order

Personally, I absolutely love to see order and structure in everything around me. Chaos in situations, whether it be in school or otherwise, absolutely drives me insane, and so, I try my best to keep my life in at least some type of order. For school papers and the like, I think it makes the most sense to make the job of the reader as easy as possible. The reader most likely has ten thousand other things that he or she would rather be doing than sitting down and reading what I have to say. So, I do my best to arrange my paper in such a way as to make my thesis, supporting statements and my conclusion scream out and grab the attention of the reader, so that he or she has absolutely no doubt in his or her mind what it is that I am trying to argue and when I tutor another student in his or her writing, I try to convey that method to them as well, without doing it for them, which can be difficult some times. When a student brings in a paper to me that is unclear and seems to have no organization whatsoever (aka it doesn't "flow" very well) it makes my job very difficult because I get confused as to what it is that the student is really trying to say in his or her paper. When this happens, I often have to stop and ask the student about what it is that he or she is trying to say, and like Dr. Rogers has been saying all along, the student usually replies with a very simple and clear cut answer, but tries to hide that in a complex and flowery style of writing.

Too tired to think of a clever title :)

Want to know the first thing I thought of when I read the question, “How do you know [order] when you see it?” FLOW!!! Yes. That evil four letter word that we talked about in class today! I know it because when I read it, it makes sense. I understand how the reader got from one word, sentence, paragraph, and idea to the next. I unconsciously (well, now consciously, I guess) go through a process when looking through a tutee’s paper. First, of course, we read through the paper. I’ll try to find the main points the tutee were trying to make and see how the tutee organized them, if organized at all. If I can’t seem to make sense of the paper and there isn’t any (dare I say it?) flow, then I’ll suggest different ways the tutee can organize it. For example, a tutee came in a couple weeks with sheets and sheets of articles and information on the subject she wanted to write about. Her worry was that she didn’t know how to start. How did she organize all the data she accumulated into coherent paragraphs? I asked her questions about the sort of material she found and what her goal was for the end of the paper. We found out that her information could be filed under four categories: How it affects the individual, how it effects the immediate people surrounding the individual, how it effects the economy, and how to fix it. She asked how to decide where to place each thought. We decided that, for this paper, it would “flow” better if she went from small to big. In other words, from the individual to the economy and how to fix it. I’ve been taught many ways to organize a paper, but I think which way I choose depends on what I’m writing about. If I write about the history of bubble gum, I would organize my essay chronologically by year. I was taught that in a persuasive 5-paragraph essay, the body paragraphs should be ordered from second most important argument, weakest argument, then strongest argument. Now, when I sit down to write an essay, I think “What do I want to write about?” Then, I’ll go out and research the subject. By the end of the researching process, my opinion may have changed on the subject, as well as what I want my paper to focus on. After that, outlines work best for me. I’m visual. I need to see the points I want to make, the points inside those points, and so on. Then, I can start writing the essay. That way simply makes sense for me.

Too tired to think of a clever title... :)

Want to know the first thing I thought of when I read the question, “How do you know [order] when you see it?” FLOW!!! Yes. That evil four letter word that we talked about in class today! I know it because when I read it, it makes sense. I understand how the reader got from one word, sentence, paragraph, and idea to the next. I unconsciously (well, now consciously, I guess) go through a process when looking through a tutee’s paper. First, of course, we read through the paper. I’ll try to find the main points the tutee were trying to make and see how the tutee organized them, if organized at all. If I can’t seem to make sense of the paper and there isn’t any (dare I say it?) flow, then I’ll suggest different ways the tutee can organize it. For example, a tutee came in a couple weeks with sheets and sheets of articles and information on the subject she wanted to write about. Her worry was that she didn’t know how to start. How did she organize all the data she accumulated into coherent paragraphs? I asked her questions about the sort of material she found and what her goal was for the end of the paper. We found out that her information could be filed under four categories: How it affects the individual, how it effects the immediate people surrounding the individual, how it effects the economy, and how to fix it. She asked how to decide where to place each thought. We decided that, for this paper, it would “flow” better if she went from small to big. In other words, from the individual to the economy and how to fix it. I’ve been taught many ways to organize a paper, but I think which way I choose depends on what I’m writing about. If I write about the history of bubble gum, I would organize my essay chronologically by year. I was taught that in a persuasive 5-paragraph essay, the body paragraphs should be ordered from second most important argument, weakest argument, then strongest argument. Now, when I sit down to write an essay, I think “What do I want to write about?” Then, I’ll go out and research the subject. By the end of the researching process, my opinion may have changed on the subject, as well as what I want my paper to focus on. After that, outlines work best for me. I’m visual. I need to see the points I want to make, the points inside those points, and so on. Then, I can start writing the essay. That way simply makes sense for me.

Ordering Things Around

Now appearing: Content.

Order for me is not a set of strict requirements which must be fulfilled in its entirety to be considered "ordered." Thinking about it and rambling, as I am often prone to do, "order" is when things align themselves into some sort of discernible pattern which conforms to personal preconceived notions that I had prior to arriving at the given object or situation at hand. When the situation, or "things" as I so brilliantly put, fail to place themselves into a discernible pattern built entirely of my own experiences, I fail to consider them "ordered" and so therefore, as this is a mutually exclusive concept of order altogether, I consider the situation or "things" to be "disordered."

Hence when something is inevitably labeled as disordered, my mind immediately springs into questioning whether this disorder is, or is not, acceptable. If it is acceptable, then I walk away without a second glance. At this point I would like to remind you, dear reader (epic lulz), that I am not referring to writing in particular, but rather my everyday life experiences as an individual.

If, however, this disorder is not acceptable, then I immediately spring into action to reorganize all the contents to better suit my own preconceived notions of "order," whether such an action was invited or not (and most often is not) as part of an uncontrollable urge on my part.

Getting back to writing, I would surmise that "order," for me, is when a paper comes in with clearly defined ideas that don't bleed into each other, beyond transitions and connecting concepts, that all act as their own "mini-essay" within each paragraph. Also I would consider the paper to be "ordered" if each paragraph connected logically with each other. If I fail to see this logical connection, I immediately demand (and Claire you can alleviate your concerns, I am simply using the word for dramatic flair) an explanation as to why these two dissonant ideas are intertwined, or even worse, juxtaposed together out of simple contrivance. If the writer can adequately explain his or her audacious actions, I will find them acceptable and move on without another word. If the writer cannot, I will immediately lash him or her verbally for breaking several cardinal rules of logic and order, which he or she obviously failed to acquire.

At this point I would like to confess I have had no coffee today and that I am very tired.

Getting back to the topic at hand, in my sleep-deprived excessively verbose and excessively harsh tonality, I consider order when writing to be as aforementioned: the clear delineation of ideas and subjects, connected only by transitions and connecting concepts, into a strictly defined "Broad introduction," "Body paragraphs with supporting, or contrasting, or narrative statements, or more that I may be forgetting at this point," and "Conclusion which neatly ties everything together."

Or if I'm writing a story, it's simply ordered chronologically and edited with paragraph breaks for dramatic tension. Whether or not it succeeds is, alas, a subject for another day.

personal audience

Dr. Rogers beat me to the quick. This response is for last Wednesday October 10.

Well I understood that other people would be reading my blogs, but I did not want to think about that. I always write from personal experience or personal beliefs-doesn’t everyone? I mean I do not think that a writer can completely take himself out of the writing since the writer is doing the writing; he is writing from his own opinions gathered and will focus on what he thinks is important. Therefore, I always write down my feelings or opinions for someone to read and probably judge, but that is scary. No one wants their personal emotions or beliefs to be put down by anyone, so people then become scared of writing down their thoughts. Even though the teacher does not grade on the opinion but more how the opinion is stated and supported, a bad grade can discourage the writer from expressing his true opinions in writing again.

With that said, I think that any writing is going to be personal to some degree, and I do not like the idea of getting so personal on the wide open net. I am not saying that I am naive to the fact that anyone can read what I write, but I am pretending that no one else will read this except for me. I do not expect any grades on my blogs, so I do not even act like my teachers read this. I simply write for me. Well, not simply for me. But I do write to a version of me. I write down how I think about these prompts for the future me to read. I know that I will actually not go back to read these entries, but I simply pretend that I am writing for me as if keeping a diary. I fictionalize this safe audience as a defense mechanism. This helps to keep me safe while still accomplishing the required task. Safe from what? Well, I want to be safe from criticism while still being able to express a part of me that most people will never see. Writing is a safe outlet because the writer can imagine that no one will ever see the writing.

Maybe if all writers can get this same idea, they will not be so afraid of how their writing is. Many of the problems in the papers will automatically be corrected if the writer does not remain so concerned with what the audience will think. If the writers fictionalize a safe non-judgmental audience, they will write very well indeed.

However, there still is a problem. The writer really knows that someone else will read the blog. It is hard to completely block that truth from the mind. So, writers must learn to let go of the real audience while writing, and then let go of the writing for others to read. Turning in a paper or publishing an entry is the final act of realizing that this paper is no longer for that fictional audience, but here we go…

The Order of Things

In his introduction to The Order of Things, Michel Foucault remembers reading a passage from Borges:

as I read the passage, all the familiar landmarks of my thought – our thought, the thought that bears the stamp of our age and our geography – breaking up all the ordered surfaces and all the planes with which we are accustomed to tame the wild profusion of existing things, and continuing long afterwards to disturb and threaten with collapse our age-old distinction between the Same and the Other. This passage quotes a 'certain Chinese encyclopaedia' in which it is written that ‘animals are divided into: (a) belonging to the Emperor, (b) embalmed, (c) tame, (d) sucking pigs, (e) sirens, (f) fabulous, (g) stray dogs, (h) included in the present classification, (i) frenzied, (j) innumerable, (k) drawn with a very fine camelhair brush, (l) et cetera, (m) having just broken the water pitcher, (n) that from a long way off look like flies.’ In the wonderment of this taxonomy, the thing we apprehend in one great leap, the thing that, by means of the fable, is demonstrated as the exotic charm of another system of thought, is the limitation of our own, the stark impossibility of thinking that.

This week, I'd like to see you all write about order. How do you know it when you see it? How do you detect it in student writing? How do you think about "ordering" when you write?

A Stroll through the Mind of Meta-Michael

i've feared this blog post for some time i think i was afraid that in order to write a blog about blogging i would have to acquire an enormous amount of self consciousness ive never really stopped to think about what exactly i think about when i write or how i fictionalize the people i am writing to in writing this post without any punctuation i am endeavoring to free my mind and strip away thought restricting conventions in order to peek into the essence of my own thoughts perhaps im taking this whole metablogging thing too far but i am realizing that typing in all lowercase letters without any periods commas colons question marks exclamation points or my personal favorite semicolons is monstrously difficult i suppose that after so many years of studying the english language with moderate success i have actually begun to think in punctuated grammar james joyce was wrong after all perhaps with the prevalence of technology my mind has become a keyboard but what exactly is it imagining when i first sat down perhaps because i have a ton of other homework to do i pictured what i will be like having completed this blog post i can see myself being filled with satisfaction and weariness and relief all at once my task completed my recent progeny released upon the world right about now i can imagine the other tutors reading this post and being absolutely baffled by the blatant neglect of convention however the others tutors are not my primary audience i am the primary audience but even with metamichael in my mind i can still imagine secondary and perhaps tertiary audiences reading this blog but most prevalent seems to be how my mind is fictionalizing the blog post itself i have a foggy vision of what these five hundred words of psychological upchuck are going to look like once they are finished perhaps i have failed this assignment rather than metablogging i seem to be metametablogging that is blogging about metablogging i suppose i should retract me previous use of audience since according to our reading writing doesnt create audiences because it isolates individuals enclosing them in a personal world apart from the greater community but for the sake of simplicity though i may fall into error in so doing i will continue to refer to the readers as audience does the audience always have to be human can my audience actually be this blog post itself i can truthfully say that more than anyone or anything else i am writing this blog post while picturing the completed blog post in my head now that im nearing my word limit however i am beginning to imagine a human audience who will expect some sort of concrete expression at the end so here goes

When I was writing this post about blogging, more than anything else I was picturing what this metablog would look like upon completion. Does an audience always have to be human? I don't think my fictionalized audience for this metametablog was; I was primarily writing to something abstract, thoughtless, and passionless. I was writing to the blog itself.

That's kinda weird.

There is no role...

I imagine my boss reading this blog. I imagine my peers reading this blog. I imagine my professor reading this blog. I’m censored. I’m half honest. But what can be expected? A person is going to have a different conversation depending on who they are talking to. I’m not going into a job interview saying I’m a heroin addict. I’m not, but the point is there are levels of intimacy each person is going to have with another, a certain amount of interaction. It’s about more than just a personified role. It’s also about how much we hold back of ourselves; about how much we allow others to know. I feel like when I’m writing I am still writing as myself, to myself, but I am aware of how much information to withhold. Don’t let all the way loose. Because as I write this blog, I am really just focused about getting the number of required words for the assignment. There is no dear diary. There is real audience. I just know what I can or can’t say. A personal censorship is happening and I don’t necessarily think that is the same thing as an assumed role. I know that when I am writing the reading response or anything else along those lines there is a voice. I go into that “I’m a scholar now” voice where I pretend I know what I am talking about. But this….this blog, I don’t really apply that same style. The blog is too informal. I’m not totally sure what my voice should be, if there is any voice. What is it? And in each blog I write I feel like I begin to just ramble about nothing. I don’t even care about half way through everything. Actually about this point in I loose my way and don’t really know what else to say. Voice…voice; my voice is always changing and being altered. I feel like every day I am writing differently. Maybe I do have a voice when I am writing this blog, but don’t know. I always just want to get it over with. This blog isn’t my favorite thing to write. If I want to just get this thing out of the way, how can I have a voice? There is no hat, but there is censorship. Could you imagine what this blog would be like if there was no censorship? And that’s the difference I’m talking about here. I am aware people might be reading this, but that doesn’t mean I am becoming someone for everyone to read. I’m just writing because I really don’t care. What kind of voice does an indifferent person have? I will admit to being censored, that I am aware of what not to say, but the role just doesn’t feel like it is there.

metablogging

Call me naive, but I've never really thought about anybody else but Dr. Rogers and Claire actually sitting down to read my silly and sometimes boring responses to the blog prompts. When I sit down to write a blog (whether it be for our English 3840 or on myspace), I never really stop and think about someone actually sitting down and reading what I have to say, which seems strange to me, because I am the type of person who doesn't say much unless I feel like I have something worth while to say. It also seems strange to me because on my blogs on my myspace profile, there are always comments that are left by readers, so I have evidence that people actually sit down and think about what I have to say. I guess it all goes back to the fact that when I am writing (or in this case, typing), I am by myself and the words that come from my brain through my fingertips and onto the computer screen, I am the only person at that moment in time that is able to read what I have written, but as soon as I hit the "publish post" button, my words are no longer in the private domain of my computer screen, but are instantaneously transmitted into the public domain that is the world wide web and I no longer have control over my words. Up until this taking this class, I didn't have a whole lot of experience with posting blogs on the internet. I have always thought it was a little bit strange to post my personal thoughts and feelings onto something that can be accessed by an infinite number of people, but the more I do it, the more fun it becomes.