Getting better at whacking the piñata

Today I re-read all of my blogs. My blogs are long, so it took a long time to read them all. However, I learned a lot about my writing and how it has improved over the semester. I now feel that I am able to analyze every rhetorical move I make and be more successful in English. Borrowing Brett’s analogy, I am no longer blindfolded and trying to whack a piñata. I feel that I am getting better at making educated decisions in my writing rather than just making random decisions and hoping they work. From reading my blogs, I have learned the following:

Long sentences are sometimes appropriate, but short sentences are often better. I remember when I got my rhetorical analysis back, I was upset with my grade. Then, I looked at Brett’s class-wide comments online and saw that one recommendation was to stop using long, flowery sentences. Initially I reacted negatively. “Yeah right. Brett, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Long sentences are who I am and I am good at writing them.” Despite thinking that long sentences were good, I tried to change my writing. In reviewing my blogs, I have noticed that writing in shorter sentences has paid off. When I re-read earlier blogs, I often didn’t understand what I was trying to say and it took me a long time to read the entries because the sentences were indeed “flowery” and confusing! For instance, in my blog “Analyzing an article using the Toulmin method,” I typed, “Tierney also stated that some opponents of the U.S. healthcare system argue that the U.S. only has better caner survival rates because cancer is detected early in the U.S., but this doesn’t show that we don’t treat cancer well, and in fact early detection is the best protection against the negative effects of cancer, so this complaint seems unworthy.” Now, this sentence seems like 4 sentences combined in one to me. Additionally, because I didn’t use separate sentences, it is unclear which ideas are mine and which were Tierneys’. When commenting on constitution of audience, nearly none of my sentences go beyond 2 lines long, and this makes the entry more readable and clear. I still use long sentences, but much less frequently, and often more effectively.

Don’t ask questions unless you give the answer. Another cardinal sin that I was guilty of at the start of this class was asking rhetorical questions. In my 09/17/2009 blog, I questioned, “Many people get tattoos of Chinese words or sayings, but why not just get the saying tattooed in English? My first impression of someone with a tattoo like this is, do they even really know what it says?” Well, what if the reader has these tattoos and says yes t o both questions? In such a case, they probably will stop reading having felt that they were disrespected or that the writer isn’t thinking about them. Instead, when I asked questions in later blogs, I followed nearly all questions with an answer. There are many examples of this improvement, but just one example (not to mention the one 2 sentences ago) is from the blog on constitution of audience where I ask, “But is acknowledging another audience the same as ‘creating’ them? I’m not really sure. I don’t think I create them.” I believe that when I ask questions like these, it gives the reader insight into how I am thinking. Also, it doesn’t leave them confused or unsatisfied because I answer the question rather than leaving it open ended. Sometimes it is OK to not give the answer such as when directly addressing the blogger audience and asking them what they think, but this is the exception, not the rule.

Engage your audience. In my first blog, I just talked about me. In my second blog, I talked about identity and me. In my third blog, I talked about tattoos and my feelings about them, not addressing the other side of the issue. In addition to ignoring anyone else’s opinions/ideas in these blogs, I started to use concepts from class without giving some background that the general public would need. For example, in my fourth blog, I asked myself whether I identified with Hochschild’s theory of true and false selves in my own life. However, in that blog I didn’t explain Hochschild’s theory or what the true and false selves are. Therefore, many of my early blogs were egocentric with little interest in the audience. Again, although I commit this offense regularly, I believe I have improved. In my 10/01/2009 blog, I gave brief descriptions of the theories of Cooley, Berger, Baudrillad, and Lyotard before making arguments about which ones were right and wrong. And, on 10/15/2009, I defined Hochschild’s theory before explaining the logistics of my convincing paper. And, in relation to not directly addressing the audience, I improved in this domain as well. In my blog “Easier said than done,” I directly asked the audience to “Think of going to a football game where you’re not welcomed,” or asked them “How could you say ‘no,’ this is not OK?” I think it is very important to make the readers feel involved, especially in the blog: readers want to know what you think, but they also want you to show that you are thinking about them and not just writing a journal. I guess this is one of the points where I started to realize that blogs shouldn’t just serve the purpose of saying what you think, but about engaging the reader too. Considering I didn’t even know what a blog was before I enrolled in English 225.021, I think I have learned a lot about this genre of writing.

Visuals were helpful when I used them, but I haven’t used them much. Therefore, I think I can improve in this area. Also, it is important to use a few examples to illustrate each point, not 1 example or 20. Too few examples don’t give enough support, whereas too many can bore the reader or make them confused.

Although I often dislike English classes, I realized today that this class is helping me learn how to be a better writer, and it shows in my blog. Also, blogging helps me practice my writing before approaching my papers.