing”, the author gives the reader guidelines for summarizing. To begin, they tell the reader to not be scared of summarizing another authors work. They go on to explain that a good summary requires balancing between the original authors ideas and your own paper. While summarizing, you must put yourself in the other persons shoes and see their argument from their perspective. However, you cannot forget your own view entirely, as this is vital to your paper. After all of this, the writer gives a template for the writing. In general, they summarize the importance and usefulness of summarizing another author’s work. It can help strengthen your paper.
I found this chapter very interesting, as I also stray away from summarizing another authors work. I often find myself scared of plagiarism, since all colleges and high schools stress this is the end of the world. I don’t like doing it for many reasons, but another one would be because I feel like it isn’t necessary to include in my paper, which is not generally a correct statement. In addition to this, I have never thought of providing a counterargument for a summary. This is a good strategy, as you have lots of information to back your claim up.
Journal 11
Identify 3-4 passages from the essay and help explain why they are significant to Mitford’s argument.
Jessica Mitford writes an essay called “The American Way of Death Revisited”. This essay shows the reader the horrors of embalming, something American’s do not think about often. On page 41, paragraph 2, Mitford states “when weaving in the story of service as it is rendered today, spokesmen for the funeral industry tend to become so carried away by their own enthusiasm…” Mitford is stating that the funeral industry makes their work sound so magical and useful that a grieving family cannot see what is bad about their services. In a state of grieving, who likes to think about the preparation of the body? This is one of Mitford’s main arguments in her essay. She thinks that the funeral industry covers up the “horrible things”, as she would say, they’re doing.
On page 43, paragraph 4, Mitford talks about how routinely the body is embalmed. According to her, the family may not even be notified that it’s being done. This is a strong argument placed in her paper because it takes away the humanity from the funeral director. It makes him seem almost like a monster. In other countries, this act is not done as routinely. It’s as if they expect the family to have an open-casket funeral, and disregard every other option available (i.e, cremation). On page 44, paragraph 3, Mitford begins to talk about the hundreds of millions of dollars that goes into the process of embalming each year. American’s are ignorant to the process of embalming, which is why most people do not have an opinion (or negative one, at least) on this process. It seems as if the industry is trying to cover up the actual process of this, as there are no books describing the activity. Although, it may be a bit more complicated than that. Embalming is not a common interest, and this may be a reason why there is not much information on the subject. Mitford makes a couple different arguments in her essay, but the three listed above are the most critical.
Journal 12
What are some questions/conceptual interests/inquiries present in Mitford’s essay. List claims, positions, and arguments Mitford makes in her essay. Then decide if you agree, disagree, or it’s complicated and explain why.
Mitford makes a couple of different claims in her essay. Her first claim states on page 44, where she says, “embalming is indeed a most extraordinary procedure, and one must wonder at the docility of Americans who each year pay hundreds of millions of dollars for its perpetuation, blissfully ignorant of what it is all about, what is done, and how it’s done” (Mitford). You could perceive this claim in one of two ways. First, you could assume she is calling Americans ignorant. Not necessarily stupid, but misinformed and not informed at all. I do agree with this claim. American’s tend to take the easy way out, or take shortcuts. Due to this fact, there are gaps in knowledge. Some people don’t care to know about certain things at all, and only focus on what’s right in front of their faces. For example, most American’s know that McDonalds is not good for them, but they do not bother considering what type of ingredients are present in the food. On another note, she could be mocking the funeral industry. This quote would make us assume they think Americans are stupid, and they only participate in embalming to take their money. This is where it gets complicated. I believe that a lot of people who take this job are just trying to feed their kids and make a living. If a job with good pay was offered, most people would take it. However, I do believe that funeral directors and the industry cover up a lot of the details about embalming.
Another claim Mitford makes is on page 50, where she states, “the religious service may be held in a church or in the chapel of the funeral home; the funeral director vastly prefers the latter arrangement, for not only is it more convenient for him, but it affords him the opportunity to show off his beautiful facilities to the gathered mourners” (Mitford). Mitford is saying that the funeral director uses this opportunity to gain customers. If these people see this arrangement and like it, they might pick it for one of their loved one’s funeral. I agree with what she is saying, but as I said above, a lot of these funeral directors are just trying to make a living. I do not believe a lot of them are doing this out of disrespect, and some may not be interested in doing this at all. Overall, Mitford makes some pretty complicated claims that can be perceived in many different ways.
Journal 13
Dealing with the Living/Dead
1. How would you feel being directly involved in the death process of a family member? Would you be able to push the button to send your loved ones “off to their final disposition” as Doughty says?
Caitlyn Doughty is someone to strongly believes that families should be involved in the process of cremation. She would like to see skylights, and have music playing in the background as the family sends them off into the cremation-machine. I would not like to be involved in the death process of a family member. Personally, I wouldn’t like to see their body, either. I would almost feel responsible for their death, and responsible for being the one to physically destroy their existence. I would not be able to push a button to cremate them. I understand what she is saying, but I have been raised to avoid death. I’ve never been to an open-casket funeral and I don’t think I’d enjoy going to one. Those type of situations make me extremely uncomfortable, mostly because I am terrified of death myself. I do feel that later generations should be introduced to this idea, because then they’d be mentally able to do these things. I don’t believe anyone in my generation would be able to do this and continue to be mentally stable.
2. Why does Caitlyn Doughty feel like it is so important to humanize the industrial crematorium?
Caitlyn Doughty is an advocate for cremation, and even preparing the body at home. Doughty doesn’t believe that embalming is an accurate presentation of the human body. In her opinion, the way we dispose of our bodies doesn’t allow us to face the fact of death. She states that the cremation room is uninviting. There are loud machines, the ashes get all over you, the person who is doing the cremation Is alone, and overall it is just not a pleasant experience. Due to these facts, the family is unlikely to witness the cremation of their family member. If there was a different in atmosphere, she believes that the family may attend the cremation, and perhaps push the button themselves. She wants people to be aware that they’re going to die, and she believes that the family members would be able to survive emotionally if they were more involved in the disposal of the body. Doughty also discusses disposal of the body by water, which is another interesting concept of being more involved with the body.
3. Having gone behind the curtains of embalming, cremation, and fast-good production, has your opinion changed regarding these commonly accepted practices? Reflect on the Pollan, Mitford, and Doughty interview and isolate a passage from each text that did not surprise you and one that did.
The most surprising concept that was introduced in these readings is the one by Doughty. Doughty talks about being more involved in the process of disposing the dead body. I was surprised to hear about the concept of cremating the body yourself. This seems like a very extreme view, and I don’t really support it. What didn’t surprise me was the part where she describes the horrors of embalming. The makeup makes the body barely recognizable, but I’m not sure I would want a half-decomposed body in a open-casket funeral. My opinion of cremation has not changed, because I’ve always believed that cremating makes more sense than burial. However, I did not change my opinion on being a part of the cremation process. I do not think that this would be comforting. For Mitford, I was surprised to hear about the process of embalming. I did not know that they went through these procedures to get to the final result. I was not surprised to heart her mention that the industry was “under the table.” Not many people enjoy to talk about death, so it makes sense that they so easily hid these practices. My opinion on embalming is still rocky. Lastly, I was surprised to hear about the amount of chemicals in McDonalds food from Pollan’s essay. I was not surprised to read about the ignorance of Americans. My opinion on fast food did not change, because I’ve always avoided eating fast food. I’ve always known that it is not good for you.
Journal 14
Has your thinking changed since you last read the essay? What seems more obvious to you now in a second reading? What ideas remain murky or unreachable?
My thinking has mostly remained the same. However, this time I focused more on the lobster industry rather than the people who eat the lobster. It is more obvious to me that the lobster industry is not as necessary as people make it. Lobster is only a luxury item because the people who consume the lobster perceive it that way, and the industry is presenting it as such. The ideas about animal cruelty are still murky or unreachable. Since nobody really knows if lobsters feel pain, it is impossible to form an opinion on it. Likewise, if we were to stop cooking lobster, we’d have to stop killing and then cooking fish, shrimp, and all other living creatures. Humans must eat, and it is impossible to decide which creatures are more deserving of death.
Journal 15
1. Why is it so difficult to resolve the moral/ethical quandaries that Herzog writes about? What is it like to live in the “troubled middle?”
Herzog reflects on the moral/ethical quandaries regarding animals. Some of the questions are; Which animals should we eat? Is it right to eat one animal and not the other? What about animals for laboratories? There is this murky middle that every human being seems to be stuck in. How can we disregard the value or rats and use them for testing instead of dogs or cats? Why do we eat fish and not dogs? It is difficult to resolve because there really is no answer. Since the beginning of time, people hunted and during that time they needed to eat meat in case their crops did not survive. Today, we don’t need to hunt anymore. We have cow farms, butchers, and industries that control the growth of crops. We have an unlimited surplus of food that never seems to end. So, why do people still eat animals? If we no longer worry about the death of crops, why do we still eat meat? It is impossible to answer these questions.
2. What does it mean to be human? What can we learn about ourselves by looking at our relationships with animals? What separates us from animals? What do we have in common? Use Herzog and Wallace to support your position.
Humans are animals that evolved from adaption to the environment. Similar to other animals, we still choose to eat meat. We eat, breathe, and use the restroom just like any other animal needs to. We have instincts, feel pain, and have general instinctual emotions. Wallace believes lobsters have pain receptors and may or may not have emotions. Herzog questions what separates humans from animals, and thinks about why certain animals are more important than others. These two ideas combine to form a gigantic moral dilemma that people face every day. I believe animals can feel pain and have emotions just like we do, but maybe in a smaller form, depending on the animal.
3. Where do you see agreement between the ideas of DFW and Herzog? Where are they in conflict? Use the texts and draw out specific (quote!) examples that help show how these texts fit into a conversation about animals and eating ethically.
David Foster Wallace and Herzog agree that the mistreatment of animals is unacceptable. Wallace states, “For those Gourmet readers who enjoy well-prepared and presented meals involving beef, lamb, pork, chicken, lobster, etc.; Do you think much about the (possible) moral status and (probable) suffering of the animals involved?” Wallace doesn’t understand why people still eat meat, knowing that suffering and pain is involved. He doesn’t agree on the killing of animals at all. Herzog talks about the killing of kittens by feeding them to snakes and states, “but while the logical part of my brain may have concluded that there was not much difference, the emotional part of me was not buying the argument at all. I found the idea of feeding the bodies of cats to snakes revolting.’ These two quotes show that neither of these authors like the idea of harming or causing pain to animals in general. However, Herzog would sacrifice certain animals for certain practices while Wallace would not. He states; “I oppose testing the toxicity of oven cleaner and eye shadow on animals, but I would sacrifice a lot of mice to find a cure for cancer.” Herzog would rather use a rat or smaller, less important animal for these practices rather than another animal. However, judging from Wallace’s quote that was presented earlier in this discussion, he doesn’t think the type of animal matters. He doesn’t think we should be harming animals at all. While these two authors share similar ideas, their values are slightly different when it comes to the animal industry.
Journal 16
Responding to TS/IS; Planting a Naysayer in Your Text
A naysayer is a criticism that goes against your argument. This chapter explains how incorporating criticism or objections can make your piece of writing more credible and interesting. If you put a naysayer in the text, it includes the reader into the debate and makes you sound less biased. For example, if someone is writing an essay about Trump, it may be more helpful to insert some information about the other side view instead of just writing about how racist he is. (Although very true..) Without a naysayer, the writer comes off as closed minded and ignorant. It is similar to starting an argument without explaining why the other side is wrong. However, it is important not to stereotype the naysayer. This could weaken the argument and make you sound like you’re ranting. It is important to represent objections fairly. Lastly, if you’re providing a counterargument it is helpful to answer the questions of the other side to help strengthen the argument.
This particular passage was quite interesting, and seems to be information I will actually use in my next writing assignment. Normally, when I read an persuasive argument paper I feel as the author is ranting. Perhaps, to strengthen their argument they could have provided a naysayer to keep it interesting. In my writing, I try to provide a counterargument when possible. However, you need to be careful when you’re doing this so you don’t come off as ignorant or too hostile. Sensitive topics need to be handled individually, because it is almost impossible to come off as informed when talking about topics like abortion, politics, etc. In general, this passage provides evidence that using a naysayer in your text can strengthen the paper.
