Sean Branick: "Coaches Can Read Too"

We were tasked with reading a paper on the ethnography of football coaches by Sean Branick, a former student of the University of Dayton. We then had to outline his steps in introducing, validating, and discussing his topic: the existence of a complex discourse community within a football team, and that it is lead primarily by the coach of said team. 

Establishing the territory

Sean Branick states within the first few lines of his paper that he studied and is now discussing the ethnography of the discourse community of a college football coach. He then specifically establishes territory by making general statements about studies on coaching: papers on the aspects of a good coach, strong coaching methods, etc.

Establishing a niche:

Sean establishes his niche when pointing out that studies have been done and essays have been written about coaching, but no one has made a point to examine football coaches with regards to a complex discourse community with multiple literacies. He then asserts the existence of such a community,  

Explaining how to fill the niche:

Sean Branick finally gets to the meat of his paper: detailing what he sees as the complex discourse community evident in the life of a college football coach. Breaking down several areas of his research, Branick examines and explains his findings from interviews with coaches and his own observations. He deals extensively with “reading” a player: knowing when they are ready to play as well as the most effective way to motivate and encourage them. 

Tony Mirabelli and Learning to Serve

“What is a menu and what does it mean to have a literate understanding of one?” This is a question Tony Mirabelli asks in The Menu section of his writing Learning to Serve: The Literacy of Food Service Workers. He declares the menu to be a genre in itself, placing great importance on its existence and the use of it. The knowledge and understanding of the menu is paramount to the successful operation of the diner, as waiters, customers, chefs, and managers make use of it; essentially everyone involved with the diner. Mirabelli seems to base the majority of his data in this section on personal experience, referencing several instances from his two years of work at Lou’s to illustrate several points. And these include not only his own experiences but those of coworkers at the time.

His primary finding is that a menu is not just a piece of printed text used to catalogue the meals a restaurant serves. It is a literacy held by those who work at that restaurant; an understanding of the meals and options offered. In his work as a waiter, Mirabelli had to hold down a considerable wealth of knowledge about every meal and specialty at Lou’s. Having a literate understanding of the menu and every bit of information on it is central to the success of a waiter/waitress, and helps the restaurant to succeed.

Discourse Community Ethnography: AIGA

For my discourse community ethnography paper, I was considering writing on AIGA at Ohio University. AIGA stands for American Institute of Graphic Arts. It is a national graphic design group, and I am apart of their student group here at Ohio University. It is currently made up of juniors and seniors in the Graphic Design studio, although anyone may participate. As I understand it, a lot of the draw of being apart of AIGA is to network with designers at both the local, state, and national level, as well as at varying positions in the design field (students, teachers, free-lancers, art directors, etc).

I think it would be interesting to take a look into AIGA for a variety of reasons. Foremost amongst them is to gain a stronger grip on this group for myself. I didn’t join the AIGA group on campus until earlier this year. Having only been accepted into the program this past spring, there obviously wasn’t much point in joining at the end of the year. For that reason, and because the group only meets twice in a month, I’m still very much getting my bearings figuring out what this group is all about and what specifically they do and work on. Also, I think AIGA is a great opportunity to examine how a discourse community can exist and function on the various levels mentioned above (local, nation, student, professional, etc). I think it will be immensely interesting to see how all of these groups are connected and how those connections function in regards to what we’ve read about discourse communities in Writing About Writing.

I obviously intend to use Swale’s six characteristics of a public discourse community.  This will give me a quick and easy plan to breakdown and analyze the discourse community within AIGA, at least on a basic level. A good place to start, if nothing else.

Elizabeth Swardle’s writing regarding the enculturation of newcomers to a community will also feature in my paper.  Her points about engagement, imagination, and alignment were particularly interesting in describing this enculturation process, where a newcomer earns acceptance and finds their place in a community.

With using Swales and Swardle, it goes without saying that Gee’s input and opinions on the community situation will make an appearance. His ideas regarding dominant literacies and sub-literacies could prove interesting when applied to the design community and the hierarchy therein. Ann Johns will also feature, as she directly responds to the statements made by Swales and Gee, while adding her own take.

Finally, I think Dennis Barons Pencils to Pixels could prove interesting. It deals with the potential changes to discourse and writing in general with each new technological innovation. Design has experienced many technological upheavals in its short life, the foremost being the advent of computers. Many instructors find the computer to be foreign to the process, going so far as to deem it an obstacle and obstruction to proper design. All contemporary designers are all the while being taught to work heavily on computer, with only small amounts of work or preliminary work done outside of it. It could be real interesting.

The writers I will reference from WaW:

Dennis Baron

John Swales

Elizabeth Swardle

James Paul Gee

Ann Johns

Swardle and the three keys to enculturation

In Elizabeth Wardle’s Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces, she lists three methods used by new members of a community so as to integrate themselves into it. The three methods are Engagement, Imagination, and Alignment.

Engagement occurs with the discovery of a “common enterprise”, as Wardle calls it. This is shared between a newcomer and old-timer(s), and is essentially both new and old working towards the same common goal. In Wardle’s account of Alan the tech guy, the engagement would most likely be the interaction between Alan and the faculty/students he works with in providing technical stability and support. The faculty/students need help from Alan so they can go about their duties, and Alan provides the support so they can do just that. In the Design world, this relationship very much so exists between client and designer. The client wants an advertisement flyer as well as designed a certain way, and a designer uses his/her knowledge and technique to produce an advert that is appealing as well as appealing to the client.

Imaginination has to do with just that: the imagination of the newcomer regarding how they think of themselves and their work within the community. This can be either positive or intensely negative as well as crippling to ones enculturation. , Alan imagined himself to be in a position of great power and authority; even going so far as to say he was a “God around here”. His beliefs were misplaced, as Alan had little power and respect in his workplace. In the design world, you could think very highly of yourself and your work, but in reality your work may not be that good or may indicate a lack of technique and/or skill that you are completely oblivious to because of how you imagine yourself.

Alignment seems to ultimately be the point where you decide whether you really like the community there and its conventions and expectations. In Wardle’s example, Alan refuses to alter his behavior and business etiquette to the preference of the University where he works; thus clearly choosing to not align with the community. In my research of the design group AIGA, I would probably define alignment as whether or not you “conform” to the loose styles and guides of the design group you are working with. This could include insisting on using elements and design techniques that are considered cliché or “trashy” to the point where you are resisting the group heavily.

Gee, Swales, and Johns

By now, we have read both pieces by John Swales and James Paul Gee regarding their respective ideas about discourse communities and their function. Writing About Writing suggests that a dialogue or conversation is occurring between the two writers as we read. On the one side we have Swales and his systematic breakdown of what he views as “the six important features of any public discourse community”. Among his key points are that a discourse community has to be centered on the idea of operating in an inclusive manner (as opposed to an exclusive manner).

In Gee’s view, a discourse community functions in a manner opposite to that of Swales’ community. In other words, Gee’s communities operate in an exclusive manner where those included are part of the “dominant group”. To me, it seemed implied that this idea is generally tied in with power and socioeconomic standing. Gee talks about the dominant group using “tests” to feel out the literacy of outsiders as a means to exclude them, as well as to “get the right person” when seeking someone for a position or job.

Then along comes Ann Johns. She backs up Swales points regarding his six key traits of a discourse community, even directly referencing them early on in her own article. She then goes on to relate the various aspects of Swales’ points to instances where they occur in her life; her mother’s AARP membership, her husband’s international bicycling group, to name a couple. Johns also brings more to the table for discussion. She makes mention of the topic of convention vs. anti-conventionalism, where she compares the tendency for established writers to part ways with what is considered conventional while students are required to learn and write in a rigidly conventional manner, ‘lest they be “torn apart” by their instructors. Johns also discusses the issue of authority in communities: asserting that those who are considered the “authority” in their community could (either consciously or otherwise) impose their values and beliefs on the rest of the community. 

Gee and Discourse

    In Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics, James Paul Gee discusses, among other things, the key differences between language, grammar, discourse, and Discourse. Gee also makes mention of "tests" imposed upon users of a certain language or literacy. These tests are based on their knowledge and usage of what is considered to be the "dominant Discourse" in a community or society. The primary outcome of these tests is that one can see whether this person is "native" to this Discourse or not.
    In other words, you can see whether a person has learned the proper usage of a language that is considered the primary language of an area. An example that Gee gives is the focus on superficial features of a language that only one who is "native" to it would grasp. His example is "middle-class mainstream" Discourse, which presupposes that is in opposition with those of lower socioeconomic standing. These "non-native users" don't have as firm of a grasp on the proper use of the language and can thus be pointed out and denied access to greater opportunities (such as a better job). I think this is an example we can all relate to as, for better or for worse, we are taught from a young age to articulate our thoughts in such a way as to imply that we are well educated and intelligent.

Six Discourse Communities

1) “A discourse community has a broadly agreed upon set of common public goals.”

In other words, all discourse communities have a framework of what they’d like to change or accomplish. For example, a student group centered on “going green” has the ultimate goal of inspiring significantly more people on campus to recycle and reduce their carbon footprint than were previously doing so before the group existed.

2) “A discourse community has mechanisms of intercommunication among its members.”

There exists a means to communicate and keep in touch in all discourse communities. In my above example, this could mean an emailing list that all the members of the group are apart of. It would also mean the meetings this group holds to discuss new topics and ways to further their goal.  

3) “A discourse community uses its participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback”

A discourse community discusses new information and ideas in its meetings or other instances where the community is able to participate. In my example, the “green group” would utilize meetings to discuss new ideas relevant to “going green” as well as different ideas as per how to spread them throughout their campus and student body.

4) “A discourse community utilizes and hence possesses one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims.”

Discourse communities make use of certain genres, or types of writing, to help communicate its message and, by extension, accomplish its ultimate goal. My “green group” would, in this instance, probably utilize print (posters, flyers, ads) to keep ideas about recycling and using less energy at the forefront of the student bodies’ mind. 

5) “In addition to owning genres, a discourse community has acquired some specific lexis.”

A discourse community will make use of certain words and phrases specific to its cause and operation. In my “green group”, this could mean the use of the words and phrases like green, environmentally friendly, and others that pertain to recycling and such.

6) “A discourse community has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise.”

Within the discourse community is at least a certain number of people who are credible in the knowledge and direction they provide. In my example, this could be a group of knowledgeable students studying fields relevant to “going green” (i.e., environmental health, environmental sustainability, green energy, etc).

Pencils to Pixels

In his piece, Denis Baron talks extensively of the leaps and bounds technology has made in regards to communication. From the advent of writing and cuneiform, to our modern age of computers and telephones, Baron discusses the implications and responses to these technologies. In the process of covering all this, Dennis Baron seemingly to “shrug” at the idea of technology changing the fundamental shape and nature of writing. His overall thought seems to be that new technologies have come and innovated our means of writing and communication time and time again, and yet writing is still writing. Honestly, I have to agree. Whether it comes from a pencil, typewriter, or computer word processor, writing is still fundamentally the same as it was years ago. The advents of “backspace” and “spell-check”, for example, have helped to aid in the creation and revision of writing, but they have not fundamentally changed how it is done. Baron does point out that technologies, as they become outdated, also become “automatic and invisible”. He points out that we incorporate older and established ideas and methods as we take on the new and “cutting edge” of technology. One could potentially make a case that this could be the aforementioned fundamental change, but I feel that it is actually just the process of absorbing established tools and methods into our everyday use.

The Future of Literacy

While each case was in essence unique, all of them generally had similar backgrounds: white, middle to upper-middle class family with access to one or more computers in their home. This I can relate to, as it essentially details my own home life. The story that I connected to most was that of Charles Jackson. Charles, much like myself, was exposed to computers at a young age. As a result, the growth of his literacy went hand in hand with the growth of his computer skills. Charles also mentions how video games, specifically online games, helped further his reading and writing abilities. This is also true of my own past. While I did read as a child, I did also spend time playing games. And, as Charles bluntly puts it,  “You are going to have to read to learn to play the games.” In this way, the use of technology helped to better my own reading, writing, and general skills of communication; not to mention typing skills.

Some of the things that really got me going on reading were early book series available to me at that age (the Redwall series, Harry Potter, etc.). I remember being especially fond of these books, as they were part of a larger series. For this reason, I was much more motivated to learn the details about the characters and places, as well as to keep on reading more of the books!                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

Malcom X and Sherman Alexie

           

Both Malcom X and Sherman Alexie overcame a great deal of adversity and strife to acquire the literacy that they did. I found the prominent difference to be in their motivations to learn to read, as well as why they read. Malcolm X viewed literacy as a means of gaining knowledge, and by extension, power. He implies that because of his race and social standing that he would not have been able to acquire this power; though he was able to while in prison via a prison library. Sherman Alexie aspired for literacy because of his own father’s obsession with books and reading. From there, he developed a great thirst for what we would call literacy. This was largely because the Indian reservation school system didn’t seem to work. Children didn’t learn to write and, as a result, often times didn’t amount to much. Sherman says of his intense drive to read and reading abilities, “If I hadn’t been an Indian boy on a reservation, I may have been called a prodigy. Instead I was an oddity.” He was using his literacy to help him get out of the reservation and out into the world.

Malcolm and Sherman both struggled with their race when becoming literate. Their race and socioeconomic statuses made it incredibly difficult for them to learn to read, and thereby improve their situation. For Malcom X it took a stint in prison to gain the access to literacy and literature, while Sherman had to go outside of the school system and ultimately his own culture to do the same.

Literacy and You

At the ripe old age of twenty, I have been exposed to many a “sponsor of literacy”. If I were to consider my primary sponsors, I would have to say that mine would be various levels of schools (of course), Church, and my family.

Obviously, high school strives to expose us to a certain variety of literacy. This includes poetry, plays, and certain novels that they want us to read and comprehend. The literacy they provide to us is tightly restricted, as per what they feel is ok for teenagers to read about. As you get into college there is obviously a much wider exposure to virtually any and all literacy. This time around, the instructors typically choose texts that will expose you to different and new ways of thinking.

Church is in a similar vein to school in how it handles literacy, though with a much narrower range of exposure. In my own experience with Catechism classes when I was young, the literacy you are exposed to is (obviously) only the Bible. They don’t really strive to expose you to anything else, but are intent that you have your facts straight on what they do teach to you.

My family has been by far the most dynamic of my literacy sponsors. Naturally, when I was very young they were careful about what I was exposed to and had access to. As I grew and matured my parents were increasingly less restrictive about what I was allowed to read, watch, etc. In this way, they exposed me to arguably the largest amount of literacy by sheer virtue of progressively allowing me more freedom as I grew up.

Any of these sponsors on their own would probably be far from adequate access, but together they contribute to a great deal of my own acquired literacy and knowledge. 

Submit for Review: A Retrospective and Reflection of a Wikipedia Editor

Wikipedia: The much-maligned fount of information that we have been warned to avoid since our days in high school.  In my opinion, the negative reputation surrounding it is largely unwarranted. I found the process of creating a new Wiki page to be a fantastic window into the world of social and collaborative writing: a world that I have had little to no exposure to.

In choosing my article, I first attempted to think of things I was interested in that were not already apart of Wikipedia in some capacity. This was an immensely difficult task, as most anything one can think of is already archived in Wikipedia in some capacity. Even after I had some semblance of a list, I had to consider whether I could contribute substantially to any of these subjects. And thus my list diminished further. Then I decided to approach from a different angle: I could peruse the list of requested articles on Wikipedia for topics that were interesting to me. After several investigations and “trial-runs” I settled upon the Slim Phatty: a stripped down and relatively simple synthesizer made by Moog. I scoured the Internet for information, and soon found my work was cut out for me. Being a new piece of hardware it was challenging to find many unbiased sources and references. I mainly had to settle for articles displaying the technical specifications for the hardware. After wringing my sources dry, I was left with about 200 to 300 words short of the requirements. I decided the best way to remedy the situation would be to create another, shorter article to augment my lacking word-requirement. Using a method similar to how I found the Slim Phatty, I chose another digital instrument. This instrument was a synthesizer in the shape of a guitar: the Misa Kitara. With this, I was able to easily bulk out my overall word length with ease by using templates I had already established in my Slim Phatty article.

Typical though this process may have been, it was often times an excursion into unconventional writing practice. Before I even wrote my articles, I examined existing articles that related heavily to the ones I wanted to write. For example, I read pages on synthesizers when brainstorming for my own synthesizer articles. In doing so, I picked up on the type of language and even structure I should use to approach them. A piece by James Porter from our textbook Writing About Writing comes to mind. In it, Porter makes the case that all writing is “intertextual”. In other words, all writing is made up of bits and pieces borrowed from a variety of sources to which the writer is exposed. The writer then assembles these borrowed pieces to create their own unique work (Porter). This is very true to my experience, for I wished to sound as professional and as credible as possible, and as such, opted to use similar formats and phrasing to the existing pages I had examined. This included how I presented the information, as well as the use of tables and “info-boxes” to display technical information for the electronics. A distinction should be made between this process and overtly copying work that has already been created. The driving point behind intertextuality is that while you may borrow bits of other writings, you incorporate and contextualize them in ways unique to you and your message.

As I mentioned above, writing for Wikipedia necessitates a completely unbiased tone. Obviously Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which brings with it distinct connotations for the type of writing and tone that should be used. This was especially tricky, as every writing and work of a writer has his or her own personal bias and tone to it; a point made by Donald Murray in his article All Writing is Autobiography (Murray). Murray describes at length how unique and personal any work by a writer is to the writer in question. Thus, a new obstacle had been created. Thankfully, the remedy was simply to be mindful of the style and tone of my work, and to sound as “encyclopedic” as possible.

When it comes to writing, even the most informal of work is multifaceted, with at least some degree of review and rewriting occurring. The method for authoring Wikipedia pages is an intensely multifaceted process on several levels. As with any writing, you must first have a draft of sorts to work from. Then, you must proceed through the Wiki article creation wizard. Most people will also work from their personal “user space” to see what the article will look like before submission. After a lengthy session of toil and work refining your page, making sure citations are correctly in place is the last step. You must incorporate your sources and citations to make it a legitimate article, as your page won’t stand up to scrutiny if proper sources aren’t in place. All of this finally culminates in the submitting of the article, which opens it up to the public for review from editors on the website; any one of whom may shoot down your piece and have it removed from the published pages of Wikipedia. Looking through an articles history page can divulge a wealth of insight into the creation of an article. This is a profound luxury that isn’t available in many (if any) forms of writing. This can benefit other writers/editors, as it allows for one to examine the “life” of an article and see how far it has progressed and evolved since its inception: creating writing that is so dynamic, that it is essentially alive. I say this, as articles never stop being edited. Some of the oldest articles on Wikipedia have edits numbering in the tens of thousands and spanning up to a decade of time. As we saw in class, the page for Shakespeare has been edited an inordinate number of times and as early as 2001.

What do I have to say after authoring two Wiki pages? I stand by my comment at the beginning of this paper. Wikipedia is undeniably a fountain of information that can (and has already) put an infinite amount of knowledge at the fingertips of any whom would choose to investigate its many articles and pages. Some question the credibility of a knowledgebase operated by anyone and everyone. To that point, I recall Joseph M. Williams’ article The Phenomenology of Error, which discusses the nature of error as social construct. Here, he essentially argues in favor of the validity of language usage that a rigid interpretation of a language may consider “incorrect”, stating that they are the products of society and almost a higher (and acceptable) form of slang (Williams). Not only that, but Wiki pages are kept open for constant and perpetual revision; allowing for the accumulation of additional knowledge by means of new pages and new revisions to existing pages. This gives it, and similarly socially geared websites, a major edge when compared to more traditional sources of information. That people can contribute new pages, and countless others may come behind them and polish their fledgling article to a professional sheen is simply remarkable.

Murray, Donald. "All Writing is Autobiographical." Writing About Writing. Ed. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2011. 57-65. Print.

Porter, James. "Intertextuality and the Discourse Community." Writing About Writing. Ed.    Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2011. 87-96. Print.

Williams, Joseph M. "The Phenomenology of Error." Writing About Writing. Ed. Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Boston: Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2011. 38-54. Print.

"Shitty First Drafts"

Anne Lamont’s essay is essentially a response to an assumption made by many writers, and especially new writers. This assumption is that when a talented writer sits down to write, they simply start cranking out their work in its developed form straight onto the page. Why this is such a prevalent misconception isn’t entirely certain, but nonetheless it exists. Lamont firmly believes the actual process of all writing to begin with the titular shitty first draft. She asserts that even established writers must simply get out any and all thoughts onto the page; things that most likely won’t be used in the end. You are to write anything and everything even if it accumulates into several pages. Through this, the writer gains a sort of foundation that can be refined and particularly effective or desirably “bits” can be removed. Lamont beautifully illustrates this point:

“There may be something in the very last line of the very last paragraph on page six that you love … but there was no way to get to this without first getting through the first five and a half pages.”

Wikipedia’s history function comes to the rescue once again in our learning. The early entries into the article history are, in many ways, the shitty first drafts of any article. They show the early stages and even the first stage. In many ways, the earlier stages of a wiki article could be likened to a shitty first draft as many users will pass through and edit and revise as time goes by.

Revision and Writing

There were several metaphors that closely resembled my process in general, not just the Wikipedia project. These included the refining, casting and recasting, and finally painting. The common theme between these styles is the dynamic writing and near constant state of revision. From the first sentence, until submission/publication: revision and alterations occur whenever it is deemed appropriate. I enjoy this style, as it is simply what occurs naturally to me. I am perpetually rereading, altering, and augmenting that which I have already written.

From Wikipedia, I think we can see first hand how dynamic a piece of writing can be; especially with the potential for perpetual revision and alteration. The author will write and revise until he/she feels the article is complete (at least for the time being). Once their article is posted, others will come in to review and scrutinize; making adjustments and revisions of their own. Furthermore, additional writers will come in and add more information as time goes by, necessitating additional revision and review from more editors.

By examining Wikipedia, I think we ultimately learn how dynamic a process writing, and specifically revision, can be. The revision and rewriting is happening all the time in a wiki. And to a certain extent, the same can apply to our own works. The revisions and alterations of a wiki page are innumerable in most cases: ranging from a minute change in phrasing to a drastic overhaul of an entire section of an article. Revisions occur all the time and could potentially occur for decades to come.

Authoring for Wikipedia: a retrospective

Indeed, I did make use of the five steps of writing. Even if I was not consciously working under them, my process can clearly be broken down, examined, and explained by them.

Planning is the first step of any writing, whether done consciously or otherwise. I can’t honestly say I planned a whole lot out before writing. With the Slim Phatty synthesizer, I knew that I wanted to utilize such things as an info box detailing the specs and properties of the device. I also wanted to spend some time comparing and contrasting it with the synth it is based off of: the Little Phatty. With this in mind, I just kind of took of with it I guess; plugging in information wherever I deemed appropriate.

A conventional draft also did not exist. Instead, I had a roughly hashed out version of my page. From there, I simply kept running through and bulking sections out with each pass. Revising also makes an appearance here, as this essentially occurred as I was improving upon each earlier incarnation.

Alignment is something that also did not really exist. Alignment only occurred in the sense of trying to avoid it. By remaining conscious of maintaining a neutral and unbiased tone, I was consciously trying to avoid aligning myself either for or against the subject of my article.

In the context of the authoring a Wikipedia article, I would say that monitoring would be defined as the constant self-critiquing and editing that occurred throughout the assignment. Not only fine-tuning at the micro level, but changing the whole organization of the page, the flow and direction of each paragraph, and even where to put pictures and topic headlines.

Wikipedia Article(s)

Here are my articles for the Slim Phatty and Misa Kitara respectively. In the event one or both are deleted, my user page is at the bottom (and contains both).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slim_Phatty

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misa_Kitara


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zc338609

Intertextuality and Autobiography

Donald Murray proclaimed that all writing is autobiographical: coming from our own past and experiences. James Porter in turn that all writing is “Intertextual”. In other words, he claims that all writing consists of bits and pieces borrowed from culturally known texts and writings.

This is a challenge to Murray’s ideas because Porter is almost asserting that writing is, on the surface, not entirely original. But while Porter does make the case that writing is in many ways unoriginal, he does assert that it is in original in the sense of the meaning derived from reading it.

Porter references some lines from the Declaration of Independence as an example that one may utilize previously published phrases and wording. By reordering them one may compose a discourse that allows for a totally different interpretation and meaning to be derived.

Murray felt writing came from each individual writer. Porter feels that writing comes from the “cultural and rhetorical milieu”, or the culture that surrounds the writer.

Murray and Autobiography

Murray asks us to consider the idea of writing as autobiography. He argues that all writing is personal to the writer. His general point is that as a writer we utilize and reflect on personal experience and memories in all of our writing. Murray references a great quote from Herman Melville: “It is not down on any map: true places never are.”

            Most would say Wikipedia, or any encyclopedia for that matter, should be devoid of autobiography. It should be a place of pure facts and no personal experience, as personal experience tends to lack in neutrality. If I were to apply this to our upcoming work with Wikipedia, I would say to be mindful of personal bias and experience sneaking into our work. Murray’s entire piece is centered around how these facts and experiences end up in our writings whether we intend to include them or not.

The Rhetorical Situation and its Constituents

Keith Grant-Davie gives direct and detailed explanations for the terms rhetorical situation and its constituents. He describes a rhetorical situation simply as “the content in which speakers or writers create rhetorical discourse.” The book also defines it as communication (discourse) that attempts to motivate others to do or change something, where the attempt at persuasion is the rhetoric and the context of it is the situation.

The constituents are separated into three groups based on their function in the aforementioned rhetorical situation. First there is the exigence, which Grant-Davie defines as “A need or problem that can be addressed through rhetorical discourse.”  There are rhetors: the people who create and produce the discourse. The “writers” as it were. Then we have the audience. Obviously, these are the people engaging in and influenced by the discourse. Grant-Davie dubs them the “mediators of change.” Finally, we have what he calls the “constraints”. These are the people or things involved in the situation that may impede attempts to “solve” the exigence. The book used an example of a chilly friend attempting to subtlety ask for the heat to be turned up. The subtlety was a constraint as the friend didn’t want to come off as pushy or rude, and in doing so she limited the potential effectiveness of her communication. A compound rhetorical situation is simply your run of the mill rhetorical situation that has several rhetors.

The rhetorical situation and constraint are very much the yin and yang of communication in any context. I think everyone would benefit from improving his or her knowledge of the two. Being aware of exactly what you want to say, as well as the constraints that really define your tone and “plan-of-attack” will ultimately make you a more effective writer and communicator. 

"The Phenomenology of Error"

When Mr. Williams refers to errors as "social constructs", he defines them as spellings, phrases, or errors in grammar of those who speak a language. These errors, while truly incorrect usages of the language in its rigidly “correct” sense, have been absorbed into the language as almost a form of higher slang. In this way, Williams deems them appropriate usages of the language and highlights the absurdity of decrying these “errors” when people have used some of these phrases for literally hundreds of years.

In my opinion, Wikipedia carries a negative connotation because it is seen as an embodiment of the above idea of “error as social construct.” The idea of a Wiki is that it is open to editing and revision from literally anyone. It’s the ethos argument. The potential for rampant error and vandalism is great. But the reality, as you and I now know, is that Wikipedia has come a long way in validating itself as a credible fountain of information while retaining it’s grassroots idea.

An article was posted comparing Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica as being similarly error prone. In response, I will go so far as to say one could make the argument that Wikipedia is more credible (generally speaking) as it is a reflection of the majority of speakers of a language. In the same vein, I could argue that Britannica is riddled with errors of language and grammar as it ignores large portions of modern English which, although at one time incorrect, have since been adopted and used for quite a long time.

An Introduction

Welcome! This is a blog I’m writing for my junior composition class. Matt Vetter is my teacher. He likes technology and writing.

My name is Zach Carlson. I like to play guitar, draw things, watch football, and throw Frisbees. I am in the junior studio of the Graphic Design program. My hometown is Findlay, Ohio. It is a very boring place. I hope to one-day work for a sweet, motivated, and next level design firm. Preferably in New York City or Chicago, but I’ll take what I can get.

I liked 151 when I took it freshman year. I highly enjoyed the writing we were asked to do, as well as the work I produced. That said: I feel like I could have pushed myself harder in some of the writings. We did have one particularly interesting project where we were required to post a finished essay online to a website called “This I Believe”. This website is a public domain for anyone to post essays and brief writings regarding the ideas, morals, and stories which influence how they live or act.

In regards to this class, I am quite interested in the “digital” aspects of the curriculum. Digital things are cool to me. Also, the digital literacy projects that are planned differ greatly from past assignments I have worked on, and I look forward to the prospect of opening my mind to new ideas and formats for writing. In this class I hope to continue developing my writing abilities as well as expose myself to writing in new and mediums and areas. I can’t say that I am honestly worried about too much in this class.