What is Style? Part II
To recap, this was my first response to “What is Style?” :
What is Style? Well pre-ENG328 my definition of style has to do with the way in which one does something. Style is ambiguous. To one person it may mean clothes, to another it may be acting, or in this case it could focus on writing. I think style in relation to writing is about the way a writer composes all of his/her pieces. It has to do with structure, diction, and syntax. Style, I think, could first start with genre, poem, narrative, short story, etc. Then possibly be followed by purpose, informative, persuasive, amusement, etc. But mostly Style is how the writer fits all of the pieces together to make a whole work of literature. Like part of Shakespeare’s style was his use of Iambic Pentameter. He used it to signal certain characters, to demonstrate certain characteristics, and he even sometimes used it as a transition. Style is all about the details; the use of certain sentences, clauses, phrases, words, and even punctuation. In my opinion, style focuses more on the “why” when trying to find out basic information of a text.
To be honest, I think I had a pretty good understanding of Style before taking this class (possibly without even realizing it). Taking this class help me solidify my understanding of Style while expanding it at the same time. If someone were to ask me what I learned about style while taking this class, I would still say that Style is ambiguous; if it wasn’t, how could there be so many interpretations of it? (For the purpose of this post, I am going to stick to Style relating to Writing) I still think it has to do with structure, diction, syntax, genre and purpose. I still think that Style is the way a an author fits all of his/her pieces together to create a final work of literature. I do not think Style is easy to define–I think it’s general rules (system of principles that dictate quality writing- [in my own words but referenced from Joseph M. William's Style Toward Clarity and Grace]) combined with personality, and the individual personality is what defines style. So in essence, everyone does have their own style. Style is like technology– It imitates previous forms while taking on a new, unexplored, and unique vision. In fact, style is often characterized by the use of technology. Style can be about the way an author chooses to form/display his/her work of art: word processor, picture, comic, blog, vlog, video, textbook, a wiki or with something else. So if I had to summarize Style into one word, that one word would be Ambiguity.
Add a comment June 22, 2009
Peer Review Recap Part 4
This last peer review went alright. Everything was just so compressed these last two weeks, it was difficult to write a solid draft. I was unable to write a complete draft to post for peer review, but it was still a draft. There are so many things to work on for this class and it has been difficult because it is almost impossible to focus on one project at a time. This makes it difficult to dedicate 100% effort to every project, especially when they leave much room for interpretation. With this said, it is difficult to give great peer feedback. Although time has put many restrictions on quality, I think the peer review went well giving the time we had and technological challenges and/or complications. I know it was also a trend for students to not always meet ”deadlines” but it does happen in a 15 week class compressed into 7.5 weeks, especially being an online class. Another hard part of the peer review is having to wait for others/have others wait for you because in an online class, everyone has their own schedules and priorities and not everyone has constant access to the internet. The last two peer reviews worked best for me. The first two were not as helpful because people gave me random feedback that was opinion-based, and the last two were more factual based and focused on things that could help my overall writing. I learned that in order to receive productive, constructive, helpful feedback, I need to give productive, constructive, helpful feedback. The last two peer reviews I also tried focusing on helping my peers in the specific areas they asked for help. Like I have said before, I do not want to change my peers essays to meet my own criteria, I just want to help them be coherent, clear, and concise–well written. I also think it is important to listen to your peers, especially when they give you advise that you asked them for. As with anything, if you ask for advice, you may not always receive feedback you want to hear, but more often than not it will be constructive. I think it is important for peers to read your essay(s) because you receive an outsider’s opinion. Sometimes there will be words, sentences, and phrases that you might think make sense, but to everyone else, could be nonsensical. One of my major flaws is making assumptions; I assume readers will be able to make connections that are implied. Instead, I need to discuss the connections and transform the implications into direct information. So to recap, I really appreciate my classmates who took the peer review seriously, because I think it really can be beneficial.
Add a comment June 19, 2009
Youtube/Low-bridge videos
The video-making process was fun. We wrote a brief script, did two practice scenes, recorded, then edited. I think creating a movie was like creating an essay, except with making a video, we did not have to be exact or full of detail. We were able to “go with the flow.” We only had to film the movie once; of course we edited it here and there, cutting out pointless words/conversations/movements and adding a little more description/details in parts (using written words so the audience could see what was being talked about as opposed to just listening to it and trying to envision it). I think Anderson makes some good points about the relationship between technology and humans. I agree with Anderson that technology enhances learning and students will enhance technology. He made a good point to say that low bridge technologies’ combinations “…of sequential, timeline-based composing and the multiple visual, audio, and textual layers create new possibilities of expression” (54). We were able to use these layers in our film and they made the movie more interesting, I think. Hopefully, they will help maintain the viewer’s attention. He was also was on target when he said, ” Low-bride multimedia, in contrast, calls for hands-on time in class for students to work together as they develop technical skills and multiple literacies” (58). Without my group members, I am not sure that I would have been able to keep my composure while finishing this project.
Add a comment June 18, 2009
Looking back, looking forward
This as a pre-writing prompt is a good idea. It gets my thinking about connections to make in my individual paper after we make the collaborative video. Honestly, I think it would be a good idea to make a “pre-writing prompt” blog for every assignment.
One of the main purposes of Walter Ong’s “Writing Is a Technology that Restructures Thought” is recognizing the presence and influence of writing technology. He compares speaking to writing and lists some benefits and disadvantages of writing. I think this is important for our Collaborative project because not only do we have to speak to an audience through our “movie”, we have to turn our experiences, thoughts, and group processes into words by writing an essay.
Another article that could be useful is Baron’s article. He talks intimately about evolution of technology and how technology, as we know it today, is simply the most recent version. I think he is right, technology will continue to evolve. What we are familiar with today will probably be very different from what we are familiar with in twenty years. This will tie into our project because we will be using word processors, computers, video cameras, youtube, etc. All of these are just examples of modern technology. It is interesting to think of the future names of “new” technologies which imitate but advance these “old” ones.
A useful connection of comics to short movies as listed in “Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art” by Scott McCould relates to closure. In movies, the audience does not have to use their imagination as often as in comics. He states, “The closure in the electronic media is continuous, largely virtually and virtually imperceptible” (68). This ties our previous visual rhetoric assignment, creating a comic, to our upcoming assignment, collaborative movie/individual essay. For the rhetoric assignment, the audience needed to engage more “closure” but for our movie/essay, they will not have to participate as intensely.
Add a comment June 13, 2009
Peer Review #3
I thought the third peer review was going to be pointless- I thought my group members were not going to respond to my comic at all. Luckily I had my husband check the site Friday afternoon to see if they had commented, and they had. Actually, their comments were very helpful! They helped to make my essay more complete. Their comments were not based on bad things about my essay/comic, but what I could add in order to make it better. I tried to do the same with my comments. Both of my group members posted what they needed help with, and I tried my best to comment/make recommendations on the areas they wanted me to. I do think I got better with this throughout the three peer reviews, just as I think my peers got better with it throughout the three peer reviews. The only downfall of the third peer review was the time issue; I was unsure if I was going to get any input or feedback from my peers- but I know things get crazy and there are priorities, it just sort of stinks when people in an online class have to depend on their online classmates who all have different schedules, priorities, and limitations. In general, The one thing about peer review that I do not like is when peers give advice based solely on opinion-which happened during the first peer review. After the second it got better and then after the third, the peer review felt more productive (this is referencing characteristics of myself and of my group members).
We all have our own writing techniques and style; I think it is inappropriate and not helpful to try to change someone’s way of writing, especially as a peer in college. To be honest, I fell guilty of this, but I was unsure of how to approach it and what sort of comments/constructive criticisms to leave. The first time, I truly forgot that it was not my writing I was revising, it was someone else’s, and I think this is important to remember. When you are revising someone else’s paper, you do not want to project your personality into it, their personality should be the only one reflected (if any). The job of a peer reviewer is so open-ended, that some people just do what they want. Although it is open-ended, there are guidelines- basically, to leave comments that help the writer feel confident and to help their essay be stronger, clear, concise, and with correct grammar and punctuation. But it is possible to have different opinions on what is “correct” because language is infinitely creative. The best and worst part of peer review is that the writer makes the ultimate decision-to use the reviewer’s comments and suggestions or to not.
Add a comment June 13, 2009
Comics ala McCloud, Part 2
I chose to analyze Jordan Schotz’s blog post. His comic was from wwww.kawaiinet.com and the copyright is to Meghan Murphy. The comic consists of four panels. Its focus is on a single couch and a remote control positioned on it. Basically, Jordan just focused on the idea that humans are a self-centered race and we identify ourselves in pictures of inanimate objects. In this comic, the couch has two circles and a line that Jordan identified as eyes and a mouth. He stated that eyes and a mouth are all that is needed to represent human emotions- I agree, but I also think it can be done with just a smile, as in Alice in Wonderland with the Cheshire Cat. In order to put Jordan’s opinions into those discussed by Scott McCloud in Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art, the “personification” he describes really begins with an icon. Scott McCloud defines an icon as “…any image use to represent a person, place, thing or idea” (27). The icon is the combination of the two circles with the line to represent two eyes and a mouth–a human-like face. The icon takes us to a next idea of McCloud’s: Closure. McCloud states, “The mental processes described in chapter two whereby these lines become a face could be considered closure” (64). By closure he means, the connections the reader has to make which the creator implies. The “white space” in between panels. McCloud states, “The dance of the visible and the invisible is at the very heart of comics through the power of closure” (205). Since this comic would be classified as a “Moment to Moment” Comic, it requires very little closure. A “Moment to Moment” Comic is the first category in a panel to panel transition. It generally reflects the same scenery, the same characters, the same focal point, etc., the difference is typically minor. The minor change in Jordan’s selected comic is the placement of the remote- over the four panels, the couch slowly eats the remote, at the end, the remote is gone and the couch is smiling. So the main ideas I have added to Jordan’s post are: icon, closure, and the panel to panel transition of “Moment to Moment.”
I FINALLY FIGURED OUT HOW TO INSERT A LINK! YES!
Add a comment June 6, 2009
Picturing Texts
The webpage I chose to analyze in honor of Picturing Texts by Faigley, et al. is bored.com. I honestly just went to google typed in “web page interesting” and bored.com came up. I thought, well, bored.com might work because if people go there when they are bored, chances are they are looking to become engaged which means the homepage should be inviting and follow rules of Picturing Texts. (I honestly have never been there before) It does: First, the motto of bored.com is “Burn your boredom.” The webpage is full of persuasive language and pictures of games. Second, the page has a lot of balance. At the top, there are a list of different words you can press to take you to where you want to go, (Home, Games, Videos, etc) and they are in the middle of the top of the page. The page is essentially three columns: the left has a “games menu” and “hot links” with one picture, the right has “just for fun”, “music”, “quizzes” and “trivia”, “humor”, “mulitplayer games”, “make money”, and one picture. The middle column is full of 9 new games and 4 new videos, but each one is divided into its own little box and every box is the exact same size and includes one picture, the title of the game/video and a short description. The website has description because it is not only applying to vision but to the observers’ other senses. One example is a video description, “Cute kitty falling asleep…ZzZzZ” You can picture a cat sleeping, but hear snoring or deep breathing. Another example is the description of a game where it says, “…Click Click Click.” Here, again you can hear the mouse clicking and envision yourself clicking the mouse. In addition, on this website you can listen to music. Some of the examples I gave for Balance can also fall under classification. Essentially, the website’s balance is attributed to its classification. All of the links lead to one page with several different components which all have one thing in common-the title of the link (videos, music, etc). The bottom of the page is divided into three parts: “categories,” “free stuff,” and “about us.” The three parts are organized but are organized in a similar fashion, as the rest of the page, to reflect balance and classification. This entire site exemplifies another notion of Picturing Texts: Unity. Although the page is divided into videos, music, games, quizzes, fun, etc, the website serves one purpose: to “burn boredom.”
Citation on ENG 328 emuonline page:
Faigley, Lester; Diana George, Anna Palchik, and Cynthia Selfe. Picturing Texts: Composition in a Visual Age. New York: WW Norton, 2004.
Add a comment June 4, 2009
Comics ala McCloud, Part 1
The comic I chose is a webcomic of the webcomic chain xkcd. The website describes it as a webcomic of “Romance, Sarcasm, Math, and Language.” The comic is about exactly what it is titled: Designated Drivers. The first panel has three and a half iconic stick figures under a “bar” sign. The essential gist is that no one planned or coordinated who was going to be the designated driver; one character shouts out, “Tom right?” The problem is they need two designated drivers. At the bottom of the third panel is the statement, “The logistics of who can get drunk are nontrivial.” Then the last panel reveals the characters being drunk. The book I will be referencing is Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art by Scott McCloud. It is a comic book explaining comics, the main character is Scott McCloud himself, well a very iconic image of himself.
I am inferencing that in the last panel the characters are portrayed as being drunk. I am doing what McCloud calls using my perception. I am seeing the character make a bizarre statement, “Yeah, and I can’t ride in a car with the wolf because he’ll eat my goat.” This character also has a goat with him, but where it came from, the readers have no idea. It is my job as the reader to participate by using my imagination. I imagine he had a goat from some crazy act he did while he was drunk. The characters are drawn faceless yet I still identify them as people because they are iconic. They have lines representing two arms, two legs, and a torso. They also have circles for heads, one of them has squiggly lines on top of the circle, implying it is a female. The lack of detail enables me as the reader, to identify myself as the character and think of me being in that situation (Which readily I could because I usually go out with my husband and our two best friends who are incidentally both male). This panel also reflects closure. McCloud states on page 67, “But closure allows us to connect these moments and mentally construct a continuous, unified reality.” I do believe “Designated Driver” allows its readers to do that. The last panel gives us the last sequence which brings them back to the original place, outside of the bar, with the same problem they had in the beginning: No designated driver. The quote at the bottom of panel three essentially meant that the possibility of everyone getting drunk is greater than zero. The word “nontrivial” in mathematics terms means that at least one solution of [a linear equation] is not equal to zero. So, everyone was given at least three opportunities (a bar, at dinner, and at a party- as shown in panel three) to get drunk, and everyone of them took at least one opportunity.
Add a comment June 4, 2009
Peer Review Recap Two
The second peer review went better than the first. Since we were not restricted to certain classmates paper to revise, it was easier to get them done. The process on Wetpaint was simpler than Google docs. It was nice not having to worry about “granting access to my essay or getting access to my classmates’ essays. The only thing I could not figure out was how to change my font when commenting on essays (to stand out to writer). I ended up using capitals because it was the only way my changes would draw the writer’s attention. My first peer review was a learning experience; although this one was too, it was a more positive experience. On Wetpaint all of the essays and rules were easily accessible (once I was able to access the website). Overall, Wetpaint was easier to use and figure out than was Google docs- a lot less stressful and did not cause me to have a major headache (and that’s always a positive). I wish I would have given more positive comments/reviews. I did try, but it is hard because I have been trained to look for what needs to be improved. It is nice to receive positive comments during peer review but I prefer to receive constructive criticism from my peers. Their criticism should help me improve my final essay so when my professor reviews my essay, he/she can give me more positive comments (typically when the positive comments outweigh the criticism, the paper is more solid and earns a higher grade). I would definitely prefer to do another peer review on Wetpaint as opposed to Google docs- much better peer review experience the second time around.
Add a comment May 30, 2009
What are others saying?
It is interesting, reading what others wrote about while comparing Strunk and White’s The Elements of Style with Williams’s Style Toward Clarity and Grace. This blog assignment is generally what we would do in class for a discussion of comparing the two books. As in a classroom discussion, the online posts enable me, as one individual of many in the ENG 328 online class, to compare and contrast my thoughts about the two books with the thoughts of my classmates. Having no classroom, it is difficult to understand what others are thinking; I am constantly wondering, does anyone else think the same way I do? These posts bring me right into a virtual classroom compare and contrast discussion. The following examples from my classmates are the ones that stuck out to me the most:
Deborah Bargardi wrote, “Williams writes about how often times the books written about writing offer strict rules on things such as good grammar and proper punctuation. S&W does just that.” I wrote a very similar statement in my blog post “Comparing Strunk and White.” It is rewarding to know she had a similar interpretation of Strunk and White. While thinking of our interpretations, I thought about the titles of the books. The Elements of Style makes me think of a list of words, parts of words, or groups of words; the main parts of style, grammar and punctuation. Style Toward Clarity and Grace is immediately more descriptive. While sounding more expansive, it gives me a goal (clarity and grace) to accomplish while reading. Deborah also stated in her blog, “But I feel that even though it was an easier read than Williams’ I think that S&W tells me things that won’t necessarily make my writing better—just have better grammar.” Although I enjoyed reading S&W more and I think it is a faster reference, Deborah is right. It is a reference for grammar more than style. To become a better (clear, concise, coherent, and graceful) writer, Williams’s book is much more effective and resourceful. http://dbargardi.wordpress.com/
Kate Wynalek gave a specific example of a major difference in the two books: detailed information. Her example is William’s devotes 27 pages (17-43) to Clairty while Strunk and White devotes only 2. I admire how she used a specific example, it is more clear, concrete, and easier to understand the difference in detail, especially to a reader of her blog who has not read either books. I also agree with her belief that The Elements of Style is more “user friendly.” But going back to Deborah’s blog, although S&W is more “user friendly,” it may not be as helpful in making the “user’s” writing more clear, cohesive, and concise. http://kwynalek.wordpress.com/
Add a comment May 28, 2009
