Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
19 November 2018
Journal 18- Revision Reflection
From the workshop, I had one major point and that was adding a personal touch to the paper. I needed to add my input or something from my personal experience that is related to the point I am trying to make. So I started to add my experiences to the points I brought up. I added some situations like how my family views eating lobster to when I discussed how other people deal with cooking lobster alive and our experience with lobster. I felt that this was an important factor because my paper lacked my viewpoint and was mainly centered around the thoughts of the other writers. Another issue was my thesis. I felt as though my thesis wasn’t as strong as it should have been. I also felt as though my paper wasn’t reflecting the point I was trying to make with my thesis. My first thesis was about one sentence long and seemed to talk about one of my points instead of the three I had down. I rewrote my thesis to include more of my points and to talk more specifically about preference and necessity and how our preference and necessity are based on our benefit. It was also brought to my attention that I needed to explain my points further. The quote debriefing would briefly discuss what I was trying to say but it didn’t explain my point. So I had to rethink about what my quotes really meant and how they related to what I was trying to say and add or get rid of some of my writing. However, I did feel restricted in what I wanted to say due to the word limit. I would have gladly expanded further on my points but that would have exceeded the word limit.
Journal 17- Project 3 Peer Review
Emma Bryan- reconsidering the lobster
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
12 November 2018
Journal 16- “Planting a Naysayer in Your Text”
Including a counter-argument or naysayer in your text can be a major benefit. Including a naysayer adds content to your piece, creating an avenue of ideas. You can use questions and criticisms to come up with new ideas and to substantiate claims. They bring to your attention new information and new ideas to build off of. Using this in a text has helped me create arguments that further my paper’s meaning, and added a point of argument. Including it in your paper adds a bit of free will and information to readers who don’t know much about the subject. The counter-argument shows two sides to the argument that will inform the reader about the other side of the argument and lead them to possibly form their own opinion. It can also help develop your debating skills by improving phrasing and helping you develop empathy, or see things from other’s point of view. By speaking in a broadened way you can open yourself up to being a more open-minded person who is confident in debating and conversing with others. Counterarguments also add text to your work, so you can fill up that text requirement quicker and more efficiently. There are many positives, but you do not want to go too much into detail on the opposing view, remember you are arguing a specific point an don’t want to stray too far from that idea. This can confuse the reader and cause your paper to sound choppy. You also don’t want to create stereotypes or labels. This can cause readers to feel limited or boxed into a category, limiting them, stifling their uniqueness. Keep the counter-argument specific to one point and reference it in a broad way so as to let people feel less boxed.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
7 November 2018
“Against Meat”- Journal 15
-Help explain what is lost by giving up meat and what is gained for Foer?
By giving up meat, or any form of food, you will be giving up possible memories that could be built around that food. For example, sushi lunch dates with mom and eating burgers on the weekends with family. These special memories created around meats would not be created or the same without those foods. Anyone would admit that a barbeque without ribs or steak wouldn’t be the same if they were replaced by tofu and carrots. It goes beyond forgetting or losing the delicious taste of meat but of giving up the possible memories that could be built because of meat. Would that be a good thing though? Maybe in order to appreciate what we have, we need to lose those values. Then we can be truly grateful for what we have, or then we may be exposed to new outlets for creating memories and new ideas.“ To remember my values, I need to lose certain tastes and find other handles for the memories that they once helped me carry”
-What do you make of the question: Why doesn’t a horny person have as strong a claim to raping an animal as a hungry one does to confining, killing and eating it? How would you answer that? If you can’t answer the question, what does it suggest about your value system?
Raping the animal is a pleasure and hunger, eating, is a necessity. Killing the animal and eating it is necessary to survive; you can survive without taking part in a sexual act. You can put off pleasure but you cannot put off eating. We are more justified with killing and have a stronger claim because not eating is against our needs as an animal. The confining, killing, and eating in many cases is worse than the raping because one has more of the animal’s feelings in mind than the other. We feel more attached to the idea of ending the life of an animal than to the causing of discomfort. If you had no response to this question then I believe it might show that you deem the raping of the animal as a worse experience than killing. This may be true, but not many animals have the function of feeling discomfort, and if they do then it would be far worse to be knee deep in crap and eating garbage. Which would you prefer? Rape or constantly be in fecal matter, hardly being able to breathe due to methane in the air, crapped area, tasteless food and having the feeling that death is near?
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
4 Nov. 2018
Journal 14- Reconsider the Lobster
Looking back at my first journal post about Consider the Lobster and comparing what I thought about the subject then and what I think about it now, my general idea has stayed the same. Looking back I was more confused on why people treated animals, whether it be for cooking or general interactions, the way they did then. Now, I see that people treat animals in a way that benefits themselves, or adds comfort. In the DFW piece, I was still questioning the purpose of why we did what we did. I hinted at the idea of cooking or preparing animals the way we do because of self-gain, but I thought it wasn’t the main purpose. However, I did know that we didn’t like to think about our cruel actions. We didn’t like to think about what happened to what was happening to the lobster, we just wanted to think about the end result, lobster.They cook the lobster knowing it is alive and possibly in pain, but they push the idea that lobster feels pain aside because they love the taste of lobster. The idea of preference and comfort seem to be more conspicuous now then it did in the DFW reading.
There isn’t much of a dark area for me. I still feel as though humans are generally selfish, manipulating outcomes for our benefit, and prefer to turn a blind eye on the dirty side of things. We prefer comfort and benefit over the real outcomes that are brought. It was shown in DFW’s piece and it was shown in Herzog’s piece.
Gunnar Frylewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
4 Nov. 2018
Journal 13- Project 2 Reflection
Project two was definitely a harder subject to discuss. I had a harder time thinking about and connecting ideas for this project. I believe the reason for this detached feeling was due to my lack of detail in the reading of Out of the Kitchen, Onto the Couch. When I read Widdicombe’s piece things, ideas, points, they all seemed to pop out at me and it seemed easier to connect issues and form a point. I went into Pollan’s piece expecting this same response but I didn’t get this feeling, nothing popped out at me. I didn’t fully comprehend what the text was telling me so I felt as though I struggled to prove a point. This text felt more challenging and less personal to me when I wrote about it, so I felt less of a drive when writing it. I felt as though I understood the main concept of the writing but was missed the other subtle meanings presented. However, I found several subtle meanings in the writing towards the end of the deadline and put them into my paper the best I could. This topic and writing felt more challenging, as it should be, then the last paper, project one. I had to change my normal steps of going about an essay and started with the ideas first.
I started my paper by putting down ideas on what I could write about. I either wrote down quotes then expanded on them, or I put down an idea and expanded with a quote. I was looking at connections between my points to create a thesis. After I put the main points from the texts I worked on my thesis and finished with a ‘call to action’ conclusion. I would normally start with my thesis then develop it as I put ideas down, but this time I did the exact opposite with my points first then my thesis.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
31 October 2018
A Mortician Talks Openly About Death,
And Wants You To, Too-Journal 12
- What issues or tensions are in play when considering cremation-this vs. that? Vs. that?
An issue that Caitlyn Doughty , a mortician, brings up with cremation is the involvement of family and the movement towards cremation from embalming. Many people view embalming as the normal or regular way of dealing with a corpse, when it is a more expensive and less natural form of spiritual release. Embalming is costly and requires chemicals to be pumped into the body which causes it to unnaturally decompose. The involvement of the family in the loved ones cremation is powerful and can aid in healing and closure. They are the ones sending their loved one off, not a stranger taking their money.
- Describe Doughty’s philosophy?
I believe that Doughty’s philosophy is centered around acceptance of death. You cannot run from it, and it will happen someday, so why not embrace it? Be okay with talking about death, and with the concept of death.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
10 October 2018
Journal 11, What’s Motivating This Writer?
Conversational writing is about understanding what the author said then, responding to what they said, “They say/ I say”. I believe that it is important to think about the author’s text as a free subject, open to criticism and discussion. By questioning the topic you get to see different sides of the argument allowing you to form new ideas and opinions. This aids in building your argument, but you first need to fully understand the text. Determine the “they say”aspect of the text. This helps you see the information that is being presented and the point that is trying to be made, allowing you to weigh in on the subject being discussed. Every author or writer will have their own way of representing the “they say” and the “I say” sides in their papers or writings. Some writers will write with their point in clear view, “I believe”, “however”, and others will have it more embezzled in the text, like Judith Butler’s writing about gender trouble. It helps if you keep the thesis in mind and think of the questions that would be asked against it, and if you bridge their words to yours, put them in your words. However, putting things into your words is help you don’t want the text to be in your words.
Don’t stick what the author/writer says into the “closest niche” or relate it to a common mentality. The point that the writer is trying to make could be a new one and should be related to a predetermined standpoint. By relating the two separate points your are altering the point that is trying to be made thus putting it into your words. You want the text to challenge you as much as you want your text to change the writers. Learn from the writing. This helps you better understand the point and create a better argument. You are responding to a point, and for the best response, you want to use their words which requires you to understand the text that is given. Fully comprehend the text and you might learn something new.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
8 October 2018
Journal 10; Out of the Kitchen, Onto the Couch
“People don’t watch television to learn things” (pg. 8). I agree with this statement. The American people have traded their creative and active activities for television and more menial things. People used to cook every night, and the day was spent reading or doing something other than playing games and being sucked-into electronics. The Food Network is just the tip of the iceberg in that it is one of the many shows that encourage you to remain still and watch television. Like Food Network, many channels aim to please their viewers so that they stay and watch more television, which leads to more ads then, more revenue for the TV channel. TV is no longer centered around information and bringing you the news, it is now fixated around obtaining your attention and never letting go.
“Assume that the entrance of women into the workforce is responsible for the collapse of home cooking” (pg. 14). I disagree with the author’s direction towards women. Although, I do agree that women have a role to play in this evolution of cooking. Men are just as capable as women to cook the meals. The economy has also shifted more toward working women. Many women are obtaining high-end jobs that men would usually be filling. On the flip side, many men are becoming a stay at home parents. However, the way it has been since the dawn of time is that women do the work around the house, cooking included. Times are changing though and we should not hinder their progress into the working world overcooking.
I agree that “Maybe the reason we like to watch cooking on TV is that there are things about cooking that we miss” (pg. 16). I miss creating something that ends up tasting or looking amazing. There is a sense of gratification that comes with cooking. I don’t cook though because I feel as though I have better things to do, and that i can go to the store and grab something to tide me over for a while. Another possible reason is that parents are involving their kids in cooking. If kids spent more time cooking and learning the fundamentals then more people would cook. Another large reason why I don’t cook often is that my parents always cooked food for us.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
3 October 2018
Journal 9; Revision Response
Upon revising my paper I found myself mainly fixing up the conclusion and several paragraph issues. Many of my paragraphs had a solid point but needed further explaining on the subject. I also needed to beef up my conclusion. It was lacking a general summary of my paper, and really didn’t leave my paper in a good state. I had to add some detail, and a general question to make my conclusion complete. In the future I will change my focus to the way my paragraphs are set up. They seem to make the point and add support for that point, but they lack further detail to smooth out the edges. The paragraphs just appear to be rough with scrambled sentences.
This drafting process was different than my high schools in many ways. We took more steps, had more time, and used an online form of revision, via google docs and word. I think they were more beneficial because we didn’t have to make the corrections in front of their faces and worry about hurting their feelings. This allowed us to be more specific and detailed with our revisions. Also, bringing up the positives and what they did good was new. We were taught to save time and just focus on the wrongs and less on the rights. I found that several of the mistakes I made in my paper i had done fairly well with earlier. This enabled me to adapt and fix the section I was having trouble with. These changes in format aided in my approach to this essay. From reading the book and reviewing what my peers wrote about my essay, I can feel confident in my writings. I feel as though my approach could still use a lot of help, but the structure is there.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
4 October 2018
Journal 8, “They Say”
Referencing what someone says in your argument is a great way to create a strong point, but which comes first, your argument or theirs? The answer is theirs. Starting with what “they say” is a way of setting up your paper, bringing up the point of argument. However, you do not want to elaborate on their point too long, after all this is your paper. Briefly summarize their idea into a few sentences then talk about the point that you trying to make. A point helps indicate what your thesis is and the conversation that your thesis is responding to. This allows readers to have a direction to be looking in when you talk about your topic, gives them an end goal or understanding. Also, make it a point to explain what your responding to. Detail adds context, context adds understanding. In order for a reader to create an opinion, or agree to the side your trying to support, they need an understanding of the information presented. Saying what they say can also aid in strengthening your introduction paragraph
By starting your paper, and introduction paragraph, with a quote or bold statement from the information given, you can represent the subject or point your paper is about. This allows your reader to know exactly what your paper will be about. You can also represent what your paper will be talking about by having an illustrative quote, revealing a fact or statistic or presenting an anecdote. These introductions set a clear path for your reader to see what it is your talking about and the standpoint your attempting to make. Although, the point of your paper is to tell the reader the standpoint that you are responding to, your standpoint and providing information to the reader so that they may create a standpoint of their own. You are trying to create a paper that represents your ideas and compares them to an alternate source.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110, H2
8 October 2018
Journal 7, Peer Review
The best suggestions from my peers came from the comments on my conclusion, paragraph structure and explanation on points I made within my paragraphs. They both emphasized that my paragraphs had a good topic and detail, but some required further explanation or detail. Several of my points like, the one I made of skipping the meal to get to the dessert, required further explanation and information so that it could make more sense. Alongside explanation, I also needed to further my conclusion. They remarked it as incomplete, and required a better leaving point. My conclusion needed to include more of my paper and the meaning of my paper along with a spot to cause the reader to think or leave the reader with the point i was trying to make. These comments are similar to the ones I gave them.
On a global scale I talked about sentence structure, conclusion and introduction on there paper.. I believe the best comment I gave was toward filling in the body paragraphs more. Their sentences in their paragraphs were abrupt and didn’t flow into one another. Although, they did have good points and supporting details the sentences didn’t flow and read well. I mentioned that their sentences were like a skeleton and they needed more beef or transition to make them flow better. My other big comment was focused on talking about staying with and supporting a point mentioned in their thesis. They brought up in their thesis about how Soylent will affect the economy, but they barely talked about the economy throughout their paper. However, they did talk about the uncertainties in Soylent. So I advised them to change their thesis or add more detail about the economy. All the important points that I covered during our peer review talk session was covered on the paper as well. The other peer and I found similar issues that needed to be covered and addressed them. We used the peer review paper as a basic script and talked about the issues we addressed online.
I wish that more local revision had come up looking back over my peer review comments. I feel as though I didn’t spend as much time as I should have talking about whether they should have placed a comma or not, or talking about if this sentence was properly placed. I also didn’t thoroughly look for grammatical mistakes either. I aimed mainly for the global concerns and feel as though I neglected the local concerns.
Journal 6; Peer Review PDFs
Peer review ( peer paper 1).docx
Main Food essay (peer review 2)
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110
9/20/18
Journal #5: Entering the Conversation
I have always viewed writing as a way of putting thought to paper. English helps form that writing into a proper and formal matter that can be properly viewed and argued. I do have to agree with the They Say, I Say book in that constantly writing, especially in a structured matter, does grow and develop the more you write. Writing allows us to make a difference and create change like Martin Luther King Jr. did when he wrote. It provides us with an outlet to talk about issues up-and-coming and issues today. I have also asked the question “Why do I need to summarize the views of others to set up my view? Why can’t I just jump in and talk about what I think”? I actually committed to this idea that I didn’t need to talk about what they say and wrote a paper on trash disposal with just my view written in the paper. My paper was handed back with a seventy-nine written on it. I found to my questions after that grade. It helps set up your paper and allows the reader to have some insight on what it is you are arguing about. I never really included much of the opposing writers thoughts or ideas in my papers before. I thought what I had to say was more important that what the author was saying. Towards the end of my senior year in high school I realized that what the opposing author said was very useful. It added support and structure to my argument. I realized that the more you could bring into your paper to support it the better.
Using what the opposing author says allows you to create a baseline, something to build the supports on. Without it the reader and myself would get lost and confused reading the piece. The question “What are they talking about?” and “Why are they talking about this?’” would spring up quite often. Using what the other says and what you’re saying helps build a healthy and well structured paper.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110
9/13/18
Journal #4, The End of Food
It all started with three young men attempting to make inexpensive cell-phone towers. Through many long, tedious days of work these workers found themselves facing the problem of finding enough money for food. Then one day one of the workers, Rob Rhinehart, an electrical engineer from Georgia Tech, created a substance called soylent. This substance is made up of only the essential lipids, proteins, and fats that your body requires for living. Soylent is priced at sixty-five dollars for a weeks-worth of the substance. It is described as having a doughy smell, yellow color, and somewhat yeasty, gritty, sweet taste. Although this product has been deemed healthy from its creator, Rob Rhinehart, and many other users it does have a side affect that will affect just about everyone who takes it. Due to the body transitioning to liquid food from solid foods the body goes through an adjustment phase where diarrhea is experienced. The main hope of the creator is to help end hunger, and create a sustainable source of food and nutrition for the world.
After I read the piece, The End of Food by Lizzie Widdicombe, I formed mixed feelings about soylent. It seems very possible to me that soylent could help end world hunger, and create a renewable society from biomechanics, but something about soylent seems unnatural and questionable to me. If this substance is a wonder potion, then why hasn’t medicine come upon this on its own, especially with our medical and technological advances in the past century? Rhinehart also talks about how we as humans can write off solid foods because of soylent, and how it has all the necessities that normal foods have thus belittling the need for solid foods. Although this can mean less reliance on fertile soil, he is writing off the unknown health factors of some foods. Scientists are still finding new health benefits in foods, like how the chemical that makes a tomatoes skin red helps prevent prostate cancer. If we do-away with normal foods, are we doing away with possible remedies and cures that are undiscovered in foods? Although Soylent’s positives seem to outweigh the negatives it still seems that soylent is too good to be true.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110
Sept. 10, 2018
Journal #3, “As He Himself Puts Its”
What is a quote? A quote is using someones else’s words to strengthen or support your argument or statement. Quotes also add credibility to what you are saying and act like proof or evidence in a statement your trying to make. A main aspect of quoting is properly framing a quote. This is a new thing for me because in high school framing was never emphasized. The closest I got to framing was explaining the quote and how it relates to the point I am trying to make. My quotations look a lot like the bad example that they put into the book. I realize now that I have to introduce the quote properly or explain why I find the it worth quoting. I am also going to start to us the quotation sandwich idea with an introduction before and an explanation after a quote. I also found that phrasing the way you explain or introduce your quote can aid support your point further. If the quote is about someone that is angry or offended by a topic your writing about, then phrasing the explanation and introduction in a negative way can help push the point. A problem that I have had for a while is having too many ideas in my explanation. I need to split up the ideas in my introduction and use one or the other.
These were my main problems and the main points that I have learned from this chapter. Proper framing, sandwich technique, further relating the quote to my main point, phrasing the explanation and introduction in a way that describes the mood that the quote is in. These and many more lessons are going to be implemented in my future writings.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110
September 6, 2018
JOURNAL #2-DFW
The writing process is a long and drawn out process, but it always starts the same, with a question. I have always started a project, whether it be a research assignment, narrative, or anything else, with a question relevant to the subject. What were the major achievements in their life? Why am I the way I am today? How does this subject pertain to me? These are a few of the questions that I ask myself before each project. Then, I research what it is I am going to write about, or I think inwardly for personal assignments. After I have collected enough data to create a strong thesis or general idea I form my collected information into a crude outline. I rearrange my outline or fine tune it until it seems organized with an introduction, three main points each supporting my thesis statement, and a conclusion. After this, I start my rough draft with basic information that I collected about the topic or I explain a personal moment. This information is followed up with my thesis or main point.This forms my introduction. After which I write down my first main point followed by my second and third. Each point is supported and explained throughout by a few supporting points and quotes. Once the three points are listed and explained I present my conclusion. I conclude my paper with a summary of my main points and a reworded thesis. My conclusion is finished with a final statement and handed in for a grade. Then came the revision of my rough draft.
Once my paper was graded it was usually revised by the teacher first and handed back to me to correct. Once I corrected the errors marked by my teacher I would have to give it to three other people to revise. Revision definitely aided me in getting a better grade and helped me improve my writing skills. My revision skills seemed to match those of others. I would read over the paper mainly looking for grammatical, sentence, or any general errors. I would then go through the paper again looking for information that didn’t relate or support the thesis statement. After looking for structure errors I would look for quotation errors. I always felt unsure with quotations in projects, and felt as though I didn’t revise quotations properly. My general steps to a writing project are basic and my revisions feel strong but lacking in the quoting field.
Gunnar Fryzlewicz
Professor Miller
English 110
September 2, 2018
JOURNAL #1-DFW
David Foster Wallace questions our justifications for cooking a lobster alive, and ultimately, questions our understanding of the world around us and our definition of pain and suffering. I also wonder why we as people cook lobsters alive? We consider a well done, juicy, flavorful steak a delicacy even though it is killed in a slaughterhouse miles away from civilization and shipped frozen to stores and restaurants across the nation. How is lobster so different? Maybe it has to do with the ‘fresh’ factor, and the health benefits that come with serving food fresh. Although there is a saying ‘you are what you eat’ and the same goes with your food. How healthy could eating an oceanic insect be, especially when this creature eats decaying or dying material off the bottom of the ocean floor? Wallace also brought up the fact that lobster used to be considered a poor-man’s meal, and laws actually restricted the amount eaten by prisoners because it was deemed cruel and unusual. So, How did lobster change from a source that was ground up for fertilizer, to a meal that is served in many ways at five star restaurants? Do you think that people wonder how their food or belongings came to be, or do they prefer not to know, or do they know and not care?
Most people don’t like to think about how their meal was killed or how the materials for their belongings were obtained and how their output affects the environment around them. Many people only want to know what they want to know. People see phones as a great tool for connecting with people and as a great source of entertainment. When you look more into what makes your phone you find something called coltan, which is an essential part of the battery, its what holds the electrical charge. You look further and you find out that a species of mountain gorillas are being wiped out due to mining for coltan in Africa. You may also look at your car as ‘your baby’, ‘your babe magnet’ but it’s really a gas guzzler that releases an immense amount of carbon monoxide, a poisonous gas, into the atmosphere. People don’t want to know about the negatives of what they have, which allows the negative deeds to stay in the dark and continue. The questioning of our justification in cooking lobster alive leads to many questioning the practices that we as a species engage in and our understanding of what goes on in the world around us.
