“Consider the Lobster”

-David Foster Wallace Journal 1

1. If I could ask David Foster Wallace a question I would ask him what inquired him to wonder about the feelings of lobsters?  I would also ask him if he would ever eat another one again.  This is because I believe his writing was very informative and genuine that if he were to continue eating lobster he would be a hypocrite at least in my eyes.
2. The limits of a written discussion on larger issues are that in perspective to other issues, how far can one go on its importance.  For example, an issue of what color socks one should wear is not as important as the importance of starvation in the world.  To anticipate the questions of the audience while writing one might try to steer the discussion in a certain way.  Another way to try to be prepared for the audience’s questions is to try to think about what someone else might be thinking by trying to see other peoples’ points of views.

 

 

Drafting Experience

Journal 2

          When it comes to drafting writing projects I have had to do a lot.  I remember in third grade my teacher said that we would be doing multiple drafts of our papers until they were good (as good as they can be for a third-grade level).  I got frustrated though because my best friend only had to do two drafts while I had to do four! That being said, I think trying to improve my papers as much as they can be is a very important thing.  When it comes to revision, I definitely need help because I do not always see my mistakes as easily as others do.  I always start with grammar corrections and then move on to content.  My logic is because if the grammar is first dealt with then it will not distract me from focusing on the content.  Once the content of the paper itself is to my liking I go back again and fix grammar errors.  This is basically my process.  While writing I sometimes make note of a certain part I will need to go back anyway as well, that way I can give special attention to it.  When it comes to editing, however, I definitely do not rely solely on my own skill and will ask for help from multiple sources.  Whether it is peers, teachers, or upperclassmen, I tend to take in multiple resources for correction.

 

Nursing Home

Journal 3

      Growing up for 7 years of my life in an apartment above a nursing home meant that I learned to have a pretty good idea of what it was like.  I remember that dusty and musky air that had this hint of a pleasant sent mixed in with it.  The air would always feel thick and warm because it was usually always warm in the nursing home.  The colors of the home were never bold ones but instead all faded pastels that were pleasant in the sunshine and gloomy in the rain.  The whole scene would almost seem soft and hazy.  Everyone moves slowly because there is no rush there. You would hear the occasional scraping of a chair being pushed or the creaking of the floor.  You could hear low grumbles of people and soft voices from the employees.  The touch is dry and dusty.  Every piece of furniture felt like it had been through a lot and the ripping of seems also atoned to that.

The scene of a nursing home is warm and slow.  It smells like cleaning products yet also dusty.  Things sometimes look gray and faded, including the people.  I understood why being a kid who walked through a nursing made me stand out.  Seeing something so bright, energetic, and youthful was out of the ordinary in a place like that.  It brought life and some sort of excitement when there were kids or animals in the nursing home.  It was very obvious what didn’t belong there and what did.

 

TS/IS: “Entering the Conversation”

Journal 4

     While reading the book, “They say, I say,” I found the part about templates very interesting.  I always believed they were for younger kids who needed help with writing.  I agreed with how the book described college students’ reactions to templates because they do seem like they stifle creativity.  That being said I also found myself feeling corrected and viewing them in a new light after reading what the book had to say about them which definitely surprised me.  I am one of those people who is not usually easily convinced or swayed.  One of the lines I really like was, “even the most creative forms of expression depend on established patterns and structures.”  I really saw the error of my ways after reading how creativity does not have to depend on staying away from all things customary but instead in the creative way it uses them.  Templates also do not affect what one says while using them.  Rather than viewing them as a boundary, I now view them as an organizer for the most creative thoughts.  It is kind of freeing knowing that a template is not used to limit writing but instead to allow writing to be as creative as possible but in a neat and organized way.

 TS/IS: “Art of Quoting”

Journal 5

      In response to chapter 3 of “They Say, I Say” I can really relate to the section on overanalyzing quotations.  I often find myself struggling on when is it appropriate to stop explaining the quote or if I had made enough sense for someone to understand why the quote supported my topic.  I had the mindset that if I over-explained a quote my paper would be messy.  This is because I thought part of analyzing a paper was to try to figure out why someone put a quote in, in the first place.  Therefore, I would always keep the explanations brief which would then make my quote not well explained and probably ended up hurting my paper more.  I really like how the author, Graff puts it to just, “go for it,” on page 49 of chapter 3.  I did not know it was better to say too much about the quotation that it was to not say enough about it.  It does make more sense now looking back because if you use a quotation you are going to want people to understand why and how it helps your argument.  Rather, than no one being able to understand why you used it.  One particular phrase Graff points out is, “Your readers need to see what you make of the material you’ve quoted,” which I completely agree with.  Whoever reads my paper wants to understand what I am writing about.  It is my purpose to write a paper that not only makes an argument but also makes an argument that can be understood.

 

Peer Editing

Journal 6

1. Grace Fav Meal Essay Revision
2. Van Fav Meal Essay Revision
3. Juliet Fav Meal Essay Revision

 

Part One: 200-300 words

Journal 7

      The best global comments/suggestions that I got from my peers during our discussion were to dig a bit deeper.  I think it is easy to write things at the surface level.  To not dig deep or put much spark into a piece of writing is easy and my peers were not about to let me do that.  I find this to be the best advice I received because they were honest and candid with me.  They were not trying to build up my confidence and make me feel like I was in a good place, but instead, they truly wanted to help me be able to improve my paper. Other comments I received were things like, “Hey, watch out for repetitiveness,” and “Maybe think about adding in a specific scene?”  All were very helpful tips and I am grateful to be able to have not only one other point of view but three others.  The best global comments/suggestions that I offered my peers were to definitely brush up on MLA formatting since there was a great lack of it and to read their paper out loud to someone and ask them if the structure of the paper itself was organized.

The best global comments/suggestions that I offered my peers were to definitely brush up on MLA formatting since there was a great lack of it and to read their paper out loud to someone and ask them if the structure of the paper itself was organized.  I suggested this because some of the content of two of the papers was a little scattered to me and by having someone hear the paper like a story, they could help them suggest what could sound better.  I also took into consideration each one of their three specific concerns and offered feedback specifically for those.  One example of this was one person was worried they did not sound professional enough so I read with that in mind and then offered my opinion of their paper in regards to that.

Part Two: Podcast

 

TS/IS: “Starting With What Others Say”

Journal 8

In this section of the book somethings that I found were interesting were even though you may disagree with a certain view, you must also keep in mind the opposing view in order to further weaken it.  I really like the return sentence concept in order to help clarity.  It is similar to a lawyer who is fighting a case but they keep referring back to the original case in order to really connect the scenario and convince the jury why their point of view is the correct one.  It is one thing to oppose something but it is another thing to make the other argument look weaker.  By opposing alone you show your cards when instead you can make the other person show theirs.  Provide a counter argument but make sure you already know the weaknesses of them.  That way you can be prepared for anything that could weaken your own argument.  I like this because you are already two steps ahead of the opposing side.  I personally like the idea of being over-prepared because I feel as though it eliminates a lot of possible chances for error.

 

Revising

Journal 9

      The main focus of my revision for the Favorite Meal Essay for me was meaningful content.  It is one thing to say how much you enjoyed the food, who made it, and how it is made.  It is another thing to actually reflect upon the person who made the food, where it comes from, and how that makes it so special.  It is sort of like when you analyze a piece of literature.  You do not solely focus on the piece alone, but also refer to the author and their background.  I really wanted to make every line count.  I wanted every line to further encourage whoever was reading my paper to want to read more about the food I chose and the story behind it.

I would change the maybe how far I went with detail in my paper.  I believe I could have specified things more than I was willing to.  It is hard to dig deep and be personal and so as much as I did try my best, I wish I pushed further still.

The drafting/revising process is much more different than my past drafting/revising because for one thing, getting peer reviews was never a requirement and I could also choose who I wanted to rather than by random selection.  The conference was also a requirement but I’m actually very thankful for this one because I really enjoyed and appreciated the fact that my professor gives us the opportunity to talk one-on-one where my paper can be the only focus.

I approached this project head-on.  I wanted to do well and I knew the only way to do that would be to be very open-minded, compliant, and work hard.  I had to be open-minded to not only the revising methods we were required to do but also the fact that this was not going to be an “overnight” paper that I could then submit the next day.

Response to Carver

Journal 10

      The values that Carver brings forward through experiences with food in this story is how even though after all the horrible things that have happened to this couple, somehow the food can bring this lowkey sense of comfort.  The simplest offer of food is one of the warmest things someone can do.  To offer someone and share the warmth of food with someone is like giving them a hug.  There is something about not just the enjoyment of food but also its vitality that makes eating it that much more special.

It is obvious that the baker and the couple who lost their son did not have the best relationship.  They clashed from the beginning, but once the baker found out about what had happened he wanted to reach out to them.  It is not as if the death of their son was his fault, in fact, he could’ve just continued being nasty and let the couple have hatred directed towards him.  Instead, he invited them into his shop and offered them some warm cinnamon rolls.  This was not some grand gesture nor was it nothing at all.  The baker suddenly became this caring and generous person.  He told them on page 217, “Eating is a small, good thing in a time like this.”  He was worried about them and wanted to take care of them in any way he could.

TS/IS: “The Art of Summarizing”

Journal 11

      There were a lot of basic points honestly made in the chapter about how to summarize.  They were good points but they didn’t seem to be anything that alien to me.  Obviously one should be careful when summarizing because there is such a delicate line between doing it right and wrong.  It is very easy to summarize too much or too little as well as make it boring.  Listing was something that was mentioned in this chapter.  I think listing is a very important, yet overlooked subject because sometimes when summarizing we can be so focused on just using what we want in our paper that we use it but not well.  It is like needing shoelaces to keep your shoes closed but not tying them properly so they do not perform well for you.  They are still useful but by not using them properly, they do not do much good for you.  I really appreciated the fact that they put a list of what words to use for different situations on pages 39 and 40 as well.  It may seem silly that they directly gave a little “cheat sheet” but I still took a picture of both pages with my phone and will be glad to use them when writing my paper.

Response to The American Way of Death Revisted

Journal 12

      Page 42, the last full paragraph of the page points out “there is some confusion here between items that properly belong in a cost-accounting system and items of actual service rendered in any given funeral,” which is important to Mitford’s argument about how wrong the overpriced funeral system is.  Another passage is on page 43, also the last full paragraph and 10 lines down says “Yet no law requires embalming, no religious doctrine commends it, nor is it dictated by considerations of health, sanitation, or even of personal daintiness.” This passage is also important to Mitford’s argument because it explains why embalming is wrong because there is nothing backing it up like the law, or religion.  Page 47, the last paragraph, as well describes the process of what happens to the body and it ironically is trying to say why funerals cost so much even though they definately shouldn’t.  All of these passages give support to Mitford’s argument of the corruption of the American funeral system.  It definately should not cost what it does.  Wouldn’t one think someone has lost enough already by having someone they love die? Why make them now pay a fortune for the process of losing them?

Mapping Thoughts-Jessica Mitford

Journal 13

      In Mitford’s essay, she raises the question about the legitimacy of the American funeral system.  She argues against it by pointing out many flaws and corrupted facts behind it.  Here are some of her claims/positions/arguments:

1. Page 42, in the last full paragraph of the page, points out “there is some confusion here between items that properly belong in a cost-accounting system and items of actual service rendered in any given funeral.”  A- I agree with this because Mitford is right.  There are some things that are questionably charged for in the process of a funeral.
2. Page 43, also the last paragraph, 10 lines down, makes the argument that there is nothing backing up the system and its reasoning by saying, “Yet no law requires embalming, no religious doctrine commands it, nor is it dictated by considerations of health, sanitation, or even of personal daintiness.” C- I think that this is complicated because although it may seem like there is something specifically backing up the American way of death, I think there is some tradition behind it despite not being required by law.
3. Page 47, the last paragraph, describes what happens to the body and ironically it says why funerals cost so much even though they shouldn’t.  One example from this is: “Head off? Decapitation cases are rather routinely handled.  Ragged edges are trimmed, and held joined to the torso with a series of splints, wires, and sutures.”  This backs up Mitfords argument because it is sort of mocking the ridiculousness of making a dead body appear as alive as possible.  D- I disagree with this point because I think for some people it is comforting seeing their loved one be made presentable before seeing them off.
4. Page 52, the continued paragraph at the top of the page describes how there is certain terminology that is used in order to better real people in.  They have worked on it even today in order to produce the best results.  A-It does not come as a surprise to me that people who are behind a booming industry are manipulative and corrupt whatsoever.  This careful choice of terminology is not only used by the American funeral system but also by many other different businesses in order to try to real in the consumer.

Response to Dealing with the Living/Dead-Journal

Journal 14

      1.  Losing family can be arguably one of the worst feelings in the world.  I think if I had the chance to be directly involved in the death process of a family member I would take it.  This is because I agree with Doughty’s view of pushing the button and sending the body off into the flames.  There is something very horrific and beautiful about the process.  Personally, I want to be the one taking responsibility for sending this loved one off and I want to be one of the last people with my family member, dead and alive.  I am not saying I would not feel sad or would have an easy time pressing the button, but I would feel like I owed something to the person who died.

2. Caitlyn Doughty feels that it is so important the industrial crematorium be humanized because she believes it is not right that she happens to be the only one often times sending these people off into the flames.  Even though she takes it seriously and as an honor, she believes it is more powerful and right when the family is there to do it.  Doughty observes and reports, “They took responsibility for that body and they took responsibility for that death, and for that loss to the community,” she believes this is crucial and how things should be (7:17).  Now, she does not want to come off as “blamey.”  She knows that very little people are aware of this, or of the fact that the family or the next kin closest to the deceased person is the owner of the body.

3.  To put it simply, my opinion on embalming has changed, I am repulsed by how corrupt the whole industry of it all is.  After reading about embalming from Mitford’s argument, I am a bit sad that the whole thing is true.  The fact that people are still willing to take advantage of people when they are clearly going through the loss of a loved one is so despicable.  “Evidently, there is some confusion here between items that properly belong in a cost-accounting system and items of actual service rendered in any given funeral.”

Cremation, I was going into it with a predetermined mindset of that it was going to be a bad thing but I actually really think it can be this beautiful, almost ritual in a sense, process.  The fact that I can even get to this perspective on cremation by listening to a mortician themselves makes it seem that much more right to me.  I do not know if that makes sense.  The fact that hearing someone whose is a master of the practice talk about it makes me feel that my opinion I have from it is that much more justified.  “I think that we’ve been so hidden from death in this culture for such a long time that it’s very refreshing and liberating to talk about death in an open, honest manner.”

My opinion on fast-food has always been the same and remains the same.  The information is out there, people warn the public all the time about the dangers of eating fast-food.  However, this has not stopped people really from consuming it.  Nor, for that matter has it necessarily stopped me.  This may sound awful, like if people know smoking can be harmful why do they keep smoking?  I completely understand.  However, it is easier said than done.  Yes, chicken McNuggets literally have so much wrong with them it is no wonder why anyone wants to eat them.  But, I guess there is something psychologically off where people want what they can’t have and sometimes it means getting chicken nuggets for $1 at 10 pm with your friends.  “By now the nugget constitutes its own genre of food for American children, many of whom eat nuggets every day.”

Revisiting “Consider the Lobster”

David Foster Wallace-Journal 15

         My perspective has definitely changed once revisiting David Foster Wallace’s piece.  Rather than reading so literally and only focusing in on the text and its specific meaning, I now approach this piece with a much broader perspective.  I now realize this piece is not just solely about one man’s concern for the morality of lobsters, but instead of the humanity of all of us.  Why do humans do what they do when they know it is wrong? It is something I never even considered when reading this the first time.  I think Wallace’s overall big picture is what seems more obvious to me now in the second reading.  The ideas that remain murky and unreachable are the fact that he has such extensive and specific research on lobsters which makes for an interesting read because I did not know all those facts on lobsters, but because of how factual it is I have a difficult time deciphering the metaphorical meaning versus the literal.

Response to “Animals Like Us”

Journal 16

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?”

It is difficult to resolve the moral/ethical quandaries that Herzog writes about because the answer is not crystal clear.  There is not an obvious solution to a predicament.  To live in the “troubled middle” is to understand and know of the problem but not knowing what to do about it.  Maybe the solution is to just not eat meat, but on the other hand why?  It almost seems easier to be on one side or the other, but I think by being in the so-called “troubled middle” it leaves you to be the most open-minded and careful.

 

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.

To be human means to survive and coexist while also growing.  We can learn a lot about ourselves through our relationship with animals.  The way we think, feel, and act towards them says a lot about ourselves.  If one chooses to be ignorant of the reality of animal cruelty then they are in denial because it is a very real thing.  We have dominance over animals due to our capability.  Animals do not have the capability of being able to balance and control the world.  They could never reign over humans.  There is so much we have in common with animals and so little.  Humans and animals both have brains, hearts, blood, etc. But the awareness that humans have and the ability to have reason and comprehension is something they do not have.  Herzog, or at least my interpretation of him, seems to be in support of my own perspective which is that our relationship with animals is like tough love.  We love them, for example, puppies, cats, baby pigs, and much more, but we also eat them.  We abuse cows and chickens through the system we raise them and kill them.

 

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.

There is some agreement between DFW and Herzog because they both can agree that humans and animals have a relationship with animals that are not always right.  Both recognize this relationship of humans having power over animals that may not always be used for good.  I think where there is conflict is that DFW questions the humanity that humans have toward animals whereas Herzog sort of just states that there may be a lack of.

“Both birds and fish are vertebrates, have brains, and lead social lives.”-Herzog

“The more important point here, though, is that the whole animal-cruelty-and-eating issue is not just complex, it’s also uncomfortable.”-David Foster Wallace

TS/IS: “Planting a Naysayer in Your Text”

Journal 17

      Once again, there was some really great advice given in a chapter of this book.  This time I think It was really important because as much as people know how to do things like putting quotes, summarizing, and introducing an opposing opinion in order to make their own argument stronger, it is really key on how you do them.   This book makes it so that doing these things come as a piece of cake.  They suggest great templates and really enforce the idea of explaining each tool used out well.

• Page 86, the last paragraph going into page 87 gives some really helpful advice on how it is important it is to take the time to elaborate on an opposing view so that way if the reader themselves also share that view, they feel like they are being taken seriously.  If one were to not take the opposing view seriously, it could also weaken their argument as well because they are not actually addressing the view but rather just including it and saying why it is wrong.
• Completely dismissing an argument also is a good way to automatically seem to fail to overcome an objection according to page 88.  I really found this interesting because when one is writing a paper and arguing a point that they strongly believe in, it can be easy to sort of just brush off other ones and dismiss them without really taking them in with full consideration.
• Another big aspect of the chapter that I took in was the offered templates.  I like to take pictures of them with my phone because I do not always necessarily have the book on hand but I know that I can very easily pull up a picture of the templates I want on my phone while writing: Here is just one of many!

.