For the two sections from Naming What We Know, I have chosen to briefly look at five ideas that I think can potentially influence my approach to my final project. Two ideas from “Writing is a Social and Rhetorical Activity” and “Writing Speaks to Situations through Recognizable Forms” overlapped for me and therefore I have included them in a discussion together.
“Understanding and identifying how writing is in itself an act of thinking can help people more intentionally recognize and engage with writing as a creative activity, inextricably linked to thought. We don’t simply think first and then write. We write to think” (19) and “That is to say that writing does not simply record thought or knowledge but rather that writing has the capacity to actually produce thought and knowledge” (44).
I think these two ideas are pretty applicable to my own writing process. Instead of just storing ideas in my head for later or to deal with last minute, actually sitting down and working through ideas and creating accessible knowledge for my project will be helpful. I also find that the expectation for myself to write down completely coherent ideas or to have well-developed answers to questions or problems in earlier stages of my writing process leads to frustration and I end up putting off this work because by doing the work last minute I can give myself what I find to be a legitimate excuse as to why it was difficult for me to create well-developed ideas—time constraints. Viewing the writing that I do “to think” as actually accomplishing something for my project and as a visual record of any accomplishments is an important idea for me to keep in mind and to use to encourage me to begin writing earlier.
“Thus, meanings do not reside fully in the words of the text nor in the unarticulated minds but only in the dynamic relation of writer, reader, and text” (22) and “The technical concept of rhetorical situation brings together recognition of the specifics of the situation, the exigency the situation creates, and our perception that by communication we can make the situation better for ourselves” (36).
For me, both of these ideas relate back to the rhetorical triangle and the importance of thinking about one’s audience, whether invoked or addressed. In terms of my own writing these two ideas should always come into play. For the topic I will be analyzing in my Senior Seminar project, the idea of the rhetorical triangle and rhetorical situation for the rhetors’ I plan on analyzing should also be a foundational frame that I use to think about the relationship between these rhetors’ and their audiences. As I plan on using artifacts from a variety of rhetors’ in response to one tragedy, it will be necessary to constantly keep these ideas in mind to know how the rhetorical situations and relationships between the three concepts in the rhetorical triangle interact for the various rhetors’.
“For writers, these questions may be rephrased: What kind of writer do I wish to be? What are my obligations to my readers? What effects will my words have upon others, upon my community?
(31).
This idea comes from the discussion on the ethics of a writer, in relation to their audience. The discussion of ethics of a writer was reminiscent to me of the discussion in Feminist Rhetoric on invitational rhetoric, especially when the terms persuasion, open-mindedness, goodwill, and humility were employed by John Duffy. As I plan on dealing with a contentious topic and political figures thinking about “what are my obligations to my readers” and these other two questions will be a helpful as a way for me to think about how to best frame the discussion within my topic.
For Vershawn Young’s “Should Writer’s Use They Own English?,” I have chosen four important points of the text to mention and one point that I can definitely connect to my Senior Seminar project.
“But dont nobody’s language, dialect, or style make them ‘vulnerable to prejudice.’ It’s ATTITUDES. It be the way folks with some power perceive other people’s language” (110).
“Standard language ideology is the belief that there is one set of dominant language rules that stem from a single dominant discourse (like standard English) that all writers and speakers of English must conform to in order to communicate effectively” (111).
“Teachin speakin and writin prescriptively, as Fish want, force people into patterns of language that aint natural or easy to understand” (112).
“Code meshing use the way people already speak and write and help them be more rhetorically effective. It do include teaching some punctuation rules, attention to meaning and word choice, and various kinds of sentence structures and some standard English” (116).
All four of these ideas are pretty important to Young’s argument and address Young’s issues with Stanley Fish’s argument and presents what Young potentially would describe as the failure of Standard English and those who support the usage of Standard English. Although these ideas are important I currently cannot apply these ideas to my own writing in a way that is not somewhat superficial. For example, through Young’s discussion I could aim to worry less about the conventions of Standard English. In relation to my project topic, I maybe could potentially use how language expectations for politicians influence the response of audiences to these politicians. For example, I could look at the act of politicians tweeting in response to tragedy and how Donald Trump’s style of tweeting differs from Hillary Clinton’s style of tweeting and how do both of their tweeting styles either align with or reject society’s expectations for the language of politicians.
“I dont believe the writin problems of graduate students is due to lack of standard English; they problems likely come from learnin new theories and new ways of thinkin and tryin to express that clearly, which take some time” (113).
This idea of the potential effect of discussing new ideas on one’s writing has application to my own writing process. I will keep this idea of Young’s in mind as I am dealing with new ideas and theories and potentially attempt to write out my understanding of any important ideas for my topic that I come across during that 30 minute to an hour period I plan on setting aside. By doing this I will be able to determine how much I am understanding about elements of my topic and hopefully will be able to gradually develop a level of comfortableness with these new ideas, sources, or theories that will in the long-term making the act of writing my working draft and final draft less difficult.