I read all the ones that had their posts up. It's interesting how everyone's idea were similar, but with different interpretations and specific examples from Orlean's article. Some supported their ideas and gave their opinions, and some didn't. The more supporting and feedback that the writer gives, the better my understanding why they chose certain examples. In my writings, I feel that I used enough support from the text, but not enough of my own reasons of why and how. Therefore, looking at what my colleagues wrote, I feel that I need to connect my thoughts to Orlean's choices. My approach to writing my essay for "Lifelike" will be incorporating texts and explain it with my reactions. Although, I feel that I wouldn't know how to write it in a way to connect with my audience while explaining Orlean's text.
Thinking back to my first essay for "Standing By" I thought of my audience as a whole, and used commonplace in most of my paragraphs. I didn't really write about my purpose, it was more about Sedaris. I feel that my tone was like insecure. I felt that if I wrote about my views, I would have trouble talking about Sedaris' purpose and connecting his choices. The thing that sets my essay from others was that, I would usually just say, "I think Sedaris' purpose is..." I didn't expand to my reactions and thoughts why and what.
I like that you talk about your concerns, especially with connecting to the audience and your tone. Something that might help is to consider the course goal and outcome, "What's at stake?" When you figure out what really matters to you it will become easier to connect with the audience because you want them to care about it too.
ReplyDelete