Journal #2
1/28/19
There are a couple of ways in which I draft and revise writing assignments. The first way is to start early, or at least in a timely manner. The process begins with looking at the requirements of the assignment. I then make an outline of what the paper or project should look like. This usually entails changing the format and putting headings for different paragraphs and a brief description of the information that is supposed to go there. If quotes are needed for the assignment, I decide which ones I am going to use. Once an outline is complete, I start writing the body paragraphs of the assignment. I find it easier to write the introduction and conclusion after the body paragraphs are finished. Once the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion are finished, I read through the paper and make sure the requirements for the assignment are met. Then I have someone else read it to look for mistakes or things I could correct. I usually use this process for assignments that are longer or more complex.
The second and far more common way I draft and revise writing assignments is by waiting until the night before to even start thinking about what I could write. At that point, I am striving for the bare minimum. I usually make sure I covered everything I needed to and then somehow try to incorporate all of those things into a mildly coherent paper. In most cases, the rough draft ends up being the final draft. I will usually skim through what I have written to look for mistakes or things I could add. If the paper seems decent enough, then I have completed it. I really wish I would not take this route to complete assignments, but being under pressure actually helps sometimes because it makes me focus. Hopefully, I will become better at drafting and revising my work as the semester progresses.
Journal #3
1/30/19
In this chapter, I found it helpful that there are explanations as to why you set up and use quotes in a certain way. For example, explaining the quote after it is used to ensure that the reader understands it in the way that you do. The templates for introducing quotes were also helpful. Lastly, I think that integrating quotes from an outside source with your own words is helpful; my English teachers in high school used to require us to do that for some assignments. I think that this chapter was helpful and I will most likely use these strategies when I am drafting writing assignments.
Journal #4
2/1/19
In the beginning of the article, it seems as though Rhinehart resents food or thinks of it as a burden. Later, we learn that that is not necessarily true. In paragraph two on page three, Rhinehart states that he imagines, “a separation between our meals for utility and function, and our meals for experience and socialization.” This is important because it shows that Rhinehart understands the emotional connection to food, but also the need for basic nutrients to survive.
In paragraph three on page six, Widdicombe describes what she sees in Rhinehart’s refrigerator. The only food she listed being there was a bag of baby carrots, which Rhinehart refers to as “recreational food.” This is interesting to me because not many people think of vegetables as a “fun snack,” in fact many think the complete opposite. This also reinforces the idea that Rhinehart does not resent real food. Widdicombe also talks about the kitchen being “bare,” which reflects Rhinehart’s minimalist personality.
In the second paragraph on page nine, Willett says, “[w]e’re concerned about much more than just surviving” when it comes to the consumption of food. This is a contrast to Rhinehart’s minimalist personality. Rhinehart seems to be primarily concerned with receiving the bare minimum nutrients, which you can survive on, but will not optimize health.
Journal #5
2/6/19
In this chapter, I found the explanation as to why it is important to state both sides of an argument helpful. For example, just stating your point of view on an issue will not make much sense if information about both the issue and the other point of view is not disclosed. If the opposite opinion is not stated, then your opinion is treated more as a statement than an argument, which does not particularly intrigue people. I also found it helpful to look at an essay and actually see where and how the templates shown in the book are used.
Journal #6
2/18/19
Journal #7
2/25/19
Global comments and suggestions from my peers that I found the most helpful were comments about reorganizing my thoughts in a way that information relevant to a particular idea was all in one place. Also, comments about incorporating my own experiences and personal connections to food were helpful. I found comments like these helpful because they are things that I would not have necessarily noticed in my own paper, and I think that incorporating these things in my essay afterward strengthened it.
In my opinion, the best global comments and suggestions that I offered my peers were comments regarding the incorporation of Widdicombe’s article and explanation of tension between different ideas. I believe these were possibly beneficial to others because they can help them think about how to articulate what they are trying to prove and give enough information so that the audience will have a better understanding of Soylent itself as well as the controversy around it.
Pertaining to my essay, a suggestion made by Sydney that was not captured on the page but came up during our discussion was to change the words in my thesis from “[use Soylent] in moderation” to “[use Soylent] appropriately” to better explain my point of view. Our conversation mostly consisted of each of us explaining our comments in more detail and giving suggestions on how to fix or elaborate on things.
This kind of peer review is very different from peer review in high school. In high school, we would tend to correct spelling or grammar mistakes more than give suggestions on how to further explain thoughts, what information to add, etc. and would not even give much thought to the process because we technically did not receive a grade for peer reviewing. The peer review we completed in this class has been very helpful not only in improving my writing, but preventing me from procrastinating.
Journal #8
2/20/19
In this chapter, I found the piece of advice about stating the opinion opposite from yours first very interesting. When I am writing, I tend to think in terms of writing a literary analysis essay because that was basically the only type of writing we ever had guidance on in high school. This entails not using the “I” voice, only stating the side of an argument that you agree with, etc. Usually, when I am writing and I feel like I am not doing the assignment correctly, it is usually because I am writing in terms of the rules of a literary analysis paper when that is not the assignment. I see how stating both sides of an argument is helpful because it gives the reader more information about the topic and you can justify your point of view better. Also, explaining what quotes and passages from other sources is helpful because it limits the amount of confusion as to why you used a certain quote and explains how the quote proves your thesis.
Journal #9
2/20/19
When revising my essay, I spent the most time reorganizing my thoughts so that ideas in the same categories were together and adding more of my own personal experiences. When proofreading my essay. This process was very different from my last revising process; I spent a lot more time reading it over and critically thinking about how I can explain myself in a way that others would understand. I think overall, revising and peer reviewing helped me because it made me think more critically about the ways I can make a clear point, use relevant evidence, and explain my point of view.
Journal #10
2/25/19
Page 10, paragraph 3
“So-called fancy food has always served as a form of cultural capital, and cooking programs help you acquire it, now without so much as lifting a spatula. The glamour of food has made it something of a class leveler in America, a fact that many of these shows implicitly celebrate. Television likes nothing better than to serve up elitism to the masses, paradoxical as that might sound.”
I somewhat agree with this. Here, it seems as though Pollan suggests that cooking programs are pushing classism by giving attention and praise to “fancy food.” We may consider food to be “fancy” if it is expensive or rare, thus eaten more often by people of a higher class. Food of this nature is definitely romanticized and receives much attention, but I would not go as far to say that this perpetuates the idea that a person in a certain social class is better than a person in a different social class.
Page 11, paragraph 2
“On a commercial network, a program that actually inspired viewers to get off the couch and spend an hour cooking a meal would be a commercial disaster, for it would mean they were turning off the television to do something else. The ads on the Food Network, at least in prime time, strongly suggest its viewers to do no such thing.”
I somewhat agree with this. I believe that Pollan is suggesting that cooking programs on the Food Network are not really trying to teach their viewers anything but trying to keep them entertained for their own benefit as opposed to cooking shows that were not on commercial networks. There is definitely some truth here, but I do not think that cooking programs on the Food Network have malicious intentions or are trying to discourage anyone from doing anything. After all, they probably do want people to be inspired so they can sell products that they advertise.
Page 17, paragraph 2
“Cooking gave us not just the meal but also the occasion: the practice of eating together at an appointed time and place. This was something new under the sun, for the forager of raw food would likely have fed himself on the go and alone, like the animals. But sitting down to common meals, making eye contact, sharing food, all served to civilize us.”
I agree with this. It makes sense that cooking would bring people closer; it takes longer to cook and prepare food than to eat raw food and this gives people the opportunity to gather and spend time with each other. This allows us to make connections with others and become more “civiliz[ed],” as Pollan suggests. If we were to lose this, people would have different attitudes toward each other and food, and this would probably be detrimental to society.
Journal #11
2/27/19
I found it interesting that this chapter focused more on considering someone else’s writing from the reader’s point of view. What I found helpful was how to think critically when reading someone’s writing; it is important to consider what provoked the author and what other views could be held on said issue because these things give more significance to the thesis and makes you think about your own opinions as well as the writer’s. I also found it interesting that it is considered acceptable and sometimes necessary for readers to assume what issue is being discussed, what other views could be held, and even what the author’s thesis is. This was interesting to me because normally, assumptions do more harm than good. A lack of information can cause confusion for the reader, so it is important to consider clarity when writing.
Journal #12
3/8/19
My comments were mostly “O,” “V,” and “I” for both papers 1 and 2. I try to focus more on giving suggestions pertaining to the structure of the paragraphs, use of evidence, and analyses rather than local concerns. The peer review process for project #2 was a little different because the rough drafts were shorter and the ideas may not have been thoroughly developed yet. This made it a little easier to give suggestions on what could be explained better, but also difficult because you have to keep in mind that the paper is in a very early stage of writing. For paper 3, I hope to make more comments about evidence and local concerns.
Journal #12b
3/20/19
In this podcast, I found it interesting that Doughty said that she “romanticized” death and cremation before she started working. It seems as though most people would want to think of death as peaceful and liberating although it is very sad. However, as Doughty explained, cremating a body is dirty and she is often the only one in the room with the body. I was sort of surprised to hear that there is not much family involvement when it comes to “sending off” their loved ones. At the same time, it makes sense because not many people know that they can be involved or it may make the family uncomfortable. I also found it very important that she distinguishes violence and terror from a “natural” death. Nowadays, terrorism and violence are common and people have the opportunity to actually see it on the internet or television, resulting in people associating death with terror. Doughty makes it clear that we should think of death not as a scary and violent, although there are people who die like that. Death is uncomfortable to talk about because it makes us sad and we do not know what happens when we die. However, it is important to talk about because it happens to everyone.
Journal #13
3/22/19
I found project 2 more difficult to write than project 1. Because of this, I spent more time writing this essay than the first essay; I found it more difficult to write the introduction and conclusion and form a thesis statement, so I spent the most time on those things. Peer review helped because we were able to talk about specific things that needed improvement and the requirements for the project in general as a group, allowing for different perspectives on writing and clarification of comments that were made on the rough drafts. Throughout my essay, I engaged with each of the students’ essays once and Pollan’s essay twice. I ended up exchanging one source for another while writing, and there were two text-on-text moments in the essay. I used another quote from Pollan and analyzed it by itself in the fourth paragraph. There was a generous amount of information to cover between Pollan’s and other students’ essays and I think I spent a fair amount of time making sure that my essay was written to the best of my abilities and understanding.
Journal #14
3/25/19
While reading “What the Crow Knows” by Ross Anderson, I found the whole concept of Jainism interesting. People who practice this religion complete their daily activities in a way that they try to avoid disrupting life at the microscopic level, which seems extreme to me. At the end of the day, nature will be disrupted at a microscopic level no matter what we do. Another thing I found interesting is the idea of consciousness in nonhuman animals and how theirs have evolved differently from ours; I had always thought it was obvious that animals are capable of feeling pain and emotion and it is confusing to me how some people still think they are not. However, it is also understandable because humans tend to only understand what is normal to them and see things from their perspective only. This article raises a complicated question: if science shows evidence that animals can feel pain and emotions, is it morally correct for humans to eat animals? This is something to consider moving forward when thinking about ethical practices pertaining to the treatment of animals.
Journal #15
3/27/19
Page 7, paragraph 3 (“Like most people… of other animals.”)
This supports Herzog’s claim because it shows the irony of human morals vs our actions. He states that he is “conflicted about our ethical obligations to animals,” most likely because humans have used animals as resources for many years (food, transportation, test subjects, etc.) but have a general awareness that animals are conscious beings. Because of this, humans may feel guilty for subjecting animals to such conditions for our own benefit, however our priorities and values tend to override morals.
Page 5, paragraph 2 (“It took Ron… would look down.”)
This supports Herzog’s claim because it shows how we can be emotionally attached to certain animals and become uncomfortable when we have to do something we think of as immoral, but ended up doing it anyway. Although it took Ron a long time to perfuse the cats that he had grown to like, he still perfused them. He prioritized the research even though the process took an emotional toll on him, which says a lot about people who are conflicted when thinking about how we should treat animals vs how we actually do treat them.
Page 2, paragraph 1 (“In an instant… three to one.”)
This supports Herzog’s claim because again, it shows how our morals tend to be ignored when something more important comes up. In this case, Judith started to eat meat again after 15 years of being vegetarian. Even though she thought it was wrong to eat animals, she started to do it again because she liked it, making comfort a priority rather than ethics. Overall, this shows how morals can have a powerful influence on us, but do not always stick with us throughout our lives.
Journal #16
4/1/19
After re-reading David Foster Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster,” I found that it connects to the other essays we have read. For example, it relates to Widdicombe’s essay in that both pieces discuss what we should or should not do in terms of preference, Pollan’s essay in that both pieces discuss our values and traditions, and Anderson’s essay in that both pieces discuss whether or not animals are “conscious” beings. It also connects to Herzog’s essay, although Herzog focuses more on the “troubled middle” perspective while David Foster Wallace is more supportive of eating animals. There are some ideas in David Foster Wallace’s essay that I question. He mentions that people, himself included, avoid thinking about the immoral practices because it makes them uncomfortable. Despite the topic of discussion being uncomfortable, is it worthwhile to talk about and possibly resolve some issues pertaining to the treatment of animals? Also, he states that lobsters are seemingly unable to experience pain. In Anderson’s article, however, he mentions that animals could experiences senses and consciousness in different ways or with different organs than us. I wonder if this would have affected David Foster Wallace’s stance on this issue.
Journal #17
4/1/19
In this chapter, I found it interesting that it is actually recommended to address criticism regarding your writing specifically as it enhances your argument. In my high school experiences with writing essays, we were discouraged from mentioning any counterarguments; we were only allowed to state our own opinions and support them with evidence as if they were facts. It makes sense that recognizing and working with objections would make an argument stronger. It would provide more information to the reader and allow the writer to analyze the evidence further. I also thought that the section titled “Represent Objections Fairly” was helpful. People can often decide whether or not your work is reliable based on how you present yourself in your writing, so it is important to recognize how others might interpret your tone.
Journal #18
4/3/19
In this paragraph, Foer explains that he has emotional connections and happy memories tied to food. This food just so happens to come from animals, which is what he is ironically against. He describes eating a variety of foods that come from animals and the events that occurred because of those foods. If Foer stopped eating meat, his actions would be compliant with his behavior and that would probably make him feel better in terms of morals. However, it also means that he would most likely lose those connections and memories that are very important to him. At this point, it is a matter of whether one values following their morals or culture/comfort more.
The question that Foer presents in these two paragraphs concerns whether or not we as humans can provide a valid explanation as to why we eat animals other than for gustatory pleasure. One might defend this by saying that we eat animals for sustenance in order to keep ourselves alive. However, animals are not the only form of food; other foods that do not come from animals can be eaten and would certainly cause less pain and suffering. Eating meat is a choice, just as being vegetarian is. If people did not prefer the taste of meat whatsoever, we would not be eating animals. This shows how morals can be overlooked or forgotten when thinking about preference and comfort.
Journal #19
4/5/19
I am finding paper 3 to be more difficult to write than the last two papers. I feel as though every piece we have read over the course of this semester can connect to David Foster Wallace’s essay and I had trouble deciding which essays I want to use. At this point, I think I know which essays I will be using, however I feel as though this may change at some point. There is a lot of information to cover, but I am hoping to write an interesting discussion about how our morals and values in society affect our behaviors. Every week, Monday through Thursday, I show up to school at around 8:00am because most parking lots fill up after that time. This allows me to kill an hour and a half before my morning classes start, so I usually sit alone in my freezing vehicle and work on homework that does not require the internet to complete. This is how I completed the first and second drafts for project 3. I also spend time writing in the Commons when I have breaks in between classes or at home in my room. Either way, I need to be alone and in a place that is somewhat quiet.
So far, the writing process for this paper has been slightly different than paper 1 and 2. I feel as though the rough drafts for paper 3 are more rushed and incoherent. Perhaps this is because I am struggling to figure out how to explain my ideas. I also started and continued to work on projects 1 and 2 earlier in the writing process as opposed to project 3; I found myself writing both rough drafts for project 3 in my car on the days each of them were due. Honestly, I am overwhelmed with assignments for other courses and I am trying to complete everything somewhat efficiently, so that is probably why I have been avoiding this paper. I hope that I can manage my time better and that explaining my ideas in this essay comes easier as I continue to develop my writing.
Journal #20
4/10/19
Journal #21
4/14/19
The revision process for project #3 has been more difficult than the last two projects. I am still finding connections between every piece we have read over the course of this semester and think that most of them are worth talking about. However, I think I am sure about which two sources I am going to use. At this point in time, project #3 looks very different from draft #3. Since peer review, I have switched out Foer’s piece with Andersen’s. I was finding that I did not really know where I was going with my essay and thought it would be better to talk about something different than what I was originally going with. As a result, I have altered my thesis statement and I am working on revising/rewriting the first body paragraph to fit the source. I have also changed some of the language used in this paper and added some of my own opinions on the issues covered as suggested during peer review. I think the changes I made have improved my paper so far; explaining the idea of animal consciousness first and then relating it to bigger issues has helped me make sense of where I want to go with this paper. I also think altering the use of language and incorporating my own experiences/opinions helps to make my argument more relatable and convincing.
