General Response to Forum G

Hi all. 

It seems that most everyone who responded to this Forum gave Kantz’s article a close reading, which I am glad to see. She offers many useful suggestions to writing a strong research essay.

I’d like to reiterate some points that some of you made and also complicate some others that I think you all can learn from.

One important issue that came up in your responses are the different roles a writer plays in the research and writing process. As Kevin notes, a good writer embodies the ethos of a questioner, a synthesizer, and an original thinker on the page. A good writer, from this perspective, is not one who sits down to “prove” a point. A good writer is one who inquires into a topic on the page by synthesizing information in ways that make an audience think about the topic at hand in a new light. The goal in this kind of writing is not to persuade an audience to see that your thesis is “right,” but instead to persuade them to consider your thesis from the angle in which you are presenting it and to think more deeply about the topic once they set down the essay. When writing your paper then, think about how you can persuade them to consider thinking more deeply about, say, how signs perpetuate racism even thought everyone might not agree that they do or how signs in malls perpetuate gender norms even though most people don’t notice. Presenting claim after claim is generally an ineffective means to persuade someone to consider your point of view. A more effective means is to vary the acts you perform on the page betweeen-analyzing, questioning, disagreeing, conceding, complicating, clarifying, revealing, emphasizing, etc.  All these varied acts will achieve smaller purposes leading your reader to consider what you want them to consider. 

One of Kantz’s strongest points, I think, is that when we research, we may find gaps between the claims of our sources and between them and our own observations or opinions. These gaps are the spaces where we can locate the original arguments. This point is important because some of you will be interviewing people and locating sources who do not agree with other sources or who do not see the issue at hand the way you do. What do you do with these sources?  Some might be inclined to not include them since they don’t agree with what we want to prove, but Kantz says that it is in those spaces of disagreement, contradiction, misunderstanding that we can locate idea worth forwarding. We create original claims then from engaging with these sources in various ways. One of the pre-writing exercises you will next embark on is how to use sources differently. I hope this exercise in conjunction with reading Kantz’s article will help you realize that rather than set out to find sources to prove your point, you can find locate sources that can drive your inquiry deeper and help you generate your own ideas.

Also, realize that as some of you note, in order to develop a strong ethos, you need to show your reader that you have thought deeply and from many angles about your topic. That is why deep research is key to strong writing–”doing your homework” illustrates to your reader that you care about your topic; are basing your own claims on the consideration of others’; and that you are not just writing off the top of your head. Realize that in this essay, you are writing for a scholarly audience who values deep research. Therefore, in order to persuade them to consider your point of view, you have to illustrate to them that you have done a lot of thinking and researching about your topic.

Also realize that when you think about writing from a rhetorical perspective, all writers, including yourself, have an agenda. We all have a goal we are trying to accomplish, and as rhetorical writers, we try to use strategies on the page to help us achieve our goals.  The difficulty about writing rhetorically is to figure out how we frame our arguments in ways that people will consider worthy of thinking more deeply about.  Too often, in the name of appearing to be objective, we tend to write in a disembodied way. We try our best to leave ourselves out of the picture by just presenting “facts.” At other times, we are too subjective; we tend to write only our opinions which we expect other to consider because “everyone is entitled to having an opinion, and here is mine that you have to consider.” This latter strategy is based on the belief that” just because you believe something, it is worthy of consideration” while the former is based on the belief that “your opinion doesn’t matter, and you just need to report the “truth.” I think Kantz does a very good job helping us realize that what we are forwarding are neither facts or opinions when we write; we are forwarding claims that other judge to be opinions or facts. Does that mean that we should only try to forward claims that others will most likely accept to be true?  The fact is (well is it? you decide) that we can never write all claims that everyone will accept to be true. However, when we write, we should be striving to get our audience to consider our claims even though they might not wholeheartedly agree with them.  

For this reason, when we write, we need to constantly ask ourselves: What claims am I making here? How does this claim help me achieve my larger purpose?  Is this a claim that others might not agree with? If so, what do I need to do to persuade my readers to consider this claim? Asking such questions will help us decide what to do with our writing. The difficulty here is, however, that the kinds of things we need to do to persuade our readers to consider our claims is both dependent on our audience and on what we think we will work to persuade them. Most often, as mentioned earlier, the best strategy to persuade someone to consider our claims is not to just present more claims. Sometimes we need to provide anecdotes, sometimes we need to use analogies, others times we need to present other source’s claims which actually don’t prove our claim but act as a catalyst to generate a new claim from us.

The point here from this entire longwinded response is to think rhetorically when you read and when you write. Figure out what you want to accomplish by filling in the following sentence….IN THIS ESSAY, I WANT MY READERS TO CONSIDER……And then try to figure out how can I get them consider this or these points by working with your source materials in ways that allow you to forward fresh insights in claims that your audience will consider. I realize that this task is not easy, but it is one I want to you strive toward in writing this essay, okay?

Please post any thoughts or questions…Laurie

Reaction to Forum F

Hi all. 

I thought I would post a general response to all of your forums here instead of replying to each forum. Overall, it seems that most of you have a clear understanding of what Sibley’s main message is. The sophistication of your rhetorical analyses of this excerpt, however, varies, and it seems clear that those of you who took time to do some outside research about who Sibley  is and where this exerpt was published were able to present a more nuanced and specific analysis of the author and audience and purpose. The lesson to realize here is that research = strong rhetorical analysis. When we try to identify a rhetorical situation based on our own readings of a text, we often understand less than we think we do about who is writing, for whom one is writing, and why one is writing. As you continue to read rhetorically throughout this unit and into the future, keep in mind then that research = strong analysis and strong writing. 

Also, in a week or so, you will be asked to go back to Sibley’s article to look at how he uses his research differently for distinct purposes. From your responses, it is clear that people disagreed with the effect of his use of examples of exclusionary acts such as apartheid, etc. The question to ask is: Considering that one of his main purposes was to draw attention to exclusionary acts in public space that often go unnoticed, what purpose do the examples of well-known and glaringly obvious historical acts of exclusion serve?  How does the inclusion of those examples help him achieve his larger purpose for writing this essay?

Also, keep in mind  for future rhetorical analyses that purposes may be multiple depending on who an author considers to be in their audience? For instance, if Sibley was writing for an audience of scholars and students, would his purpose for writing be the same?  or are there nuanced differences in purpose we should be aware of?

Also, keep in mind that in order to determine audience, you can research where a text is published (writers target their work for specific publications) and in what discourse communities an author tends to run (in Sibley’s case, academic ones). 

Thanks and please post questions if you have them.

Research Tools

Hi all. To help collect, organize, cite, and analyze your on-line research, you might try working with one or both of the following platforms. They are both very useful bookmarking programs that allows you to take notes and create tags for articles you stumble upon and want to save for later use.  Both programs are free and can be easily downloaded. Check them out!!

1.  Zotero   http://www.zotero.org/

2. delicious.com

Both programs will be very useful to you now and in the future.

Methods for Conducting Observational Analysis

For those of you conducting observational analysis, you need to take field notes, which will serve as your primary data. Please read the information below for how to create useful field notes. 

Field notes

These are notes taken by the researcher about their thoughts and observations when they in the field ‘environment’ they are researching. They can also be notes you make immediately after leaving the field if it was not convenient to write while in the field. It is not unknown for researchers to head for the lavatory so they can temporarily leave the ‘field’ and be on their own to write up their field notes. Field notes are usually about the people you have been studying, their actions and the setting you have observed. For instance it could be details and impressions about an interview that would not be picked up by in an audio recording. It could be comments the informant made once the audio recorder had been switched off and they researcher records them as soon as they have left the interview. The notes can be quite unstructured and include things that seem to be significant to the people or topic you are researching. Field notes are an important form of data collection in ethnography and participant observation. But are useful in all approaches to qualitative research.

 

Writing up field notes

Whether field notes constitute primary data or are really a form of analytic description and interpretation of what is being studied is a matter of some debate. If they are the former, then the notes can be thematically analysed and coded just like interview transcripts and other primary data. If they are seen as the latter, then they may be treated more like analytic memos and always kept distinct from other, primary data.

Whichever you choose, there are a number of approaches to the use and write up of field notes.

• You can be open and candid, even critical. Your field notes are for you and will not be viewed by your participants.
• Include both detailed descriptions of events (inscriptions) and notes about what people said (transcriptions).
• Order events by date, significance or interest. Try to pick out turning points.
• Write about events in a detailed way like a short story. Use what Geertz refers to as ‘thick description’ (Geertz, 1975), in which you try to be descriptive as possible about observations that are integral to your inquiry. 
• Record them in the first person or the third person (but be consistent) and decide if your attitude to your participants will be sympathetic or neutral.
• Record your emotions about events in the research or the project overall.

This information is taken from:   http://onlineqda.hud.ac.uk/Intro_QDA/writing_analysis.php

Don’t Forget….

Hi all. Don’t forget to be keeping your eye out for possible projects to work on for rest of the semester. It might behoove you at this time to go back and read the sustained research essay due at semester’s end and the  research proposal assignment to gain a clear sense of what kind of work I am asking you this semester. Realize, you will be deciding on your project by next week!

Thanks for posting all the interesting advertisements. I was surprised to see that so many of you chose ads focusing on cigarettes/smoking and teen pregnancy/condoms. Why do you think so many of you gravitated to these ads?

Some of you may choose to write about advertisements in public space for your research projects, but I want to encourage you to choose ads that will allow you to develop some provocative thinking about their use in public space. Military ads, for instance, make for very rich material. As to some of the Adbusters. I actually think the BLF would be fascinating to look more into as well. While I do think ads make for interesting discussions, I hope to see some of you taking up local issues of public space–ones that you are truly invested in… 

Anyway, I look forward to seeing what “transgressive signs” you all find. I think some pretty interesting discussions have emerged out of Forum D thus far. 

Thanks. Laurie

General Response to Our Work Thus Far in this Class…

Hi all. 

On a whole, I am pleased with the hard work you are putting into this course. I was particularly pleased with many of the forum discussions that emerged in response to Mitchell’s essay on public space and appreciate your struggles to understand public space. Realize, as I posted on Abby’s blog this morning, that public space, as Mitchell defines, it is a “product of competing ideas of what should constitute space;” therefore, defintions of public space are always dependent on who is forwarding that definition, their interests in that space, their cultural understanding of public space, their personal opinions, etc. . As Mitchell draws on Lefebvre to make clear, public space is a struggle between representational space (appropriated, space in use for people), presented space (space that is controlled and ordered), and spaces for representation (space use for political visibility). Therefore, public space  as a conception is not a static space; it shifts with use and struggle over control. Public space is constructed, imagined, and contested. 

As we begin to research public space (urban, rural, virtual, constructed, natural, imagined, etc.), begin to think about how the signs in use within that space participate in the struggle over public space. Begin to inquire into how signs mark space in attempt to shape public use of that space. While some signs may not seem to control public action in explicit, physical ways, others signs do shape public thought and feelings. As we move through the material world around us, we are constantly affected by the signs we enter into interaction with. Your job this semester is to begin to pay attention to your and others’ interactions with the signs in the public space of your choice.  Therefore, begin to think about narrowing your search for signs in public space to a specific space, whether that be a particular neighborhood, town, or website. That way, you can really begin to understand that public space through primary research of that space.

I am also pleased by the discussions that arose from your response to the icons, indexes, and symbols I posted in Forum B on your group pages. Productive discussions arose over the role of intent in the meanings signs give off, the appropriation of signs and change of signs in use over time, the importance of indexicality, and the controversies over the appropriate use and placement of signs.  I was particularly interested to read your opinions about the “immigrant crossing sign” and the inquiries that sign raised. I also found the discussion around the statue of “the Native American” useful for my own understanding of icons. You might go to the final posts in Group 1’s Forum A to read more about how icons are often just simulations–imitations that have no real resemblance to the things they supposedly refer to.

I also am very excited to see the unique signs you are all posting on your individual blogs. I have tried to offer feedback to both stimulate your thinking and raise inquiries that might be of interest to you. As many of you noted, signs often interact and enter into dialogue with each other depending on their location. You can think, in other words, of signs speaking to one another, joining the struggle for public space.  What messages do they send? What inquiries do their conversations raise? What tensions emerge from their proximity to each other?

What I want you all to realize is that over the next month, you will be exploring public space looking for signs of various sorts. You can think of taking on the role of a flaneur–Baudellaire’s concept for one who moves through and observes space. In this class, the notion behind the flaneur is that while you act as a distant observer in that space, your observations and the work that evolves out of it also directly affects that space. Thus, just as the space around us shape our actions and thoughts, we ultimately have the agency to shape that space as well. 

As you act as a flaneur over the next few weeks, keep an eye out for signs and built environments that raise interest in you.  Some of you may choose to research a particular site to see what struggles exist between certain parties over the use of that public space. Others of you who do the extra credit assignment might grow interested in how people interact within specific places.  Others of you might want to explore how specific sites exclude some and secure space for others. Yet others might be interested in exploring how specific designs of built structures shape the behavior of certain people’s behaviors or how certain spaces are surveilled by certain parties. Whatever you decide, you will research and write with the purpose of contributing to conversations about and or control of that space. By adding your informed input, you will, in other words, be adding to the contesting ideas surrounding that space.

I hope each of you will ultimately develop a research project that genuinely interests you and affords you the opportunity to spend time in a public space that has some meaning for you.  I will be happy to brainstorm project ideas in coming weeks as you generate ideas. Just email me with your thoughts.

Thanks and carry on with the good work!

Laurie

I also am creating a site on our course blog where you can post interesting signs that you encounter and want to share with the class that may not have relevance to each week’s assignments. In addition, you can post your project ideas there to receive feedback from everyone as well as ask questions about readings or the spaces you travel through.  This Forum, titled Flaneurs’ Forum, can be accessed on the right side of our course blog’s home page.

Student Introductions

Please introduce yourself to the class by telling us your name, your major, your hometown, and 1 or 2 interesting details from your first freewrite, including in which city you currently find yourself located.  Post your introduction to this front page by clicking on “Comment” following my introduction below.  In a couple of days, please read through the posts on the this thread to find out who is in this course and then please respond to one or more of your classmates by posting a new comment.  

Instructor Intro:

My name is Laurie Gries.  I am a fourth year doctoral student here at SU in the Composition and Cultural Rhetoric program, who has been teaching writing at the university level for seven years.  I was raised in Montgomery, Alabama; there, I was brought up in a very segregated community where public space was very much divided along racial lines. I have spent most of my adult life in small towns in the Rocky Mountains, where I learned to read my environment through the surrounding mountains and rivers. This summer,  I will be begin working on my dissertation and teaching this on-line course from Portland, Oregon.  Here in Portland, the graffiti is thick; I have been particularly amused by a graffiti artist who keeps writing “Boat” on buildings all over town. It seems like such an odd word to spray paint all over town.  I have no idea what it means. (Perhaps, that is the point.)

I will be on the job market next fall; I hope to land a teaching job at a university on the West Coast. In my dissertation, I am tracing visual and material objects to see what rhetorical meaning they take on as they circulate amongst and across various networks at different scales of time.

Anyway, welcome!  I hope you enjoy this course….