Response to Week of Apr 19th Prompt

Out of the papers you are putting into your English portfolio, which one do you think shows your best work and which one do you think needs to be edited the most? Explain why. Be specific. Provide examples of your best and weakest areas.

The paper that I think shows my best work is my epigraph essay. Regardless of what my readers think I am a really big fan of it mostly because it was something I actually enjoyed writing about. The last epigraph that had been written by Thoreau that I close read was actually really interesting to me and I felt like I had a pretty good grasp on it. My conclusion was something that I actually really believed in and hopefully that has translated into a good communication of that idea. Obviously I still am trying to revise it so I hope that by portfolio time it has accomplished what I desire it to accomplish. The one that I think needs to be edited the most is my Research Paper. This is because I believe I am currently walking a fine line between writing a good one and having it fall apart. I submitted that essay as my third essay submission to my group and hopefully their reading can give me a good idea of how I need to approach it from this point till it is final. Also, I feel this needs to be edited the most, or at least the most carefully, because it is the longest paper and therefore I need to make sure I keep the reader engaged through the whole thing and I don't lose them. I believe one of my better areas is style of writing. I think I use good language and am not overly generic. Of course it is not incredible or anything, but it is one of the things that I feel best about in my writing. One of my worst areas, unfortunately, is putting myself in the readers shoes. I feel all to often I do not supply enough meta-commentary to adequately explain my thought processes. I tend to understand what I am writing about pretty well, so I sometimes overlook the fact that my reader may not be following me.

Response to Week of Apr 12th Prompt

Describe the kind of things you think Chris would do if he did make it out of the wild alive? Would he contact his parents? What would he say to them? Would he get a job, go back to school?

First off, if Chris had made it out of Alaska, he would have first contacted the people he had spent the most time with during his previous travels. This would include Wayne Westerberg, Jan Burress, and Ronald Franz. Based on the assumptions that Krakauer makes, Chris may have been leaning towards returning to typical life. How long that would have lasted, no one can even assume, however, I think he would have taken a little longer to contact his parents. I also doubt that he would just show up at their house. Based on his feelings that they were always worrying about him when they shouldn't, I feel that he would abhor their reaction to his arrival. Most likely he would send his sister Carine a letter from some distant location, allowing for a slower integration into renewing contact. Therefore he would be able to deal with a preferred family member. In terms of getting a job, I suspect he would remain close to either Westerberg or Burress, whom he had worked for previously. Beyond these initial reintegrations, any other thoughts on his future would be pure speculation and, in my opinion, are not worth discussing.

Response to Group C Prompt

At the beginning of chapter 17 of Into the Wild, author Jon Krakauer refers to the fact that McCandless did not have a topographic map a few times. In fact, McCandless did not have any map at all (174). This brings up the issue of how prepared Chris McCandless was for such an adventure. Krakauer often brings up letters from angry Alaskans or outdoorsmen who wrote letters complaining about this very issue, something that they saw as elementary knowledge and common sense. It is extremely difficult to argue that not having a map is not a sign of being unprepared when going out into the wilderness. However, it is important to note, as Krakauer does, that Chris had no intention of being 'prepared' in a conventional way with modern equipment (174). As we approach the end of the this documentation of McCandless's journey, has your overall view of Chris McCandless changed at all regarding this topic? Do you think that this is a sign of arrogance, ignorance, or just a human being challenging themselves? The chapter appears to be heavily defending Chris's mistakes in the wild, while still acknowledging them. Are Krakauer's methods effective for you in this case?

My view has not changed. As stated in the question, Krakauer says that McCandless had no intention of being prepared. Therefore i believe it is wrong to fault him for his decisions, especially since they didn't harm anyone else. Not to take his death lightly. It was tragic. However, I had believed from the beginning that McCandless was someone who did what he was passionate about, and he should be commended for that. Therefore I believe it was just a sign of a human being challenging themselves. Regarding Krakauer's writing, I found this chapter very effective. It does bring up a lot of the mistakes that Chris made, and I could definitely see where people could get upset with it. But right after that Krakauer addressed the mistake with such conviction that I was back on his side. If you are trying to make people see something one way, then the best way to accomplish that is to rebuke what the others say, and I believe Krakauer did that very effectively in this chapter.

Response to Group B Prompt

What is your topic for the research paper? How does this topic currently impact American culture (or another country, if that's where you're going with this)? How is your book/show/movie different from all of the other books/shows/movies out there like it? How is it unique? What specific cultural issue will you be addressing in your research essay and why is it relevant TODAY.

The topic for my research paper is the film Star Wars and how it has created what seems to be a endless supply of products for merchandise companies and marketers to utilize. The impact on American culture is that it has swamped stores with products, sometimes of questionable quality, yet consumers continually purchase them based on a face or name, which is to be portrayed as a bad thing, because it removes the artistry out of the movie business and the public mindlessly purchases useless things as a result of the high profile films. What separates Star Wars from movies it that it was the first to capitalize on this and in a bigger way than any other film. The specific cultural issue that I will be addressing is consumerism, an aspect of American and Western culture that is sometimes criticized as being indulgent.

Response to Group F Prompt

"Do you think it was a good idea to add the chapters about Walt (Chris’ father) and Krakauer as individuals? What did it do for you for your views of the novel? Did anything change your opinion or did it support what you already thought? Why?"

I think it was a great idea to add these chapters into the book. The chapters about Chris's family were not as effective on me because I had felt that Krakauer had basically been hinting at what the issues there were for most of the book. I knew that Krakauer was going to include some of his own life experiences into the novel, because he says that in the author's note. When I finally got to his two chapters, I was blown away. I had not been expecting anything like that. The connections between their experiences were so good and the emotion with which he told his own story kept me riveted. For me, it only added to the credibility of the novel, which I had held in high regard before this. To me it specifically addressed one naysayer who he quoted on page 71 as saying, "Krakauer is a kook if he doesn't think Chris 'Alexander Supertramp' McCandless was a kook". All of a sudden, with his own hiking adventure in the book, Krakauer becomes a very reliable and experienced kook doesn't he? To me, putting that chapter in the book showed that, 1)Krakauer knows what he's talking about when it comes to people venturing into the wild alone and 2)Krakauer knows what it feels like, and what goes through one's head, and what motives a person may have to go into the wild alone.

Response to Group E Prompt

"What did you think was the most effective type of media in presenting an aspect of rhetoric? Would you have chosen a different media source if you could for the rhetorical analysis project? Why or why not?"

I think this question may be a little vague, and much too broad for it's own good. There are so many different aspects of rhetoric and so many different ways in which those aspects can be presented, even with specific media types. However, I guess the most effective way to present an aspect of rhetoric would be in the form of video. Whether this be a TV show or a commercial of some kind, I believe this is the most effective way because it is such a large outlet of news and information and is so widely viewed. While I know that magazines and newspapers have not died off yet, and that internet is up and coming as possibly the most prominent source of media, I still think that TV holds much of the worlds attention, and commercial would probably be the more specific outlet of rhetoric required material.

This being said I would have liked to have chosen advertisements for the project, because they, like commercials, require lots of information to be sent to a consumer in a short amount of time. Making an advertisement would have been rich with analysis possibilities for this reason. There is so much to put into a small space, and you have to catch the consumer's attention, and you have to effect them enough to spend their hard earned money on your product.

Response to Group D Prompt

"In response to the Taylor Swift article we read and discussed about in class, what is one song that means something to you? Is it by your favorite artist? Analyze the lyrics (if there are any). When listening to the song, what images come to mind? Why?"

"Look at this big eyed fish, swimming in the sea, oh

How he dreams to be a bird, swoop and diving, through the breeze, so one day

Caught a big ol' wave up on to the beach, now he's

Dead you see, beneath the sea is where a fish should be"

This is from a song called "Big-Eyed Fish" by Dave Matthews Band. No this is not my favorite artist, but they are way up there on my list. This also one of my favorite songs of theirs. I chose this one specifically because I felt I had a fairly good grip on the lyrics and there meaning. This is the first verse of the song and we get this 'big-eyed' fish swimming around the sea, and it wants to be a bird and fly, but when it tries, obviously it gets beached and dies. He goes on to sing, beneath the sea is where a fish should be. This lays out the ideas of being who you are. Don't try to be anyone else, cause you're really good at what you do, and if you try to become someone you're not, it will only screw things up.

Obviously the song paints pretty clear pictures. I see a fish swimming around and there's seagulls above and it tries to go on the nice sandy beach. More than looking at that obvious of an image I guess I can say that I also see the general idea of someone stepping into the world, trying to find their place, 'big-eyed', etc.