Self Review

     OK so after trying to download this document multiple times (turns out you need the latest word, no exceptions) and finally just using a school computer to get it, I finally accomplished the self-review to review our analysis of my writing process.
     It helped me look at my paper with more of an outside perspective and I think that really helped. I made some improvements because of that and I really hope that they make a difference.
     Overall I lengthened and deepened my paper because of it. I hope you all had a good experience with it and it helped you. Sorry I couldn't add much more, I just don't have much to say today.

Rhetorical Analysis

     So when I saw this assignment I thought back to when I was in my AP Lang. class and from I remembered I thought a rhetorical analysis was and analysis of a writer's rhetoric used in a piece such as; logos, ethos, and pathos, as well as things like imagery and personification. After reading our actual outline I was pleased with how much I retained from high school.
     After reading the outline I would reword it like this:
-The introduction to your piece should include your thesis which will state what recurring rhetoric is used in favor of the author's argument in the piece you have chosen. You will then state how and why this is used in their favor using proper vocabulary, examples, and explanation. Also you can analyze other points of rhetoric that either don't fully support the author or that are not neede. To do this you will need a very good explanation of these point, so good that someone else can read it and agree with you. It is probably a good idea to research the intended audience so you can analyze what rhetoric would appeal to them most. In your conclusion you should restate your thesis and how you think it was proved and make sure that there are no "loose ends" in your paper. You also need to remember to personally distance yourself from the author or content of the paper. This is an academic paper and should be treated as such.
     I feel that I've had a good enough background with this type of essay to be able to confidentlly write one on a chosen piece instead of a predetermined artical. I also think that this is an academic paper my pre-writing will go smoothly since I will not be writing a persuasive or personal narrative type paper.
     Good luck to all of you with this assignment! Sometimes these papers kind of suck (in all honesty) :)

My Chaotic Mess

     Reading through everyone else's blogs I was happy to find some people that have the same struggles that I do when trying to write a formal paper.
     I really relate to Sarah Gibson when she talks about narrowing down her topic and how it takes seemingly too long. I always have this problem but it is after I finally decide who I'm writing for. A lot of the time I struggle to decide wether or not I should write the paper for me or the teacher. I get too attached to subjects and I know that so it is a bit of a struggle. Then I usually try 3 or 4 main topics that I want to be the focus in my paper and compare things such as supporting evidence and relevency to the original prompt. This whole process sometimes takes me days because I will be thinking and scribbling notes until I get the final "ah-ha" idea that incorporates good supporting evidence and good points to make.
     Now I am a bit jealous of Jeremy Gremard. The way he explains his writing process as so organized (using the bubble meathod) while I'm thinking about the scattered papers all over my desk trying to write the essay for this class and I'm almost envious. I do wish I could be an organized person but in all honesty I'm not. Not just with writing either, with everything. But I have found that it has worked for me in a good way. Because through my sporatic scribbling of ideas I let my mind wander and write down every veiw and point I can think to make. This also makes writing the actual body of the esay pretty easy since I already have evidence, support, and sources scattered about to use.
     I do wish I was more organized but I believe I have adjusted myself to utilizing my own thought process,  instead of trying to follow a certain outlining method, to my advantage.

The Wonderful World of Corporate Food-Stuff

     Alright so my Uncle has always been one to expand my views on things. Saying that, in middle school he gifted me a book called Chew On This. This is a documentative book written in the early 2000's that takes a look into the "fast food nation" of the earlier part of the century. I've probably read this book about a dozen times since I got it, even with the out of time information.
     Logos: The biggest part of this book is it's use of facts and statistics to strongly express there views through this literature. This book is split into 3 main body topics; the look into how the food is raised, the fast-food industry, and the health effects on the population. As you can imagine they had a very deep look into the ways of the slaughterhouses that were/are handling the beef and chicken in the fast food industry. What they really pulled a lot of number for was when they were discussing the health epidemic in the country. They discussed obesity rates and other health issues that could be related to eating fast food.
     Pathos: Two chapters that strongly used emotional appeals were the one that discussed a McDonalds worker and a teenager who had gastric bypass surgery. When discussing the McDonald's worker she admits to working almost 18 hours straight with not even a thank you (appealing with anger). And with the teenager he tells of his struggles that have become of his gastric bypass (appealing with sympathy).
     Ethos: This whole book delve into the ethics of society while questioning a growing health epidemic in our country. It displays multiple points of views as to why the good and the bad are happening because of this.
     I recommend this book (old information or not) because it is extremely well written and a great piece of literature.

Ethics, emotions, and logic...

                   e·thos

ˈēTHäs/

noun

1. 1.

   the characteristic spirit of a culture, era, or community as manifested in its beliefs and aspirations. (ethical)

   
   

   

       

   pa·thos

   ˈpāˌTHäs,-ˌTHôs/

   noun

   1. 1.

          a quality that evokes pity or sadness. (emotional

      
      

      Lo-gos 

      
      

      1. means persuading by the use of reasoning. (logical)

      
      

      
      

      
      

           So there are 3 basic approaches you can take when delving into a new paper. These choices; ethos,pathos, and logos all describe a different way you could go about it.

           Ethos. To take an ethical appeal in a paper of have to think of the "why" or "why not" when going about your points and support. A good example of when to use an ethical based paper is like in a debate-like setting. A setting where you're trying to persuade the room to agree with you. So based on your viewpoint you take the best and worst of it and use it in your favor.

           Pathos. Using emotional support and devices in your paper. This type of appeal can evoke a lot not only from your paper but also your audience. An emotional appeal to a paper is a way to make a more personal connection to your audience through the use of anecdotes.

           Logos. A logical appeal to the subject. This is an approach that I would strongly urge to always be used in a paper. Using a logical approach to a paper ensures that you are basing your points on facts rather than getting too emotional attached to a subject.

           Utilizing these appeals in a paper can help improve your audience appeal. If used correctly it also helps you write a deeper meaning into your paper.

      
      

      
      

Pleasing the Audience

     I am very fortunate to have had some debate experience through my highschool years in the sense that I can clearly see two sides to a situation. Having this little experience has also shown me that the crowd is half of the work. Like take the presidential debates as an example. They don't go up there talking about how dependant we are on everyone else, no. They talk about utilizing our own resources and blah blah blah stuff like that.
     Anyway in a purely academic paper it is always important to keep in mine that:
1. you are writing to state or prove a fact through facts. You're not persuading and you're not debating so there needs to be a solid support to your thesis.
and
2. the P.E.E. of righting an academic paper is almost no fail as long as you are accurately proving and supporting your point.
     Which brings me to the topic of your thesis. It never fails that all of us have had a class where we have been assigned such a broad subject that we try to address it all. When in reality we need to fine a less broad fact from the original subject to be supported by other findings. For example say you have been assigned to write a paper on something pertaining to global affairs. Well you could go and define the statement and then drone on for 12 pages and lose any many to your paper because of an overload of information covering such a broad spectrum. But just by defining something more clearly, like saying "The UN is an overpowering governmental control that does not define strict limits." (just an example) and then suddenly you have a structure for a much more defined paper.
     Now following up on that the paragraph structure. I personally think that a P.E.E. paper is a very effective tool when used properly. Personally I like to add some extra evidence just to have more of a foundation to my claims. It really is simple: point, evidence, evaluate. It almost never fails as long as you're supporting with valid information.
     I hope you all have an easy time writing your academic papers...and may the odds be ever in your favor.

Writing Processes

     My writing process has developed over the last couple of years from a neat paragraph by paragraph outline, to a much more sporadic scribbling process involving lots of lines and circles. So using the reading on page 6 in our books I will try to vividly illustrate my writing process.

     Prepare-Analyze the assignment and take stock:
     So when preparing any kind of paper (essay, debate outline, etc.) I always carefully read over the prompt before slapping on a big, bold, title on top of my drafting paper and a nice subtext of my general idea underneath.

     Explore by Reading-Read to broaden your knowledge of your topic and to help you identify different views.
     Umm can anyone say google? But no really a simple search can open up the world of opportunity. I have found that a debate oriented database gives great results

when wanting two sides of a story from all legitimate sources.

     Plan and Organize-Narrow your topic, draft a working thesis, and create a working outline.
     OK so here's where the creative part of my mind starts working. So first I give all of my clearly defined ideas a paragraph. Then I subtext my reasoning and proof behind my statements. Then I go through and organize these fragments for a better flow. And then a final walk through to eliminate any useless material.

     Draft-Use your working outline to draft paragraphs and to explore your topic further through writing.
     Alright so after organizing I actually write my ideas into legible thoughts so that are clearly or fully displayed.

     Review and Revise- Switch from writer to reader to review you draft and identify goals for revising.
     This is just the final walkthrough where I make sure everything flows well, I didn't misquote or miscredit anything and make sure I am getting my point across clearly.