Bertoff: The title sounds like a Twilight Zone episode. When I saw the name "I. A. Richards," I thought I remembered him as being a New Critic. Since I already knew how he suggests people should read texts, I was interested to see how he thought people should write. He mentions a code...that sounds about right for Mr. Richards. Bertoff's comments about semantics and abstractions vs. actual "events" and how that ties into imagination and the "intelligent eye." I kind of want to put this into the category of the other essays that have high commentary on thinking, writing, etc. but don't really talk about how to implement that into the classroom...but I really liked Bertoff's essay. I simply mean that I enjoyed reading it. Funny stuff and anyone who mentions Buster Keaton in an academic text is alright with me.
Hairston: New paradigm. Cool, got it. So, here it is. Short and sweet. This isn't for me. I'm out. Done. I'm dropping out of the education program at the end of the semester. I don't know why I rationalized the torture I feel from going through my education classes before, but I'm not going to anymore. I'm miserable, I really am. I had a mini-nervous breakdown yesterday about doing full time work and full time school and about the prospect of teaching. I don't want to do it. Teaching was just going to be a job to get me through library science grad school anyway.
Sorry, I know I'm venting and you guys don't really care about my stressed out mental state. This does have something to do with the Hairston essay, I swear. I was re-reading through it last night to do my blog and I realized that I'm a traditionalist. Here is the sentence that stuck out the most: "Young adds that underlying the traditional paradigm is what he calls the 'vitalist' attitude toward composing; that is, the assumption that no one can really teach anyone else how to write because writing is a mysterious creative activity that cannot be categorized or analyzed" (115). THAT'S ME!!! I believe that, however wrong anyone else thinks it is. I wouldn't go as far as to say that it cannot be taught or that someone's writing cannot be improved upon, but I DO think it is mysterious. I don't like reading these essays because they try to de-mystify writing for me and I'm afraid that my writing is going to get screwed up in the "process." Maybe there should be a change...I don't know. I know I'm not going to be a part of it, though. Man, I hope Shipka doesn't fail me for writing all of this. She's right about the career suicide on this thing. I maybe just committed student career suicide.
Reither: I felt like Reither just kind of summed up what everyone in the field was doing, which was good for me to read at this point in the semester. I don't really know what else to say about this essay other than "gee, they really love their process." Also, Reither, I never thought that discourse community didn't mean knowledge community..okay? You've made that point a bit clearer than it needs to be.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hi everybody! I have a huge favor to ask! I am working on a paper concerning gender differences in written communication. If you could bring, or e-mail me a copy of a conversation you had with someone of the opposite sex, I would greatly appreciate it! It could be about anything! You could print out an IM conversation, or provide a copy of a letter- anything in writing that implies conversation, even if it is not an actual conversation (like the text of a card someone gave you, etc.). If you have time, could you briefly describe your interpretations of or intentions for the conversation, and tell if you think it was successful- why or why not? But if you don’t have time, the text will do just fine! Thanks for your help! Even two responses would be a lifesaver! You can email me at erika6@umbc.edu or you can reach me on my blog page. If you can get the text to me before Sunday that would be awesome! I owe you one! :)
Post a Comment