Presentation Stuff

Here are links to the materials for my presentation tonight:

Review Paper: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0ENMKQP7b-PVHViaDdEUDZmMTA

Slides: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kHj-Rgeqo1vRfINUAJq1VGb7vr6K0u6x3kaOS_Do7Jw

"Richetti Method" Essay: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0ENMKQP7b-PR3JKbkYzT2NNZWs

I will also be sharing my Review Paper via email instead of distributing hard copies in class tonight.

Is it (rough) drafty in here?

Link to rough draft of piece:http://philome.la/KMarzinsky/nj-route-29

Peer Review Questions

1.       Is it clear that the narrator is the road itself? If so, is it too clear?  That is, does the piece lack subtlety and rely too heavily on the novelty of the narrator’s identity?

2.      Is it clear what Route 29 wants to accomplish and why?  Does the narrator’s motivation feel organic?  Does the conflict have high enough stakes to engage you as a reader?

3.      Are the somewhat sparse language, the brevity of the piece, and the abundance of simple sentences effective?  Are enough images evoked? 

4.      Does the tone of alienation and melancholy come through?  Is it effectively juxtaposed with Route 29’s goals and purpose?

5.      Does the piece rely too heavily on knowledge of the road and its geographic features?  Or would someone who’s never been on the road still be able to appreciate it?

6.   Does there need to be more interactive elements?  

 

Identity and the Storm

Of our assigned readings this week, I responded most strongly to "Butch, Bi, and Bar Dyke: Pedagogical Performances of Class, Gender, and Sexuality" by Michelle Gibson, Martha Marinara, and Deborah Meen.  I think this article is especially relevant because of the current political storm, which makes the divided and contradictory nature of our country all too apparent.  Identifying as an American, or even as a Democrat or Republican, has transformed from an answer to a prompt for more questioning.  In many ways, academia as it is presented by the three authors in the article, can be viewed as a microcosm for our country as a whole.  Now more than ever, Americans are being questioned about their dossiers, about what makes them a valid citizen of the country. 

When discussing class distinctions, the author that identifies herself as Bi mentions that the social narratives about one's class identity "are [...] fairy tales; the reality is an identity that never quite fits, is never quite comfortable, authentic, or believable" (Gibson, Marinara, and Meen 73).  This doesn't just apply to class identity, but to any identity, most notably writer identity.  I think that a lot of students believe a "fairy tale" about identifying as a writer.  In their minds, a writer is an amalgamate being composed of so many dust jacket pictures and coffee-scented stereotypes.  It wears a turtleneck sweater, speaks in beatnik riddles, and keeps a bandolier of ink quills and effortlessly brilliant papers on its chest.  It may or may not have a moustache and the brooding eyes of a pachyderm.  Seeing that they're not this mythical creature, these students decide to reject "writer" from their identities.  That, or they try to quantify the writer identity: "Well, a person is a writer once they're published."  "A writer has an MFA."  "A writer works at a newspaper."  The truth is that those are fairy tales too.  There are plenty of published, MFA-holding newspaper journalists that don't feel comfortable calling themselves writers.  It's almost a paradox.  A writer is someone who writes, yes, but also someone who is comfortable "lying" about being a writer.

Another quotation from the same part of the article actually made my eyes tear up as I thought of it in relation to my own identity: "I can talk or write about my working-class past, but I no longer live in it. I have no real identity there, and I have no real identity in the professional class; I only have the dream" (Gibson, Marinara, and Meen 74).  I feel this way at the current hour of my life.  I struggle to identify as a graduate student because of the difficulties I'm having adapting to grad school life; I also know that I'm no longer an undergrad, and I'm certainly not a professional anymore (despite working a full time office job for 6 years before focusing on school).  I'm not really an adult, but I'm not a child.  I'm just kind of here, dreaming of becoming something, and wondering when any moniker will fit without bunching at the seams or draping like a tent.

Going back to the whole political theme (I know this blog has been disorganized; forgive me), I think something said by "Bar Dyke" toward the end of the article can be taken as the best advice for all of us. "I believe that constructing and performing our nontraditional identities through personal experience is an inherently political act designed to transform the public spaces we inhabit from oppressive realms into inclusive realms" (Gibson, Marinara, and Meen 92).  There is a chance that in the coming years, the social climate of our country will change drastically, that many more identities will be seen as "nontraditional." The best thing we can do is perform our identities, whatever they may be, as authentically and loudly as possible.  We must show the nation and the world that we the people will tolerate nothing less than "inclusive realms," even if oppression becomes the norm.

A Global "Society of Authorship"?

Of our two articles for this week, I responded much more strongly to Will Richardson's "Selections from Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms," or more specifically, one portion of said article.  On page 5 it states: "We are creating what author Douglas Rushkoff calls a 'Society of Authorship' where every teacher and every student, every person with access will have the ability to contribute ideas and experiences to the larger body of knowledge that is the Internet.  And in doing so, Rushkoff says, we will be writing the human story, in real time, together, a vision that asks each of us to participate (Rushkoff, 2004)."  What intrigues me is that now, ten years after the publication of the book from which the article is taken, we have a society where Internet access and participation is as widespread as Richardson predicted; however, I don't think it is a "society of authorship."  If anything, it seems like the more tools we have to distribute our voices in written format, the less people think of themselves as authors.  Instead, they come up with new words, like "blogger," to describe what they are and what they do, as if "author" or "writer" are taboo.  Why is that?  Anyone who writes is a writer.  If a blog is a kind of writing, then why not just call bloggers writers?  We don't call writers who write in other languages something different.  Who created this dichotomy and why?  And if writing is migrating more and more into the digital realm, then will writers someday cease to exist semantically, replaced by some other word that means the same thing?

As for the other article, I think what stuck out to me the most was the difference between types of multilingual students.  I never really took "1.5 generation" students (Matsuda 39) into consideration as something separate from ESL or EFL students.  And this is even after having worked with each type of student in the writing center, and having seen the difference in their issues and performance.  It makes me realize just how easy it is to overlook what, on the surface, seems like an obvious or commonsense concept in the academic world.  Sometimes we get so focused on each little task ahead of us, each individual session and student, that it's hard to see the whole picture.  I know this is kind of the opposite of the problem educational institutions usually have, but I think it is just as valid, and can have just as many negative effects. 

If we have tools, like those mentioned in the first article, to make voices heard by a global audience, then we really must make sure we're equipping people of all language backgrounds to make their voices heard by as many people as possible.  In this day and age, that often means legible, coherent English.  If we're unable to succeed in giving students that power, then it's no wonder they don't want to think of themselves as writers or authors.