WWD Activity 3: Intertextuality

For my Non-Western World Literature class this semester, we are required to write Issue Frames (one page paper) for each novel that we read. These papers must include a thesis and support two claims or points that we want to make. One paper that I wrote was based on a play and the play's movie version. My main resources were made up of the play itself, the movie, class lecture notes, class debates, and an article review of the play. The way I created something "novel" and something original was basically by analyzing my rescources and giving my opinion on the text after intrepreting those resources.

I think my teacher was mainly concerned with my ability to generate a substantial thesis and follow the guidelines specified in the syllabus. He was very much interested in my opinion, but at the same time he wanted me to give specific support from the intertextual sources that were available that led me to my opinion.

I think the article review was the main intertextual resource that I used. I found that the author's points of view were very helpful in giving me ideas in which to generate my thesis. Also, my professor suggested we use direct references from the book whenever possible. I used direct quotes and indirect qotes, which are the most explicit expressions and forms of intertextuality.

Freewrite: What Works Well in the Actual Observation Process

I observed two of my English 301 classmates write a letter to a potential WVU student who wanted to know more about the Professional Writing and Editing program. As I was doing this, I realized there were many more details to be alert and attentive to while I was observing and taking notes. I noted their specific jobs and roles they designated in order to effectively colloborate with their partner. One writer decided he would type, while the other one would give insightful input. The typist would refer back to the question frequently to make sure the information they were coming up with was actually relevant to the question. They both sort of "brainstormed" to achieve the correct phrasing of what they planned on writing. One partner would thoughtfully say aloud a sentence, while the other would verify agreement or a better term he had in mind. Also, I noticed they would always confer with one another after clarifying an important point. My placement affected the data I collected because my close proximity allowed me to observe every minute detail worth paying attention to. If my placement had been farther away and less convenient, then their discourse would have been less audible; thus prohibiting my observation. As the activity evolved, my data collection shifted in a postive way. By familiarizing myself with their discourse and methods to achieve the final written work, I felt like I could zone in on the most important details that led them to create the work.

Freewriting: Writing the Research Proposal

2 types of interviews: discourse-based and stimulated elicitation interviewing.

What kinds of questions can I ask in my discourse-based interview with the organization I research? Do I have to present them an alternative of mine that I create or other alternatives that they had thought about incorporating into their writing? Would I be asking them what led them to alter certain parts of the texts while leaving certain parts the way they were?

In my stimulated elicitation interview I need to decide what kind of props (such as which texts or external stimuli) I should use.

Rhetorical Activity 3 ARCS p.113

The Daily Athenaeum featured an article by Eugene Kim that generated ideas to fix one of America's greatest health problem of obesity. The helpful solution Kim proposes is that Washington to issue a tax credit to Americans who stay fit and at a a healthy weight. He proposes that Americans who maintain their BMIs between 18.5 and 25 should qualify to receive a 1,000$ tax credit. Adults could check their BMI during their annual checkup to the doctor.

The writer does a fantastic job of providing evidence early in his argument that obesity is a major health problem whose hidden costs affect a great number of the American people. Conjecture is established, therefore the first question of stasis theory is confirmed. Kim argues what constitutes obesity by stating healthy BMI levels, which defines the obese population. This confirms the second question of definition for stasis theory. The question of quality has substantial evidence throughout the article by invoking that obesity is obviously a bad thing that should be avoided due to major diseases such as heart disease. The argument seems to lie at the question of policy by proposing that the federal government act by issuing a tax credit to those who qualify. The position that Kim seems to be arguing against is the inaction of the government to reward those healthy Americans who are not such a burden on the economy. He argues that while the government provides tax cuts to Americans in other ways such as through child tax credits or Earned Income Tax Credit, there has not been much done (as far as money incentives) to deter Americans from essentially, becoming fat. The position he is arguing against is the position to remain idle and watch while our economy is burdened with extreme health care costs. Kim's argument follows the four questions of stasis, therefore I conclude that he can achieve stasis with the opponent.

Freewriting exercise: Analyzing Job Application

After analyzing the job skills freewrite on p 21, certain goals of the writer came to mind.
By listing all their acquired skills they can choose the best ones to pick to list for the resume. By Looking at the experience section: this gives a reader a sense of what kinds of experiences the writer felt were worth mentioning.

Writer's Audience Freewrite p23:
This gives us insight into the background of the company and allows the writer to decide what the company's interests are. It allows the writer to gain a new perspective on the company and what kind of document they want to write.

Rhetorical Activities Q. 2: Theatrical Argument Vs. Rhetoric

People engaged in theatrical arguments are not that interested in listening to a rhetor's argument with the possibility of being persuaded to change their mind on a specific point. Popular forms of theatrical argument such as Crossfire feature the people shouting at each other and not giving the ohter person's argument time to sink in before they begin shouting their opinion. While shows like these are entertaining, it is not really true rhetoric and it mainly just defeats the purpose of why arguing can be a good thing. Arguing in the rhetorical sense is meant to listen to another person's argument and to respond in a logical manner, with the awareness that beliefs can change without any moral defeat being given to the person who changed their mind. However, in a show like Crossfire how many times would a viewer expect to find the hosts of the show truly behaving like this and changing their mind? This wouldn't happen mainly because then the audience might view them as intellectually weak. Another show that comes to mind as a form of theatrical entertainment is the ESPN show "Pardon the Interruption". PTI features two guys usually shouting at each other, but it proves to be quite entertaining but yet no persuasion usually happens. However, PTI probably would go off the air if it featured the guys just passively listening to each other and being easily persuaded. So, in a way I think theatrical argument has its place on television but with the world of sports that goes along well since sports are a form of entertainment. As far as political shows like Crossfire goes, Stewart had a very valid point that in regards to more serious matters arguing "for the sake of arguing" doesn't get anything done and wastes time for the American people.

Rhetorical Activities Q.#4

Congress has been debating federal regulation of guns since 1934. Advocates of gun control argue that by controlling the public's access to firearms, crime and fatalities caused by juveniles and criminals in schools and other public places will decrease. There has been much speculation after the school shooting at Virginia Tech. about whether a tighter reluation by federal government on guns could have prevented the deadliest mass shooting in America. It is a tragic fact that a mother would have to worry about sending her kid out to school or a kid would have to feel uneasy sitting in a classroom, but the fact of the matter is the threat is real. Opponents of gun control say the real issue that needs to be addressed is the fact that some kids feel left out and are "victimized" which leads them to lash out at innocent people. It is unfortunate that while we are arguing between how much regulation should the government have over guns, tragic events such as the Va. Tech shooting take place. Hopefully, America can find some middle ground so that families don't have to feel ill at ease when sending their kids out to school.

Rhetorical Activities Q.#1

A 2005 USA Today article on abortion basically states that abortion has and will continue to be a huge issue that divides Democrats and Republicans. Complexity of the issue is evident through the fact that most people take the middle ground when it comes to abortion, instead of objectively deciding a clearcut yes or no. The importance of the the issue of abortion is a known fact with the general public, with it being a deciding factor with individuals in determining their political party. Hoewever, the issue repeatedly states cases in the past where abortion has been an issue. It talks about past elections where party leader's stands on abortion affected whether they won or lost in that particular year. It talks about how politics are constantly changing and are always pertinent in today's society. Instances that create kairos to the audience are shown through recent news conferences between the party leaders. The article draws on kairos in that way. Also, at the end of the article there's a section devoted to showing how gun control is a similar issue that divides the political parties.

The next article discusses the controversy over the Catholic's pro-life stance on abortion and some of their religious member's (e.g Sen. Joe Biden) decisions to make a stance for abortion rights. Since a reader might not understand why the issue is so urgent, it establishes relevance through stating that Joe Biden could be a link between Catholics and abortion rights. It creates kairos through the dramatic opposition shown through public comments made by more conservative Catholics. It leads the reader to wonder if other Catholics will decide to become more lenient on the subject of abortion. The article doesn't delve into any other related subjects as the USA Today article did, mainly because it seemed to want to focus its audience on the drama between the Senator and the Catholic community.